The Prisoner Remake.

[The Badger]

The trailer is here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FqQsaK5KpQ

First thoughts: I'm glad they didn't try to slavishly copy the look and style of the original, and instead came up with their own ideas.

Second thoughts: It's a pity that their ideas are so 'meh'.

 

[Harvey]

There was a thread here not too long ago when the trailer came out, perhaps it was in General TV and Media and not this forum. To sum up my thoughts: I'm looking forward to it, but nothing will work as proof of concept except for the series itself. I love the original and it's a tough act to beat (especially McGoohan's favorite episodes).

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Looks good to me, as a six episode miniseries. Not sure I'd feel the same way if they tried to drag it out into full series format. Jim Caveziel wouldn't do that much TV anyway.

 

[auntiehill]

I'm fairly ambivalent. I love The Prisoner, and any nod to it makes me happy, but.... this doesn't get me very excited to see it. As Harvey said, the original is a very, VERY hard act to follow.

What was creepy about the Village was the way so many just settled into their roles and accepted their fate. To have people brainwashed to believe that nothing else exists EXCEPT the Village rather misses the original's points about the individual vs. society.

I will give this miniseries a try, but somewhat hesitantly.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

Damn! I was one of the ones claiming that a Prisoner remake couldn't be done, at least not in any way that would really justify its existence. But this looks really interesting. (And even if it turns out to be totally lame, it's got Ian McKellen, and that's worth a lot.)

 

[The Badger]

I apologise if this trailer has come up before. I didn't see it, but my search-fu is weak.

I'll certainly be watching it, at the start at least. And Ian McKellen seems to capture the sort of friendly malevolence needed for the role.

 

[Christopher]

What was creepy about the Village was the way so many just settled into their roles and accepted their fate. To have people brainwashed to believe that nothing else exists EXCEPT the Village rather misses the original's points about the individual vs. society.

From what I've read, it isn't trying to make the same points as the original. The original was about the fear of the individual being subsumed to the state, the community, the collective, etc. I read an interview where the makers of this adaptation were instead questioning modern society's cult of the individual, suggesting maybe we've taken it too far in the other direction. Something like that. I don't quite get what they were saying, and I don't know if it will work. But it's definitely not the same message. It's not missing the point if you're intentionally aiming elsewhere.

And I think it's probably the right way to go -- trying to do something different with the concept rather than trying to recapture the same spirit.

 

[Agent Richard07]

Here's the other thread.

Since this is a mini series, I might wait and watch it on DVD so I can see it all at once commercial free.

 

[Candlelight]

I apologise if this trailer has come up before. I didn't see it, but my search-fu is weak.

I'll certainly be watching it, at the start at least. And Ian McKellen seems to capture the sort of friendly malevolence needed for the role.

This is the first time I've seen the trailer on youtube, otherwise it was blocked and could only be viewed inside the US.

It looks good. Many of the original elements are still there, and they have good actors in the main roles so it should be a good time. And the shortened season does allow for faster story telling.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Damn! I was one of the ones claiming that a Prisoner remake couldn't be done, at least not in any way that would really justify its existence.

I don't know why anyone would doubt it. It has a durable premise that won't wear out its welcome after just a few episodes and keep in mind, most people watching won't know or care that there was ever another version of the story. Same as with almost all remakes.

I read an interview where the makers of this adaptation were instead questioning modern society's cult of the individual, suggesting maybe we've taken it too far in the other direction. Something like that. I don't quite get what they were saying, and I don't know if it will work.

Wow, sounds ambitious. It's easy to see how to make a paranoid fantasy about the destruction of the individual - and the problem of course is that the idea is not very fresh to say the least. To try to make the opposite point sounds counterintuitive and hard to pull off, but at least they aren't doing the same old thing.

So I guess this isn't the "durable premise" that I assumed they would be going for. This is more interesting than I expected...

 

[jamestyler]

Sounds quite interesting...

I've just seen the trailer and it feels like they've injected a dose of Cape Wrath into the original concept. I'm rather curious to see how it all plays out.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

I was hoping we'd get to hear Patrick Stewart belt out "I am not a number, I am a free man!" *sigh*

 

[23skidoo]

I'd posted this to another thread on the trailer, but to summarize, I watched only the first 4 minutes and then turned it off because it was getting too far into spoiler territory for my liking.

As someone who was very leery of a remake, I have to say I was impressed. At least based on the trailer it looks like they're following some of the same notes as the original, while maintaining an original look. The appearance of ...


... had me cheering. And the appearance of ...


... gave me pause for thought. I have an interesting theory that the series...


... but even if that doesn't end up being the case, I think this is going to be a cool show. No complaints about the casting. My only criticism is referencing the characters as "6" and "2" (not "Number 6" and "Number 2") sounds awkward and clumsy. And the "Seek the 6" slogan associated with this show sounds a bit daft. But these are minor points. I'm definitely looking forward to this show (and, with any luck, the associated upswing in publicity for the original).

ADDITIONAL: How come the spoiler tags aren't working? If you want to see what I had in the spoiler space, click "Quote" on this message.

Cheers!

Alex

 

[Christopher]

ADDITIONAL: How come the spoiler tags aren't working?

They are; you just didn't use them right. There are two steps to the spoiler dialogue; the first is to enter what the spoiler is about, and the second is to enter the actual spoiler. You put all your spoiler text in the "about" section and left the other part blank, which is why nothing is showing up.

Here's an example of how it should work (click "Quote" to see the format):

Spoiler: Prisoner character

Rover

 

[bigdaddy]

It's only 6 episodes? I thought it was 13.

 

[Harvey]

Nope, it's always been six episodes. Which is close to what McGoohan originally intended his version to run.

 

[Christopher]

^Yep. McGoohan wanted seven episodes, which is why everything between the first five and the last two episodes of the original series is pretty much filler.

 

[Harvey]

Some of it more creative than others, but certainly most of it is not essential.

 

[Candlelight]

I'd posted this to another thread on the trailer, but to summarize, I watched only the first 4 minutes and then turned it off because it was getting too far into spoiler territory for my liking.

I agree. Why produce a nine minute trailer for a six-part series? Seems like heaps. Just a three minute trailer would've been better.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Six actually strikes me as being rather short for the premise (assuming one hour episodes) but it certainly won't wear out its welcome at that length. 13 might be stretching it.