• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

AMC's "The Prisoner" preview (Ian McKellen, Jim Caviezel)

But it leaves me with one question. In this iteration, who is Number One? And will the Beatles play over the speakers when all is revealed?

You are, number two.

(You asked two questions, you berk!)

Sonuvabitch. So I did. Okay, it left me with two questions, one of which is more important than the other. Now I leave it up to you to decide which one of those questions it is.

"Questions are a burden. Answers a prison for one's self."
 
A lot of highly talented actors do TV now. The TV stigma has faded away since the writing on TV has become much better on certain cable networks (AMC being one of them) while movies have become increasingly dumb.
I wouldn't say it's the better writing on cable. I mean, the 24 lead actors AND guest actors have people who are primarily known as movie actors. Life on Mars, CSI as well (Gary Sinise and Lawrence Fishbourne for crying out loud!). And sitcoms! 2 and a Half Men, According to Jim, there's a bunch to be sure.

It's ALL of TV.

On one hand, if Laurence Fishburne, Charlie Sheen, Gary Sinise, Harvey Keitel and Kiefer Sutherland were still getting the kind of movie offers they received in their prime, they would not be on TV. At least not as series regulars. Bruce Willis may do three episodes of Friends, but he'd never sign up full-time as the star of a sitcom.

On the other hand, Noah Wyle and David Schwimmer could make over $20 million a season on TV since they received $1 million dollars-per-episode paychecks.

The Prisoner is just a mini-series.

It wouldn't suprise me though, despite his movie resume, McKellen considers himself first and foremost a stage actor

Also it wouldn't suprise me if sometimes a project or comes along that would make a well establish stage or movie actor jump and do some tv work - and not just a cheap cameo shot (anyone remember Sir Derek Jacobi on Frasier?)
 
I think Ian McKellan just has that (awesome) attitude of being up for anything that looks interesting to him. He doesn't strike me as an actor who would think of a certain medium of artistic expression as being beneath him.

He's a working-actor, and he'll go where his interest takes him.

That said, it looks really interesting.
 
The preview looks awesome. They seem to be taking the core elements of the original premise, but spinning their own thing. Probably the smartest way to go. As I mentioned in another thread, the only think I wish is that the Village would look more surreal. Then again, we didn't see much of it in the preview. Perhaps there is more to come. In any event, that is a small quibble.
 
The Prisoner is just a mini-series.

Mmmmhmmm... so was Californacaion and Kings, one is now a show and the other is canceled and the 13 episodes didn't wrap anything up.

Huh? Kings was never a mini-series, and neither was Californication. You're not making a coherent argument here.

Both were called that before the shows started, so maybe you should get your facts straight.
 
Mmmmhmmm... so was Californacaion and Kings, one is now a show and the other is canceled and the 13 episodes didn't wrap anything up.

Huh? Kings was never a mini-series, and neither was Californication. You're not making a coherent argument here.

Both were called that before the shows started, so maybe you should get your facts straight.

You should probably tell that to Michael Green, creator of Kings. He posted the following on July 26th.

"Kings was originally picked up for 13 hours of content, 12 episodes with the two-hour pilot. It was not a mini-series, but a full series with a full series' ambitions to last for much longer."
 
Both were called that before the shows started, so maybe you should get your facts straight.

You've already been proven dead wrong when it comes to Kings. Californication was not designated a miniseries by the Golden Globes, and there is no mention of such a thing on the Showtime website or Wikipedia. A Google search brings up no relevant pages. As far as I'm concerned, the burden of proof is on you here, and if you want me to get my facts straight, you'll have to actually present some that support what you're saying.
 
I've been a fan of The Prisoner ever since I first played the old Edu-Ware game for the Apple II back around 1980 and not long after that started watching the show. When I heard they were going to remake the show, I shuddered, since the track record for such things being successful is abysmal; for every Battlestar Galactica that's worked, there's been a dozen I Spys, Wild Wild Wests or The Honeymooners that have not only flopped but have been piss poor productions, to boot. And fans of The Six Million Dollar Man breathed a sigh of relief when plans to reimagine it as a comedy with Jim Carrey collapsed.

When I heard AMC was doing a remake of The Prisoner, I crossed my fingers, because for one it's AMC, and the fact Ian McKellen signed on also increased my hopes that it will be half-decent.

I took at look at the YouTube version of the ComicCon promo, but had to turn it off after 4 minutes because it was getting too spoiler-heavy for my liking.

But what I saw I really liked. Although, of course, the actual execution of the show may fall flat, based on the trailer it does seem to me that they really have nailed many of the elements of the original show (including a few surprises). I was skeptical whether this would work, but based on this, I think it stands a good chance. I'll definitely be watching.

The only thing that falls flat with me is the somewhat needless choice to have the people referred to as simply "6", etc, and not "Number 6," etc. It just comes off sounding awkward, even coming from Ian McKellen. I think that was a bad call, but in the overall scheme of things it's minor.

I think this will do justice to the original. Between BSG, the new Prisoner, and what looks to be an impressive retelling of V coming up, not to mention a letter-perfect reimagining of Get Smart last year, could it be Hollywood has finally gotten the formula right for doing remakes that actually recapture the spirit -- or actually improve upon in the case of BSG, at least -- the originals?

The vibe I'm getting from The Prisoner remake is that it stands a very good chance of sparking interest in the original (unlike some remakes that have been known to wreck interest; for example Universal seemed poised to finally release the original Bionic Woman to DVD and might have done so if the remake series hadn't flopped). If a remake causes people to seek out the original production, that can't be a bad thing.

Cheers!

Alex
 
The thing about the original here is that it's already in wide release on DVD, and has already been widely written about and studied. So a new version that is bad won't damage anything that's poised to come out. And a new version that is good will only create more interest in The Prisoner. So I'm in.
 
The thing about the original here is that it's already in wide release on DVD, and has already been widely written about and studied. So a new version that is bad won't damage anything that's poised to come out. And a new version that is good will only create more interest in The Prisoner. So I'm in.

Very true. There's even supposed to be a Blu-Ray edition coming out not long before the show airs (and, no, they haven't gone and replaced Rover with some CGI thing!).

The thing is, though, The Prisoner may be widely available, but it's still very much a niche fandom. So this has the potential to introduce new viewers to it. And interestingly, if they do keep the same spirit and tone of the original, this is also good because when viewers today go back to watch the original, they won't find the 40-year difference too jarring.

(Mind you, maintaining the same tone isn't always a guarantee that a "modern-day" viewer will like the decades-old original. If you go to the Doctor Who board here, there's a thread in which a viewer, who up till now only knew the updated version of the series, went back to look at one of the all-time classics of 1970s Doctor Who and disliked it so much he basically says he has little interest in watching any more of the old show.)

Cheers!

Alex
 
Very much looking forward to this. I originally thought it was going to be a theatrical release, but I'm very glad it's not. I don't think they could do the property justice in a mere 2 hours.

I saw a release date of 2009 but no details. Anyone know when it's coming out?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top