That would have been a great Season 1 finale, and then we could have had Garthe and the Goliath II as the Big Bads for a theoretical Season 2.
I was thinking recently that a Magnum PI/Rockford crossover could have been really fun.
The General Knight Rider thread.
- Thread starter Skipper
- Start date
Well, yes, that's the point -- you want it to feel futuristic relative to when it's made, not relative to something from decades earlier.
Meh, the Green Hornet's Black Beauty had one of those in 1966.
First off, it's not the battery I have an issue with, it's the idea of sticking with internal combustion. Fossil fuels are a deservedly dying industry, and the faster it dies, the better for the planet.
Second, the word "plausible" is a non sequitur in a conversation about Knight Rider, of all things.
That's all incidental. Like I said, people don't invest in TV shows because of the tech, they invest because of the characters. If you don't have that, you don't have a show, you just have a Popular Science article.
That's a debate that is not relavent to this topic, we're going to have to agree to disagree on that.
We're trying to have it be as grounded as possible, so not go too crazy and make it unbelievable.
If you want more main cast members out in the field, we can do that.
There's nothing saying that we can't have both tech & people out in the field.
It's just a matter of how much of each do you want?
Who's "we?" I thought the drift of the thread was that a successful reboot had to capture the feel of the original, and there was nothing grounded about the feel of Knight Rider.
That's not what I said. I was talking about quality, not quantity. You're forgetting my earlier comment about focusing on the core duo, KITT and the driver, and building a strong bond between them that audiences can connect with. If you don't have that, piling on more characters won't help.
Us Fans who want a Knight Rider ReBoot and want to help make it work.
Knight Rider was "Relatively Grounded" for it's time.
Outside of KITT itself, everything was plausible and practical.
From driving up the ramp into the Semi-Truck's rear compartment.
From traversing the US to fight crime.
It was basically "The Lone Ranger", and replace Tanto w/ a Smart Talking Car that happens to be his mechanical Horse.
So Less is More.
I mean, is anyone else in this thread besides you talking about it being grounded?
Sure, it was superficially set in the present-day world, but that doesn't make a show grounded. I mean, remember the episode where some bad guys stole KITT's CPU out of the car, and Michael found it through some nebulous psychic affinity for his partner? I've always remembered that for how dumb and arbitary it was, throwing in something mystical as a cheat to patch a plot hole.
No, I'm saying it's not about numbers at all, it's about the quality of the character writing.
::shrugs::
I usually watch all these "Live-Action" shows, and most things are grounded minus a few fantastic features of the Primary Protagonists Vehicles.
Yeah, that was the writer deciding to include "Mystical Mumbo Jumbo" because they couldn't figure out a better solution for whatever reason.
Blame the writer(s) on that ep.
Ok fair enough, that's what you have a good writing staff for, to make the main Protagonist Compelling.
)
It occurs to me that this is something large multimodal models (so-called "generative AI") might actually be good for. Feed in (legally licensed) footage of car stunts from 1970s-80s shows and movies, train the LMM to realistically depict the details of how cars behave when they do jumps and landings and wild stunts like that, and apply that to the digital models of the modern vehicles in the new show, so the CGI looks believable. Though of course you'd need human artists designing and editing the shots to make sure the LMM didn't mix and match elements of different stunts in a nonsensical way, and to choose the right camera angle to render it from, etc.
Although I suppose there might be some differences in detail in the construction of a modern car's undercarriage compared to decades ago, and that would have to be accounted for. For instance, in older shows and movies, you'd often see a car's hubcaps fly off when it did a screeching turn or a jump, and I'm not sure that would happen with modern hubcaps. (I remember an episode of The Greatest American Hero I rewatched last year where a car lost three hubcaps at separate points during a chase scene, but still had all four at the end of the scene, since of course it was cut together from multiple separate takes. Hubcap loss was such an unavoidable thing in car stunts that they just ignored it and hoped the audience would suspend disbelief.)
Most modern cars don't have hub caps anymore, it's gone the way of the dodo bird.
Hmm, mine does, but it's from 2001.
My car's from 2005 & 2006, don't have Hub Caps.
All the Newer Vehicles I've seen don't have them either.
Yours must be part of the last generation with them.
Yes and no. Tesla's have wheel coverings i.e. hubcaps. Most low cost Asian vehicles have some sort of plastic wheel cover you have to remove to get to the lugnuts. Higher end vehicles have just straight wheels/rims. And you can purchase after market covers for your wheels.
You mean like those things that spin independently of the wheels?
I wouldn't classify those as hubcaps. Those are more decorative.
What I'm thinking of are those plastic hubcaps you can purchase at most auto parts stores that snap on to the outer rim of the wheel.
Same in Italy. Only on some historic cars.
Similar threads
