I Am Not A Number, I'm A Free Man!
Posted by: Tarquin Maynard - Portly on 17 April 2010
9 pm, saturday
Yippee!
Yippee!
Posted on: 17 April 2010 by Mike Dudley
Speaking as one of those who claims to understand episode 17 of the original, I'll be watching with interest. Looks at the moment like they don't change "Number 2" throughout, though.
"I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I...."
"I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I...."
Posted on: 17 April 2010 by Bob McC
"What do you want?"
"Information"
Well you won't get it out of Mike Lacey
Its on at 9.30!
"Information"
Well you won't get it out of Mike Lacey
Its on at 9.30!
Posted on: 17 April 2010 by Tarquin Maynard - Portly
blushes..
30 minutes to blow up a white spacehopper?
M
30 minutes to blow up a white spacehopper?
M
Posted on: 17 April 2010 by Bob McC
well at least it is only 6 episodes long, and this one has a proper conclusion.
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by Analogue Rules OK
It's going to be difficult not to compare it to the original "Prisoner" with Patrik McGoohan(RIP)
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by Blueknowz
I have the Boxed set of the original not watched in some time,forgot the New one was on!was it any good?
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by Guido Fawkes
No - IMHOquote:was it any good?
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by droodzilla
quote:Originally posted by Blueknowz:
I have the Boxed set of the original not watched in some time,forgot the New one was on!was it any good?
Certainly not a patch on the original (and I'm not someone who think original is always best). It's ditched virtually all the stylistic trappings of the McGoohan version, though the big white bubble monsters are still there. The tone is more serious than the original, but in a bad way (it loses the madcap, whimsical quality). Thematically, there's a post 9/11 vibe going on, with references to terrorism, and twin towers looming over the village. Really, it's a completely different show. Taking all that into consideration, I found it quite watchable, but hardly ground-breaking TV.
Posted on: 18 April 2010 by Bob McC
no piped blazers - apart from the old man we see in the beginning who looks surprisingly like McGoohan did at the end of his life
no Lotus 7
no mini mokes - but , even wierder, they are using Renault Dauphines as taxis
An old Thames van used as a runabout
still got 'Rovers' but a lot bigger now
most disappointingly - the original font isn't used or the music
no Lotus 7
no mini mokes - but , even wierder, they are using Renault Dauphines as taxis
An old Thames van used as a runabout
still got 'Rovers' but a lot bigger now
most disappointingly - the original font isn't used or the music
Posted on: 19 April 2010 by Mike Dudley
Odd that the critics here are disappointed that the new version is different from the original. What would be the point in making the same thing all over again? Just go and watch the McGoohan version if that's all you want.
I thought the "nods" to the original were well placed and quirkily amusing. The blazer - "Be seeing you" - the backlit passageway that Caviezel walked down - the thump on the table - the big rubber border guard whatsit.
I find the new premise interesting and I'm looking forward to seeing where they go with it. Oh, and McKellen is on top form as Number 2. Can't wait to see how they deal with the question of "Who is number 1"...
Get with the programme, people!
I thought the "nods" to the original were well placed and quirkily amusing. The blazer - "Be seeing you" - the backlit passageway that Caviezel walked down - the thump on the table - the big rubber border guard whatsit.
I find the new premise interesting and I'm looking forward to seeing where they go with it. Oh, and McKellen is on top form as Number 2. Can't wait to see how they deal with the question of "Who is number 1"...
Get with the programme, people!
Posted on: 19 April 2010 by BigH47
quote:Originally posted by Mike Dudley:
Odd that the critics here are disappointed that the new version is different from the original. What would be the point in making the same thing all over again? Just go and watch the McGoohan version if that's all you want.
I thought the "nods" to the original were well placed and quirkily amusing. The blazer - "Be seeing you" - the backlit passageway that Caviezel walked down - the thump on the table - the big rubber border guard whatsit.
I find the new premise interesting and I'm looking forward to seeing where they go with it. Oh, and McKellen is on top form as Number 2. Can't wait to see how they deal with the question of "Who is number 1"...
Get with the programme, people!
People seem to be saying why? With the original being so iconic, they aren't likely to improve on the original.
Would you re-record Beatles albums and think they could be done better?
A better question is why can't writers think up some thing new instead of this cop out lets "re-imagine" ........ insert name of practically any classic film/ TV series. Usually without any improvement, apart from newer special effects.
Posted on: 19 April 2010 by Mike Dudley
Yeah right - cover versions. What a waste of time, eh? Good grief.