The new show-ok to talk about it yet?
Rusty Magic
America first. I've seen the first 2 episodes tonight, with the rest
to follow in the next 2 days.
Are most of the readers here from the UK? Would it be ok to start a
discussion about it? I hate going on a board and seeing spoilers
because something's aired somewhere else first. Just thought I'd ask.
:)
roger
news:fbf3c8f8-f415-4929...@h14g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> Are most of the readers here from the UK?
There are more readers than posters, so impossible to answer.
> Would it be ok to start a discussion about it?
Of course. Those who want to watch the "reimagining" when it reaches their
own country's tv can avoid such threads. Those like me, who haven't been
able to work up any enthusiasm to date for the project and will probably not
actually watch the show because life is too short for what the majority of
professional critics to date reckon is anything from an embarrassment to a
mess, can read the threads with impunity.
Of course, that won't stop a certain supposed Dr Who fan from crossposting
key plot points, but nobody has to read everything here.
:-)
Ignis Fatuus
The balloon's bigger but the rest is a mess; and it looks as if it was
shot on an iphone.
Twin Peaks is a much better candidate for a 'reimagining' of The
Prisoner. God Help Us and Save Us from a 'reimagining' of Twin Peaks.
Legend-11
> "Rusty Magic" <rusti...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:fbf3c8f8-f415-4929...@h14g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Are most of the readers here from the UK?
>
> There are more readers than posters, so impossible to answer.
>
>> Would it be ok to start a discussion about it?
>
> Of course. Those who want to watch the "reimagining" when it reaches their
> own country's tv can avoid such threads. Those like me, who haven't been
> able to work up any enthusiasm to date for the project and will probably not
> actually watch the show because life is too short for what the majority of
> professional critics to date reckon is anything from an embarrassment to a
> mess
What did such "professional critics" think of the original I wonder? I
know you were around back then, Roger, were the majority favourable
reviews? Actually, I didn't know one could be professional at watching
telly and forming a personal opinion. I guess I must be one, too. I
guess we all are. :)
Without giving away any spoilers, I've watched the first two episodes
[nuts to waiting for it to arrive in your own country - that is what the
interwebs are for], and I think the reviewer who said it is "incoherent"
must quite literally have shit for brains. So much for *his*
professionalism. I could have played a game of chess and followed it at
the same time.
Is it iconic and ground-breaking? Certainly not...but it never could be,
it is a remake. Was it enjoyable and entertaining? For me, yes. Well,
after the rather slow first episode at least (again named 'Arrival').
Will I be following it to the end? Yes. Would I recommend it based on
what I have seen so far? Well, only to those prepared not to expect too
much from it...and those prepared to leave the baggage of being a
fanatic of the original at the virtual door, as I did, but yes.
I've see The Avengers movie - I know embarrassments and messes, and I
honestly don't think this is one. It is ultimately nothing more than
worth a watch though - nothing to sing and dance about. Could it sully
the memory of the original? Impossible.
In fact, I think this will bring new fans *to* the original - and that
is certainly no bad thing. If they've enjoyed this, just wait till they
see how it was done originally...it will blow their minds.
Legend-11.
roger
news:hds7ur$udk$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> What did such "professional critics" think of the original I wonder? I
> know you were around back then, Roger, were the majority favourable
> reviews?
I didn't come to the original series from any reviews. Reviews in those days
came *after* tv shows had been seen by the viewing millions and, given the
absence of the 'Net, were few and far between. I watched the series because
of the huge colour spread of what seemed surrealistic scenes in the Tv Times
preview the week of 'Arrival'. I like surrealism and what I saw in the
magazine appealed to me. Now, 42 years on, what I see of the many fairly
consistent reviews doesn't make the "reimagining" attractive to me. You have
to base what you watch on something. The AMC previews hadn't caught my
(re)imagination prior to the initial screening; the present crop of reviews
confirms that the actual programme hasn't tickled many other people's
fancies either. As has been said before, if this AMC series hadn't been
associated with one of the best tv programmes of all time, it wouldn't even
have rippled the surface. Lost in a double-episode midweek slot to avoid
being too noticeable, it's almost worked; I nearly haven't noticed it.
:-)
Legend-11
They're not all that bad, the reviews. Here's one that seems to agree
with me: "Adequately serviceable television". It also notes that
McKellen is as good as ever. It points to Caviezel being the weak link -
I'd also tend to agree with that, but not to the same degree:
http://americandaily.com/index.php/article/2559
I've see one or two more reviews that don't beat up on it so much, I
just never bookmarked them. The bad reviews are also very typical of TV
productions that are surreal or leftfield...which is why I paid them
little notice. Mainstream reviewers often struggle with TV that asks a
little more of you than your average easy to follow drama.
There is a lot of crap on TV these days, so I'll take "serviceable" when
I can get it. I honestly think it's worth a watch - if only to look for
the little homages to the original. It will be a watch once thing,
though, which shows the gulf in class when compared to the
original...which I've watched many, many times and will do many times more.
As I say, if the best thing to come out of it is to bring new fans to
the original...great. In the meantime, I found it a decent enough
distraction.
--
Legend-11.
Snit
12:08 PM:
The first two I thought were pretty good. The second two - not so much.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Graeme
glacial.
Graeme
wrote:
> There is a lot of crap on TV these days, so I'll take "serviceable" when
> I can get it.
Why take serviceable when you can buy a DVD set of something GOOD?
Television no longer has the monopoly on our sets that it once had,
yet people sometimes still act as if it did.
> I honestly think it's worth a watch - if only to look for
> the little homages to the original.
It is worth it for that. If you like the original, that is. There's
not much reason why anyone who has never seen the original should
watch it, though. It's more heavily padded than Lost Continent, the
main character is unengaging, and it's too heavily loaded with
flashbacks and scenes where nothing happens. The send-up of a guy in
a village is intriguing, but they just aren't doing much with it. The
only way it might possibly improve on the original is if it comes up
with a decent ending, which I guess we'll see tonight.
> As I say, if the best thing to come out of it is to bring new fans to
> the original...great.
Isn't it more likely to drive fans AWAY from the original? Anywho who
has never seen the original, who sits through this, is likely to have
felt they've suffered enough and not want more. A person who has
never seen the original does not have the motivation to sit through
the hours and hours of nothing waiting for a payoff that we have.
RVG
> Twin Peaks is a much better candidate for a 'reimagining' of The
> Prisoner. God Help Us and Save Us from a 'reimagining' of Twin Peaks.
Except perhaps if it's done by Lynch+Frost themselves.
After all, Hitchcock remade a lot of his own British black and white
movies when he had access to Hollywood actors and Technicolor cameras
and film.
--
Jazz up your life!
Jazzez-vous la vie!
http://rvgmusic.bandcamp.com/
http://rvgjazznstuff.jamendo.net/
"La premi�re arme de la R�sistance c'est l'information." Lucie Aubrac
Dewey
@bluebubbleconspiracy.motzarella.org:
> Ignis Fatuus a �crit :
>> Twin Peaks is a much better candidate for a 'reimagining' of The
>> Prisoner. God Help Us and Save Us from a 'reimagining' of Twin Peaks.
>
> Except perhaps if it's done by Lynch+Frost themselves.
>
> After all, Hitchcock remade a lot of his own British black and white
> movies when he had access to Hollywood actors and Technicolor cameras
> and film.
>
Other than The Wrong Man I'm hard pressed to think of one.
--
"You are, number 6"
- The New Number 2
Ignis Fatuus
<not....@themoment.org.invalid> wrote:
>Ignis Fatuus a �crit :
>> Twin Peaks is a much better candidate for a 'reimagining' of The
>> Prisoner. God Help Us and Save Us from a 'reimagining' of Twin Peaks.
>
>Except perhaps if it's done by Lynch+Frost themselves.
Lynch has reworked it into other projects; and it seemed to be going
nowhere by the end.
>
>After all, Hitchcock remade a lot of his own British black and white
>movies when he had access to Hollywood actors and Technicolor cameras
>and film.
One, inexplicably. The only distinction of the Stewart/Day version of
The Man Who Knew Too Much is launching Que Sera Sera - and neither the
movie nor the song would be missed IMO. Fortunately there's Rear
Window and Vertigo to redress the balance.
Dewey
news:Xns9CC692036490Bde...@130.133.1.4:
Sorry - meant the Man Who Knew Too Much.
Legend-11
> On Nov 16, 3:03 pm, Legend-11 <Slithee...@dropallthisgooglemail.com>
> wrote:
>> There is a lot of crap on TV these days, so I'll take "serviceable" when
>> I can get it.
>
> Why take serviceable when you can buy a DVD set of something GOOD?
> Television no longer has the monopoly on our sets that it once had,
> yet people sometimes still act as if it did.
>
>
>> I honestly think it's worth a watch - if only to look for
>> the little homages to the original.
>
> It is worth it for that. If you like the original, that is. There's
> not much reason why anyone who has never seen the original should
> watch it, though. It's more heavily padded than Lost Continent, the
> main character is unengaging, and it's too heavily loaded with
> flashbacks and scenes where nothing happens. The send-up of a guy in
> a village is intriguing, but they just aren't doing much with it. The
> only way it might possibly improve on the original is if it comes up
> with a decent ending, which I guess we'll see tonight.
>
>
I wouldn't change a single thing about the original. Crazy, surreal
ending and all. For me it was all perfect. The first and only time to
date I've ever felt that for a TV show. I love it passionately.
--
Legend-11.
"Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence" - Leonard
'Bones' McCoy, Star Trek (2009).
Legend-11
> Ignis Fatuus a �crit :
>> Twin Peaks is a much better candidate for a 'reimagining' of The
>> Prisoner. God Help Us and Save Us from a 'reimagining' of Twin Peaks.
>
> Except perhaps if it's done by Lynch+Frost themselves.
>
> After all, Hitchcock remade a lot of his own British black and white
> movies when he had access to Hollywood actors and Technicolor cameras
> and film.
>
...but Twin Peaks isn't so old as to really warrant it. I think the cast
was perfect the first time around, you'll never get that again.
redcat
> Ironically, although it takes place in the desert, the pacing is
> glacial.
Right, so I don't get why the Electronic Telegraph said this:
"This remake is smart and quick, and succeeds in ways that the original
did not. The compressed time frame of six episodes versus the original's
seventeen gives more urgency to the storytelling, revealing clues to the
mystery at a faster pace and accelerating the viewing thrill."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/6580978/The-Prisoner-AMC-TV-Review.html
P.S. I found it worse than I even anticipated. Yup, it exceeded my
expectations.
Ignis Fatuus
wrote:
>
>It is worth it for that. If you like the original, that is. There's
>not much reason why anyone who has never seen the original should
>watch it, though. It's more heavily padded than Lost Continent, the
>main character is unengaging, and it's too heavily loaded with
>flashbacks and scenes where nothing happens. The send-up of a guy in
>a village is intriguing, but they just aren't doing much with it. The
>only way it might possibly improve on the original is if it comes up
>with a decent ending, which I guess we'll see tonight.
>
At least it was consistent.
Graeme
wrote:
> I wouldn't change a single thing about the original. Crazy, surreal
> ending and all. For me it was all perfect. The first and only time to
> date I've ever felt that for a TV show. I love it passionately.
I did like the last act of Fall Out, but found the first three acts to
be rather tedious.
Graeme
> At least it was consistent.
Yeah, I think one area where we could all agree it exceeded the
original is that there will be no debates about what order the
episodes should go in.
Ignis Fatuus
wrote:
>On Nov 18, 12:16�am, Ignis Fatuus <Ig...@fatuusisland.com> wrote:
At least there were some holes in the plot.
Graeme
> At least there were some holes in the plot.
Both literally and figuratively.
Moor Larkin
There is no debate about episode order, it's a matter of historical
record.... :-)))
And most of us haven't seen the recent revisionism so we have no idea
whether it exceeded, exploded, exfoliated or is merely exhumation.
I'm getting hints that there is no Number One and Number Two is number
two because he is too modest to be number one and number six has to
accept that there is no Out, so be happy and join In........
Next thing they'll be telling us is that all we need is
love..... :-)))))))))))
RVG
> RVG wrote:
>> Ignis Fatuus a �crit :
>>> Twin Peaks is a much better candidate for a 'reimagining' of The
>>> Prisoner. God Help Us and Save Us from a 'reimagining' of Twin Peaks.
>>
>> Except perhaps if it's done by Lynch+Frost themselves.
>>
>> After all, Hitchcock remade a lot of his own British black and white
>> movies when he had access to Hollywood actors and Technicolor cameras
>> and film.
>>
>
> ...but Twin Peaks isn't so old as to really warrant it. I think the cast
> was perfect the first time around, you'll never get that again.
>
I'd love the idea of retelling the same plot with different actors in a
different location at different periods of time/history, mixed with
excerpts of the original TP, like Lynch did in Inland Empire.
Kyly McLachlan could even make a cameo as a pharmacist - that's what DL
wanted Dale Cooper to be twenty years after the series finale. :-)
Ignis Fatuus
<moorl...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On 18 Nov, 14:34, Graeme <graemec...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 18, 12:16�am, Ignis Fatuus <Ig...@fatuusisland.com> wrote:
>>
>> > At least it was consistent.
>>
>> Yeah, I think one area where we could all agree it exceeded the
>> original is that there will be no debates about what order the
>> episodes should go in.
>
>
>There is no debate about episode order, it's a matter of historical
>record.... :-)))
>
No doubt at all. The UK transmission order is the Only acceptable
guide. It wasn't even shown complete in America (although apparently
it was the Americans who stipulated Seventeen episodes).
Ignis Fatuus
wrote:
>On Nov 18, 8:55�am, Ignis Fatuus <Ig...@fatuusisland.com> wrote:
>> At least there were some holes in the plot.
>
>Both literally and figuratively.
Perhaps they were symbolic as well. And they all went down - which
made them more accessible. Perhaps the writers dug them themselves.
Graeme
> There is no debate about episode order, it's a matter of historical
> record.... :-)))
It's a matter of historical record that they were ordered one way in
the UK, a slightly different way in the US, and yet a third way in the
DVD release. But I wasn't talking about historical records, I was
talking about what way they SHOULD be ordered, which is a debate that
seems to go on constantly. With the new show there's no debate: just
throw the DVD's in the trash in any order that you please.
Legend-11
> Legend-11 a �crit :
>> RVG wrote:
>>> Ignis Fatuus a �crit :
>>>> Twin Peaks is a much better candidate for a 'reimagining' of The
>>>> Prisoner. God Help Us and Save Us from a 'reimagining' of Twin Peaks.
>>>
>>> Except perhaps if it's done by Lynch+Frost themselves.
>>>
>>> After all, Hitchcock remade a lot of his own British black and white
>>> movies when he had access to Hollywood actors and Technicolor cameras
>>> and film.
>>>
>>
>> ...but Twin Peaks isn't so old as to really warrant it. I think the cast
>> was perfect the first time around, you'll never get that again.
>>
>
> I'd love the idea of retelling the same plot with different actors in a
> different location at different periods of time/history, mixed with
> excerpts of the original TP, like Lynch did in Inland Empire.
>
> Kyly McLachlan could even make a cameo as a pharmacist - that's what DL
> wanted Dale Cooper to be twenty years after the series finale. :-)
>
All this talk of Twin Peaks has made me dust off the box set, I've just
watched the pilot again. It's still as fantastic as the first time I
watched it. It just brings back so many fond memories. My friends and I
would get together for Twin Peaks parties at whoever had the biggest
telly's house, scoff cherry pie and drink lots of coffee - a tradition
our friend from America brought with him. The opening music transports
me back there in a second.
Why is there nothing as original or good as Twin Peaks any more? For me,
only Lost has since come close...but even that comes no way near close
enough. I'd hate to think I'll live out the rest of my days without
finding another gem like The Prisoner or Twin Peaks on my TV. It's sad. :(
--
Legend-11.
redcat
> Legend-11 a �crit :
>> RVG wrote:
>>> Ignis Fatuus a �crit :
>>>> Twin Peaks is a much better candidate for a 'reimagining' of The
>>>> Prisoner. God Help Us and Save Us from a 'reimagining' of Twin Peaks.
>>>
>>> Except perhaps if it's done by Lynch+Frost themselves.
>>>
>>> After all, Hitchcock remade a lot of his own British black and white
>>> movies when he had access to Hollywood actors and Technicolor cameras
>>> and film.
>>>
>>
>> ...but Twin Peaks isn't so old as to really warrant it. I think the cast
>> was perfect the first time around, you'll never get that again.
>>
>
> I'd love the idea of retelling the same plot with different actors in a
> different location at different periods of time/history, mixed with
> excerpts of the original TP, like Lynch did in Inland Empire.
>
> Kyly McLachlan could even make a cameo as a pharmacist - that's what DL
> wanted Dale Cooper to be twenty years after the series finale. :-)
>
He became a dentist, instead. Close.
Ignis Fatuus
wrote:
In forty years time they may be proven to have been right. But even
then they'll have to ask themselves if the improvements could have
been made without the original.
In the meanwhile We'll have seen a good number of Original programmes
that are ripe for improvement.
Ignis Fatuus
There are many tangential similarities between the two series.
Six is an 'agent' 'renditioned' into a closed community in order to be
interrogated.
Cooper is an agent assigned to a closed community for the purpose of
interrogation.
Both communities are presented in an heavily stylised fashion; with an
emphasis on parody of social conventions.
Six 'escapes' to find himself imprisoned in a parody of his ideals.
Cooper finds himself imprisoned in the antithesis of His ideals.
There's no direct link between the two; but both present a surreal and
highly critical view of social values.
Northern Exposure is a wonderfully alternative view of the surreal
moments that punctuate social conventions in a closed community.
RVG
> RVG wrote:
>> Legend-11 a īŋŊcrit :
>>> RVG wrote:
>>>> Ignis Fatuus a īŋŊcrit :
>>>>> Twin Peaks is a much better candidate for a 'reimagining' of The
>>>>> Prisoner. God Help Us and Save Us from a 'reimagining' of Twin Peaks.
>>>>
>>>> Except perhaps if it's done by Lynch+Frost themselves.
>>>>
>>>> After all, Hitchcock remade a lot of his own British black and white
>>>> movies when he had access to Hollywood actors and Technicolor cameras
>>>> and film.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ...but Twin Peaks isn't so old as to really warrant it. I think the cast
>>> was perfect the first time around, you'll never get that again.
>>>
>>
>> I'd love the idea of retelling the same plot with different actors in
>> a different location at different periods of time/history, mixed with
>> excerpts of the original TP, like Lynch did in Inland Empire.
>>
>> Kyly McLachlan could even make a cameo as a pharmacist - that's what
>> DL wanted Dale Cooper to be twenty years after the series finale. :-)
>>
>
> All this talk of Twin Peaks has made me dust off the box set, I've just
> watched the pilot again. It's still as fantastic as the first time I
> watched it. It just brings back so many fond memories. My friends and I
> would get together for Twin Peaks parties at whoever had the biggest
> telly's house, scoff cherry pie and drink lots of coffee - a tradition
> our friend from America brought with him. The opening music transports
> me back there in a second.
>
Got the French box-set and FWWM last week. Until then I had the VHS
boxset (UK) and a copy of personal recordings a friend made when it was
shown on cable TV in 2003 or something.
Dunno about the Gold edition, but the French edition (published by TF1
and CBS, TF1 being the TV channel owned by Bougues, Lynch's French
producer) has stunning audio and video, even for standard DVDs, plus the
intos by the Log lady, etc.
> Why is there nothing as original or good as Twin Peaks any more? For me,
> only Lost has since come close...but even that comes no way near close
> enough.
I love the X-Files although the main arc is flawed. CarnivīŋŊle had its
warm TP moments, not only because of Michael Anderson.
Twin Peaks remains unique because it mixes absolutely ALL the genres,
and at the same time you can have horror, fantasy, classical procedural
cop story, soap, slapstick comedy, Stan Laurel (aka Harry Goaz),
science-fiction, teen slasher, teen romance, etc. all in the same
*scene*. Plus Badalamenti's music and Lynch's own way to shoot
interiors, especially wood houses.
> I'd hate to think I'll live out the rest of my days without
> finding another gem like The Prisoner or Twin Peaks on my TV. It's sad. :(
>
Well, I'm quite content with the Sopranos (of which the subtext is quite
eery when you think of it, the New Jersey mob being a kind of Black
Lodge where people are not at all what they seem in daylight), The Wire
(as terrifying a cop show as the Hannibal Lector books) and Babylon 5
(greatest space-opera ever, far beyond Star Trek for the quality of its
writing).
And I'm still waiting for a DVD release of Wild Palms by Oliver Stone.
--
Jazz up your life!
Jazzez-vous la vie!
http://rvgmusic.bandcamp.com/
http://rvgjazznstuff.jamendo.net/
"La premiīŋŊre arme de la RīŋŊsistance c'est l'information." Lucie Aubrac
RVG
http://www.theprisoneronline.com/images/stories/prisoner_timeline.jpg
> Northern Exposure is a wonderfully alternative view of the surreal
> moments that punctuate social conventions in a closed community.
RVG
And the DH's suburban neighborhood looks a bit like the Village too. But
I gave up after season 3, I found it not as provocative as Sex and the
City and not as funny as Ally McBeal (in the category of TV comedies
where the lead character is a female).
Andre
> Legend-11 a écrit :
>
>
>
> > RVG wrote:
> >> Legend-11 a écrit :
> >>> RVG wrote:
> >>>> Ignis Fatuus a écrit :
> warm TP moments, not only because of Michael Anderson.
>
> Twin Peaks remains unique because it mixes absolutely ALL the genres,
> and at the same time you can have horror, fantasy, classical procedural
> cop story, soap, slapstick comedy, Stan Laurel (aka Harry Goaz),
> science-fiction, teen slasher, teen romance, etc. all in the same
> *scene*. Plus Badalamenti's music and Lynch's own way to shoot
> interiors, especially wood houses.
>
> > I'd hate to think I'll live out the rest of my days without
> > finding another gem like The Prisoner or Twin Peaks on my TV. It's sad. :(
>
> Well, I'm quite content with the Sopranos (of which the subtext is quite
> eery when you think of it, the New Jersey mob being a kind of Black
> Lodge where people are not at all what they seem in daylight), The Wire
> (as terrifying a cop show as the Hannibal Lector books) and Babylon 5
> (greatest space-opera ever, far beyond Star Trek for the quality of its
> writing).
>
> And I'm still waiting for a DVD release of Wild Palms by Oliver Stone.
Wild Palms is out on DVD. I got it a couple of years ago.
Andre
RVG
> On Nov 19, 9:20 am, RVG<not.h...@themoment.org.invalid> wrote:
>> And I'm still waiting for a DVD release of Wild Palms by Oliver Stone.
>
> Wild Palms is out on DVD. I got it a couple of years ago.
>
Exact: I found a r1 DVD on Marketplace.
--
Jazz up your life!
Jazzez-vous la vie!
http://rvgmusic.bandcamp.com/
http://rvgjazznstuff.jamendo.net/
"La premi�re arme de la R�sistance c'est l'information." Lucie Aubrac
Brian Watson
> In the meanwhile We'll have seen a good number of Original programmes
> that are ripe for improvement.
The Office. Remake it without that annoying fat bloke.
Medium. Go large.
Smallville. Ditto.
Highlander: Remake it with light sabres.
Wonder Woman. Just ... remake it.
UFO. Remake it with CGI.
Dr Who. Remake it without all the grimacing and running.
--
Brian
"Fight like the Devil, die like a gentleman."
www.imagebus.co.uk/shop
Dick Spanner
> From what I've read, the "re-imagining/remake" is airing in North
> America first. I've seen the first 2 episodes tonight, with the rest
> to follow in the next 2 days.
> Are most of the readers here from the UK? Would it be ok to start a
> discussion about it? I hate going on a board and seeing spoilers
> because something's aired somewhere else first. Just thought I'd ask.
> :)