The prisoner remake - I'm liking it. Who's with me? Different story, interesting

[Liberal_in_LA]

[Orrex]

1. I kind of can't stand Jim Caviezel

Even ignoring The Passion of the Christ, he always seems kind of watery to me.

Ian McKellan is invariably excellent, of course.

[Brickbat]

2. I thought it was crap, frankly.

And not good crap that's fun to watch anyway. There was no suspense or intrigue, and James Caviezel was totally unconvincing, IMO.

Your mileage, clearly, may vary!

[CBGLuthier]

3. I finally decided to not bother watching it.

Nothing new there. Ultimately, to the matter of remaking it, I quote the real NUMBER Six's question to the General.

"Why?"

[Liberal_in_LA]

5. Well, I'm sure AMC will air it 50 zillion times. You can change your mind

;-)

[pokerfan]

4. I watched it

to give it a fair try but I probably won't be back for more. An extrememly dull remake without the fun of the original and Jim Caviezel is no Patrick McGoohan.

Ian McKellen is the only reason to watch and that's just not quite enough.

[Moondog]

6. +1

[rebel with a cause]

11. Exactly!!

My question is: Where is the sarcasm? That is what made the original good. That and the different colorful outfits the villagers wore. I miss the old story which I thought was ten times more interesting than this one has been so far.

My daughter rented the original series a few months ago and we watched it. Although I may give it this one more chance, I would recommend anyone to do rent the old one instead of watching this thing. Its campy and dated but still beats this one. Just my opinion. :shrug:

[azmouse]

7. I never saw the original and know nothing about the story.

I saw some of the episode last night. It wasn't terrible but it wasn't very compelling either.
I'll probably watch the rest of it but I haven't decided if I like it yet.

[valerief]

8. Why can't the 21st century have new shows? Why do they all have to be 20th century remakes? nt

[curlyred]

9. I'm a little irritated (spoiler)

by the Twin Towers imagery and references. Seems a little conspiracy theory-ist and even a tad disrespectful.

[Brickbat]

10. When I saw that, I said out loud,

"Seriously? That's seriously the best they could do? WTF?"

[rebel with a cause]

12. When I saw it, I said nothing

but waited until my kids noticed it twenty minutes later. When they said WTF I laughed at their delayed notice of it and their reaction. Inappropriate is all I can say about that image being used for such a dumb plot unless they come up with an awfully good ending to explain it all. I loved the original Prisoner but this just does not live up to the campiness and head scratching reactions that show had. This one is taking itself way too serious to be a good remake.

[Liberal_in_LA]

13. agreed. 4 more hours to show that using the twin towers was appropriate

[CrownPrinceBandar]

14. I'm pretty meh on this..............

I'll watch the rest of it to see how it ends. IMHO, Caviezel was a wrong pick for 6, he's not nearly dry or witty enough for the character. Also, the twin towers imagery is way too heavy-handed, in a Mel Gibson kind of way.

I give it a solid C.

[elocs]

15. I haven't seen it, but what ever is the point of remaking a tv classic like The Prisoner?

The original was 17 episodes and was solidly good because unlike what is done now they didn't stretch it out for years until it was just a shadow of what it once was just to get the show into syndication to make more $.

[Liberal_in_LA]

16. Anyone still watching?... crickets crickets...