The Prisoner To Be Remade On U.K. TV

An anonymous reader writes "Various UK news sites are reporting that Sky One is to commission a remake of the cult 60s UK TV series, The Prisoner. See u.tv and This is London." From the This Is London story: "The series, which made its debut 1967, is today credited by its fans as being ahead of its time. Featuring McGoohan as a former secret agent trapped in an isolated seaside village, it was shown in more than 60 countries. The new version will not be placed in the original setting, the north Wales village of Portmeirion, or have the arty, 'pop' feel of the original, according to the magazine Broadcast. Damien Timmer, who has been lined up to executive produce the show, told the television and radio industry magazine that the new series 'takes liberties with the original'."

Comments

Why do we need a remake?

[ericdano]

Why do we constantly need a remake of everything? Battlestar Galactica is about the only good remake to come in a long line of them.

I can see maybe another series LIKE the Prisoner, but not a complete remake of the series. The series is a classic. The way it uses music, and of course the mannerisms of No. 6.....

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[negative3]

And what exactly do they mean by "take liberties with the original." That is probably code for "when we got done with this bitch it will be damn near unrecognizable."

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

The new Battlestar Galactica sucks. No Imperious Leader, no Lucifer and no Muffet

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

Battlestar Galactica is about the only good remake to come in a long line of them.

I can see maybe another series LIKE the Prisoner, but not a complete remake of the series.

Interesting. You complain about the rash of remakes, single out the single remake that dared to be different from the original for praise, and then complain that the Prisoner remake should be like the original.

Don't you have that backwards? If the remake is nothing more than the original, there's no point in making it, and the remakes you complain about confirm that. However, a new spin on a classic can be worthwhile, as your praise of Battlestar Galactica indicates. Surely that reasoning concludes that this remake should go in new directions rather than remain the same as the old series?

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[ericdano]

Seriously. The Prisoner is a classic. It would be like remaking Citizen Kane. Of course, they did remake Psycho.......another classic. And look at the results there. Terrible remake.

A petition should be started to prevent this remake from happening.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[AtomicSnarl]

Not just to remember, but to remember better.

As a child, I still recall the "WTF Is This?" nature of the show with the dealings and double dealings in the plot and settings. "You're not Number 6, your THE Number 6!" And of course, nightmares of being chased by those damn white bubbles...

But as an adult, I get the dissapointment of seeing two idiots on a rotating teeter-totter in the control room while some other lackys wave their arms at some edge-lit plexiglas as if it were somehow important. Atmosphere yes, but now very stale.

This is where Battlestar Glactica shines. It updates the cardboard and blinky lights to something more credible which in turn supports and embellishes the plot and the writing. I've heard it said that ST:TOS and (older) Doctor Who were crap, but they were Glorious Crap! The writing and (sort-of) acting overcame the environmental and special-effects cheese factor. The Prisoner was head and shoulders above this. Bring the enviroment up to date, and the original writing will shine through again! With competent acting, of course... One hopes.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[ericdano]

Battlestar is more like a re-invisioning. Battlestar pays credit to the original, and breaks new ground. But it is a diamond amongst many many rocks. I can't think of another example of a remake being up to par or better than the original. And with the bar so high on the original Prisoner series.......

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[ericdano]

Maybe you can get George Lucas to digitally enhance the Prisoner series like he did Star Wars? I mean, I hear he is looking for work now that Star Wars is all done......

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Scrameustache]

Why do we constantly need a remake of everything?

Dunno, I find this one odd.

Although there are things I'd like to see remade... Logan's Run has been mentioned by Brian Singer a few times, that would be nice. The idea was good, but badly executed.

The Prisoner, however, was well done. It doesn't need to be remade.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Doktor Memory]

The important difference is that the original Battlestar Galactica was very, very, very, very bad. Not good. Terrible, in fact. Unwatchable. Occasionally downright embarrassing. Anyone who has fond memories of the original Galactica probably last watched it as a hyperactive 7-year-old. Changing the original series could only improve it.

The Prisoner, to put it mildly, does not suffer from this problem.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[thisissilly]

The industry needs to learn, remaking a good film or series is a losing proposition: at best, people will say "it was as good as the original". Sure, you DO get the brand recognition when the remake comes out, but if your version is not as good, many people will not bother, or go rent the original instead. And your odds of being not as good are high.

The proper thing to remake is the mediocre. Take the good parts, flush the bad parts, and you get something that is equal or better than the original. If I were a movie maker looking to do a remake, I would be scouring IMDB for things rated between around 5 to 6 1/2. Any better than that, you will run in to trouble, and much worse, it likely is not salvageable.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[cytoman]

A petition should be started to prevent this remake from happening.

Why? It's not as if the original is going to be "deleted" and "replaced" by any remake! The original is always there, and if by watching the remake you feel that the original was better, you will enjoy the original more than you did the first time around. If the remake is better, again you win. So, why complain and push for blocking remakes?

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Senjutsu]

The Prisoner, to put it mildly, does not suffer from this problem.

I don't know about that. The original The Prisoner was, to put it mildly, completely ruined by the utterly retarded ending. This is an opportunity to revisit the concept and redeem it by actually giving some meaning to what was going on, rather than just have it degenerate into psychedelic nonsense.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do we constantly need a remake of everything?

Because people watch them!

Seriously, launching a TV show or a movie is an insanely huge gamble. Anything that increases the odds is something the money guys like ...

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, they did remake Psycho.......another classic. And look at the results there. Terrible remake.

You do realise that the remake of Psycho was shot-for-shot identical to the original don't you? Seriously, like I was saying elsewhere in the thread, everything you are saying is an argument for the remake of the Prisoner to be different... and yet you want it to be the same? That doesn't make sense.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[mordors9]

Think of us poor Yanks. We will likely get a cheap ripoff of your remake in a few years if your remake does well.....

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Golias]

The industry needs to learn, remaking a good film or series is a losing proposition: at best, people will say "it was as good as the original".

They will "learn" when people stop watching them.

Nobody makes a movie or TV show for the sake of getting Slashdot visitors to talk about how good it is. That might be helpful towards their goal, but it's not the goal. The goal is to make money.

Remakes make money. As long as this is true, they will continue to be churned out.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

...yet.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Bobzibub]

Like Dr. Who, much of the Prisoner is not simply the theme-park theme... It was a show that explored freedom the limits of individual freedom. Like us, you are allowed to do what you want and live freely, but only on the fixed limits of an island. And I think that the ra-ra "sandbox" that the protagonist lived in is more relevant to our sandbox now, than back in the 60s.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, probably because you were hyperactive seven year old when you were watching The Prisioner.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[sg3000]

> Seriously. The Prisoner is a classic.

Agreed! The Prisoner (minus the last two incomprehensible and silly episodes) was an incredible show. I remember it came on one night late on PBS (after Red Dwarf), and I recognized it from the description on The Straight Dope.

We were all set to make fun of it (hey, look! a campy 1960s era show!), but we quickly became engrossed in the plot (it was one of the better episodes -- The Schizoid Man). I was actually quite surprised how much I enjoyed it.

I ended up buying the A&E boxed set, and I was amazed at McGoohan's understanding of how society tries to mold its citizens. Plus the whole "spy versus spy" part was an intriguing bonus (particularly "Hammer and Anvil").

This is a show that doesn't need to be remade. Today, they'd have to cut it in half, make Number 6 run around shooting people with a machine gun, and have a hooter babe leading woman.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple. TV writers have no imagination. Probably because most of them grew up watching more or less the same stuff they're now writing for television. Expect to see a younger actor with great hair, more fashionable clothing, a non-posh accent, an "attitude", a total lack of eloquence, more sexual situations, lots of soap opera-style subplots, and product placements... not to mention a sports car that is twice as small and fuel efficient. And you dare to ask me: "Why did you stop watching television, Number 6?"!

Mind you, the original was a bit overrated as well.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[On Lawn]

I agree. The series has all the markings of meaning and intention, but its so esoteric that no one really has figured it out. People don't even agree what order the series should be played.

For all the political grandstanding people are putting in shows these days, I seriously doubt that a remake would be able to maintain enough aloofness as to preserve an elusive point.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Doktor Memory]

Mmmmph. I won't make a blanket defense of "Fall Out" -- it's certainly not flawless, and doesn't necessarily hold up that well today -- but I tend to think of its flaws as artifacts of its era, rather than as outright artistic failures.

The series always wavered in between straight-up cold war spy thriller and existential parable of individuality and liberty; I can't fault McGoohan for coming down hard on the latter side for the finale, even if it did skirt the edge of "psychadelic nonsense" as a result. If he'd gone the other way, we'd probably barely remember the show at all. ("Aha, Number Two is... A Soviet agent!" Snore.)

And even at its worst, The Prisoner had neither a Space Disco nor a Cute Robot Dog...

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[slashdotnickname]

Why do we constantly need a remake of everything?
For the same reason some genres of music get recycled... a proven successful formula and a fresh new audience. It's a lot cheaper repackaging the past then developing new stuff. I've never seen the original Prisoner so I might catch the new series... although I doubt it, the premise is kind of stale by today's standards.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[crucini]

For all the political grandstanding people are putting in shows these days, I seriously doubt that a remake would be able to maintain enough aloofness as to preserve an elusive point.

Exactly. McGoohan was so zealously independent and iconoclastic that The Prisoner remains accessible to any individual feeling at odds with a totalist environment, whether that environment is liberal, conservative commercial or whatever. The TV makers of today couldn't resist mixing in their dislike of Bush, Christians, etc. That would prevent the new show from enjoying the wide-ranging and long-lasting appeal of the old.

Of course there's also the inevitable addition of sex, sticky sentimentality, bogus ethical dilemmas, and cheap laffs.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[stienman]

Why do we constantly need a remake of everything?

To renew copyright.

You see, if a company owns the rights to a copyrighted script/movie/show/etc then by making another one with essentially the same script/plot/etc they can effectively prevent others from doing the same even though the copyright for the originals ran out. Once you change enough so that the big media conglomerates can't go after you for copyright infringment, you've created an essentially different story.

Of course the originals can be distributed after their copyright runs out. This is fixed by releasing a 'newly mastered' or 'digitally enhanced' version. They can copyright the new release of the old work, and one has to find an old copy to get the non-copyright version from - which can be difficult, if not impossible, to do since the studios controlled the masters and any original copies that legally left posession of the owner may be poor quality, damaged, and usually form an incomplete set if it was a series.

-Adam

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Profane MuthaFucka]

You missed a huge reason why the Prisoner was so shocking. The last two episodes were a bare-naked call for violent overthrow of the government. If that didn't leave an impression on you, but the rest of the series did, then I wonder what else in life and the literary and performance arts you are missing.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Carpe PM]

"Questions are a burden to others"

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[trygstad]

> The original Battlestar Galactica was very, very, very, very bad.

True. But not as bad as Space: 1999, quite possibly the most bizarre and humorless sci-fi series ever made. At least no one is talking about remaking it. (I think I should not have said anything. Forget you read this. You have never heard of Space: 1999.)

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

The original Battlestar Galactica was very, very, very, very bad.

The original Galactica was actually "very, very, very, very bad" to the ....umm, lessee.....17th power, approximately.

Space 1999 would have been that much worse, except for the fact it gave Spider Robinson a chance to write a scathing review of it. I recall it being in an old Galaxy magazine, but it may have been in Analog. It could have enen been collected in one of his books, maybe "Time Travellers Strictly Cash". Worth looking for.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[pboulang]

I've never seen the original Prisoner so I might catch the new series... although I doubt it, the premise is kind of stale by today's standards.

Wow. How remarkably arrogant and naive you are.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[stupidfoo]

Rosebud.......

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[aled]

Battlestar Galactica is about the only good remake

I still don't understand what people see in the remake of Galactica. I see that it has a lot of fans here, but IMHO is the worst show I'd seen in the last years.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

"McGoohan was so zealously independent and iconoclastic that The Prisoner remains accessible to any individual feeling at odds with a totalist environment, whether that environment is liberal, conservative commercial or whatever."

Does "liberal" have a different meaning in the US than it does in the rest of the world? Surely a liberal environment cannot be totalitarian, simply by definition.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[burbilog]

Because remake is a good business plan. Small risk. Guaranteed profit. Who cares about content?

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[ericdano]

Oh my God. The content and the story lines are great. That is the reason why Galactica has a huge following. Edward James Olmos has been awesome in just about every episode. It's a very powerful show.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd prefer the newest version of the same car TBH.

(The 260 bhp of that one is still measly though... I know of one guy who's modded his up to have 900 bhp.)

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[mpe]

I still don't understand what people see in the remake of Galactica.

Complex characters and strong continuity. Both on which you don't tend to find often in US productions. Probably at least partly due to US broadcasters wanting to frequently show episodes out of order, hence the dreaded "reset button".

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[mpe]

The important difference is that the original Battlestar Galactica was very, very, very, very bad. Not good. Terrible, in fact. Unwatchable. Occasionally downright embarrassing.

Compared with Galactica '80, with it's flying saucers, flying bikes, dodgy time travel (with dodgy Hollywood history), the "super scouts", etc the original Battlestar Galactica isn't that bad :)

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[mpe]

But not as bad as Space: 1999, quite possibly the most bizarre and humorless sci-fi series ever made.

It's more or less classic Gerry Anderson, except that he probably does puppets better than live actors :)

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[mpe]

The proper thing to remake is the mediocre. Take the good parts, flush the bad parts, and you get something that is equal or better than the original. If I were a movie maker looking to do a remake, I would be scouring IMDB for things rated between around 5 to 6 1/2.

The actual bods in charge of TV do not think that way. Especially with commercial TV where the "customers" are more likely to be considered advertising agencies than viewers.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[EntropyEngine]

"Why do we constantly need a remake of everything?"

You should know that questions are a burden, and answers are a prison for ones self...

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Tony Hoyle]

I kinda agree.. Incomprehensible script, amateurish camera work, (mostly) poor acting... I really wish they hadn't called it BSG since it's a different story really - then I could just not like the latest US blockbuster rather than not liking a classic remake (I really loved the original series, although it had bad acting and poor storylines, it didn't take itself too seriously).

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Burz]

I've never seen the original Prisoner so I might catch the new series... although I doubt it, the premise is kind of stale by today's standards.

Wow. How remarkably arrogant and naive you are.

And what are you, a bitter TV addict? Since when are people expected to watch a show before they decide if they are going to watch the show? And they are supposed to be personally attacked because they express disinterest in the basic idea of a TV show?

This is how fanboys sink to new lows when they try to climb onto a high-horse.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

In the U.S. it's become a general purpose smear word aimed at do-gooders... or just about anyone who isn't a rabid right-winger.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[AndroidCat]

"Oh oh, I've got it! We'll do it where the Village is like the Matrix where everything is computer CGI, only we'll have a huge difference because, get this, rather than everyone waiting for The One, they're waiting for Number Six. Okay?"
"Umm, in the end of the series it turned out that he sort of was Number One. It's confusing."
"Damn. Run it past the lawyers. Now, who can we get to play Keanu Reeves?"
"..just about any block of wood.."
"You're fired."

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[MrYuk1723]

TV makers of today couldn't resist mixing in their dislike of Bush, Christians, etc

I don't think you need worry about that, since we're talking about Sky, the News International outlet that makes Fox look like some kind of intellectual hippie propaganda...

NUMBER TWO: Why did you resign?
NUMBER SIX: Dunno.
NUMBER TWO: Come now, surely we can discuss this like reas--
[NUMBER SIX whips out his 9mm and blows the rest of the cast apart while running and jumping. There is a massive explosion and he stares into the sunset in a vapid but moodily-lit profile]
NUMBER SIX [to camera]: Watch "Dream Team" Wednesdays at 8pm.
END.

I don't know. I probably won't bother watching it.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[ReelOddeeo]

Very insightful. But you forget something. Not just to renew copyright, but to add patent protection. Didn't we just hear something about being able to patent stories?

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[heson]

They have to take liberties, lots of liberties. The world is diffrent today, the message has to be tuned, the styling has to be tuned, every detail has to be changed more or less. As long as it keeps the spirit Im happy. (But they will probably do stupid stunts like those who rewrote a discarded 007 script calling it Mission Impossible or make a soap opera of it.)

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Mr Z]

"Answers, a burden to oneself."

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Deanasc]

Anyone who has fond memories of the original Galactica probably last watched it as a hyperactive 7-year-old.

True that. I loved the original because I was in the all important hyperactive prepubescent demographic that drove all of TV science fiction in the 80's. Athena on Battlestar Galactica? Wowie! Princess Ardalla on Buck Rogers? Boing! Princess Leia? Schwing! Those women on Electrowoman and Dynagirl? Sproing!!! Aaaahhhgh what's happening to my body?

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[pboulang]

No, I am not a bitter TV addict. I am a columbian drug lord.

And they are supposed to be personally attacked because they express disinterest in the basic idea of a TV show?

Making a critical (take that as stemming from "critique", not "important", it is obvious you have trouble understanding these things) decision without information is arrogance. Feel free to look up the definition. I also used the word "naive" because TV is not about the premise of the story, but in the telling. Saying that "the premise [of The Prisoner] is kind of stale by todays standards" shows an ignorance to the fact that throughout the history of storytelling, basic premises have been reused over and over again.

This is how fanboys sink to new lows when they try to climb onto a high-horse.

You clearly could have those labels applied to you, so I understand and appreciate your knee jerk reaction. Do you do any critical thinking at all or do you watch shows like Survivor believing them to be unscripted? You feebly attempt to use loaded words and you mismatched your metaphor ineffectively. Do you still cry when you think about those times that daddy touched you? You're obviously channelling a lot of aggression since my original post merely chided someone for leaping to conclusions.

Next time, I'll use a 6th grade reading comprehension as my guide so my point is clear for readers like yourself.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[unknown51a]

The last 2 episodes were powerful.

I just found the Dem Bones song to be disturbing.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Burz]

Do you still cry when you think about those times that daddy touched you?

Haha! You started this by attacking someone and you're trying to end it the same way, with linguistic nitpicking to boot? How pathetic.

Have a better day...

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does "liberal" have a different meaning in the US than it does in the rest of the world?

Yes. In the U.S., "liberal" means "centrist."

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[pboulang]

So you are saying that my original statement regarding naivete and arrogance are unfounded? I had to define my terms because you neglected to talk to my original point and I had to assume you misunderstood. Call it nitpicking if you want.

And regarding attacking, we're in the same boat there.

And regarding your daddy? Come one, that's just plain funny :)

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[crucini]

I'd say a liberal in the US today is roughly one who believes:

1. Aggression by the US is never justified.
   
2. Aggression against the US is always justified. Well, not justified exactly, but "we must ask why they hate us."
   
3. Whenever the US disagrees with the UN or the EU or France, the US is wrong. The US must pass a "global test."
   
4. We are engaged in progress, which means moving away from traditional society towards an ideal society. Every part of traditional society, such as the nuclear family, religion, and respect for authority, is bad.
   
5. Conflicts are generally caused by misunderstanding, or one of the combatants lacking money or education. Therefore it would be foolish to oppose violence with violence, or to punish those who initiate conflicts.
   
6. Anyone who belongs to a "victim group" should develop a sense of group identity and resentment, and constantly demand more from society. Everyone else should accomodate the demands.
   
7. Every woman has a "right to choose" - meaning a right to abortion.
   
8. Informed dissent from the above views simply doesn't exist. There is a tiny group of wealthy manipulators who pretend otherwise, purely for financial advantage. There is a much larger group of unfortunate dupes who vote against the liberal platform (which actually represents their interests) because the manipulators have hoodwinked them.
   

There's much more, but I think that's adequate to identify the genus.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[On Lawn]

Does "liberal" have a different meaning in the US than it does in the rest of the world?

I'm curious, what does it mean to the rest of the world? For every definition of liberal that I can state, it can definately be totalist, even totalitarian. I believe the same for conservatism.

Libertarianism or Anarchy, perhaps is a contradiction depending on how it translates from paper to product. But I'm willing to entertain what you feel liberalism is that would make it contradictory.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[eglamkowski]

Liberal in the US has no single definition. In fact, those who would consider themselves liberal in the historical sense now call themselves libertarian, but even that word is becoming twisted. Conservative also has no fixed meaning.

Republicans and democrats have flip-flopped completely SEVERAL times over the past 150 years.

Left-wing and right-wing have no connection to their historical usages.

Political nomenclature in the USA is worse then useless, it's used deceptively as a means to attack people. The nominal descriptive power of these words is long gone.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[Libby Liberal]

Well, as a pretty much unabashed liberal, I'd like to point out that you're batting zero for eight so far.

Re:Why do we need a remake?

[mink]

Funny story.
Back when the re-make of Time Machine was done. You suddenly could not get film prints of the older version.
It seams like some studios are trying to "replace" the old versions in peoples minds.

The Best Show of All Time

[gadlaw]

My favorite show of all time. Ahead of it's time and gave me a view into reality when I was growing up. I remember when it was on PBS stations and after the show there would be a panel discussion about what it all meant. Classic. And of course, they'll totally screw it up. God, I hate remakes.

Re:The Best Show of All Time

[Davey McDave]

Probably one of my favourite shows too. Though, I'm probably one of the only ones of my generation to truly admire it, which is a pity, considering it really has that same lasting appeal that say, Clockwork Orange has. I still wear my "I will not be pushed, stamped.." shirt with pride when I'm out and about.

As a family we stayed in Portmeirion every year, often in different houses, and to be fair, if you take that out of the equation, it ceases to become The Prisoner. The location was perfect: completely out of odds with what you'd expect, a beautiful mediterranean village in the middle of nowhere in North Wales. Let me tell you, the weather is often quite beautiful there, as well. It was surreal, unusual, and contributed to the feel of the entire series, the eccentricity of it all, the removal from any kind of current social context, making it equally applicable throughout the ages (again, see Clockwork Orange).

And besides, the entire point of remaking the series in a modern context is entirely contrary to the point of the Prisoner: you remake it and you cheapen it, you make it become a fad or a brand rather than a unique point of history (let's face it, the second episode makes a reference to the fact man hadn't landed on the moon yet!). If you want to preserve the legacy, make your own drama rather than ruining another.

To quote the series itself, "my life is my own".

Re:The Best Show of All Time

[pboulang]

And besides, the entire point of remaking the series in a modern context is entirely contrary to the point of the Prisoner: you remake it and you cheapen it, you make it become a fad or a brand rather than a unique point of history (let's face it, the second episode makes a reference to the fact man hadn't landed on the moon yet!). If you want to preserve the legacy, make your own drama rather than ruining another.

I think it is perfectly valid to remake the series in a current conext though. The beauty of the original show was the context in which it was created. I would be extremely happy with a remake if they took the premise and started over completely. It would be a shame to redo with the same script.

The different approaches someone from the 21st century would take is completely interesting. The way that Battlestar tips a cap to the original and completely makes a new story is a good way to do this. The cultural climate is different, let's see a new take on the same story.. doesn't that allow you to be more critical of current society?

Re:The Best Show of All Time

[mpe]

I think it is perfectly valid to remake the series in a current conext though.

It's already been done, by Fox as it happens, when Homer Simpson became "Mr X".

Re:The Best Show of All Time

[Deanasc]

Did you ever stay in the #6 house? Were the interiors the same as portrayed (with obvious exceptions) on the TV show?

Re:The Best Show of All Time

[Davey McDave]

Haha, you've clearly never been to the place!

The place where Number 6 stayed is actually a very small building, the filming inside his house was in a studio in London. The real life building is, suitably, the Prisoner shop, where you can buy all kinds of paraphernalia to do with the series - and the only permenant tribute to the series in the village itself (that day visitors can see anyway, if you stay there then one of the TV channels plays 2 episodes of the series every night).

Other bits of interest include the Green Dome (now erm, a brown dome due to the copper oxidising) which is an art gallery, and the old person's home which is the Portmeirion Hotel - very prestigious place, I believe, they do weddings quite a lot.

If you want to stay there, you'll have to book plenty in advance, though. And pay an arm and a leg. If you ever get the chance, and you're around North Wales, I highly recommend visiting for the day. It's a truly surreal experience.

Re:The Best Show of All Time

[pboulang]

A single episode doesn't exactly fall into the category of "remake". As much as I enjoyed the parody, it was mocking the show as it was. I would like to see a re-interpretation of the material, which may very well serve to reinforce the stength of the original.

Re:The Best Show of All Time

[Deanasc]

No sadly, my one trip to Britain was unfortunately short. I barely made it out of London. I would have very much liked to spend a couple days "In the village".

Sixth post

[AEton]

I am number six... ....wait, who is number one?

Re:Sixth post

[Anonymous Coward]

Floating Point Error! I an NAN!!!

Re:Sixth post

[fishmasta]

I am not a number! I am a free man!

Re:Sixth post

[stevey]

I am not a number! I am a free man!

Nicely sampled and used in one of Iron Maidens tracks, IIRC.

Re:Sixth post

[Johnny Mnemonic]

You are #827305. I am the new #176043.

Will the new Prisoner have a /. episode, where the prisioner has a plan for escape, but it invovles the use of Windows so he's modded to -1 and no one hears about it?

But seriously--this is an interesting time for this to be discussed. I believe it comes from a desire to challenge the group-mind attitude that has led to our current state of politics, just as the first one did. Hopefully the massive suckage of this remake won't obscure that message, but that'll be pretty hard to do.

Re:Sixth post

[Sarisar]

For a quick minute of the song here from the Iron Maiden website (so I guess it's legit!) from The Number of the Beast album

They used a sample from the beginning of the prisoner on the song, but the clip isn't of that.

Re:Sixth post

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was cute how the answer to "Who is number 1" was
"You are number 6" or was that "You are, number 6".
Considering the ending there is a good chance the second meaning was correct.

Re:Sixth post

[nigelo]

Will the new Prisoner have a /. episode...?

The prisoner is just like /. :-

We want information...

You won't get it!

Re:Sixth post

[Fallingcow]

The prisoner is just like /. :-

We want information...

You won't get it!

By flamebait or by troll, we will!

Re:Sixth post

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not a number! I am an Anonymous Coward!

High and futile hopes

[tuoppi]

Hopefully they will put some effort on this one, give it some character and not kill it prematurely (like the original was). Or kiss up viewers with end season cliffhangers.

Re:High and futile hopes

[goldrybluszco]

The original wasn't killed prematurely, there were more episodes made than originally planned. The idea of remaking the Prisoner is a joke, almost as bad as making a sequel to 2001: A Space Odessey. ;)

Re:High and futile hopes

[AuMatar]

You realize that Arthur Clark wrote at least 2 sequels to it that I know of.

Re:High and futile hopes

[Anonymous Coward]

3, if you're curious. They get increasingly strange.(the very fact the last one is 3001 should be a hint...) And there is the point that the Kubrick(spelling possibly?) wasn't involved in the sequel...

Prisoner

[dao_way]

I always wanted to be chased down the beach by a big bouncing transparent ball. I know, I'll take a really innovative TV series from the late 60's, steal the name and "prisoner" idea, change it completely, and dump everything that was cool about it; that is, "the arty, 'pop' feel." My guess is that the ball will be bouncing after the producer, or should we just wait until the "other ball drops"?

Re:Prisoner

[ericdano]

Or take a great book, like "I, Robot", and change it completely, add Wil Smith, and hype it to no end.

Re:Prisoner

[radish]

When I passed my driving test the first road trip I went on was to Port Merrion, where it was filmed. Amazing place, well worth a visit if you're anywhere near. Anyway - the gift shop sold weather balloons, we wanted one soooo much, but as penniless students it wasn't possible (plus we had nothing to blow it up with). So we settled with going down to the beach (the same one he was chased on) and drew a huge bicycle in the sand.

Fun times :)

Re:Prisoner

[TheRaven64]

Fun fact: The reason everyone stands still when Rover appears is because they slowed down the footage of Rover bouncing to make it look more menacing - if people had run away then it would have looked (even more) silly.

The Swansea University Computer Society has an annual beach party at the end of the academic year, and in 2002, a friend brought along a weather balloon. After a couple of hours of blowing it up (no one thought to bring a pump...), we tied it with a load of elastic bands to people and let them run around the beach being chased by Rover. If you stopped, the bands would ensure that Rover caught you...

I'm not a number!

[__aaclcg7560]

Standby for Version 2.0 of The Prisoner. Or is that Version 6.1? Hmmm...

Re:I'm not a number!

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want to spoil anyone's day, but this article isn't quite the good news you might hope. Anyone is Britain reading it will think: "Oh cool. A remake of 'The Prisoner'... oh hang on, it's being done by Sky. Oh shit."

Sky are the Pay TV barrel scrapers in the UK. They charge huge amounts of money for their shitty sat channels and show 99% imports. Their only home-made programmes are crappy pseudo-documentaries and a piece of low-budget excrement called "Dream Team". I don't hold out much hope for this remake.

Re:I'm not a number!

[rwyoder]

Standby for Version 2.0 of The Prisoner. Or is that Version 6.1? Hmmm...

This being the age of HDTV, I am sure you will find reruns of the original on channel 6, and the new series on channel 6.1.

Gah.

[solios]

The Prisoner is absolutely one of my favorite shows of all time. I really don't see why a remake is necessary - the original was just fine, thank you. If we're talking "liberties" I can only assume it'll be in the "sex sells" department as opposed to the allegory department, or the Iconic Representation department.

Sorry, I just don't see The Prisoner working without McGoohan or that 60s Bond-esque Secret Agent flavor.

Re:Gah.

[kfg]

I really don't see why a remake is necessary. . .

Because the "creative" people don't actually have any "ideas."

KFG

Re:Gah.

[gibno2]

I personally would like to see re-runs of the original as I do not think they can possibly duplicate it. More likely they would ruin it.

Re:Gah.

[Brandybuck]

I fear them making political changes. In the orginal you had no idea if the bad guys were the Brits or the Russians or someone else. Has he been imprisoned by his former employers or his former enemies? What I fear is that they'll blurt out the answer, in some cheesy "It's Bush!" shocker in episode one.

Re:Gah.

[psicic]

No, it's a Sky One remake, so is far more likely to be 'It's [insert some random terrorist's name here]'
 
Sky One sure as hell can't be seen as anti-American (unless they're doing some 'Britian is best'-exposé) and their TV shows aren't known for their complex, intelligent plots. (Not to be confused with films funded by the parent company, BSkyB( see http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0228488/ for a very good movie they funded.)

Re:Gah.

[slothman32]

Luckely they are showing them. Or at least here they are.
BBC america usually has them in the middle of the night.

Re:Gah.

[Walt Dismal]

Why a remake is necessary. Well... A producer, a director, and a writer survived a plane crash in the desert. They dragged themselves out of the wreckage and started slogging for civilization. There was no water for days. On the fourth day they came upon an oasis with a small pool. The producer got there first, unzipped, and urinated in the water. In shock, the writer protested "For god's sake, man, why did you do that?" The producer shrugged and said "I thought it needed a little something!"

THAT is why the Prisoner remake is not likely to be any good. It's endemic in the culture to take something good someone else created and made famous, badly clone it, and put one's own stamp on the clone to mark it as your creation. It's ego, stupidity, and the nature of the film power game that dictates it. They'll probably cast some rap singer as the lead, relocate things to some all-purpose Southern California desert, and have a blazing guns finale where the hero rescues Britney Spears from Dr. Evil then laughes heartily and freeze-frames, drinking a cola.

Oh, you laugh? Remember the FOX TV remake of Dr. Who? Where they had an LA street gang machine-gun Dr. Who to death? I have $50 that says ignorant bad taste has not gone out of style. Don't take my bet, it's a sucker bet.

Re:Gah.

[mpe]

I fear them making political changes. In the orginal you had no idea if the bad guys were the Brits or the Russians or someone else.

A way of updating this would be to address the "who are Al-Quada" question, actually far more possibilities here than Brits/Russians. But far too politically incorrect for the mainstream media to touch except to push the OBL conspiracy theory.

Wrong substance

[$RANDOMLUSER]

> The new version will not...have the arty, 'pop' feel of the original...

That wasn't pop, it was lysergic acid diethylamide.

Re:Wrong substance

[scottinflorida]

Now, thats funny!

Signed, Timothy Leary, from the grave.

Will this one make sense?

[skribe]

The danger that a remake will face is that many of the elements that made the original fun will be downright annoying to the reality-tv generation.

skribe

Re:Will this one make sense?

[Scrameustache]

the original fun will be downright annoying to the reality-tv generation.

Sweet! Payback.

Re:Will this one make sense?

[Johnny Mnemonic]

The danger that a remake will face is that many of the elements that made the original

The message that we should challenge authority, that we have certain inalienable rights? I think it's no accident that there are unpopular wars occurring during the timing of the original and the remake.

Unique Series

[TheRecklessWanderer]

The Prisoner was unique in many aspects. I would put it akin to the book version of Hitch hiker's guide to the galaxy. Now there was a fantastic book, with all sorts of insight and clever commentary. The Prisoner was a social comment on our times. We know this because it has been parodied on "The Simpsons". In any case, the new version will ruin a classic which is a sad thing. Why can't people just think up new things, instead of ruining old things.

Re:Unique Series

[Sarisar]

Number 6:Welcome, friend. I'm Number 6.
Number 15:I'm Number Fifteen. What number are you?
Homer:I am not a number! I am a man! And don't you ever ... oh wait ... [notices a button on his lapel with a "5" on it] I'm Number Five. Ha-ha! In your face

Someone had to quote it!

Please recreate that sense of disorientation

[G4from128k]

The Prisoner was great because of the disorienting plot lines and characters - it was seldom clear why #6 was there, what they wanted him to do, or how they were manipulating him. Half the time he seemed to be getting away with some little bit of rebellion only to find that he was doing exactly what they wanted him to do.

I can understand that they may not be able to reuse the old setting, but I hope that they can recreate some place for the "Prison" that has a similar feel of idyllic ordinariness to contrast with the surreal psychological drama.

Re:Please recreate that sense of disorientation

[robertc5]

A setting eerily like Microsoft Headquarters!

Re:Please recreate that sense of disorientation

[mikael]

Most of the series was filmed in the Welsh village of Portmeirion, which has some incredible architecture. It was an excellent choice for filming the series, if for nothing else, all the scenery remains on site, and wasn't dismantled or auctioned off.

I hope they could build a new village or sets somewhere permanent, so that it could become a tourist attraction if the new series were to take off. Although, I think it's going to be hard to compete against such a classic series.

Re:Please recreate that sense of disorientation

[Alsee]

I can understand that they may not be able to reuse the old setting, but I hope that they can recreate some place for the "Prison" that has a similar feel of idyllic ordinariness to contrast with the surreal psychological drama.

That's exactly why they have to change the setting. They need some place for the "Prison" that has a surreal psychological feel to contrast with the idyllic ordinariness of remake "drama".

-

Possible location

[isny]

Guantanemo Bay.

Re:Possible location

[Belseth]

Guantanemo Bay.

Isn't that where they are setting the next Survivor?

Re:Possible location

[On Lawn]

That'd be funny.

Instead of the existential angst ("I'm not a number") expressed so bemusingly in the origional we have the jihadist angst ("I want 72 virgins") portrayed in a fish out of water.

Re:Possible location

[iphayd]

No, that's eastern Europe.

Re:Possible location

[Alsee]

No, Guantanemo Bay wouldn't work... the whole plot falls apart. It completely ruins the mystery and suspense of evil Number One's identity.

-

Re:Possible location

[mpe]

>Guantanemo Bay.
Isn't that where they are setting the next Survivor?

It might work better in Iraq.

And fix the ending too

[SysKoll]

The ending of the original series was a big let down. Looked like the producers and writers got afraid to take a stand and settled for a "you have to imagine it" ending. I hope that this time they'll fix it and make it plain instead of cheating the audience.

And I sure hope they won't put together a half-baked end chapter where they blame the CIA or the Nazis or involve an alien conspiracy.

C'mon, guys, grow a spine.

Re:And fix the ending too

[TeknoHog]

The ending of the original series was a big let down. Looked like the producers and writers got afraid to take a stand and settled for a "you have to imagine it" ending. I hope that this time they'll fix it and make it plain instead of cheating the audience.

The original ending was put together in a hurry, as the series was cancelled.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_Out_(The_Prisone r)

Re:And fix the ending too

[thrillseeker]

The original ending was put together in a hurry, as the series was cancelled.

I didn't know it was a Fox TV show ...

Re:And fix the ending too

[MsGeek]

It wasn't a Fox show then, but since it's being made by Sky TV in the UK, it will be a Fox show now. :P

Re:And fix the ending too

[mbourgon]

Um, I don't see how the ending was flawed.

(from the "Troyer Tapes", an interview with McGoohan in 1977.): http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~culttv/pat_intervi ew.htm

Troyer:
D'ya know what's really interesting, to me, is a number of my friends and colleagues who watched the entire series told me, after the last show, that they were angry because they hadn't found out who No. 1 was. That went by quickly and they refused to acknowledge it.

McGoohan:
That was deliberate. I forgot how many frames; I think there were 52 frames, or something, of the shot when they pulled off the monkey mask. And No. 1's a monkey and then No. 1's himself. It was deliberate. I mean, I could have held it there for a good two minutes and put a subtitle on it saying, "It's him," you know. (All laugh.) But I thought I wasn't going to pander to a mentality so low that it couldn't perceive what I was trying to say, so you had to be a little quick to pick it up. That's all.

Not sure what was so tough, except the combination of the allegory and the real world. #1 is #6. And when he goes back to London, the door to his flat opens automatically. And he shows no surprise. The world is our prison. We are our own enemy. And the cycle begins again.

Be Seeing You...

Re:And fix the ending too

[Reziac]

When I first saw The Prisoner lo those many decades ago, I too was confused and disappointed by the ending, and thought the producers had lost their collective minds.

Couple years ago I got the DVDs and watched them head to tail... and yep, it's now clear that #6 is #1. Over the last few episodes, he's gradually going round the bend, and at the very end goes totally over the edge. We're seeing the world from inside a madman's head -- naturally it looks insane!

"Everyone's crazy here except for me and thee -- and sometimes I'm not so sure about thee."

Re:And fix the ending too

[idlemachine]

and yep, it's now clear that #6 is #1

More importantly, we're told this from the very beginning:

"Who is Number 1?"

"You are, Number 6."

:)

Re:And fix the ending too

[Reziac]

Yep, exactly so, despite the pedantic arguments about the speaker's lack of inflection (ie. lack of an audible comma).

Like most crazies, #6 largely hears what he wants to hear, and we're seeing the Village through HIS eyes.

"takes liberties with the original"

[Dystopian Rebel]

Poll: For the new Prisoner series, which of the following liberties is most likely to be taken?

a) 80% of the production budget will be for explosions
b) 80% of the production will be for cleavage
c) the Lotus Seven that McGoohan drove will be replaced by a Toyota Echo
d) the Rover balloon will have advertizing pasted all over it
e) Adam Sandler in the main role

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[Anonymous Coward]

Should be "Land Rover" for choice c).

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[Jerry Coffin]

For the new Prisoner series, which of the following liberties is most likely to be taken?

a) 80% of the production budget will be for explosions
b) 80% of the production will be for cleavage

The breakdown is likely closer to:

1. 35%: Clueless producer who visits the set once a month.
2. 22%: Explosions
3. 21%: Cleavage
4. 20%: The set that everybody finds cheesy and annoying.
5. 1.5%: Snacks served to the actors/actresses/vistors on the set.
6. .5%: Writing.

To a modern TV producer "real depth" means "explosions and cleavage."

--
The universe is a figment of its own imagination.

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[Pneuma ROCKS]

f) CowboyNeal

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[kfg]

"explosions and cleavage."

The Tenth Victim.

There's nothing quite like exploding cleavage.

KFG

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[AussieVamp2]

That is in the first episode of The Professionals though, not The Prisoner, the 'exploding cleavage' scenario. :)

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[kfg]

http://www.us.imdb.com/title/tt0059095/

http://www.cultsirens.com/andress/andress.htm

"Then came THE TENTH VICTIM (a sci-fi flick) with Marcello Mastroianni (still in a black suit and shades, wow) where Ursula wears the infamous bra that shoots bullets, a scene impossible to forget when you're an impressionable teenage boy."

KFG

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[Alsee]

a) 80% of the production budget will be for explosions
b) 80% of the production will be for cleavage
c) the Lotus Seven that McGoohan drove will be replaced by a Toyota Echo
d) the Rover balloon will have advertizing pasted all over it
e) Adam Sandler in the main role

All of the above, of course.
Except it's obviously not 80% for explosions and 80% for cleavage. That's just silly. It's only 60% of the budget for explosions and 60% of the budget for cleavage.

And before any math nazis jump in bitching that I made some mistake that it adds up to 120%, yes I know it adds up to 120%. No I did not make a mistake. Obviously 20% of the budget is for exploding cleavage.

Like I said, 80% and 80% is just silly. 60% exploding cleavage is way over the top.

-

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[Quiet_Desperation]

d) the Rover balloon will have advertizing pasted all over it

Actually, that's kind of a good idea. I'd have "Sony" and "Microsoft" on them, and if the companies complained, I'd tell them to get bent.

I just hope rover is not replaced by some overdesigned CGI creation. The reason the white ball worked was that you didn't know what the fuck it was. The viewer had no reference point to deal with it. It was a clinical, sinister... something. Intentional or not, it was a brilliant thing.

If they just do a robot or something, it'll just be a, you know... robot. :-\

What they could do is stick with the basic white ball, but allow it to change shape and size as it chases someone. Give it some added capabilities while keeping it an abstraction.

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[plusser]

What's a Toyota Echo? They don't sell it in the UK....

They might try and use a Caterham Seven, which is a kit version of the Lotus Severn!

I can guarantee one think - having used to be a Sky Suscriber, the series will be absolutely rubbish.

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[AussieVamp2]

Wow. Never came across that one!

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[Dystopian Rebel]

"What's a Toyota Echo? They don't sell it in the UK...."

Mwahahahaha! There is no escape. I am Number 2, and any golf cart in the Village will leave your Toyota Yaris standing at the lights.

Re:"takes liberties with the original"

[mink]

Thats nothing compared to Flesh Gordon's "Pasties of Power".

Turkey Number 6

[Charles E. Hardwidge]

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." - Albert Einstein

This is not and never will be The Prisoner. In taking its name it's getting attention, but not on its own merits. Unless it totally blows people away, they're going to have a turkey on their hands. It would've been better to have taken the original creative inspiration and made something new. You may copy a master, but you never be a master, unless you learn to stand up on your two feet and create something of yourself.

"Never confuse movement with action." - Ernest Hemingway

Re:Turkey Number 6

[psykocrime]

This is not and never will be The Prisoner. In taking its name it's getting attention, but not on its own merits.

Very true.

Unless it totally blows people away, they're going to have a turkey on their hands. It would've been better to have taken the original creative inspiration and made something new. You may copy a master, but you never be a master, unless you learn to stand up on your two feet and create something of yourself.

Well said.

Uh, what happened to the movie?

[PhantomHarlock]

There was going to be a Prisoner movie, did it go away? There's no mention of it in IMDB anymore even. Here's something at least: http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hp&cf=prev&id=18084 05507

Re:Uh, what happened to the movie?

[fm6]

If I had a dollar for every movie that was ever "in development", but never went anywhere, I could afford to make a movie myself!

I am not a number...

[Anonymous Coward]

EEEEp! I am a free man! (Tinfoil cap enabled!)

If only it could be as good as

[tenzig_112]

the new Kolchak. Yikes!

Anyway, I vote for number 6 and pretend it makes a difference. I wouldn't want to appear unmutual, now would I?

Lets see what its like before we judge.

[click2005]

I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.

Re:Lets see what its like before we judge.

[Tony Hoyle]

You are number #921437.

Another Re-imagining

[blueZhift]

I'm guessing that they're going for a Battlestar Galactica style re-imagining. So maybe Number 6 will be a woman this time! I must say though that the new Battlestar Galactica has become one of my favorite shows, so there is a chance that something good can come from a Prisoner remake.

Be seeing y....oh never mind...

Re:Another Re-imagining

[Fallingcow]

The new BSG might be my favorite show of all time, if they can manage to end it by no later than the end of season 4. The end of season 3 would probably be a better stopping point. God, I hope they don't run it too long and ruin it. That happens to so many shows (*cough* The X-Files *cough*).

That said, I don't think a remake of The Prisoner could even hope to touch the original, let alone be better. It's just not the same kind of show.

Whatever you say, number 824291...

[Anonymous Coward]

[EOT]

Um... you are stuck in slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone has a number.

D'oh

Will they ever learn?

[Belseth]

Did anyone else have a Kolchak chill go up their spine? Picking the bones of dead TV shows is what passes for original thinking in entertainment today.

I feel sorry for the guy...

[Abuzar]

the Brits'll never let him out.

I declare this PINO

[Anonymous Coward]

Prisoner In Name Only

"Nowhere Man" was the best "remake" of the show

[Eryq]

A one-season hit that was inexplicably cancelled, "Nowhere Man" combined elements of "The Prisoner" and "The Fugitive". Some of the scripts were weak, but the show as a whole was brilliant.

And the theme music Kicked Ass.

Re:"Nowhere Man" was the best "remake" of the show

[ucblockhead]

It was a great show, but the cancellation was hardly inexplicable as it had like three viewers.

Re:"Nowhere Man" was the best "remake" of the show

[shadowhillway]

Agreed, NwM was the remake of The Prisoner.

Unbeknownst to me until I saw this /. story and researched: NwM is going to be released officially on DVD at the end of the year. Although this would be my 2nd NwM DVD set. ;-)

I Regret to Say...

[k0hlrabi]

Your Wedding Falls Square in the Middle of the Prisoner Marathon

Re:Will they ever learn? Ans: Nope

[robertc5]

Yeah, that one sucketh beyond the abilities of a mere mortal comprehend. (Not to mention production values or lame plots); the protagonists all fell into the hip-young-hunky X-file or CSI casting model.

The Show would have been IMHO far better off to have resurrected Darren McGavin for the role. I mean, really. What has Kolchak been up to all these years?

The good news is - they have found a cure for death.

The bad news is - only Bill Gates can afford it.

They don't need to...

[Abuzar]

how about a reality show of daily life in the US?

Re:They don't need to...

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, and since the president is preaching freedom way over there in China, maybe Hu Jintao can give us a few pointers on freedom here in the US?

Re:They don't need to...

[Tony Hoyle]

That's the point though.

The world *is* portmerion. We just can't see it.

Re:They don't need to...

[mink]

Once you do see it, it's hard not feel like No.6

Translation for US audiences:

[MsGeek]

Sky = Fox.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Re:Translation for US audiences:

[Anonymous Coward]

Sky are owned by the same company (News Corp), but don't even have the programme track record of Fox (The Simpsons, The X-Files). They are utter, utter, unmitigated shite once you get past their habit of buying the big U.S. series and showing them first. Any programme actually made by Sky is low-budget dogshit.

Sky? Oh God - not them!!

[John Muir]

Sky One is our version of Fox.

Think of Fox with less taste, brains and progamming and you get the idea.

The Battlestar Galactica remake was shown on Sky here but I think was the work of the Sci-Fi channel more than anything, so don't get your hopes up about this show.

I have a horrible vision of something far worse than the latest series of Dr. Who....

Yep

[Trikenstein]

It'll be Prisoner Island. And when someone gets voted off, the balloon will scarf them up and poop them off a pier.

No Portmeiron!?

[Cath0de]

What? This makes no sense. Why would they take an incredibly deep and bizarre show, in which much of its appeal stemmed from the location and style, and remake it? Well, they may at least explain to us what that ape in the last episode was doing there. I am not a number, I am a free man!

Lovely.

[Anonymous Coward]

Damien Timmer, who has been lined up to executive produce the show, told the television and radio industry magazine that the new series 'takes liberties with the original'."

What do you bet that Mr. Timmer is gay?

Vortoxian Marketroid-speak...

[Anonymous Coward]

'takes liberties with the original'

"Darker and more metroxesual."

"Doesn't that just mean 'angsty gayness'?"

".... DarkER and MORE metrosexual."

I hope they remember which one is the "Original"

[Punto]

This reminds me of what happened to "the night stalker". They decided to remake it, take some 'liberties with the original', so it became a cheap copy of the x-files (which aparently was heavily influenced by the original night stalker), and now it's cancelled.

I hope they make something interesting out of this, and not just try to ride on Lost's popularity.. (I didn't really care for the x-files or the night stalker, but I like the prisoner and lost).

So thats it then...

[Anonymous Coward]

They are going to turn the cameras on the UK public.

The New Prisoner/s!

Because we ran out of ideas and need the money

[toxic666]

Was that even a serious question? Whenever the "entertainment factory" runs out of ideas and needs to get something in front of an audience, they go for a remake. Sadly, they've chosen the culmination of a great actor's TV spy incarnation to mistranslate this time.

Check into the Danger Man -- First Season (1960-1961) and Secret Agent -- aka Danger Man (1964-1966) series if you like The Prisoner. There is a lot of interesting context. McGoohan was the first choice for James Bond in Dr. No based upon the cancelled, original half-hour series. As the spy-genre took hold, the character was modified and came back in the Secret Agent series (you'll recognize the theme song from the Wal-Mart "Roll-Back Man"). That was cancelled after two seasons and then McGoohan went on to make The Prisoner. Agent John Drake was the antithesis of the Hollywood spy-genre because it relies on plot instead of sex and violence.

The Prisoner was the result of the evolution of a concept that had (arguably) failed twice before. McGoohan just managed to get it better each time.

And now the entertainment industry wants to remake something a real talent took to its logical (??!!) conclusion almost 40 years ago. They don't have the vision to evolve the concept, so they will goose it for a couple bucks.

Re:Because we ran out of ideas and need the money

[Reziac]

IIRC, McGoohan owns the rights to The Prisoner outright, and was himself working on some sort of sequel, but wouldn't say anything more about it. Whatever happened to that project? Or is this perhaps its descendant?

A direct sequel, perhaps to bring the series full circle (lots of ways that could go), might be interesting, just as the progression from Danger Man to Secret Agent to The Prisoner was inherently a fascinating concept. And I'd bet something on that order was what McGoohan had in mind for the above project.

But as you say, a pure remake is unlikely to be anything valid with respect to the original trio, nor particularly good on its own merits.

Now, if the exec producer can follow through on his promise "Although it will be a radical reinvention, it will still be a heightened show with themes such as paranoia, conspiracy and identity crisis" *without* trying to rehash the past, then that could become a good show.

It sure can't be worse than Yet Another Reality Show!

Get over yourselves. This could be interesting.

[tm2b]

Ok, now a lot of people are complaining, and asking why a remake is necessary (necessary? What TV is necessary? ).

Christ, people. At worst, it'll suck. Big deal, so does most of everything on TV. It certainly couldn't be worse than yet more Eastenders, Are You Being Served?, 'Allo 'Allo, or any of the other crap that's been spewed by the BBC over the years.

On the other hand, The Prisoner touched on a lot of interesting themes, first among which was the tension between individual liberties and the demands of society. This is an interesting topic, and I welcome any TV that tries to comment on it - at worst, it just won't be worth watching.

If the (extremely excellent, don't get me wrong) Patrick McGoohan Prisoner is so holy to you, go buy the goddamned DVDs. They'll still be there long after the remake has aired, no matter how good or bad the remake is.

SID 6.1

[B3ryllium]

The three adjectives which best describe this [Prisoner] are Sadistic, Intelligent, and Dangerous.

Re:SID 6.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, Vice President Cheney. I know him well...

Why?

[vmxeo]

I'm a huge Prisoner fan, and at first glance was very interested to see it being remade. But after more thought-it's considered one of the best sci-fi shows of all time. How to do you even hope to improve on that? Create a new CGI animated Rover? Write a more surreal and confusing final episode? Replace number EVERY week, instead of every other?

Sorry, just don't see it happening...

Obligatory multiple /.-tradition post

[davidwr]

Might as well get these out of the way now....

I for one welcome our new Number One overlor.. oh wait.

In Soviet Russia, TV kidnaps YOU. Damn, that doesn't work either.

All your island are belong to us. Drat I'm oh-for-three.

How about a nice game of human chess? Lame.

Get rich quick:

1. Find cult classic.
   
2. Announce a remake
   
3. ???
   
4. PROFIT!!!

And finally....

When they broadcast this in HTDV, will Number One personally set evil-broadcast-flag-bit?

MOD +5 JUST_PLAIN_STUPID :)

Why all the complaints?

[Hektor_Troy]

It's not like you need to watch it. If you don't, you won't have your fond memories of the show ruined. And, just so you know, not everyone here has seen the blasted show anyway, nor are we likely to do so - unless it's remade.

Why? Well, why on earch would I want to go and spend a fortune on DVDs of a show, that noone in my circle of friends have ever seen? Why should I trust a bunch of weirdos on Slashdot of all places that this is a must see series? Are you going to reimburse me if I don't like it? I don't have any money to begin with, so even paying 14 bucks for the first season is too much.

Re:Why all the complaints?

[otis wildflower]

If you don't, you won't have your fond memories of the show ruined.

I have to say though that the so-called sequels to Highlander ruined the first one forever.

Re:Why all the complaints?

[Anonymous Coward]

why on earch would I want to go and spend a fortune on DVDs of a show, that noone in my circle of friends have ever seen?

The opinion of your 'friends' is stopping you from watching the Prisioner? Did you get lost on your way to Livejournal and register here by mistake?

I'm not a number, I'm a free man!

[tstur]

http://www.ironmaiden.com/discography/audio/notb/P risoner.asf

Re:I'm not a number, I'm a free man!

[Anthracks]

I was hoping a fellow metalhead would make the Iron Maiden reference in this article :). Mod points to you if I had 'em.

How to make a mockery of the Prisoner

[crucini]

In case the producers of the new show are reading, here are my suggestions:

1. Add a sultry female co-star, #7. Initially, she and #6 suspect each other of being spies for #2. Develop inevitable romantic plot. She tends to bail out #6 when he screws up his plans. Optionally, wrap in black leather.
   
2. Use monumental, fascist-inspired sets with towering spires, grim tunnels and riveted doors. Light dramatically. Every footstep must echo loudly and every slamming door must sound like a dumpster being dropped by the garbage truck.
   
3. Make each #2 a caricature of utter, unsympathetic evil, ala Voldemort in Harry Potter. Optionally, monsterize #2's face with latex appliances.
   
4. Replace Rover with a hi-tech CGI robot that floats around firing laser beams.
   
5. Highlight #6's human side via friendships with other inmates. Feature sticky scenes of sentiment in which #6 exchanges a manly hug with his buddy before one of them heads off to near-certain death.
   
6. Use the show as a megaphone for the political issue du jour. Frex, have #2 refuse to sign the Kyoto treaty, whereupon the island becomes choked with pollution until #6 persuads him to sign. Of course, there must be a "vote fraud" episode.
   
7. Add montages with hip-hop and rock.
   
8. Replace the ironic distance of McGoohan with someone more meaty, sweaty, earthy and hunky. Let him bellow from the diaphragm, "Like, it's so lame being a number! I'm an individual!".
   

Re:How to make a mockery of the Prisoner

[ExoticMandibles]

If he's #6, she should presumably be #9.

larry

I understand Stewart Townsend needs a job....

[Anonymous Coward]

The Prisoner is part of an era. Are equivalent would be for an individual to live under constant surveillance while carrying out his "normal" life.

wow...this takes me back...

[cryptocom]

I remember watching The Prisoner as a kid. I loved the show. It was so different from anything else that was on. Huge plastic balloons chasing people around an island, where nothing is what it seems, and no one is who they pretend to be...it's no wonder i started smoking weed!

It's a Murdoch station, remember

[JoeBuck]

It's a right-wing network that's doing this, remember. They'll probably make the #2 characters be liberals, while #6 will be a crusader for the right, a follower of neoconservatism and Ayn Rand.

Re:It's a Murdoch station, remember

[Fallingcow]

Number 6 already seemed rather Randian to me. He's a kind of superman--he outsmarts just about everyone, even when at a significant disadvantage, he wins most physical confrontations, again, even when outnumbered or at a disadvantage, maintains his integrity where NO ONE else in the Village has--and his character never really changes through the whole series, just like a character from one of Rand's books.

Number 6 is also being in much the same way as, say, Howard Roark was: his purpose is to show you an unflinching, perfect ideal, while the chaos and immorality and nastiness of the world around him is demonstrated to the viewer/reader.

The show also suffers from some of the same flaws as Rand's work--there's only so much you can do with a character who reacts in a super-predictable way and never, ever changes.

Rand was very bad at writing such characters, and seemed to think the reader would be interested in watching an unchanging character go through the EXACT SAME problem 20 times (if this is an exaggeration, it is a very slight one) in a row (reacting the same way each time, of course) and then reading a 20+ page monologue explaining why the protagonist was so wonderful and why everyone else was wrong. If she couldn't do better than that, she should have stuck to writing essays.

McGoohan was smarter than that and only wanted to run what, 7 episodes of the Prisoner originally? That way the character wouldn't start to get dull. Let me tell you, I watched all 17 episodes (for the first time) in the space of 2 weeks or so, and noticed that some of the episodes show signs of stress from the exact problems that I've mentioned. The series is great, but I sincerely wish they'd let him do his shorter run. We'd have missed a couple of great episodes, but the series would be much tighter and have significantly higher per-episode average quality.

I'm not talking about philisophical similarities here, of course. I just thought it was interesting that you'd mention Rand when Number 6 was so similar to the sort of protagonist that she seemed to love.

Re:It's a Murdoch station, remember

[Alsee]

It's a right-wing network that's doing this, remember. They'll probably make the #2 characters be liberals, while #6 will be a crusader for the right

Cuckle. That would be so fucked-up and twisted it would be worth watching :D

Episode list:

1) Number 6 wins because Number 2 is too much of a wuss to use torture to get the secret information.

2) Number 6 wins because Number 2 doesn't want to go to war.

3) Number 2 is killing babies... and making Solyent Green out of them. Obviously Number 6 strangles him to death with his bare hands, to save the cute little babies.

4) We are about to learn the indentity of Number 1 because there is about to be a public wedding between Number 1 and Number 2... but at the last moment Number 6 breaks up the event because he learns that (Egads!) Number 1 is a MAN (and this week's Number two is a man). Number 1's identity remains a mystery.

5) Number 2 won't let Number 6 have automatic assault weapon with built in rocket launcher... Number 2 only allows Number 6 to have a dozen handguns and rifles.

6) Number 2 tries to trick Number 6 by (badly) glueing together some human skeleton bones with some bird bones and fish bones and calling it an evolutionary fossil.

7) Number 2 electrocutes Number 6 with a cattle prod every time he says the word "God". Number 2 has spys everywhere to catch Number 6 every time he tries to secretly pray. Number 6 finally manages to get acomplete prayer off to God while suffering continuous electric torture and God answers his prayer by striking down Number 2 with a deadly lighning bolt.

8) Number 6 gets sick, and Number 2 tries to give him free medical insurance.

9) We learn that Number 6 is even more heroic because he's a former coke snorting aloholic and now he's only addicted to massive quantities of legitimate prescription narcotics... while we discover that the evil Number 2 is trying to grow loco-weed marijuana seeds in his garden to treat his cancer and glaucoma.

-

In a word...

[Thedalek]

Y---Y-EEEEE--SSS--!
-Y-Y--E-----S---S-!
--Y---EEE----SS---!
--Y---E-------SS--!
--Y---E-----S---S--
--Y---EEEEE--SSS--!

Doctor Who on BBC, Prisoner on Sky One. It's hard for me to think of a better situation that doesn't violate the laws of physics.

Re:In a word...

[Alsee]

YEC?
What does YEC mean? And why would you build it out of the letters 'y' 'e' and 's'?

-

Re:In a word...

[ettlz]

Doctor Who on BBC, Prisoner on Sky One. It's hard for me to think of a better situation that doesn't violate the laws of physics.

I can: Prisoner on Channel 4 or BBC or somewhere else I don't have to pay for endless pap imported from the US and various seizure-inducing Pokémon derivatives, all wrapped up in a 1:3 adverts to programming ratio.

Re:In a word...

[Thedalek]

It means my ascii art sucks when I forget to use a fixed width font.

Unknown "them" better enemies

[Siergen]

I share your concerns. Today's writers (at least the ones who can find work in the mainstream industry) seem to have lost the ability to tell a story without figuratively hitting the audience over the head with a club. The original sometimes hinted his own government was against him, but other episodes implied it wasn't. All you knew for sure was that "they" were against him and were watching, always and everywhere...

Today's writers will pick a stereotype "bad guy" (probably the U.S.) and make it very obvious who it is.

Re:Unknown "them" better enemies

[Tony Hoyle]

I always understood that he knew too much and his government didn't believe his reasons for wanting to leave. His government was at the very least in collusion - remember when he escaped in the packing crate, and 'they' faked a plane ride and dumped him in an exact duplicate of his bosses office (only to be found out when they forgot to compensate for timezones)? His boss was there going along with it.

Re:Unknown "them" better enemies

[Siergen]

Yeah, but there were other episodes which contradict that (continuity was not absolute), such as the episode where he woke up alone in the Village, then sailed home to England. His old agency helped secure an aircraft to try to locate his place of exile, but it was a trick and he was ejected back into the Village.

In another episode one of the out-going Number 2's makes a reference to returning to "the Motherland", which is certainly not the way that a Brit refers to England.

Re:Unknown "them" better enemies

[Brandybuck]

That's the great thing about the series: while you're convinced that it was his government, I can find other people equally convinced it was not.

So?

[SuperKendall]

They'll probably make the #2 characters be liberals, while #6 will be a crusader for the right, a follower of neoconservatism and Ayn Rand.

Just as poor. Thinly disguised and overly obvious political messages are never very watchable much less enjoyable no matter what the orientation.

That is because often such messages exist to the exclusion of well-thought plot. And really isn't a good plot what we are all looking for any any fiction?

Re:So?

[crucini]

I find South Park quite watchable, although (or because) it's often a thinly disguised swipe at liberals. But South Park is not on the same level as The Prisoner. The Prisoner is real art, and says something universal about man and civilization.

Re:So?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just as poor. Thinly disguised and overly obvious political messages are never very watchable much less enjoyable no matter what the orientation.

That is because often such messages exist to the exclusion of well-thought plot. And really isn't a good plot what we are all looking for any any fiction?

What? You thought the parent poster meant that to be an improvement? I'm taking it you've never actually READ Ayn Rand if you think he needs to be informed that political messages "exist to the exclusion of well-though plot."

Re:Get over yourselves. This could be interesting.

[swordgeek]

From the description they've given, it sounds like it won't be a remake at all. More than likely, it'll be a crap series that was inspired by a creatively handicapped producer seeing an episode on TV late one night.

What bugs me most about this is that the relevance of the Prisoner was in its setting and mood and social commentary. It sounds like this will have a different setting, different mood, and no doubt different social commentary. Why not actually create something (gasp!) original at that point?

Re:Sixth post Homer

[saskboy]

Slashdot looked deep into my soul
and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined.

-/Obligatory Homerism from Stonecutters episode.

Evil remakes

[el americano]

Haven't you ever heard a bad cover of a classic song on the radio and thought, "Except for these no-talent bastards, I'd be listening to the original right now."? I don't need a remake, or a cover, or an homage, or whatever the hell you want to call it. If it preempts one showing of the classic, then we're the worse off for it.

Answer - We don't.

[jd]

You are correct that remakes are terrible, with NO exceptions to date. (The American version of Red Dwarf being the exception only in that "terrible" is far too nice a term.)

There ARE other stories to tell, though, based on the series. What of the agent who faked his death in the first episode? How did he break in the end? Several Number 2s admitted to being prisoners themselves - was there a natural progression going on from prisoner to guard to authoritarian figure? How did The Village start in the first place and when? There were several prisoners under threat of death that Number 6 tried to save - were they really in danger and how did they resist so much as to be placed there?

There are all the events prior to The Prisoner. For that matter, assuming no other prisoners excaped, there are all the events that occured to the evacuees afterwards. Was a new Village founded? Number 6's house had the automatic door - does this indicate that he was merely on parole from The Village? Or maybe that their techniques had improved so much that a physical prison was no longer required - a psychological one being quite sufficient.

Oh, there is no shortage of things they COULD do, based on the series. So what do they do? Remake the episodes that have already been done, only minus all of the social context that made them meaningful in the first place. The biggest intellectual challenge here is to guess which versions they'll use. (There are at least two versions of the second episode and reputedly different versions of the first and third as well.)

Re:Answer - We don't.

[1u3hr]

You are correct that remakes are terrible, with NO exceptions to date.

I can think of some exceptions. For instance, All in the Family is often considered quite good, being a remake of Till Death Do Us Part.

In movies, The Magnificent Seven (from The Seven Samurai).

Had an impact on me

[Rorschach1]

I never thought the original series had had much of an impact on me. But yesterday a friend sent me a package of surplus weather balloons, and I started filling some up with air to test them out.

Those things were seriously creeping me out, jiggling around in the living room...

UK remakes SUCK

[Anonymous Coward]

Just look at the new Dr.Who or Mr.Fag

Re:Sky? Oh God - not them!!

[unitron]

"Think of Fox with less taste, brains and progamming..."

rejoinder: Is that possible?

alternate rejoinder: Oh, you mean Fox News Channel!

I am not a remade TV show...I am a free man!

[Zhe Mappel]

The new version will not be placed in the original setting, the north Wales village of Portmeirion, or have the arty, 'pop' feel of the original, according to the magazine Broadcast.

They can do without me watching, then.

Really without the subtle, brilliant McGoohan, it scarcely matters. His vision made The Prisoner a landmark of subversive entertainment.

And that is what we so desperately need in the age of the Bush-Blair Disaster. Our societies are riven by lies and led by fools, and it's high time to shake things up. Again.

Don't do it by cannabalizing and retrofitting The Prisoner, for god's sake. Once you strip away its late-period Cold War associations and its theatre of the absurd, you no longer have The Prisoner.

Instead, commission completely new works, unfetter the writers who want to challenge us through TV (as HBO so successfully has done), dare to present new voices, and look toward new greatness.

Howls of righteous indignation...

[Hosiah]

Count me as one who loathes the idea of a Prisoner remake. That show had a frission about it which, I submit, would be *impossible* to reproduce today. As well you might say you were going to re-make the Mona Lisa using Paris Hilton as your model - what makes the picture special isn't the subject, but the presentation, dummy! *(Me imagining I was gripping a TV executive by the lapels and bashing his head on the desk.)

Meanwhile, there's tons of gold waiting to be mined, in the form of forgotten books. Larry Niven's "Ringworld" - God, what an epic it would make, if given the Peter Jackson treatment - a well-realized puppeteer would forever make Mr. Spock look like a person with pointy implants glued to his ears! Ira Levin's "This Perfect Day" - Orwell's 1984 meets Kubric's interpretation of "A Clockwork Orange", with the action pace of a James Bond flick and the characteristic plot-twist-at-every-turn of all of Levin's work. Terry Pratchet's "Discworld" series - now, look at the traveling luggage and Rincewind and Twoflower and tell me they wouldn't be a hit with the Harry Potter crowd! Heinlein's "The Cat who Walks Through Walls" - picture Hitchcock's "North by Northwest" done in space, after Hitch had done a few espresso shots to quicken the tempo. There's decades of material crying to be brought to a larger audience, and all we seem to get is cannibalistic re-digestion of all that was made before.

Re:Howls of righteous indignation...

[cmotd]

Totally, I'd love to see the John Carter of Mars series done LOTR style! These days hollywood just steals from it's own past. And complains loudly when ppl pirate the results. They should be grateful that enough ppl are interested to want to steal their crap.

Re:Get over yourselves. This could be interesting.

[Hosiah]

If the (extremely excellent, don't get me wrong) Patrick McGoohan Prisoner is so holy to you, go buy the goddamned DVDs. They'll still be there long after the remake has aired, no matter how good or bad the remake is.

The agony comes from the confusion that inevitably results. When we talk about the Prisoner from here on out, it'll be yet another show we have to carefully specify the *original* to the video store clerk, who likely won't even stock it because it'd compete too much with the straight-to-DVD remake that they're still trying to move...

Listen, one time grandma says she got my daughter "The Cat in the Hat" for Christmas. I looked forward to passing on a love of Dr. Seuss's rhymes to the next generation, only to see the box opened and it was the Mike Myers abomination of an attempt to do a movie version!!! If you've never seen this (lucky, lucky you!), trust me that it's grounds to murder all involved in it's production. (And the memory of Mike Myers making jokes about drinking piss and showing his bare ass will stick in your memory forever as a reason *not* to take liberties. Period.)

Yes, you can take a big ol' shit on the Mona Lisa and I'll still be able to get clean print copies from reproductions. The point is WHY SHIT ON THE MONA LISA IN THE FIRST PLAAAAAAACE?

Misleeding title

[DrScotsman]

I thought it'd was going to broadcast on uktv from the title.

I'll Wait And See

[Master of Transhuman]

But I doubt they can do better than McGoohan, who was the main force behind that show.

While the last two episodes were highly allegorical (and I still don't comprehend parts of them), there's no denying the significance of the last scene, as the door to his London apartment closes with the same sound as the door to his house in the Village...We are all in the Village at all times.

And of course, as a Transhuman, the significance of Number Six ripping off the mask of "Number One" and seeing, first an ape's face, and then his own, is hardly lost on me.

His words "Every man votes for a dictator" could not have been more prophetic after the last two elections and certainly apply to every other election as well.

OT: South Park

[David Rolfe]

I find South Park quite watchable, although (or because) it's often a thinly disguised swipe at liberals.

What a weird thing to say. I find that South Park is often a thinly veiled swipe at conservatives. I think this is why they still enjoy such a large audience. Matt and Trey are equal opportunity 'haters'. I guess the genius is that we all see it through our own colored glasses.

E.g., when a stupid liberal watches this all they see is a hilarious parody of ham-fisted American colonialism; but when a stupid conservative watches it all they see is hilarious caricatures of elitest left-wing Hollywood.

I find both sides hilarious, which is probably why I hate politics so much.

Re:OT: South Park

[crucini]

I disagree - they're not equal opportunity by any means. They do often attack conservative folly, but not as often as liberal. As for Team America (which was awesome) - the Team are unambiguously the heros of the movie, despite their clumsiness, overblown patriotism, and "very bad intelligence." Parker and Stone poke gentle fun at Red America. But the anti-American actors are portrayed as unredeemably foolish, spoiled and evil, and are violently killed.

Back to South Park: Looking at part of Season 5, C=conservative, L=liberal:

• Scott Tenorman: C focuses on Cartman's evil nature; by implication, condemns his single-parent family.
  
• It Hits the Fan: C Opposes widespread cursing.
  
• Cripple Fight: ??
  
• Super Best Friends: L Mocks religion
  
• Terrance and Phillip: Behind The Blow: ??
  
• Cartmanland: C Cartman's evil nature again, plus lessons in microeconomics.
  
• Proper Condom Use: C Opposes sex ed.
  
• Towelie: C Opposes pot.
  
• Osama Bin Laden Has Farty Pants: ??
  

I see one Liberal and 5 Conservative. May be an unrepresentative sample.

Re:OT: South Park

[David Rolfe]

I said originally: I think this [each 'side' being spoon-fed their own position in a way that is amusing to the 'other side'] is why they still enjoy such a large audience. Matt and Trey are equal opportunity 'haters'. I guess the genius is that we all see it through our own colored glasses.

You said I'm wrong, it's obviously a conservative show that makes fun of liberal consistently, "I disagree - they're not equal opportunity by any means. They do often attack conservative folly, but not as often as liberal." You then go on to point out episodes you believe are 'conservative' (even though calling any episode of South Park conservative is a stretch).

I think it's your colored glasses. Each of the episodes you marked as conservative could be labeled 'makes fun of conservatives'. To claim that South Park is against wide-spread cursing (and is therefor pro-conservative) based on the existence (and hyperbolic consequences depicted) of the we-can-say-shit-on-TV-episode... that's just retarded. Maybe satire and parody are lost on you. If anything it's a protest against the conservatives running the FCC (this meme is repeated frequently on the show).

Further, America! Fuck yeah! Overblown patriotism has never stopped nuclear proliferation or terrorism. It's just a farce. "the Team are unambiguously the heros of the movie, despite their clumsiness, overblown patriotism, and "very bad intelligence." Parker and Stone poke gentle fun at Red America. But the anti-American actors are portrayed as unredeemably foolish, spoiled and evil, and are violently killed." Which entirely makes my point -- equal opportunity. If this isn't a parody of our failed, contemporary foreign policy, I don't know if we can even agree on anything. If not, there's really no point in debate.

This season so far (season 9) has also been pretty equal opportunity (barring the recent episode making fun of R. Kelly, Scientology and Tom Cruise's gayness -- that doesn't really seem political on any level other than pointing out that Scientologists are bat-shit insane) made fun of topics like global warming (Two Days before the Day After Tomorrow), gay marriage (Fancy new Vagina, Follow that Egg), fun with racism (Gingerkids), cross-dressing plus WMD (Marjorine), the PSP episode or why conservatives are wrong about Terry Schiavo (Best Friends Forever), racism and stupidness of Hollywood movies (Die, Hippy Die), etc.

Anyway... nothing personal, but it doesn't look like you are going to change my mind. The Point stands. I see more than one side when I watch; maybe you don't, but your anecdotal evidence isn't swaying me. South Park is equal opportunity and this why it continues to be successful. If the far-fringes of both sides (that can stand to watch swearing kids, butt-sex, violence and gore) only see the part of the show they want to see -- not the giant homosexual fuck-suck fests to demonstrate against Goo-backs (racism, bad immigration policy) and not the natural unavoidable Capitalist progression of ma and pa shops into Satanic soul-devouring big-box stores for middle-class families (the Walmart question) -- that doesn't undermine the fact that fun/admonishment is pointed to both sides of every issue covered. The ending of every show can be summed up: Stan (or Kyle) gives a little sob story about why we should take a common-sense, centrist, pragmatic, inclusive position on nearly any debate. Cartman's point of view, while almost always hilarious is almost always wrong (just to mix it up, I think they've given one or two episodes where Eric was 'right').

Well again, nothing personal. I don't mean to sound too riled up.

I have a plot line.....

[mormop]

The Prisoner part two - Synopsis....

A TV executive wakes to find himself in a strange isolated place with a whole lot of other TV execs. The only way he can get himself released is by coming up with an original idea for a new series. Given the current output of recycled bollocks on the telly it could easily run for several thousand episodes.

This is Sky 1, Fols.

[Anonymous Coward]

The BBC Remakes Dr Who. Big success, and well in keeping with the original whilst updating the format and making a truly modern TV programme. Well done BBC.

However, Sky 1's original drama series do not bode well:
  Dream Team - wooden acted soap opera about a purple football (soccer) team.
  Mile High (or whatever it's called)( - wooden acted soap opera about the (s)exploits of a team of artificially orange cabin crew on an airline seeming hopping between England and popular 18-30 destinations.
  Hex - supernatural "thriller" with a lesbian ghost and barely legal teens skimping about in underwear. Story itself on the level of Look and Read (story-lead reading programme - UK folk will know what I mean) but without the learning inserts. The words "gaol" and "bait" bityh have the "ay" sound in them. Hey I'm learning already.....

Other "original programming" by Sky One recently have involved looking at the best pubs to have a fight in, the best gangs in the world (and how to get killed by them).

Everything else on that channel appears to be The Simpsons. I have Sky One because, amongst the rubbish and dross, you find gems like Battlestar Galactica and Deadwood.

In short - I have no faith in Sky One being able to pull this off. Sure, they have the money, so production values will probably be high (I bet they see this as some kind of trophy so they will be willing to spend), but I have little confidence that they will be able to match the original's social comment, satire and style. I think it will be a mish-mash of pseudo cryptic dialogue, and every episode will end with a resolution. It will also have to pander to the short attention-span audience, and very likely have to explain everything too.

And, finally, I bet they either murder the theme tune....

chess

[lovebyte]

The prisoner turned me off chess for ever!

Love, love, love

[Roland Walter Dutton]

No. The things that happen in "Fall Out" - including what the Village does after Degree Absolute, the choice it gives to (the former) Number 6, the choice he makes, who Number 1 turns out to be, and what happens in the end - make sense. They just don't make sense on a "real world" spy-fiction level.

The Prisoner is an allegory. Not a silly elaborate allegory: "the Butler symbolises Unease, while the shape of the telephone handsets represents Half-Truth"; nothing like that. It's simply that the Village symbolises the human world we live in. After the undertakers call, it seems at first that Number 6 is still in his room. That's because he hasn't travelled at all. The place he wakes up is the same place he fell asleep in - "The whole world as the Village.". The Prisoner immediately starts trying to escape the Village and get back to London. But if the Village is the whole world, how can he escape it? That's why it's so crushing when Number 2 taunts him at the end of "Dance Of the Dead": she's right. Number 6 can't escape, because there is nowhere for him to go.

"Fall Out" gets wild and wooly because it pulls back the curtain and shows the allegory behind the spy-story. It has to do that because a spy-story ending - "He wins in the end, it was Dr. Sinistro, bye" - makes no sense in terms of the allegory. Number 1 has to be who he or she (haha, no spoilers here! :) ) is revealed to be in "Fall Out". Who or what else could be Behind It All, responsible for the whole human condition? Communism? Dr. Sinistro? Not flossing? The Prisoner can't just "win in the end", unless you're happy with the concept that he creates a perfect world for everyone and we all live happily ever after. It's not that Patrick McGoohan couldn't think of a good resolution to his allegory that also "makes sense" as a spy plot. There couldn't be such an ending.

That's not to deny that "Fall Out" is consciously zany, though it's more pomo than psychedelic. In fact, part of the problem seems to be that the script doesn't lay on the pomo heavily and obviously enough for everyone to pick up on what is happening. Not that they'd necessarily like the episode any better if they did. It doesn't deliver on the spy-story level. But it's certainly not meaningless.

You are Number 6

[MrSteveSD]

We are all number 6. We are exposed to psychedelic brainwashing TV and we go about chanting the same implanted phrases like a mantra. Insurgents Foreign Fighters War on Terror etc The newspapers are just as brainwashed. When was the last time a paper showed some independent thought and said Resistance instead of Insurgents? or that "War is Terror"? Part of the prisoner was about how technology in the future would be used against us. Those fears certainly weren't ungrounded. The government tells us they have to spy on us for our own protection. They also seem to think they have the right to lie to us. When people try to protest they are beaten up by riot police and/or arrested, assuming they can get a permit to protest at all. Be seeing you....

Hitch Hiker

[Anonymous Coward]

Surely you mean the radio play? If you haven't listened, give it a try - it's by far the best version, those radio pictures are just funnier!

Available from the interweb:

http://www.kcrw.com/cgi-bin/db/kcrw.pl?show_code=h g&tmplt_type=Program

God no..

[nurb432]

Why do they have to go out and ruin yet another classic?

This pattern of systematically destroying our classic shows/books has got to stop.

Time for a protest.. The Prisoner is sacred ground.

Raiding the archives

[Iron Fusion]

I'm not an IP! I'm a free man!

It's not America...

[Anonymous Coward]

The UK is not America. Remember? The British government is lead by the leftist Labour party and Tony Blair. All European nations still have large socialist parties and we regard the American right-wing as monstrous! Granted it's owned by News Corp - but they have to adapt to the market and the average Brit is not Fox viewer!

takes liberties with the original

[Teahouse]

In other words, "We are too afraid to take huge chances that might fail like the original, so we are going to make a "safe" Prisoner (oxymoron) with bland scripts (written by committee and network execs) and film the entire thing in an awesome "futuristic" village set (It will look like Ghery's crap). We expect this to draw a wider audience (morons) to see our new "Prisoner" (in name only) and therefor be successful (make more money but have no heart)."

The Prisoner is one of the few shows/productions I have ever watched that I feel strongly should NEVER be remade because it's wierd chemistry could only be created once. Some of the chances they took were just awful, but it all comes together because it was like nothing made before or since. You can't recreate it, and you xcan't "make it better". Why BBC is even trying to do this I have no idea, Prisoner fans will absolutely not watch it, and regular folk won't get it. Where is the audience, and what is the point? Just show the original again, it's always fresh.

Be seeing you.

Sky isn't necessarily bad..

[Doktor Memory]

Although I think remaking The Prisoner is an awful idea, SkyTV's involvement doesn't necessarily make it worse. Just because they're part of News Corp doesn't mean that they're the sample people who produce "Cops".

Sky is probably best known in the US for co-bankrolling Ron Moore's remake of Battlestar Galactica with SciFi Network, which I believe at least one or two people around these parts liked. (This is why the first season of Galactica aired first on Sky -- they got first-airing rights as part of the deal.)

Re:Sky isn't necessarily bad..

[acb]

Sky are lowbrow and proud; the most significant things they produce themselves are "documentaries" in which celebrities express their opinions, backed up by flashy graphics and interviews with other celebrities, and not even a bare minimum of critical thought or intellectual engagement. Don't expect a Prisoner series in which they have creative input to appeal to anything but the lowest common denominator. Certainly don't expect it to have subtlety or be written on multiple levels, because that's not part of Sky's business model.

My guess is that it'll be somewhere between a 24-style action thriller and the sort of celebrity-sexploitation reality-TV that fills cable TV in the UK.

Here's why.

[webweave]

I for one loved The Prisoner and visited Portmerion just because it was in the show but...

Entertainment is a business, business does not have a creative bone its body.

People who work in entertainment want to get paid.

Those whose job title contains the word creative have to convince those with no creativity to open up the purse and invest in some project that has appears to have some chance of making a profit.

By regurgitating classics you are saying "this made money in the past and can again" to those who would not understand and would most likely be scared by a truly creative idea.

The result is those working in entertainment get jobs, business gets a return on investment, nothing more.

Were going to have to avoid the theatre and contest fake reviewers for giving positive reviews to all this remake crap if we want to ever see an original idea again.

Kind of reminds me of GM in the 70's and 80's when they rebadged poorly designed and built Chevys as Cadalliacs. They were using the remaining past glory of the Cadalliac to sell the imposter, it worked for a few years until they burnt enough people that the line had to be slowed and cars started to pile up on lots while customers switched to Lexus and BMWs.

counter-examples

[geoswan]

Most remakes suck.

But the occasional remake is so much superior that people forget it is a remake. Did you know that the Humphrey Bogart version of the "Maltese Falcon" was a remake? There were earlier 1931 and 1936 versions.

Did you know that the wonderful "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels", with Michael Caine and Steve Martin, was a remake of "Bedtime Story", with David Niven and Marlon Brando? Michael Caine's performance is at least an order of magnitude superior to Niven's original performance. The remake was both funnier and deeper.

Have you ever seen the 1973 Richard Lester version of The Three Musketeers? Subsequent remakes suck in comparison. But the 1973 version is also a remake.

Slashdotter who lives nearest the village?

[HogynCymraeg]

I live in Blaenau Ffestiniog - 8 miles away. Am I the nearest slashdotter to the village?

More simply I suggest it is risk aversion

[PurpleWizard]

Doing a remake with an existing name "The Prisoner" catches peoples existing mind share automoton will sit down and watch it (at least once) mentality.

Things that are competely new are often never recognised as good or classic in their own time. Especially think art. So remakes are in effect cashin in on the past risk taking.

What we all want to know therefore is where are the risk takers providing "The Prisoner" of the future.

On the other hand there is something culturally useful to remakes in that they can post a contempory take on the times for comparison with the past. Allowing futures generations (assuming human survival) to judge us for our era of failing innovation, greed and cowardice. I'll stop there I'm starting to rant in a detracting kind of way

Re:Get over yourselves. This could be interesting.

[acb]

This isn't the BBC, this is Sky, Rupert Murdoch's tabloid cable-TV channel.

Had the BBC remade it (unlikely, as it was not a BBC programme), there would be some hope of the producers assuming that the viewers have some intelligence and wish to have it stimulated. With Sky, there is virtually a guarantee that it will be a no-brainer.

McGoohan Was Great

[camperslo]

Liked his character much more than James Bond. The BBC has some interesting things to say about The Prisoner and Patrick McGoohan.

"Producers of the James Bond movies are widely reported to have offered the role of 007 to Patrick McGoohan, who allegedly declined due to the character's propensity for casual sex and extreme violence."

From an Episode

[peetm]

Why?

Re:Get over yourselves. This could be interesting.

[stry_cat]

Christ, people. At worst, it'll suck. Big deal, so does most of everything on TV. It certainly couldn't be worse than yet more Eastenders, Are You Being Served?, 'Allo 'Allo, or any of the other crap that's been spewed by the BBC over the years.

First, Are You Being Served? was one of the best TV shows ever made. It's a sitcom but yet it does the full range from funny and stilly to serious and a bit depressing. For Americans it provide a very interesting look into the still highly structured British society of the 60's and 70's.

Now the awful Are You Being Served Again just plained sucked. It had all the right elements, but the writters took the show in the wrong direction into plain looney sistuations.

Second, you are right about the remake of the Prisoner. It will suck, no big deal. About 90-99% of TV suck anyway. Worst that will happen is that we all go find the first series on DVD and show it to all of our friends. Amazon.com has the entire series it for just $70! http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00005NKCQ/104-40 95099-4359934?v=glance&n=130&n=507846&s=dvd&v=glan ce

I've figured it out

[TheConfusedOne]

The problem with the left wing and right wing description is that politics is a helicopter not an airplane.