The Prisoner Reimagined

[eponymous_rose]

For those who haven't seen it yet, here is a nine-minute preview of AMC's The Prisoner, which is, of course, a reimagining of the 1967 classic, this time starring Sir Ian McKellen and Jim Caviezel.



I'll jump on the bandwagon and say this: I think it'll be enjoyable on its own merits, but not particularly as a remake remake. McKellen looks spectacular, and I'll probably be swayed by Caviezel eventually, and I very much like the look of it, but it seems a lot like two of my favourite things will be changed up quite a bit.

The first is the sheer, giddy surrealness of the Village itself. The original seemed more... I don't know. Over-saccharine in frankly impossible ways, which made the undertones of menace much more effective. This new Village looks a lot like it's trying very hard to show you just how gosh-darn weird the place is, honest. It's tricky to judge based on the preview, which is all about the creepy jump-cuts and such, but this version seems to be purposely pulling out all the gimmicks that we've seen in TV and movies a million times before - the ones where we smile sagely and go, "Ahh, non-linear storytelling. Oooh, surrealism. I remember this." It's risking cliché, is all I'm saying.

Also, and I'm not sure about this one, but it looks like they may have cut the espionage part of it? Is this all just happening to ordinary people? Or are we being nice and subtle and revealing bits of Number Six as he figures them out himself? (One of the things I really liked about the original was that Number Six's level of self-awareness and memory seemed to change from episode to episode - he was losing bits of himself all along. Essentially, where the reimagining seems to be about his defeating a sort of self-amnesia, literal or no, the original was about slowly and inexorably acquiring that same loss of self. They could well be telling the same story from two different directions, here.)

Anyway, it's all sort of a moot point, because it's a reimagining, and I for one am extremely interested to find out how much different our Village is now, 42 years later.

Comments

[pimpmytardis.livejournal.com]

First of all, I'm not convinced by Caviezel in the clip-- he seems so generic. I sent the clip to my sister, saying "Needs moar spies." To which she replied, "Needs moar Wales!" How true!

[everlasting-day.livejournal.com]

I've still yet to see a full episode of The Prisoner (I know, I'm a terrible cult TV fan), but the village in the remake doesn't look a patch on the original. Ian McKellen looks great, but I dunno, I can't say the clip really got me all that excited (mainly due to Jim Caviezel who's so boring) - I think I'll just have to finally stop procrastinating and watch the original series instead!

[alto2.livejournal.com]

I haven't finished watching the original yet, but I admit I'm intrigued by what they're doing with the remake. I think it's wise not to try to make it just like the original, though I agree that Caviezel is pretty generic. My main objection to the whole idea basically comes from the fact that we seem to be remaking everything lately. Why the heck would you even touch something as iconic as The Prisoner?? Wouldn't it be nice if someone remade something that didn't work so well into something worth watching instead??

[oldstarnewshine.livejournal.com]

I really wish they'd stop remaking '60s and '80s shows (especially successful ones, how about pulling another Battlestar Galactica out of the air instead?) and invent some new ones. That said, SIR IAN \o/. I love love love dystopic anything, so this got me totally excited! (And that second point of yours got me thinking-- maybe this is sort of a sequel to the original?)

[shannonsequitur.livejournal.com]

BWAHAHAHA ICON.

[imsane-honest.livejournal.com]

The original "Prisoner" is one of those many TV shows of days of olde that I've been meaning to watch forever. The remake seems as if it could be very good in it's own way, but even I can tell that it lacks the eeriness I got from the few clips I've seen of the original. This isn't necessarily bad, but it's definitely different.

Caviezel isn’t the guy I would have chosen for the role, in all honesty. He’s in one of my favorite movies (“Frequency.” Good times), but the favorite status isn’t due to his acting at all. However, that was five-odd years ago, so I hope he’s gotten better.

And hey, Ian McKellen is made of about 18 different types of awesome, so who am I not to cheer like a fangirl?

(This is really just my way of saying that I agree with you and giving a ‘hi’ after a long, terrible absence. Emphasis on the terrible. And the long. And I suppose the absence as well. Woe!)

[eponymous-rose.livejournal.com]

Hee! Great responses - that about sums it up. ;)

Mostly I can't stop laughing at the icon. It's mesmerizing!

[eponymous-rose.livejournal.com]

Ooh, you should! Excuse me while I cough in a way that is not at all significant. (http://eponymous-rose.livejournal.com/239016.html) It's really wonderful. I also recommend the series Patrick McGoohan did just before it - Danger Man - as a more conventional spy show that nonetheless manages to subvert a few clichés of its own.

[eponymous-rose.livejournal.com]

Yeah, there seems to be this whole obsession lately with fixing things that aren't broken - I mean, there's drawing in a new audience, and then there's just cashing in on something that was already fairly popular.

I think it's wise not to try to make it just like the original

Oh, definitely! That's always a danger - and I am definitely looking forward to finding out just how different it's become.

[eponymous-rose.livejournal.com]

Oooh, agreed! I mean, you'd think it would at least be less stressful than messing with something this iconic, where all eyes are going to be on your every foul-up. ;)

[eponymous-rose.livejournal.com]

I'm not familiar with Caviezel at all, so I'm not entirely sure what to make of him yet, but I'm going with the tried-and-true 'benefit of the doubt' approach. :D

And I definitely recommend The Prisoner, for it is awesome and short and bite-sized and doesn't involve the ten or eleven series of catch-up that most iconic TV shows require. ;) Excuse me while I cough meaningfully. (http://eponymous-rose.livejournal.com/239016.html)

And hiii! This absence has been long and terrible indeed, mostly because I am terrible at commenting on your awesome updately posts of awesomeness. I shall attempt to rectify this posthaste! *dramatic pose*

[imsane-honest.livejournal.com]

Two steps ahead of you. I may or may not have DELECIOUS LOBSTERed the first two episodes... Now it's just a matter of actually finding the time to watch them... *plots*

Dude, I've been failing as much - nay! - more than you have. Your flist is roughly the size of a small country, whereas mine's an unruly small town in the hilly regions with lots of inbreeding. But never mind! We shalt endeavor to be awesome once more!