Quote:
Originally Posted by
Josh Dial 
Given the tone of this comment (and the one above), I highly doubt you actually watched the entire mini-series, and most likely gave up during the first episode (or perhaps skimmed aheard for a bit).
After watching the entire 6-episode series, I thought it was well-done, but perhaps a little too "high-concept" for the bulk of viewers. During the big reveal, which comes only in the final episode (of course), the show sticks with its surreal, jumbled (but in a good way, in my opinion) manner of story-telling, and you really have to pay attention to grasp it all.
I will ignore the accusations and grant you permission to doubt whatever suits you.
If you'd been paying attention, you'd know the miniseries was broadcast in three segments lasting two hours each, not in six episodes.
I knew where it was going and how it would end mid-way through the second two-hours, not because I was paying attention, but because I know something about storytelling, and there was nothing here I haven't seen on the page and the screen before.
Your synopsis-spoiler is correct, however, and what you fail to comprehend is that if one word of your synopsis is correct, this remake is not
The Prisoner. It is something else, something different.
Patrick McGoohan's
The Prisoner is a specific concept requiring a specific approach.
This flaky remake that you think so highly of does not "play the scene."
A remake infers an obligation to be faithful to the original.
For examples of remakes that are faithful to the original programs, which "play the scene" while simultaneously contributing something new, check out the feature film versions of
The Addams Family and
The Flintstones, both good examples although in a different genre.
In contrast, the producer / writer of this flaky remake has an entirely different concept that is demonstratively at odds with the very subtext, substance, and concept of the original
The Prisoner.
He inserts a few references to
The Prisoner to justify stealing the title and to piggy-back his program on the commercial viability of the original.
Bill Gallagher and company do not respect the original nor do they feel obligated to be faithful to all the things that made it special. Instead, they simply exploit it for their self-aggrandizement. Their contempt for the original even extends to the promotion, as evidenced by Ian McKellan's remarks:
He is, of course, really talking about himself and this "remake."
If AMC had removed the unnecessary and irrelevant references to
The Prisoner, and perhaps called their mini-series
The Village or
Zardoz or
Solaris or
Alice Through the Looking Glass or whatever, I would have more respect for this cynical, exploitive, and essentially dishonest undertaking. They may have purchased the legal right, but the end result is ethically and creatively bankrupt.
If you want to see the brilliant, ingenious, and authentic
The Prisoner, watch Patrick McGoohan's original.
Edited by Richard--W - 11/19/09 at 8:13pm
