Latest on The Prisoner

[CovenantJr]

Just found this.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7483053.stm

Sir Ian McKellen and Jim Caviezel are set to star in the ITV remake of the 1960s TV cult show The Prisoner.

Sir Ian will play the sinister Number Two who controls a mysterious place known as The Village.

Passion of the Christ star Caviezel takes the role of Number Six, who finds himself trapped there, with no memory of how he arrived.

It is understood that the six-part series will include scenes shot in Namibia and South Africa.

The original was famously filmed around the Italianate village of Portmeirion on the Llyn Peninsula in North Wales.

Disturbing

Created, written and produced by Patrick McGoohan, the 1960s series was a riff on Cold War politics.

The remake, which is due to premiere in 2009, will reflect 21st century concerns and anxieties such as liberty, security and surveillance.

Sir Ian has called it "an enthralling commentary on modern culture."

"It is witty, intelligent and disturbing. I am very excited to be involved," he added.

Writer Bill Gallagher, who watched the original series when he was a boy, said: "Here was something that was more than television, something I couldn't quite grasp but couldn't let go of.

"It's a unique opportunity for a writer to be able to go back to The Village and tell some new stories about that strange place and its surreal menace.

"We hope to serve up something as beguiling and disturbing as the original was."

Producer Trevor Hopkins says fans of the old series will not be disappointed.

He said: "Jim Caviezel and Ian McKellen bring an incredible level of talent to the project, and we're honoured they are taking on these important roles."

ITV have not yet revealed whether the production will return to Wales.

Grr.

[Menolly]

I'm unsure how to read your response, Cj.

Grr...that they have not revealed if they will return the production to Wales?

...or...

Grr...that they are even contemplating redoing The Prisoner?

I love the original show; I hope this remake does the original proud.

[lurch]

HOLY I AM NOT A NUMBER!!!...Everyone should watch this..The original was the classic Surreal show of its Time!!..It is the father and mother of Northern Exposure, Twin Peaks, ED and of course LOST..As a youngster i experienced the very same thing upon watching the series for the first time..totally perplexed but couldn't let it go. The PBS re-aired the series with commentary at the end of each episode..( Canadian Broadcast put that in ) and that helped alot. Just for grasping the idea of visual metaphors and seeing the fantastic demonstration of them ..This is going to be a real Treat..WEBSITE HERE I COME!!

[CovenantJr]

I'm unsure how to read your response, Cj.

Grr...that they have not revealed if they will return the production to Wales?

...or...

Grr...that they are even contemplating redoing The Prisoner?

I love the original show; I hope this remake does the original proud.

Grr because I don't think The Prisoner can ever be satisfactorily remade (it was too much of its time, and Patrick McGoohan, who is no longer involved, wrote a lot of it). An additional grr for avoiding Portmeirion though; that place was a character itself. It's like rewriting the Covenant novels but setting them in Belgium instead of the Land.

Plus, as Lurch pointed out, it was a highly surreal series. By taking it out of the fairly bizarre-looking Portmeirion and keeping the same Number Two throughout (instead of changing him every episode), a lot of that is immediately lost.

[lurch]

Cjr..try to keep in mind..that surrealness is a way of seeing,,not that which is being looked at...A moose is a Moose.. rite, nothing surreal there,, but place a Moose in a kitchen or living room..now you got surreal.,,the juxtaposition of the incongruent.So, I'm only slitely concerned with Place. Its how the Place is photographed and presented that will tell how faithful this 2nd go around is to the original and its underlining themes is.

[Menolly]

I am with Cj regarding the lack of McGoohan's involvement though. I hope those in control of it now honor his vision and influence of the show.

[lurch]

I am with Cj regarding the lack of McGoohan's involvement though. I hope those in control of it now honor his vision and influence of the show.

The mere fact that the word " surreal" was used by those developing this redux is encouraging.

[Menolly]

Yes, but...

McGoohan's vision helped define surreal. Will this remake be able to expand upon it, or fall back upon what has come to be expected from the term?

Will they be innovative and break open our barriers of the mundane?

One can only wait to see...and hope.

[CovenantJr]

So, I'm only slitely concerned with Place. Its how the Place is photographed and presented that will tell how faithful this 2nd go around is to the original and its underlining themes is.

You've never been to Portmeirion, have you?

[danlo]

I applaud the attempt, of course nothing's going to recapture McGoohan's vision-but I bet it will be a lot better than most of the dreck out there. I can't wait to see this. (purist wienies)

[Cagliostro]

I'm willing to give it a chance, but I have huge reservations. Other than the silly trampoline and water sparring game and about every fight scene, this show was especially brilliant and I have high hopes and expectations of a remake. I don't feel like nobody could ever do it justice, but just that I doubt anybody could do it justice.

And yes, I was one of the fools who bought the boxed set for $150 when it came available.

[lurch]

So, I'm only slitely concerned with Place. Its how the Place is photographed and presented that will tell how faithful this 2nd go around is to the original and its underlining themes is.

You've never been to Portmeirion, have you?

Only by the " virtual" route. That it is a place of fancy and fantasy i am not questioning. I applaud McGooghan for picking that as back drop and as you said,,it was a character in its own rite. The same can be said of LOST.. The Island is a great back drop and by end of season one.. it was clear that the Island was a character in the show as well...and by the end of season 3 what was the great easter egg?.."only fools are enslaved by time and space" So,, its already clear, that the fancy and fantastic can be pretty much any where,,as long as its presented that way.

After LOST,, and the likes of Lynch'es Twin Peaks..i agree that this production has some challenges in front of..But its cool to remember,, that LOST and Twin Peaks may have never been given a chance,, if it wasn't for The Prisoner.

[CovenantJr]

Well, I've just started watching this remake. So far, I remain somewhat sceptical. At this point it hasn't really impressed me, but it's early days yet. To its credit, the remake does seem to be sticking closer to the spirit of the original than I feared it might. Some things aren't convincing me at all, and though Jim Caviezel is fine he lacks the intensity of McGoohan. Hmm. We'll see what I think as I watch more.

Things that are satisfactory:

Spoiler

-The Village's tranquility. It's far bigger than the original Village, and the whole feel of it is a bit Californian for my liking, but it's not bad. The uniformity of architecture is interesting.
-The sudden appearance of Rover at the end of the first episode. If someone had asked me to name one thing I thought wouldn't be in the remake, I'd have said Rover.
-Including scenes from the original, done slightly differently. For instance, the 'local destinations only' scene and the 'biggest map you have' scene.

Things that are unsatisfactory:

Spoiler

-Seeing Number Two's home life. That just doesn't seem right.
-Number Six just isn't very intense. He isn't angry or defiant enough, really. And in the first episode he lobs himself off a building. Suicidal Number Six? Hmmm. I miss things like "I've resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered! My life is my own." Speaking of which...
-We see Number Six spray painting 'resign' on a window in his pre-Village life, so presumably his resignation is going to be a theme. So far, though, the angle has been "You've always lived in the Village. Anything else is delusion." No mention of his resignation at all.
-I'm not sure I buy into the idea that no one realises they're in an artificial place. How would that happen? Perhaps this one will be answered as I watch more of the series.
-The series isn't as surreal as the original, which I expected. This in itself isn't such a problem. It becomes a bit of an issue, though, when surreal things happen. Much as I welcomed Rover's appearance, for instance, the series itself isn't surreal enough for that to work. It seemed a bit jarring.

Again, some of my criticisms might be resolved as I progress through the series. It hasn't repelled me or put me off (yet), and that's saying something.

[CovenantJr]

Having now completed The Prisoner 2009 (unless there's a sequel, of course), I've realised something. The big problem with this otherwise very good and very interesting series is that it's called The Prisoner. This should never have been described as a remake or a reimagining of any sort. It's largely original, and the few ties to the original series are generally completely unnecessary.

Take the numbering, for instance. There is really no need for the inhabitants of the Village to be numbered. They aren't homogenised and dehumanised the way the people in the original were. The numbers are unnecessary.

Similarly, the Village itself doesn't need to be called the Village. It probably needed a vague name of that sort, but identifying it with the setting of the 1960s series was pointless.

The resignation was also gratuitous. The whole matter of Six's resignation is irrelevant; it seems to be included only as a tenuous link to the original series.

In short, this is an interesting, thought-provoking series that is decently acted (particularly by Ian McKellen, who is mesmeric as Two) and well written, but should in no way be connected with The Prisoner.

Now I'll launch into an apparent contradiction of the things I just said. The strongest points, for me - or at least the most enjoyable - were the parts where the series most resembled The Prisoner in tone and attitude. There is an episode (maybe two episodes; I forget) in which it's unclear who is on whose side, what anyone's agenda is, and who might be secretly working for 'them' (whoever 'they' are). This reminded me of an episode from the original, called 'Checkmate'. I enjoyed the rampant paranoia and distrust, and the effects of these on the characters' relationships. Unfortunately, this, along with other aspects such as the secret cult of 'dreamers', is something that was never really touched upon again.

That is really the second biggest flaw in the series. It seems to switch direction part way through, as though it intended to be twice as long and was suddenly truncated and had to rush to a conclusion.

Overall, though, it's a very good series. It's thought-provoking and more than a little sinister. It never really had any emotional effect on me - I neither cared about Six nor even particularly respected him - but the story and themes kept me engaged. Like many good works of fiction, though, it's actually watching certain characters that is the real pleasure. Without Ian McKellen, the series would have been considerably diminished, for he brings Two to life with impressive conviction.

Worth watching, certainly, and far more intelligent and adventurous than most new TV. Just don't expect anything that remotely resembles The Prisoner.

[Cagliostro]

It's a pity. Well, I still plan to give it a watch, and I have now added them to Netflix for whenever they get in. I'll probably bump them up considerably though because I have an interest, and from what you have said, Cov. Thanks for the heads up on its comparison with the original, as I'm a fairly big Prisoner fan (I don't plan vacations to Portmeirion each year, or post on a website of Prisoner fans, but I've watched the series more times than most series).

So does it end anywhere as ridiculous as the original? Strangely, I hope so. After the initial shock and disappointment, I've come to almost respect the freakout that is "Fallout."

[CovenantJr]

No, the tone is more menacingly odd than deliriously weird.

[Cagliostro]

Ok, I've only watched the first episode "Arrival," and so far, I am looking forward to seeing what is to come. My criticisms:

Spoiler

I'm missing the claustrophia of the original series. Everything looked a little too small and compact. Now it is wide and open with room to breathe. Also, there is a nightlife in the Village, whereas before it seemed a bit naughty to be outside of your dwelling after curfew.

The dialog does seem as sharp and full of real or possibly faux meaning. The dialog in the original really kept you on your toes, and was frequently very clever. For example, in the episode when Number 6 is being persuaded to run for some political position that you know means nothing:
Number 2: Do you plan to run?
Number 6: Like blazes. The first chance I get!

The quick cuts that add to the paranoia and sense that everything is very off. Instead they are replaced by weird little electronic flashy images like how Se7en did (if I am remembering correctly), which I guess gets the point across, but the electronic nature makes it seem like a malfunctioning robot having these flashes.

It's a small quibble, but they don't call them "Number 6," just "6." It's subtle but it had a better feel to me, or maybe it's what I'm used to.

Like Cj said, Number 6 is just not as intense and charismatic as Patrick. His line of "I am not a number, I am a free man" was shouted, but was not the bottled rage of the original.

These are all fairly minor, and pretty much expected of a remake. It's mostly what I miss from the old series, and something I can get over. Now, for what I like about it.

Spoiler

The stupid fist fight scenes that drug down the original now seem to be gone. There are now armed men, which is definitely more ominous, although to a degree, the original had Rover, and therefore didn't really need guns. But I think it adds a bit to the scary, at least in the scene we see them.

It is still interesting, and captures a lot of what made the original so good.

The shiny buildings that at first looked like a mirage, later accompanied by the giant Rover. I am interested to find out more on what all that is about.

Despite what I said about the size of the Village being too big, I do like that we get to see "The Mountains" that we never saw on the original, if that's what those hills and dunes are. It is filmed spectacularly.

Ian McKellan, as expected, delivers wonderfully.

I might report on each episode, but we'll see.

[sindatur]

Cag, let go of mostly everything about the original, other than the Superficial that's it's about a guy being held prisoner in a strange place and given a number. And of course, the mind games. Just about everything else is entirely different. I enjoyed it myself, but, yea, very different indeed and that really disappointed alot of people.