Be seeing you

Be seeing you
- The Prisoner

It is upon us. This Sunday AMC's remake of the classic and iconic cult television show The Prisoner premieres. I feel a surprising amount of hatred toward this show I haven't even seen. It's a combination of factors. First, it's a remake, which automatically deducts 50 points. Second, it's a remake of a show that should not be remade. The original is certainly not for everyone, but it is very much a product of it's age. The themes and context of the original will be lost on modern audiences. That's if they are even kept. Indications indicate they will not.

I read an article about the remake, which can be found here. Okay. Okay. Let's at least try to keep an open mind. Hmmm, they've got Ian Mckellan playing Number 2, that's a good sign, he's a good actor. I like the change in venue from Wales to a playland village in Nambia. The idea of the idyllic village being surrounded by desert is actually pretty cool. And they are keeping the Rovers, though I fear not in quite the same incarnation. Patrick Mcgoohan even indicated he was interested in playing Number 2 in this series shortly before his death.

But even as my hopes were building just slightly, they crashed. First, not only will they have the same Number 2 throughout the entire series, but they are giving him a wife and a "troubled teenage son". They even hint that some people will consider him the hero! The guy they got playing Number 6 refused to watch the original series "for fear of absorbing too much of McGoohan’s bravura performance." And it turns out Ian Mckellan doesn't even like the original series. He thinks it's crap. How can you have someone in a remake that doesn't even respect the source material? They are making Number 6 part of a "love triangle"? Oh come ON, that's just cheap. And as a final crushing blow, they are changing the main message from one of individualism to one embracing "community". Taken together, these facts indicate a remake that doesn't even embrace its source material, but instead stole the gimmick to support its own cheap, bankrupt "storytelling" (read: moneymaking).

AMC has been making a name for itself with original television series of late with the critical success of Mad Men. Frankly, any station that supports Christina Hendricks and her...ahem...assetts is ok in my book. But this project doesn't look like a way of modernizing a taut psychological thriller. It's look like a project stealing a conceit, hoping to draw in viewers based on name recognition of a source material it so blatantly disregards, and substituting cheap nighttime drama plotlines (troubled teenage son?) instead of pschological questions and discussions on the nature of reality, personal will and personal morality. Perhaps I'm wrong. I'm basing my assumptions on little actual input, I admit. But all the evidence so far is less than encouraging. Time will tell. But in a world where National Treasure is considered gold while films like Children of Men are overlooked, I harbor little hope for taste in general.