 by snicks
Video Blogs
TV Shows:
Find Articles On:
Navigation |
Sir Ian Mckellen to take on sinister role in remake of "The Prisoner"
Out icon Sir Ian McKellen will bring his talents to the small screen in a six part "re-imagining" of the cult 60's show The Prisoner. Ian will star as Number Two, one of the men in charge of "The Village", who makes life difficult for Number Six (played by Jim Caviezel, who last played Jesus), a man who awakens to find himself trapped in this strange environment.
According to the producers, there will be something for fans of the original, but the new version will stand alone. "There will be nods and winks and references back to the original, but I don't think that they'll feel in any way that their original has been tarnished." "Even though this would fall under sci-fi traditionally, this is a drama at its core." While the original show worked as a metaphor for the paranoia of the Cold War, AMC says that the remake will reflect 21st stressors like constant surveillance and the conflict between liberty and security. I don't remember much about The Prisoner, but I hope they try and keep at least one lasting, nightmare-inducing image: That creepy, giant ball thing that would bounce around and envelop people who tried to escape. I tried to recreate it with Bubble Yum and a a little green Army Man, but the subject ... did not survive. After the break, you can see the ultra-groovy opening to the original series ... in French! Submitted by on Mon, 2008-06-30 15:06. |
User login Recent comments
Recent blog posts
New forum topics |
re- the show
That's Awesome News
The Prisoner is one of my all-time favorite shows. PBS has run it a couple of times, and I think another cable network in the US has run it as well.
It's interesting that no one seems to agree on what it means, especially the ending. Based on my perception, and also on what McGoohan and others have said, it's not really about the Cold War tensions at all, though it may have started out that way. I think McGoohan turned it into a psychological rebellion against group-think and any efforts to take away individuality or to impose non-critical, narrow-minded thought processes.
In the show's opening sequences, Number 6 says "I am not a number, I am a free man!" And then Number 2 laughs derisively, as if to say, "what a fool, you can't be a free man in this society".
It always struck me that the normal citizenry went around with brightly colored clothing and cheery attitudes, but had nothing substantive to say, and accomplished nothing. They seemed to be almost empty hulls. The show also seemed to me to be dealing with "the meaning of life" in such a bland, empty place that imposed conformity and prohibited individual thought. In one episode, for example, Number 6 seemed to be conforming, having joined an art contest. However, in the end he tried to use his large canvas painting and the large wooden easel to make a sail that would allow him to escape the island. It didn't work, however, implying that art was not sufficient as a "salvation" mechanism.
No one can agree, either, on the ending, and I've never figured it out myself. It seems obvious to me that Number 1 is really himself, i.e., a person is his own worst enemy, his own jailor, his own oppressor. But many don't seem to see it that way. Supposedly the show started out with another goal and plan, and McGoohan eventually hijacked the show, and wrote the ending episodes in a few days by himself when the show was cancelled and the co-creator forced out.
But wow, what a mind blowing show! I'm really looking forward to what they're going to do with it. I'm guessing I'll be disappointed, but you never know.
That should be one hell of a set.
Out and proud gay Ian McKellan talking with staunch Catholic Jim Caveziel will either be Crystal and Alexis or Ishtar (great talent, bad idea).
I would pay to be there.