I was also quite surprised and disappointed by the result.
I understand this is not really a remake, they tried to make something different.
But it lacks the humor and the surrealistic dementia of the original.
And the Village lacks the charming pittoresque of Portmarion.
I was also quite surprised and disappointed by the result.
I understand this is not really a remake, they tried to make something different.
But it lacks the humor and the surrealistic dementia of the original.
And the Village lacks the charming pittoresque of Portmarion.
Yeh the "new village" looks like a KOA campground.
I must add that i am also quite disappointed by Number 2. I like Ian McKellen, but his character is not given enough scope.
I won't even comment on Number 6. This actor has less charisma than Patrick McGoohan had in one of his tennis shoes.
Thoughts after the series is over:
Judging by comments at amctv.com - it seems that one either liked the series or hated it. I find myself in the liking camp. It was decent science fiction with an ending that continued to make you think after it was over. It did not resolve the issues of the village but instead explained the purpose and rationale for the village, leaving the ultimate answers as to the morality of it all for the viewer to decide for themselves.
I found that the explanation for the existence of the village to be more or less what I had anticipated from the beginning based on comments by 2 ("There is no out there is only in") but the purpose of the village was much different from what I had guessed it to be (I was anticipating a social experiment for the purpose of military control).
In the end, the main question I am left with was the reason for the death of Lucy. Her death seems at odds with the stated goals of Summakor.
Edit: Also it was an interesting surprise to find out that the flashbacks were not in fact flashbacks.
Andrew Turner(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber)
I have never seen the original series, and I have a feeling that's for the better insomuch as being a critical factor in liking or disliking the re-visioned series:
A thought from the show I've been semi-pondering all day - dreamers are deemed dangerous and yet it is a dreamer that is necessary for the continuation and survival of all.
It was a decent Sci-Fi flick but other than a few similarities it has nothing in common with the original, so little in common they should have called it something else.
I'm nonplussed. I watched the first three episodes and called it quits. Not much in relation to the original, I feel little to no sympathy for the protagonist, and they have the great Ian McKellan, who gets to wander around in a white suit and spout semi-philosophical nonsense. Bleh.
Andrew Turner(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber)
Shadowborn wrote:
I'm nonplussed. I watched the first three episodes and called it quits. Not much in relation to the original, I feel little to no sympathy for the protagonist, and they have the great Ian McKellan, who gets to wander around in a white suit and spout semi-philosophical nonsense. Bleh.
Do you think you might view it differently if you had never seen the original?
Quite possibly. However, it seems that even if I were new to it, there is something fundamental missing from the script. It is like Lost without the character development. In Lost, there was mystery about the characters. Here, it's total confusion.
Andrew Turner(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber)
Those who disliked the pilot, if you stuck with the show, do you like it now (as a whole)?
Recent Posts
