A life time fan and Prisonerologist of the 1960's series 'the Prisoner', a leading authority on the subject, a short story writer, and now Prisoner novelist.
Hello nr6de, Sorry to address you like that, only I don't know your name. Yes indeed, a Renault Dauphine. I got that wrong when I originally wrote that article. But the good thing is, it drew someones attention. May I ask if you have watched the 2009 series of THEPRIS6NER, and if you did, what impression did it made upon you? I know that many fans of the original series, on both sides of the Atlantic, took against the 2009 series, and that I am in a minority group when it comes to appreciation for THEPRIS6NER.
Yesterday I was about to post this comment and the whole text box suddenly got lost or at least nothing was published. There may still be something left in the backend of your blog, I don't know. Anyway, I gave you the link to the page on my website, I think it was July 13th, where my initial comment was published. I was among those who did bang the drum for the show prior to the US premiere for us here in Germany. But all that remained was basically disappointment. The major flaw, to me, isn't the fact that Swakopmund instead of Portmeirion was used as the location. Which was a wise decision. But the almost complete absence of any coherent narrative. It's just crap, plain awful. And Caviezel is a walking insult to McGoohan, actor and character. - Wir sehen uns! Call me Arno.
Hello Arno, No, there was nothing of your comment which got lost I'm afraid. What happened to it I cannot say, but you are not the first to suffer from such an event.
I thank you for your comment about the 2009 series of THEPRIS6NER, you are quite entitled to your own opinion. In fact I would congratulate you on what you had to say. That might seem a bit strange coming from someone like me who has a great deal of appreciation for the series, as do others like me. Also those who have read what I've had to say, reflecting my take on THEPRIS6NER and have decided to give the series a second chance. It's no skin off my nose if fans of the original series of 'the Prisoner' like yourself who do not like the 2009 series, after watching the 6 episodes, that's fine. Because at least you gave the series a chance. What I cannot stand though, are fans who have condemned THEPRIS6NER after watching only a mere 30 minutes before switching off and condemning the whole series.
I don't see Jim Caviezel being a walking insult to Patrick McGoohan, that's a bit strong. Jim Caviezel is not as strong an actor/character as McGoohan was. Besides which, THEPRIS6NER was writen for Two, not Six. With the original series, it was McGoohan who forced his will on the series, such was the size of his ego, that he forged each of the 17 episodes around himself!
Regards David BCNU Breathe in, Breathe out.....More Village - {Two}
"THEPRIS6NER was writen for Two, not Six." I agree! Alright, probably "insult" is a bit too harsh but he's certainly miscast in the title role. Before and while watching the series a 2nd time I was reading a detailed recap (see http://epguides.com/Prisoner_2009/). But even this wouldn't make things more intelligible. We're expecting The Prisoner 2009 in September. - BCNU!
Hello Arno, THE PRIS6NER has much in common with, and has many elements of the original series, only they've been reinvented, reinterpreted. One other thing the 2009 series has in common with the original, in 1968, when 'the Prisoner' had come and gone, the vast majority of the General public here in the UK hated McG's creation, they thought it to be the biggest load of rubbish to be seen on television at that time. And the same has been said of the 2009 series. But then after ten years, McG's series was re-screened here on British regional television, and quickly became the best thing since sliced bread! Okay, if not Jim Caviezel in the tile role of THEPRIS6NER, what about Ian Mckellen as Two? I certainly enjoyed Ian's portayal as Two, and certainly he got the best one liners!
I found the 2009 series quite easy to understand and comprehend, from the second time of watching the series. All the clues about the series are there, right from the very beginning. What's more all, well nearly all of THEPRIS6NER is explained, the viewer is left with no doubt what the series has been about. Security - surveillance both of which pervade our everyday lives. THEPRIS6NER makes one question one's reality, your surroundings, of what is real and what is not. Whereas with the original series, much of which still remains unanswered today, and will remain an enigma! Trying to fathom the original series of 'the Prisoner,' to come to try and understand it, you are taken down many avenues. 'the Prisoner' either means what it is, or its so surreal or allegorical, that it can mean anything you want it to. But with THEPRIS6NER 2009, it's all in the mind, in the subconscious, it can be a dream, and that has been said of the original series, that the Village was created in the mind of No.6. The Village in the 09 series, has no substance, those born of the Village like 11-12 do not actually exist, and can never leave the Village. And those who are brought to the Village, broken people who are there to be made better, actually live two existances at the same time. There is even a representation of the former No.6, a cameo role which had been offered to Patrick McGoohan, but which McG turned down either because he was too ill at the time, or because he wanted the role as Two, a role which had already been cast, to be played by Ian McKellen. I wonder what fans would have thought about it had McG played a role in the 2009 series?
It is true, there are many issues in the remake that were addressed by the original, too. You name them. I'd disagree, though, in the case that here no questions would be left unanswered. As if that mattered! I am not talking about the many plotholes (like: what happens physically to the "real" people that are brought into the Village, surely not everyone's a volunteer? How do those people, interact with Curtis' wife M2 or with anybody else if everything is inside M2's mind? What should it mean: "broken people"? etc.pp.). No, I still contend that it's Gallagher's inept script, slickly looking on the surface, causing so much havoc to any attempt on interpretation. He just picks narrative fragments and throws them together with the result that he irritates viewers. I don't call this surreal or surrealistic. Mind you, it doesn't matter if the mini series cleans up all and everything. McGoohan's Prisoner may have seen countless difficulties in its development stage and during production which, in the end, lead to a surplus in meaning, surrealismus, allegory and so on. But I'm sure McGoohan knew what he was doing even if ultimately he kind of ran out of power. Gallagher most certainly did not. He played safe, or was trying to do so because AMC expected him to. Ian McKellen was almost unknown to me. I disliked, e.g., the "Lord Of The Rings" movies (having been a fan of the "old" Peter Jackson, think of the imaginative "Heavenly Creatures"). But you are right here. He steals the show thereby being, well, a tragic character. But it doesn't help the The Prisoner as a "remake" oder "reinterpretation" or "reimagination". - Thanks for this thought exchange.
Hello Arno, No-one is a vounteer in 'new' Village, they are are just as much Prisoners as in the original series. Both the Village and those brought to it are in the mind of M2, but they interact and develop as they would in normal life, that is all I can say about it, as explained in the series. I agree, Two cuts a tragic figure at the end....he has lost a son whom he has always wanted. In the end, Curtis and Helen are broken people having lost their son. So will the 'new' Two, the former Six, bring Curtis and Helen back to the Village to be made better.......I wonder!
Like yourself I have enjoyed this exchange of thoughts, so THEPRIS6NER is good for something, having the same effect as the original, in getting people to think and discuss. And I have not forgotten the link you sent me for your web page.
Thank you for the second link. I've logged onto both now, and I'm happy to see that I'm not the only one who has gone to a great deal of time and trouble in the name of THEPRIS6NER 2009, which indeed you have. I'm impressed, as you have done an excellent job on the comparisions between the series. I think you just about got them all, save for one, and that is reported in a recent posting of mine regarding a 'clocking - on machine,' which is reused in the series as a diagnosis machine, diagnosing Six's blood in the final episode 'Checkmate.' This in the same way as an adding machine is used as a control panel in the original series. But apart from that, you've just about got it nailed.
It's a Renault Dauphine with the engine in the rear. Wipers and sand, blurred vision guaranteed, appropriately.
ReplyDeleteHello nr6de,
ReplyDeleteSorry to address you like that, only I don't know your name.
Yes indeed, a Renault Dauphine. I got that wrong when I originally wrote that article. But the good thing is, it drew someones attention.
May I ask if you have watched the 2009 series of THEPRIS6NER, and if you did, what impression did it made upon you? I know that many fans of the original series, on both sides of the Atlantic, took against the 2009 series, and that I am in a minority group when it comes to appreciation for THEPRIS6NER.
Regards
David
BCNU
Yesterday I was about to post this comment and the whole text box suddenly got lost or at least nothing was published. There may still be something left in the backend of your blog, I don't know. Anyway, I gave you the link to the page on my website, I think it was July 13th, where my initial comment was published. I was among those who did bang the drum for the show prior to the US premiere for us here in Germany. But all that remained was basically disappointment. The major flaw, to me, isn't the fact that Swakopmund instead of Portmeirion was used as the location. Which was a wise decision. But the almost complete absence of any coherent narrative. It's just crap, plain awful. And Caviezel is a walking insult to McGoohan, actor and character. - Wir sehen uns! Call me Arno.
ReplyDeleteHello Arno,
ReplyDeleteNo, there was nothing of your comment which got lost I'm afraid. What happened to it I cannot say, but you are not the first to suffer from such an event.
I thank you for your comment about the 2009 series of THEPRIS6NER, you are quite entitled to your own opinion. In fact I would congratulate you on what you had to say. That might seem a bit strange coming from someone like me who has a great deal of appreciation for the series, as do others like me. Also those who have read what I've had to say, reflecting my take on THEPRIS6NER and have decided to give the series a second chance.
It's no skin off my nose if fans of the original series of 'the Prisoner' like yourself who do not like the 2009 series, after watching the 6 episodes, that's fine. Because at least you gave the series a chance. What I cannot stand though, are fans who have condemned THEPRIS6NER after watching only a mere 30 minutes before switching off and condemning the whole series.
I don't see Jim Caviezel being a walking insult to Patrick McGoohan, that's a bit strong. Jim Caviezel is not as strong an actor/character as McGoohan was. Besides which, THEPRIS6NER was writen for Two, not Six. With the original series, it was McGoohan who forced his will on the series, such was the size of his ego, that he forged each of the 17 episodes around himself!
Regards
David
BCNU
Breathe in, Breathe out.....More Village - {Two}
"THEPRIS6NER was writen for Two, not Six." I agree! Alright, probably "insult" is a bit too harsh but he's certainly miscast in the title role. Before and while watching the series a 2nd time I was reading a detailed recap (see http://epguides.com/Prisoner_2009/). But even this wouldn't make things more intelligible. We're expecting The Prisoner 2009 in September. - BCNU!
ReplyDeleteHello Arno,
ReplyDeleteTHE PRIS6NER has much in common with, and has many elements of the original series, only they've been reinvented, reinterpreted. One other thing the 2009 series has in common with the original, in 1968, when 'the Prisoner' had come and gone, the vast majority of the General public here in the UK hated McG's creation, they thought it to be the biggest load of rubbish to be seen on television at that time. And the same has been said of the 2009 series. But then after ten years, McG's series was re-screened here on British regional television, and quickly became the best thing since sliced bread!
Okay, if not Jim Caviezel in the tile role of THEPRIS6NER, what about Ian Mckellen as Two? I certainly enjoyed Ian's portayal as Two, and certainly he got the best one liners!
I found the 2009 series quite easy to understand and comprehend, from the second time of watching the series. All the clues about the series are there, right from the very beginning. What's more all, well nearly all of THEPRIS6NER is explained, the viewer is left with no doubt what the series has been about. Security - surveillance both of which pervade our everyday lives. THEPRIS6NER makes one question one's reality, your surroundings, of what is real and what is not. Whereas with the original series, much of which still remains unanswered today, and will remain an enigma! Trying to fathom the original series of 'the Prisoner,' to come to try and understand it, you are taken down many avenues. 'the Prisoner' either means what it is, or its so surreal or allegorical, that it can mean anything you want it to. But with THEPRIS6NER 2009, it's all in the mind, in the subconscious, it can be a dream, and that has been said of the original series, that the Village was created in the mind of No.6. The Village in the 09 series, has no substance, those born of the Village like 11-12 do not actually exist, and can never leave the Village. And those who are brought to the Village, broken people who are there to be made better, actually live two existances at the same time. There is even a representation of the former No.6, a cameo role which had been offered to Patrick McGoohan, but which McG turned down either because he was too ill at the time, or because he wanted the role as Two, a role which had already been cast, to be played by Ian McKellen.
I wonder what fans would have thought about it had McG played a role in the 2009 series?
Regards
David
BCNU
It is true, there are many issues in the remake that were addressed by the original, too. You name them. I'd disagree, though, in the case that here no questions would be left unanswered. As if that mattered! I am not talking about the many plotholes (like: what happens physically to the "real" people that are brought into the Village, surely not everyone's a volunteer? How do those people, interact with Curtis' wife M2 or with anybody else if everything is inside M2's mind? What should it mean: "broken people"? etc.pp.). No, I still contend that it's Gallagher's inept script, slickly looking on the surface, causing so much havoc to any attempt on interpretation. He just picks narrative fragments and throws them together with the result that he irritates viewers. I don't call this surreal or surrealistic. Mind you, it doesn't matter if the mini series cleans up all and everything.
ReplyDeleteMcGoohan's Prisoner may have seen countless difficulties in its development stage and during production which, in the end, lead to a surplus in meaning, surrealismus, allegory and so on. But I'm sure McGoohan knew what he was doing even if ultimately he kind of ran out of power. Gallagher most certainly did not. He played safe, or was trying to do so because AMC expected him to.
Ian McKellen was almost unknown to me. I disliked, e.g., the "Lord Of The Rings" movies (having been a fan of the "old" Peter Jackson, think of the imaginative "Heavenly Creatures"). But you are right here. He steals the show thereby being, well, a tragic character. But it doesn't help the The Prisoner as a "remake" oder "reinterpretation" or "reimagination". - Thanks for this thought exchange.
Hello Arno,
ReplyDeleteNo-one is a vounteer in 'new' Village, they are are just as much Prisoners as in the original series. Both the Village and those brought to it are in the mind of M2, but they interact and develop as they would in normal life, that is all I can say about it, as explained in the series.
I agree, Two cuts a tragic figure at the end....he has lost a son whom he has always wanted. In the end, Curtis and Helen are broken people having lost their son. So will the 'new' Two, the former Six, bring Curtis and Helen back to the Village to be made better.......I wonder!
Like yourself I have enjoyed this exchange of thoughts, so THEPRIS6NER is good for something, having the same effect as the original, in getting people to think and discuss. And I have not forgotten the link you sent me for your web page.
Best wishes
David
BCNU
If you haven't seen it yet, there's an article called "Parallel Prisoner": http://www.match-cut.de/spdln/spdln100.htm#spdlne
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if everything is covered, probably not. - Wir sehen uns!
Hello Arno,
ReplyDeleteThank you for the second link. I've logged onto both now, and I'm happy to see that I'm not the only one who has gone to a great deal of time and trouble in the name of THEPRIS6NER 2009, which indeed you have. I'm impressed, as you have done an excellent job on the comparisions between the series. I think you just about got them all, save for one, and that is reported in a recent posting of mine regarding a 'clocking - on machine,' which is reused in the series as a diagnosis machine, diagnosing Six's blood in the final episode 'Checkmate.' This in the same way as an adding machine is used as a control panel in the original series. But apart from that, you've just about got it nailed.
Regards
David
BCNU