Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AMC Releasing a New "The Prisoner" In November

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the that's-number-six-to-you dept.

Sci-Fi 174

DynaSoar writes "The Prisoner is one of the most influential and enduring TV shows to have appeared during the 1960s. This single-season (1967-68), 17-episode series, starring its co-writing, co-directing executive producer Patrick McGoohan, maintains a steady fan base and gains more with each syndication re-release. For over 40 years there have been announced intentions and projects to resurrect this surreal psychodrama combining science fiction, allegory, and spy thriller in a new series or movie (but always without McGoohan, who adamantly refused, saying 'he'd done it'). Finally, since December 2008 a remake has been in the can. In November 2009, AMC will begin airing an original six-part mini-series of The Prisoner starring James Caviezal as the spy who resigns only to find himself abducted and transported to 'The Village,' where he is renamed (or rather renumbered) Number Six, and where the minds behind his incarceration attempt to pry and/or trick secrets from his brain. Chief among those minds is the visible face of the administration, Number Two, played by Ian McKellen. Unlike the original, with a new Number Two in each episode, McKellen appears throughout. To promote the upcoming release, AMC is presenting (along with a ton of 'additional material') the entire original 17 episodes, free for the streaming."

cancel ×

174 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Soo.... (3, Funny)

Sasayaki (1096761) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307697)

So this The Prisoner... ... is the new number two?

Re:Soo.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307791)

You are number six. I am not a number, I am a free man!

Re:Soo.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307875)

Who is number 1 and why is this fucking giant rubber ball following me?

Re:Soo.... (2, Insightful)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308501)


If "Number Two" is the usual euphemism for a shit, then possibly so. Aside from personal dislike for casting Ian McKellan in everything, there are so many things that can go wrong here, it'll be a miracle if it's anywhere near as good as the original series. Heaven help us if they try to dumb it down or make it more accessible. A lot of remakes are really worthwhile (okay, some remakes) bringing it up to date for a modern audience and shaving off some of the things that would alienate people today (wobbly sets or very bad special effects) or doing away with some of the limitations that had to be bourne in the old days (such as some prudish attitudes). But The Prisoner doesn't fall into any of those categories as far as I can see. It's also a shame that Number 2 is the same every episode as the way he changed sometimes illustrated the lack of personal importance. Number 2 was an identity that, if a particular person were performing it badly as happened, could mysteriously be replaced by someone else. Individuality didn't matter - continuity did.

It's quite possible to do a good remake of The Prisoner. It's even possible to do a good remake of The Prisoner that is different to the original. I will try to assess the new version on its own merits. But I see two big reasons why it probably wont be. The first and biggest is that the modern entertainment industry usually gets greedy and aims for every demographic at once. People with tastes on the ends of the bell curve, usually suffer. The Prisoner appealed to a surprisingly large number of people given how esoteric it was, but it was nonetheless clearly not trying to be all things to all people. From what I read, it was a struggle to get it approved and made even then. I can well see it being watered down and modified to try and bring in a lot of people who wouldn't be expected to like it otherwise. And when that happens, you tend to get a muddle that fails to completely please anyone. To put it more graphically, some people like chocolate, some people like cheese, some people enjoy both, but nobody likes cheese in their chocolate.

The second reason is that I doubt the remakers will have the balls to finish the series with Patrick McGoohan's grand fuck you to understanding that made the finale so appealing to me.

Anyway, that was quite a rant, but I (along with a lot of others) really like the original and it's still out there for anyone who wants to see it. It seems a little off to me that the moment Patrick McGoohan passes away, they start remaking the series. Still, makes circle around one eye with thumb and forefinger, be seeing you. ;)

Re:Soo.... (1, Troll)

Atrox666 (957601) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309367)

Lets break this down:
1) Magneto is behind this whole thing? Seriously unless there is a mutant or a midget lurking about this guy doesn't need to be there the whole time. Number two is supposed to change. That's called the premise.

2) Jesus as number 6?!?! First of all you can't make him a fucking Yank(no offense). Second of all he just doesn't fit the role.

3) I like suave in my super spy. Six is just an emotional basket case in the trailer. McGoohan was super cool and when the cool broke down it was an event. It was epic. "I AM NOT A NUMBER!".

4) Go home and don't come back until you've taken a lot of drugs. The trailer isn't fucking trippy or surreal in the least..so what was the point of making this? In a country that already has employment drug testing they really should have ensured minimum standards on this project.

5) The big ball is too big (Rover)

Re:Soo.... (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#29310043)

2) Jesus as number 6?!?!

He's not Jesus, he's an actor. If he's a good actor he can play a myriad of parts. Look at Morgan Freeman's role in Unforgiven as opposed to his role in Robin Hood. Look at Patrick McGoohan's character in The Prisoner as opposed to his role in Braveheart.

First of all you can't make him a fucking Yank(no offense).

First off, number six is British (and so is McGoohan). Secondly, unless he's as bad a Kevin Kostner (who can only play himself, and play him badly at that) a good actor can assume about any role. Freeman did a damned good job as a Turk, Mel Gibson did a damned good job as a Scottsman.

As to "Jesus as #6", you don't see the delicious irony? Maybe they should change it from #6 to #666?

Re:Soo.... (3, Interesting)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309481)

>>>it'll be a miracle if it's anywhere near as good as the original series.

That's what people said in 1987, 1988, and 1989 about Star Trek TNG, but it did eventually prove itself to be just as good as the original (and often times better like season 4). TNG eventually scored 12% of the American audience, equal to how many had watched the original in the 60s.

As for "The Prisoner" after years of hype by fans I finally watched it last year, and I was unimpressed. Yes it is an intelligently-written series, but there were a lot of moments where I wanted to reach for the fast-forward button because many of the middle episodes were excruciatingly dull.

Okay you can now mod -1 for me, since you disagree. ;-)

Re:Soo.... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29310333)

That's what people said in 1987, 1988, and 1989 about Star Trek TNG, but it did eventually prove itself to be just as good as the original (and often times better like season 4). TNG eventually scored 12% of the American audience, equal to how many had watched the original in the 60s.

TNG wasn't better than TOS. You are making the foolish mistake of equating quality with popularity. They are totally unrelated.

You have pointed out a good example of what can go wrong with this. They could spend way too much on effects, develop unlikable characters, then hire mediocre actors to play them.

Re:Soo.... (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309883)

...shaving off some of the things that would alienate people today (wobbly sets or very bad special effects)... But The Prisoner doesn't fall into any of those categories as far as I can see

What about the episode where the computer exploded because number six simply asked it "why"? I have the series on tape; PBS rebroadcast it a decade or two ago, and some of the effects and props are cheesy indeed. Not as bad as some on STOS, I'll admit.

Re:Soo.... (1)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 4 years ago | (#29310073)

What about the episode where the computer exploded because number six simply asked it "why"? I have the series on tape; PBS rebroadcast it a decade or two ago, and some of the effects and props are cheesy indeed. Not as bad as some on STOS, I'll admit.

Good catch. In that case, I'll grant you that some aspects of it could stand improvement for a modern audience. As I said, it's possible to do a good remake of The Prisoner. I just think that given the overall timelessness of its surreal events and setting, it's less of a problem for modern audiences and that, for some of the reasons I gave, I fear this wont be a good remake. I wont mind being proven wrong and would chose that over being proven right.

Re:Soo.... (1)

niktemadur (793971) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309895)

I doubt the remakers will have the balls to finish the series with Patrick McGoohan's grand fuck you

AMC, American Movie Classics, hmmm... Truth is that, by virtue of being unconstrained by many requirements of network TV, cable has become the medium of choice for dark, ballsy and trippy TV series so far. Currently, there's plenty of talent out there making television, which in another age would have been in film, the pioneer at recognizing the medium's potential being David Chase, with "The Rockford Files", "Northern Exposure" and then his polished, cable masterwork "The Sopranos". Then there's "Deadwood", "Dexter", "Battlestar Galactica", "Breaking Bad", etc. I've heard that "The Wire" and "The Shield" belong up there, but I've yet to see any episodes.

As far as finales are concerned, "The Sopranos" rivals and probably bests "The Prisoner" in the "fuck you" department, while "Battlestar Galactica" infuriated many by leaving a whole bunch of weirdness unanswered, such as the glaring matter of Two Earths, one scorched and the other pristine.

So yeah, sure, I'm willing to give this new "The Prisoner" the benefit of a doubt. That said, remember that McGoohan wanted to film only 10 episodes, but the production company told him "no", it had to be 16, so several episodes are, quite noticeably, filler material. This is what happened to Abrams with "Lost" (how many fucking times can you have Kate go off without permission, getting caught then waste two episodes rescuing her?), so that after the third season when his contract expired, he renegotiated the terms to bring down the season total from 25 to 16, making the storyline much leaner and meaner.

Bitches! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307699)

I fucked your dead great grandmother!!!1

Inside of Me (3, Insightful)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307701)

Something small and quiet just died...

Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (5, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307789)

From the comic pdf, it looks like they've completely missed the original point.

He had resigned because ... that is never stated ... and then he is kidnapped but he doesn't know which side kidnapped him.

The guards didn't use guns. Aside from Rover, it was purely psychological. Even the times he escaped, he was betrayed by people he thought he could trust who turned out to be working for The Village.

Psychological. That's the key.

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (1)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307823)

We don't have attention spans long enough for story ideas that cannot be swiftly resolved with guns.

Let's try an jive thing up a bit, eh? You know, like 24, with brainwashing!

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (5, Insightful)

shawnap (959909) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308417)

We don't have attention spans long enough for story ideas that cannot be swiftly resolved with guns. Let's try an jive thing up a bit, eh? You know, like 24, with brainwashing!

I know this is a joke, but the thought of tv moving so smoothly from a show about a villainous agency who kidnaps and tortures the hero, to a show about a heroic agency who kidnaps and tortures the villain has left me too wistful to laugh.

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (2, Insightful)

Big Hairy Ian (1155547) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308879)

We don't have attention spans long enough for story ideas that cannot be swiftly resolved with guns.

Poppycock I'm tired of watching stupid shite that's been dumbed down by some idiot producer who assumes that everyone else is dimmer than he is the 40 Watt waste of space.

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (3, Insightful)

Atrox666 (957601) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309473)

No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
-- H. L. Mencken

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29309721)

No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people. Yet.
-- Anonymous Coward

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (1)

16K Ram Pack (690082) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309699)

We don't have attention spans long enough for story ideas that cannot be swiftly resolved with guns.

Really? We've evolved so much as human beings in 40 years?

Or it is simply that that's what TV and media companies would like us all to believe, in order to excuse the frequently poor crap they produce?

The technology of editing and graphics has allowed people to do more cool shit, but it's used to fill up what's on the screen rather than enhancing it. It's used to distract you, to move you on from what you've seen because it really isn't very good.

There's an old British TV series called Civilisation which was written and presented by Kenneth Clarke. And it's totally gripping to watch despite the fact that it frequently is a man standing in front of a painting or some architecture and just talking about it in a shot that lasts for a few minutes.

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29308201)

You should have paid closer attention to the original. Number 2 resigned because of the Village. His knowledge of its existence is the reason for his being placed in the Village, which was of course ideal for his plan to bring it down.

Totalitarianism can never be tolerated, in any form.

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (1)

RLBrown (889443) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308309)

My take on the original was a little different. I viewed it as an exploration of the Prisoner's own mind by himself. He resigned from an important job, but did not himself understand why he resigned. At his apartment he dreamed of the Village, which was a map of his mind. Only in the first few episodes is he not in control - for most of the episodes to the end he manipulates all Village residents easily, seeking only the answer to "who is number one". He is always told the truth about that - "you are, number six" and "six of one, half dozen of the other". In the over the top finale, where the hallucinogenic nature of the whole experience is laid bare, he finds number one to an aspect of himself. However, whatever you interpretation, I believe we will find this new mini-series does not get it. The ever changing number two, always replaced by unlikely persons, was integral to the original concept. The fact that no one was ever who they seemed, the lack of high violence (a fair fraction of every episode was just walking and talking), were all part of the fascination of the original series. I know that many will say that taking the show as having been all in his mind is a cliche, but it was not such a big cliche when this show was produced.

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (3, Interesting)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309841)

Sometimes he resigned, sometimes Number 2 was "reassigned." (Remember the uber-sexy 60's phone?) The Number 2's in the original Prisoner were tasked to get information from No. 6. Through varying methods, No. 6 was subjected to all sorts of tricks and outright violence (remember the ladies from the Committee?), and it was No. 6 who foiled their plans by not revealing squat. They even gave No. 6 a chance to become No. 2 in an "election" (one of my favorite, because of its scathing commentary on current "choices" in politics). The reasons for No. 2's departure(s) throughout the series was each of their failures to extract the "information" required of No. 6 by whoever ran The Village. What that information was, or who was running the Village, is never stated. No. 6 alternates from foiling the plans of No. 2 to orchestrating escapes and/or convoluted acts to throw off No. 2.

One of the biggest "aha!" moments actually occurred at the end of the final episode. When No. 6 returns to his apartment in London (after a wild ride altogether), the door opens automatically... JUST like in the Village. How's that for a mind-blowing twist? :)

Re:Anyone bet that they don't totally ruin it? (1)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308541)


Even worse - if you make it to the end of the comic, you see the last seen is him holding his smartphone with the caption below of "sponsored by..." whichever phone company it was. Palm, I think.

I think the butler did it (2, Interesting)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308151)

Something small and quiet just died...

My first reaction was oh good maybe i'll understand it this time. Then I thought well if I did maybe some of the magic would be gone too. Sort of like how the mysteroulsy tantilizing aspect of the X-files slowly drained out and only sculley kept me watching and eventually that was not enough.

I recall seeing the prisoner on as a kid. Back then it was common for syndicated shows to be shown out of order since it was expected there was no story arc. for example, it did not matter what happened last week in Hawaii 5-0.

So it was a mystery what the hell was going on more than it even was supposed to be.

Later when it came to DVD I watched it end to end. And I still don't really understand it. especially the last three episodes. It was oddly a product of it's era but also way way way ahead of it's time for TV. A surreal secret agent show.

I always liked how #2 changed but no one said anything. The one constant seemed to be the butler.

Re:I think the butler did it (1)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308557)


Your reminiscences make me want to go and re-watch the whole thing. I have a fond memory of him drinking to the bottom of the glass and finding, written on tiny letters at the bottom, "you have just been poisoned". James Bond would never have survived that scene in Casino Royale if he hadn't watched The Prisoner as a kid. ;)

Re:I think the butler did it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29309247)

Ah,"The Girl Who Was Death" [wikipedia.org] . That episode was hilarious. It was kind of a "spy's fairy tale" version of his own job. So many clichés. It's not surprising they turn up elsewhere.

Re:I think the butler did it (1)

hughk (248126) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309787)

The prisoner is old enough that they wrote many of the cliches. The series was an inspiration to many writers and directors.

Re:Inside of Me (2, Funny)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#29310397)

You're eating small live animals? Dude, that's a different kind of geek altogether!

This is amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307703)

This just shows how far Linux has come. That Linux is used in the production of this masterpiece, and that the general public will know about it, can only mean good things!

Where's the "new" in this "news"? (3, Informative)

PhxBlue (562201) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307713)

This was announced at Comic-Con more than a month ago.

Re:Where's the "new" in this "news"? (1)

Chambers81 (613839) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307865)

The comic con panel for the mini series was very good. The trailers looked amazing and it was one of the shows I was most excited for. The availability of the original series online for free for those of us that have never seen it before was probably worth a post by itself.

Re:Where's the "new" in this "news"? (2, Funny)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308097)

Well, it's new for us who did not go to the Comic-Con, and don't read other comic-related blogs. Better late then never.

On the other hand, it's highly likely that those who still don't know about it, also don't actually care about it. ;)

Re:Where's the "new" in this "news"? (1)

Mr Z (6791) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308645)

I'm a big Prisoner fan, and this was the first I've heard of this particular remake. *shrug*

Re:Where's the "new" in this "news"? (2, Insightful)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308845)

I'm a big Prisoner fan

Which might just put you in the OP's category of "people who don't care about the remake". I mean, if you think about it. ;)

Re:Where's the "new" in this "news"? (1)

RubberDogBone (851604) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308953)

If you wanna really get right down to it, it was "announced" years ago when word got out that a remake was being produced. And then again last year when the news came out that the thing had, in fact, been made. The ONLY question was really when it would show up on American TV and which channel would be showing it. BBC America (edited for content and time and compressed to fit in more ads), or Syfy (edited for content, compressed for time, featuring awful CG dinosaurs for no reason), or AMC (left alone, with extras). So if AMC wants to run it, good for them. I think they'd do well showing the original show and Secret Agent too and any of a number of older British or co-prod shows. BBC America won't touch them. Someone should.

Why ruin a god thing? (1)

plopez (54068) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307715)

Having said that, I wonder if the drugs will be any better....

Re:Why ruin a god thing? (3, Funny)

NewbieProgrammerMan (558327) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307813)

Why ruin a god thing?

Oh come on now, just because Jesus is starring in it doesn't mean we need to bring God into it too.

Boondock Saints 2 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307717)

There is going to be a sequel to Boondock Saints.

Trailer [youtube.com]

I assume this begins like a Mike Myers movie (1)

Velox_SwiftFox (57902) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307757)

With Number 1 spiraling back to earth from his trip aboard his spacecraft?

Link to the series (5, Informative)

Tensor (102132) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307769)

Was putting the link to the actual place you can stream the videos too much work ?

http://www.amctv.com/originals/the-prisoner-1960s-series/

If the link worked... (3, Interesting)

jackb_guppy (204733) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307801)

AMCtv.com is using the latest version of Flash to bring you the best quality video. Please update your current flash player by clicking here

Does not update a x64 based linux OS nor can I find one on download sites.

Suggestions?

Re:If the link worked... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307819)

Go and get yourself a real OS?

Re:If the link worked... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29308015)

http://www.mininova.com/tor/1322108 [mininova.com] - The.Prisoner.Series.1967 (8.45 gigabytes).

Re:If the link worked... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29308021)

Works for me in 64 bit linux, with version 10 of the Adobe Flash plugin.

Gentoo AMD64

Re:If the link worked... (3, Funny)

jhol13 (1087781) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308063)

1. Boycott AMCtv because it is not using "open" alternatives like, uh, Vorbis?
2. Change distribution to X?
3. Try under Wine?
4. Change community attitude towards non-free software?
5. Bitch to everyone who does not 100% agree with "FOSS is the only one" and "all information must be free"?
6. Convert to "iPhone for everyhting"?

Is that enough or you need more trolling? :-)

Re:If the link worked... (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309497)

...must...not...say...profit! Ahhhhh!!!!!1!1

Re:If the link worked... (1)

leonstr (927273) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309501)

Actually "Free as in Freedom" is a very Prisoner-esque concept...

Re:If the link worked... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29308065)

You could try installing a 32 bit version of flash with a 32 bit browser, that should probably work. But the new version of flash is going to be 64 on linux I think so you may want to give that a shot when it's available (don't have a 64 processor right now and havn't been up to date on flash development but...)

Re:If the link worked... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29309259)

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=64bit+flash

64bit flash10 works fine on any linux distribution.

Re:If the link worked... (1)

Porchroof (726270) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309345)

Install Windows.

Re:Link to the series (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307987)

"Can not be shown in your current location"

same with the ATL-laser

Can someone please tell them that the world is global?
It's one thing that it's hard to air a show globally, but when it comes to internet they are taking pains to stop me from watching.

Re:Link to the series (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29308085)

Are you one of those rounders I keep hearing about? Listen, we know the world is flat, quit trying to tell us it isn't. You act like we could travel around the world by traveling in one direction forever or something.

Re:Link to the series (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309759)

Geeze, for a flatter you're pretty dumb. Of course you can travel around the world by traveling in one direction: the outer diameter.

Re:Link to the series (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29308239)

The video are location restricted.

Apple 2 video game (5, Interesting)

fdicostanzo (14394) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307783)

I remember the old Prisoner 2 video game for the Apple II. They gave you a secret number and all you had to do was not give it to them when they asked. Sounds easy. Just don't type the number.

Well, they got me! Applesoft programs would sometimes crash into prompt with an error and line. One would almost instinctually list out the line to see what the error was. So when the video game seemed to crash I listed out the line..... You lose!

I have never enjoyed losing a game so much.

Re:Apple 2 video game (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307853)

The CIA used video game simulations like these to train people to not divulge confidential information. The computer would "crash", ask for login credentials, and tell you you lost if you tried to log in.

Re:Apple 2 video game (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309193)

Even with syntactically correct, but otherwise spurious, credentials?

I remember this being featured in that wonderfully idiotic "thriller" The Recruit where Colin Farrel is "caught" and interrogated, being asked for the name of his instructor. He gives in after 3 days, and the back "wall" of the chamber he is held in moves away to reveal the rest of his classmates, watching his every move and choice while "captured."

I pity them (4, Insightful)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307839)

I can't imagine what it must be like to work on a production like this. The actors, the writers, the directors... everybody. Imagine knowing, every day you go in to work, that you're working on inane, pointless crap that's nothing more than the result of an endless negotiation between lawyers for the sake of earning a few bucks. Imagine knowing that out there, somewhere, is a truly classic work of art that you had absolutely nothing to do with. Knowing that somewhere inside you there might be a person who's just as intelligent and creative as Patrick McGoohan, but instead you're stuck making some senseless drivel that borrows the name of his vision. What a horrible, sad, soulless existence that must be. Truly, I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

Re:I pity them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307891)

Yes, in this day and age working on a *paying* job must be torture.. /rolls eyes

Re:I pity them (4, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308121)

Sadly that form of existence, called "living your life in a walking daze", is the state of nearly all people in this society.

They work for someone who is no bit better than them, has some crappy ideas, but has the money to make others with much better ideas, work for him to make them real.
They fall into a passive state of not thinking for yourself. Not leading. And when they come home, they do the same, by watching TV.

I don't think it's actually life anymore. You are just a material that gets used up. A human resource.

Re:I pity them (2, Insightful)

vrai (521708) | more than 4 years ago | (#29310149)

Sadly that form of existence, called "living your life in a walking daze", is the state of nearly all people in this society.

Everyone is asleep but me! [xkcd.com]

I don't think it's actually life anymore. You are just a material that gets used up. A human resource.

Anymore? As opposed to a utopian time when all men were free and lived only for themselves? Never existed outside of wishful thinking and revisionist history.

Re:I pity them (4, Insightful)

dbIII (701233) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308141)

Some episodes were brilliant. Others were pointless crap. Some had incredibly bad and stupid dialogue which were saved by Leo McKearn and Patrick McGoohan looking and sounding very intense about it. Some actors and cinematographers can take rubbish and turn it into gold.

Re:I pity them (1)

rho (6063) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308173)

On the upside it encouraged me to add the original series to the Netflix queue again. So, uh, good job, guys?

Alternative running order (5, Interesting)

TastelessGarbage (598415) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307841)

The PBS station in San Jose reran the series about 20 or so years ago. Scott Apel hosted bumpers before and after the series, which greatly enhanced the viewing. The biggest move was his re-ordering of the episodes into a sequence that made more sense than the CBS original run, in particular. The re-ordering went as follows:

Arrival

Dance of the Dead

Checkmate

Free for All

The Chimes of Big Ben

Many Happy Returns

The Schizoid Man

The General

A, B and C

It's Your Funeral

Living in Harmony

Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling

A Change of Mind

Hammer Into Anvil (my favorite ep)

The Girl Who Was Death

Once Upon a Time

Fall Out

In this order, the series consists of three cycles. Cycle one (ending with Many Happy Returns) focuses on #6 trying to escape. Cycle two (ending with Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling) focuses on 'intrigue in The Village' as #6 adjusts to his captivity. The final cycle consists of #6 taking charge and subverting The Village from within. Continuity is also improved in this sequencing.

And yes, #6 does have a name: Carl (his fiancee would know his name, after all).

Re:Alternative running order (1)

mockchoi (678525) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307965)

I never thought of it, but what you are saying makes perfect sense. I'm looking forward to watching the series again this way.

Re:Alternative running order (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308175)

And yes, #6 does have a name: Carl (his fiancee would know his name, after all).

His first name may have been Carl, but his last name was Drake. The only reason they didn't use it during the series is that it was done by a different production company than the one that'd done Secret Agent, and they couldn't get permission. In fact, if you can find and read the novels that were written about the series, one of them starts, "Drake woke up."

Re:Alternative running order (1)

DynaSoar (714234) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308373)

One can also obtain the DVD "The Prisoner: Special Edition" and look into the 'extras'. Two episodes had their soundtracks redone, but on this DVD were presented in their original form. Doesn't add meaning such as this reordering, but worth a comparison if one's a fan.

Re:Alternative running order (3, Interesting)

ZM73 (1631005) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308741)

Where do you get that his "real" name is Carl? If The Prisoner (#6) has a "real" name, it's John Drake, (ie, Secret Agent, aka Danger Man, from which Patrick McGoohan first starred.) In fact, the photo used of #6 in The Village is a stock photo of "John Drake" from Secret Agent. However, I have never heard of #6 being referred to as "Carl", even by his fiance. I just re-watched "Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling" (the episode with Janet, #6's fiance) and she never once utters "Carl."

.

Please, if you can, point to your reference where #6's name is Carl.

.

Also, if you wish to speak of running order, you should check out the Wiki of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Prisoner_episodes [wikipedia.org] There are 5 different running orders listed, all of which seem to have their own validity.

.

In the end, Patrick McGoohan (RIP) should have the last say in all of this... and over the years he never once admitted that #6 was John Drake, (or any other "real" name). Plus, he always said that the running order should have been much shorter than it was: only 7 episodes:

Arrival

Dance of the Dead

Free For All

Checkmate

Chimes of Big Ben

Once Upon a Time

Fallout

.

The reason the series lasted 17 was due to network requests, not Patrick's. Although British TV series have always been "odd" in the number of episodes making a whole "season," they didn't want to do just 7 episodes, but Patrick didn't want to do 24... so, there are 17.

.

As for the running order debates... frankly I don't care where AB&C, and The General belong in the greater running order, but they certainly belong in That order, (and back to back). Colin Gordon is one of the few actors who plays #2 twice, and in the opening sequence of the episode of The General he says "I AM Number 2" NOT "I am the New Number 2." Thus bridging his appearance from AB&C into The General. If we are to take The General as coming before AB&C, then it's rather out of place to then hear him say he is the New #2 at the start of AB&C.

.

Another running order debate is with placing Checkmate before Free For All. Frankly, Free For All MUST come before Checkmate. In Free For All, as he is campaigning for #2's "office" he announces that he intends to find out who are the prisoners and who are the warders. Then, in Checkmate he formulates a theory on which to test this separation. It would seem illogical to reverse these two in the running order.

.

And... no matter where you place Dance of the Dead, it must be within the first 2 or 3 episodes as one of #6's opening lines in that episode is "I"m new here!" If this episode starts creeping into a running order later that the 3rd episode, that line becomes less logical.

.

As for the second-half (or last third) of the running order... there really aren't as many line specific instances, or continuity points to really say one way or the other. Maybe because these later episodes were merely filler... until we get to the conclusion with Once Upon A Time and Fallout, which (frankly) should be watched as one episode.

.

If it were me, this would be the definitive running order: (A slightly modified Six of 1 Appreciation Society running order):

Arrival

Dance of the Dead

Free For All

Checkmate

Chimes of Big Ben

AB&C

The General

The Schizoid Man

Many Happy Returns

It's Your Funeral

Change of Mind

Hammer Into Anvil

Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling

Living In Harmony

The Girl Who Was Death

Once Upon A Time

Fallout

.

Still.... I'd really like to know where "Carl" came from. In my 16 years of fandom with this show, I've Never heard "Carl" being used as #6's real name... in any circles of fans or critics.

Re:Alternative running order (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29308849)

I've just watched openings of AB&C and The General and in AB&C â-2 says 'I am Number Two', in General - 'I am the new Number Two'.

Jesus as the Prisoner? (2, Interesting)

tomRakewell (412572) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307893)

Wow, Jesus (James Caviezal) is is not a number but a free man. FYI, Caviezal was struck by lightning during the filming of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ". Kind of like getting eaten by that big bouncing ball...

If one believes in God... (2, Funny)

MsGeek (162936) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308241)

...one might think the lightning strike was a divine verdict on the whole tawdry spectacle of The Passion Of The Christ.

hey fags! DIE!!!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29307907)

i hope you rump roasting faggot bitches all get aids and die!!!! get the fuck out of my society. i have no time for worthless shit suckers. diseased mentally ill homofags.

Proper use of quotes in title (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307967)

Verbally the title could be a little ambiguous, Is not the same AMC releasing "The Prisoner", than AMC releasing the prisoner (in the last reading the first thing anyone will think is "what is AMC?")..

I suspect that more people will be happy with AMC putting free the old The Prisoner, than releasing a new one.

What number will he have? The old one was 6, maybe next one will be 66, and we should wait till the real good version, in the reboot of the serie, when will be 666 (if the prisoner is 666, i would be very afraid of some entity called AMC that not only managed to imprison him, but plans soon to release him to the world)

Re:Proper use of quotes in title (1)

sdBlue (844590) | more than 4 years ago | (#29307995)

I for one am quite happy about the old ones being released, and cautiously optimistic about the new series.

Re:Proper use of quotes in title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29308117)

No one should be happy about the Great Old Ones being released. Oh, you meant old ones... Oh, that's a little different.

Re:Proper use of quotes in title (1)

DynaSoar (714234) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308349)

Verbally the title could be a little ambiguous, Is not the same AMC releasing "The Prisoner", than AMC releasing the prisoner

Originally the title was: Number Six Returns: AMC Releasing "The Prisoner". Less ambiguous but with enough double meaning to be catchy. The original did require fixing as it was max length before adding the quotes, and they caused it to truncate at the 'e' in 'Prisoner'. I didn't see it in the editor but did in the post-submission display.

What number will he have? The old one was 6, maybe next one will be 66, and we should wait till the real good version, in the reboot of the serie, when will be 666 (if the prisoner is 666, i would be very afraid of some entity called AMC that not only managed to imprison him, but plans soon to release him to the world)

If only you'd noticed that Jesus from 'The Passion of Christ' was playing the the hero, this last bit would have had much more impact. Someone already mentioned Caviezal having played Jesus, but nobody has yet commented on whether having McKellen as #2 would make it "Jesus vs. Magneto" or "Jesus vs. Gandolf". Since in the editing they decided that the links to the actors IMDB pages weren't necessary, it's more difficult to make such connections. Of course had I followed all the links I'd started with, I'd have noticed that one said "the ever changing Number Two" which I interpreted as a new one every episode, most Number Two actors played in 2 episodes, and one of them in 3. I might have even noticed how many of the Number Twos had played one part or another in Dr. Who, but I doubt I'd have had the nerve to appear to be that much of a nerd.

I wish them the best, it isn't an easy chore... (2, Interesting)

NeuroManson (214835) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308093)

About 8 years ago, I came up with, but never penned (maybe to the benefit of all), the idea of taking the concept of The Prisoner, and the concept of reality TV and bringing them together.

The psychological aspects alone would have been awesome, get a bunch of unsuspecting "reality show" contestants together, seperate them into groups based on political beliefs, make them increasingly paranoid with each episode, force them in some way to work with/against each other, make them believe they were in fact prisoners in some kind of foreign or even an American prison camp, and totally play on that situation.

Like I said, it may be a good thing I never did that. It could have made me millions, or could for someone daring enough to do that (in which case, send me money via paypal), it could have majorly screwed things up, but it was a concept worth thinking about at least.

I guess that means I'll... (5, Funny)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308221)

Be seeing it.

What's the point ? (3, Insightful)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308253)

Yet another regurg of something that was once original and worthwhile. Am i really supposed to believe they're doing this for some other reason than to milk some of their 'property' until it's dry ? Give me back my culture already.

working torrent anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29308269)

off the original version... the only ones i could find were dead...

So while the media industry complains about... (3, Insightful)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308303)

... "Knock-off Nigel" buying knock-off DVDs, they're busily pumping out knock-offs and "remakes" and "sequels" of stuff from the 1960s?

Dear film producers,

I will start buying DVDs again when you start producing original content. No, adding an Audi R8 and some explosions doesn't count as original.

Okay I'll bite (2, Interesting)

crimperman (225941) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308443)

What is AMC? I am guessing it's a US TV channel but I've never heard of it. A simple "US TV channel AMC" the first time it's mentioned in TFS would have helped!

Re:Okay I'll bite (1)

Rick Richardson (87058) | more than 4 years ago | (#29310129)

We don't get AMC in Minnetonka, MN. Only TCM (Turner Classic Movies), which is commercial free.

Re:Okay I'll bite (2, Funny)

Vohar (1344259) | more than 4 years ago | (#29310261)

It's American Movie Classics, which has been expanding their definitions of 'movie' and 'classics' since they first started. They began with movies like Casablanca, now they're on Bride of Chucky.

Seriously, Bride of Chucky. 11pm EST today.

Watching the first episode... (2, Insightful)

seeker_1us (1203072) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308623)

Why am I reminded of Teletubbies? And why does that scare the @#$% out of me?

It could be worse (1)

maroberts (15852) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308711)

Why am I reminded of Teletubbies? And why does that scare the @#$% out of me?

It could be worse, you could be In the Night Garden!

Re:Watching the first episode... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29309853)

Probably because you don't consciously remember the time when you were caught trying to escape and were brutally interrogated by Village personnel wearing Teletubbie outfits.

Be seeing you, Number 1203072.

What's wrong with the original location? (2, Informative)

Snospar (638389) | more than 4 years ago | (#29308651)

I visited Portmeirion [portmeirion-village.com] a couple of years back while on holiday in Wales. IMHO it was the perfect location for The Prisoner - a quirky, custom made village built into the hillside/cliffs leading down to a stretch of beach. The original show used this location to great effect and as I walked around the village I felt sure I was about to be chased by a seemingly sentient, menacing, white bubble - either that or knocked down by a jaunty Mini Moke! [wikipedia.org]

Did they replicate the concrete boat in Swakopmund (Namibia)? I somehow doubt it and hope they didn't just fall back on cheesy CGI.

Where have all the original story tellers gone?

Re:What's wrong with the original location? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29309299)

Maybe this will assuage your worries: http://www.denofgeek.com/television/100695/the_prisoner_heres_the_new_village.html

I've been to Swakopmund several times and saw some of the sets for the show. Swakop definitely has an odd feel to it, something about a colonial German villa transplanted and squeezed between the Namib sand dunes and chilly south Atlantic makes it feel otherwordly. Still, McKellen coming to Namibia didn't produce as big headlines as when Jolie does anything, anywhere; Namibians are still in love with her.

Half-Life connection (1)

HoppQ (29469) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309007)

What I want to know is if there is a Half-Life connection. I mean, looking at their posters in the downloads section [amctv.com] , Ian McKellen sure does look like he could be the G-Man. Is Number Six going to be seen crawling in vents with a crowbar in hand?

Comicon (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309155)

I saw this at Comicon - they had clips from the upcoming series running, and were taking photos of people as ID Badges for the Village. Had a nice retro-modern look to their largish booth.

I got my ID. I hope the series is good so that it'll be a fond collectable item some day (not like I'd sell it), rather than yet another tchotchke from some worthless failed project.

The clips they showed looks like it has promise, but you never really know until you actually watch it.

I Am SO Buying This (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29309627)

This Prisoner was one of the great shows (well, a couple towards the end were sloppy). This sounds superb.

Sounds very kafkaesque (1)

rohit krishnan (1153201) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309813)

Anybody seen the original? The setup sounds very similar to Kafka.

I think they captured the original spirit well. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29309873)

When I went to the site and tried to view the video it said:
"THE VIDEO YOU ARE TRYING TO WATCH CANNOT BE VIEWED FROM YOUR CURRENT COUNTRY OR LOCATION"

The mix of surreal paranoia and bureaucratic nonsense this engendered took me right back to the original episodes.
Looking forward to seeing the final result!

I can't imagine they're going to get this right. (1)

brennanw (5761) | more than 4 years ago | (#29309885)

That said, I'd still like more...

information...

Thirty Six Hours vs The Prisoner (2, Interesting)

hammarlund (568027) | more than 4 years ago | (#29310101)

The story line for The Prisoner (1967 - 1968) is eerily similar to the 1965 movie called "Thirty Six Hours", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/36_Hours [wikipedia.org] . In it, James Garner wakes up in a hospital supposedly five years after attending the final briefing for the D-Day invasion. He is disoriented; there's a newspaper dated five years later. He goes to the window and looks out in a scene reminiscent of the opening sequence of The Prisoner. Instead of the village, he sees the hospital grounds. The deception is an attempt to discover the plans for the D-Day invasion, "by hook or by crook". It's uncanny how similar The Prisoner is to this movie. It's been a long time since I've seen the movie, but I believe that the Garner character is referred to as Number Two (instead of number six in The Prisoner), as well as other similarities.

Something tells me the last episode... (1)

wonkavader (605434) | more than 4 years ago | (#29310357)

Something tells me the last episode won't resemble "Fall Out" -- the original last episode. If you haven't seen the original series, haven't seen the last episode when everything becomes "clear" (HAHAHAHAHAH!! [Read that as maniacal laughter]) and "#2" "Escapes" "The Village" [read the quotes as irony/dual meaning], you might still think there's a possibility that the new series will be a little bit faithful to the original.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>