Cool, thanks for the link.  It looks like a definite "reimagining" as they say - let's see if they remake the message as well as the set design. I also found this link for general info on both the original and the remake (it also has some downloads - wallpapers, a ring tone of the TV theme, and "The Prisoner' font).

There's a discussion over at a Facebook fan group for The Prisoner about the degree to which the remake will suck.  I thought the following exchange was pretty funny, though:

Mark Stivers (Sacramento, CA) wrote on December 28, 2008 at 11:27pm

I will definitely watch. With surveillance technology getting ever more sophisticated, it's more relevant than ever. And I will see McKellan in anything.

I just found out about the remake today, listening to another podcast.  They do have a preview/trailer up.

http://www.amctv.com/originals/the-prisoner/

Hmm, Ian McKellen?  Not exactly the person I would expect to want to appear in a anti-collectivist themed show.  Something doesn't seem right about this casting choice.   Then I found this:

http://io9.com/5322509/prisoner-writer-explains-why-our-new-paranoia-is-...

Now, not only am I not liking what I'm reading, it appears the bastards are inverting the message.  This reminds me of how they neutered Rollerball, in the remake.  Is it me, or does this seem deliberate?   Either that, or McGoohan's message went completely over Bill Gallagher's head.

Can't have the sheep accidently watching the original series, can we?  They might get the wrong ideas.

Have been watching the original series OnDemand from Comcast. I watched Ep.1 a couple weeks ago, and have been joined by additional family members for 2-7.

It. Is. Awesome. (My 10-year-old's words, but I agree with him.)

I'm still looking forward to the remake when it starts on AMC next weekend, but the original has officially spoiled me. The bar is set VERY high.

Quote from that page from the new director from that webpage:

On the thematic differences between the original and the new series:

McGoohan's piece was based upon the assertion of the individual, and I allowed myself to look at it in the polar opposite way. What happens if the cult of the individual is allowed to run? We're all obsessed with self, we're all obsessed with more, and now, and me, and gimme... and what happens if that's affected us, and what if that kind of world, what are the consequences of that? McGoohan says, 'Look. We live in a world which is authoritarian, and we've got to break it.' What if we live in a society now that's selfish and dangerous?

The series begins tonight. I've heard one glowing review, from a radio guest who is pretty anti-state, so... We'll see.

But really, I keep asking myself. I'm not much of a prude when it comes to re-makes, but with "The Prisoner", I just don't see any sense in it. The original is simply its own work; it stands on its own as a masterpiece that cannot be duplicated or even imitated. In this one case, I ask, why tamper with something so profoundly excellent?

Hmm... makes me think of "Planet of the Apes"... ;-)

Be Seeing You!

Four episodes in, and I haven't made up my mind yet.  There are some touches that I like, but right now it seems more like Gaslight or Dark City than The Prisoner.  Maybe it will all pull together tonight, but I don't know...

Is "crapulent" a real word?  Because I think it applies.

I missed the AMC showings (mainly because I don't have it), but found out that the new series is downloadable from iTunes (but not w/o parting with $16.99)

In a hour or so I should be able to watch the first episode.   I watched some of the episode summaries on the AMC site, and it still appears to me that they are subverting the message(s) of the original. 

Just curious, does AMC run ads?    if so, I'd be interested in knowing who bought time when the show aired.

Yes, they run ads.  The main sponsors were Subaru and Palm.  The DVD will be out in March 2010.

Got to see the end last night. This new series showed promise, but if one is a fan of the original, it's a pale imitator, a shadow of the original, lacking true power and cohesiveness. People might think that the oroginal Prisoner was mysterious and left unresolved, but if one actually has a BRAIN, he can understand the themes and messages very easily. In this new one, they work hard to make it as disjointed and schizoid as possible. They must have thought that if they could do that, their pedestrian explanation for the existence of the Village would be viewed as 'wierd'. It's not. It's pedestrian.

Now, that being said, the final scene is pretty powerful, given the set up they create, but it's not "The Prisoner", it's a commentary on personal prisons, our desire to care for others, and psychology. There's no political theme at all. It's all self-based, not external. IN the original, it was both, and much more sophisticated.

Be Seeing You!

If anyone is still interested (not sure why anyone would be), check out the cast/writer discussion from the San Diego ComiCon here.  The writer, Bill Gallagher, kept saying that he wanted to update the story by focusing on how much more selfish we are today than in the sixties.  Not sure how he came to that conclusion, but it's clear that AMC greenlighted the wrong guy for this project.  Why not have Michael Moore direct Atlas Shrugged while we're at it?

The upside of this travesty is that the original McGoohan episodes are now available on iTunes.  $30 for all 17 episodes.

My wife and I watched this series when it came ONDEMAND here on comcast, and we were both impressed. Having never seen the original (and that might be the main reason) I though it was one of the greatest things that I have seen on the television for a long time. 

Gard, I mostly agree with you on the ending, but I think that it goes a bit deeper than just showing the personal prision. It shows a man being convinced that the village is a necessity. He is broken down and led to believe that the prison that is the village is the only way to help people and that he needs to be involved in leading it in the right direction, even though the village is not a necessity, but just one solution, albeit a terrible one. He thinks the only way to help the people is with the system that he has been presented with instead of letting the system fail and finding his own humane approach to the problems.

All this said, I may be misremembering (or as my wife would say exercising my selective memory). It has been a while since I saw it. But I would be interested in viewing the original. I guess I will look on Amazon unless anyone has anywhere else (aside for itunes) to find it. 

As an academic work, "Policing the Globe," while eminently readable (unlike some academic prose), is likely to be mostly read by serious researchers and students of its subject matter. That's a shame, for Andreas and Nadelmann shed considerable light on the evolution of the ever-more-integrated international police apparatus. Given the acceleration of that integration since the attacks of September 2001 and the technological advances leading us ever closer to an Orwellian surveillance society, it might behoove us to pay some attention.

While "Policing the Globe" is not indecipherable academic-speak, it is dense. But it is also chewy. It's the kind of writing where you start out underlining the really important parts, but quickly find you have to switch to quick slash-marks on the page margins because otherwise you're going to underline half the damn book.

============================
mcse braindumps 70-270
latest ccna dumps
certification dumps
70-271 braindumps