"Ed Chilada" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:d8n7g2lj2oqn6a8t4eh4gv47ppakmltjl1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 03:57:22 -0400, "80 Knight"
> <80_knightREMOVEMEPLEASE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>"Ed Chilada" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>news:15e5g2t0q7cilm7nfelghjpqs2bu04ri6q@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> Having a car from the early 80s in the new film is going to look
>>> stupid. It'll *have* to be updated. Besides, didn't they pretty much
>>> state that KITT wasn't the car as such anyway, so it'll still be KITT
>>> regardless of the model of car it's in.
>>
>>In the movie version of "The Dukes of Hazzard" they still used the 1969
>>(much older then the 1982 Trans Am KITT) Dodge Charger for the General
>>Lee.
>>I see no reason why a 1982 Trans Am can't be brought back. KITT is a
1982
>>Trans Am, and always will be.
>
> One film was set in backwards redneck America, and even included a
> scene where they went to the 'big city' and got laughed at.
You fail to see the point. The General Lee was a 1969 Dodge Charger, just
as
KITT is a 1982 Pontiac Trans Am.
> The other film is supposed to feature a futuristic car, and having it
> based on a car from 80s simply isn't going to work.
You have your opinion, and I have mine. The 1982 Trans Am is one of, if
not
*the* most beautiful car ever produced. I once owned one myself, back in
2000. It was red with black interior, totally mint shape, and only had
86,404 KM's on the clock. Drove better then anything I had ever driven, or
have driven since.
|
