In article <2KSdnW0T85p8zpfYnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, "80 Knight"
<80_knightREMOVEMEPLEASE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Anybody" <anybody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:150920061846278207%anybody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > In article <hhkOg.59616$OI1.5409@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, lraszewski@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(L.
> > Ross Raszewski) wrote:
> >>
> > <snip>
> >>
> >> The details of what Knight Rider was were right *for its time*.
> >> Trying to do it now without making it right *for this time* is a
> >> terrible mistake.
> >
> > This is the same silly idea which means we're now stuck with the awful
> > and barely recognisable new "reimaginaed" Battlestar Galactica - about
> > the only thing that's remotely the same is the name and core idea.
> >
> > We've also got fools at Paramount that want to "reboot" the Star Trek
> > franchise, this time basically ignoring anything they want to that's
> > already been established.
> >
> > Two examples among lots of other ridiculous "remake" / "update"
rubbish
> > coming out of Hollyweird in recent years.
> >
> > If these idiots like this want to make their own shows with their own
> > ideas, then they should go and make their OWN show, and not hi-jack an
> > old one and bugger it up beyond recognition. The ONLY reason to do
this
> > is to stuff more money into big-wigs pockets at the expense of the
> > original versions' fans.
> >
> > What we definitely do NOT want is some garbage masquerading under the
> > "Knight Rider" name - we've already been there with the awful Team
> > Knight Rider. They should simply release the DVDs of the original and
> > make a new show with a NEW NAME ... just put "based on Knight Rider"
in
> > the credits if by some miracle it has anything remotely recognisable
in
> > it.
>
> All 4 seasons are out on DVD, and even if they do make a new Knight
Rider
> movie, and even if it sucks, the new movie won't erase the DVD's from
> history. They will still all be there, for you and everyone else to
watch.
> Does Hollywood care about money, and only money? Yep, it sure does.
> Does Hollywood making a new Knight Rider movie mean the original show is
> going to be harmed? I can't see how it would be.
> The point is, no one knows if it will be any good or not. You can't
judge
> something that hasn't even been made yet.
True, but you can have stomach-turning expectations based on all the
other unrecognisable garbage coming out of Hollyweird that uses the
same name as an old show. Their track record is attrocious, so a "new"
Knight Rider isn't somthing to look forward to, but rather dreaded.
:-(
A "new" Knight Rider doesn't "harm" the original in the sense that it
does still exist, but it does cause confusion and split the fan-base.
It makes no sense at all to use the same name on a new show that's SO
different - people expecting to se the original (or something remotely
recognisable) end up disappointed, and people who didn't like the
original are unlikely (or at least less likely) to watch the new
version because of the name.
Simply changing the car used for KITT of course is not what I mean by a
"new" Knight Rider show, but it is the first step in the wrong
direction of making silly changes for the sake of "updating" a show to
current ideas. The show is a product of its time. If they want to make
a "new" show, then they should make a NEW show with a different name to
match the different ideas they're using.
|
