Re: Official Teaser Poster for Knight Rider The Movie

In article <t17qk2lahq7iuerhcejg7mrh3o6k8n8od7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ed Chilada
<nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 11:55:21 +1300, Anybody
> <anybody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <Xns987125374963Eivanotter@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ivan Otter
> >Rudakov <ivanotter@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Just needs to be something fitting.  1983 TA is not fitting anymore. 

> >> Just like we are all sure that David won't be Michael (hes just too
OLD) 
> >> KITT won't be an old TA (ditto).
> >
> >And it then won't be "Knight Rider", just some modernised rubbish full
> >of silly ill-fitting ideas that's hiding behind the name of the
> >original show for tha sake of making money during the current fad of
> >remakes / updates.    :-(
> 
> Please explain exactly what should be made, for you to consider it a
> Knight Rider film, including the character, actors, cars, settings and
> potential plot. Essentially, outline the film that *you* think should
> be made. Please don't bail by saying that one shouldn't be made.

That's precisely what I personally do want: NO so-called "Knight Rider"
movie and no more idiotic "remakes" / "updates.

No matter what they do they can not possibly re-capture the essence
that made "Knight Rider" (or whatever) what it was. They simply create
some modernised nonsense that doesn't fit and then they wonder why most
of the time it bombs badly. It's totally illogical to pee all over the
existing fan base. If that fan base can't support a movie version, then
don't make it, make something else instead.