In article <46fd7ddd$0$32537$4c368faf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Milt
<netrage@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Anybody wrote:
> >
> > Whether the new show is any good or not in it's own right is utterly
> > irrelevant. If they follow through with this idea it will NEVER be
> > "Knight Rider" as we know and enjoy it - as such it WILL be a crap
> > version of so-called "Knight Rider". What it will be is "new Knight
> > Rider" or "Doug Liman's Knight Rider", a totally different show and as
> > such should have a totally different name.
> >
> How do you know this? Its amazing how quick you are to trash this as
> being total crap and nothing like the original before even seeing so
> much as a still photo from it. True, it won't be the "Knight Rider" we
> know completely but that might not be a bad thing. We won't know it
> until we see it.
That's the entire point I'm making - it definitely won't be the "Knight
Rider" we know and enjoy. It'll be some "updated" show that bares
little resemblance to "Knight Rider" other than re-using the same name
and perhaps vague ideas. That makes it a different show, NOT "Knight
Rider", and if it's not "Knight Rider" why re-use the name?!?
> > No doubt the same deaf and blind morons who believe "Ron Moore's
> > Battlestar Galactica" is exactly the same as the original will not
> > start blathering on about how good that show is and completely miss
the
> > point. :-\ So I will refuse to even bother wasting time answering
> > those messages here and now.
> >
>
> Well, I'll agree with you about Battlestar Galactica, that new show has
> NOTHING to do with the original. However, I waited to make that decision
> until I saw the pilot episode. I wasn't going to say it was crap and
> nothing like the original until I saw it for myself.
Again, that's the point. Whether the new show is any good or not in
it's own right is completely irrelevant. I'm saying that the ridiculous
changes Hollyweird WILL force in make it a crap "Knight Rider" show,
not necessarily a crap show by itself ... ie. it will have bugger all
to do with "Knight Rider" other than stealing the old shows name. It
re-using the name does is split and confuse the franchise (the original
usually has to change it's name to something like "Classic Knight
Rider" so the dumb***** can tell the difference and fans can know which
version is being talked about).
The proof of this is:
- The quote from the news item: "a weekly series in which
cars ****ft shapes". Where the BEEP BEEP BEEP does that
ever fit with "Knight Rider"?!? Ignoring the minor changes
in later seasons, KITT doesn't change shape - "Knight Rider"
is NOT remotely meant to be Transformers.
- Every other silly "remake" they shoveled out that are
bugger all like the original at all.
- One of the first network moron who was intrested in
making David Hasselhoff's new "Knight Rider" show, but only
if KITT didn't talk.
If they want to make a true "Knight Rider" show (or "Battlestar
Galactica" or whatever), then make a "Knight Rider" show that is true
to the original since that what fans liked.
If they want to make a new show simply to make money, then make a new
show and give it a new name because it will not really be "Knight
Rider" in anything but name anyway.
WHERE IS THE HOFF WHEN YOU NEED HIM?!?!
|
