"Anybody" <anybody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:290920071202483278%anybody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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.
So tell us then, oh wise one. What would you do for even a Pilot episode?
Give me a story line.
|
