The Prisoner ist eine Mini-Serie, die sechs Episoden umfasst und die Thematik der gleichnamigen Originalserie aus dem Jahre 1967 aufgreift und in die moderne Welt einführt: Ein Mann wacht im Nirgendwo auf, ihn umgibt Sand, man weiß nicht was geschehen ist, was gerade passiert und was passieren wird. Er findet eine Stadt, ein Dorf. Nach kurzer Zeit wird ihm klar, dass es nur dieses Dorf zu finden gibt, denn der Taxifahrer, den er ordert, nach New York zu fahren, kennt diese ominöse Stadt nicht. Grund dafür ist: There is only “The Village”. The Village also, der einzige Ort auf Erden – wenn es sich denn um die Erde handelt. Noch mysteriöser wird es, als sich die Leute nicht bei Namen nennen sondern mit Zahlen ansprechen. Jeder in dem Dorf hat eine Zahl, gerade diese repräsentiert ihren Namen. Der Mann, um den es in The Prisoner geht, wird “6″ genannt. 6 (James Caviezel) ist verloren in einer Welt, die er nicht kennt. Einziger Anhaltspunkt zu “seiner” Welt ist Number 2 (Ian McKellen), der wichtigste Mensch in The Village, der, der was zu sagen hat und der, auf den alle Bewohner heraufschauen. 2 scheint was zu verheimlichen und 6 will wissen was. 6 will raus. Er kann aber nicht, er weiß nicht wie. Er ist gefangen.

Es sind sechs Episoden, die anfangs verwirrender nicht sein könnten und im Zuge der Handlung an Klarheit gewinnen. Doch auch am Ende wird man sich vielleicht noch an den Kopf packen und sich fragen, was man denn hier sechs Stunden lang geschaut hat. Es ist eine Geschichte über die Kraft der menschlichen Imagination, die Ausweglosigkeit der Gedankenwelt und die Verbindung zur realen Welt. Gefangen im eigenen Körper, ein Gefangener seiner selbst.

In moderner Aufmachung und schnellen Schnitten, mit Flashbacks und der Macht des Mysteriums á la Lost begibt sich The Prisoner auf  Terrain, welches sich nicht in seiner Komplexität verliert, sondern den Zuschauer zum Nachdenken anregen wird. Über die chaotisch reale Welt, den Lärm, den es beinhaltet und den Stress; Über die Flucht in eine neue Welt, in der es geregelteres Leben gibt, einfacheres, aber auch sinnloseres. Gerade die Zahlen in The Village sind identitätsberaubend und lassen die Bewohner als kleine Spielfiguren oder Puppen darin leben. Mit 6 ändert sich jedoch die Gefühlslage und die Atmosphäre in der mit Sand umgebenen, perfekten Welt. Rebellion der Spielfiguren? 2 gefällt das gar nicht.

Es sind nur sechs Episoden, die man sich ohne Bedenken anschauen kann. Bedauerlicherweise ist mir das Original nicht bekannt, welches nach einigen Meinungen düsterer und besser sei als das Remake. Nichtsdestotrotz kann ich die aktuelle Version dieses interessanten Gedankengefängnisses empfehlen, und sei es wegen der ansprechend gespielten Rollen. Allen voran Ian McKellen, seine Interpretation des 2 ist wunderschön kaltblütig und grausam, die Art, die voneinem Lächeln begleitet wird.

_____[ * * * . . ]_____

“You only think you are free.”

The AMC mini-series The Prisoner is an update to the cult favorite series from the 1960s about a government agent (James Caviezel) who is kidnapped and sent to a remote island known as “the Village”. When he wakes up in the middle of the desert, not remembering what happened, but having dreams and visions about his early life in New York, he tries to find out where and who he is. The government agent is called 6 by everybody and soon he has to deal with an old man named 2 (Ian McKellen), who he thinks of keeping him as prisoner, though 2 states that 6 is a free man. 6 finds allies in a doctor named 313 (Ruth Wilson), in a cab driver named 147 (Lennie James) and in 2’s own son 11-12 (Jamie Campbell Bower). 6 is looking for a way out of the Village.

Episode 01: Arrival
Ehm, yeah… Fascinating. Really. Maybe I should see the original, after AMC finished this remake, I only heard of it. Most interesting – even for me – is, that I almost knew nothing about the series before. I just knew the title, saw two promo posters for it, knew that Ian McKellen and Jim Caviezel are in the main cast and that this one is a remake of an old original. Nothing from the story, and I read nothing about the series at all. And so, I am quite surprised after what I saw here. Really fascinating stuff; mysterious, deep, reminds me of a mixture of Meadowlands (which I could rewatch btw), Shyamalan’s The Village and a bit of Dark City. And maybe The Prisoner is a bit of all of them.
So, 6 wakes up in the middle of the desert, witnessing 96 being chased and killed. 6 has some kind of visions, he has memories about New York, his home, he knows names, he knows history, but he doesn’t know who he is or where he is. He has to learn that the Village is “the” Village – there is nothing out there. Maybe another village in the universe. The mystery part is definitely a great setting for the series, and the village itself really looks like the loneliest place on Earth. It already looks like that the village is some sort of a prison with persons, which original memories are wiped and replaced with new ones, which excludes everything outside of the Village. But where is the Village located and is it really that simple to understand? I think there is more behind all of this than just a prison with prisoners in it.
The episode itself was good. Jim Caviezel overacted a bit (especially in the scene where he meets 2 for the first time, when he smashes his hand on the table), but other than that he is a good “6″ (damn, now I am thinking of Battlestar Galactica…). Ian McKellen could have more screentime for the fact his name is billed first in the credits, I know nothing about his role, except he is the “2″ – now I am interested to know who (and where) is “1″. The rest is pretty much unknown for that. Here a possible love interest for 6, there the dying hope of a way out of the Village; here a cab driver, who possibly knows more than he says, there a kid, who starts to learn that there is more than this life. The first episode (as a part of a mini series I don’t really see it as a pilot) basically set up everything we have to know for the next minutes of the show. Lots of questions, a few answer, lots of possibilities how the story could evolve during the next parts. Only the cliffhanger seemed a little awkward and pushed the story more into a science fiction genre. Which, I think, could be a mistake story-wise. But I don’t know the original and I don’t know hoe the writers handled that at their time. I let myself surprise what’s to come and will not spoil myself. This is, after a long while, the first real series from which I don’t know anything. 8/10

Episode 02: Harmony
Between the first two episodes I read an article about the old series, and now all the surprises are gone, because I know what is going on in the series. Nevertheless the remake is still fascinating and definitely not clear which story it will take for the next parts. For a resistance story it could be already too late; after two episodes 6 is already almost crazy and short before not believing in his dreams anymore. The end of the episode made it clear.
The story is told a bit too slow. Instead of giving us a few answers about what is going on, the writers gave us the episode story of the brother and the therapy thing, which feels like a one-episode thing. The relationship between 6 and 313 is not really building, and 2’s son 11-12 is not thinking too often about 6’s words about something outside of the village. It still looks mysterious and complex, but it just feels like the writers wanted to not reveal secrets before the finale. Okay, I liked the story with 6 and his alleged brother, just the fact that the revelation of 16 (Jeffrey R. Smith) not being 6’s brother and instead telling about them looking at everybody all the time came too short (still: The tables in the pool looked great, I want to sit in there, too). And I still don’t like the big white ball; this is kind of too much. The story seemed just like a “filler” to prevent letting the viewers know about the mystery in the story. I already know that the writers cut the spy story and going in a complete different way than in the original, but it still feels that the writers don’t want to expose any information for their big finale. It is like Lost.
It was still a good episode, but it was a bit weaker than the first one, and I think the rest of the series, probably with the exception of the finale, will be the same. I like the story, I like how the writers try to keep it complex, and I like that nothing is certain for sure (especially the ending with 6 in the crazy house made it clear that anything can happen), but I don’t like that any new mystery series has to be the new Lost, keeping all the secrets in the back, revealing them only in the finale. I already get bored with this, but as long as The Prisoner is a mini series I will have fun with it. 7,5/10

Episode 03: Anvil
Pretty much another typical stand-alone episode. Even the man story arc didn’t have minutes to discuss. There really was nothing about it, except the “psycho games” between 2 and 6 and 6’s efforts to get 313 out of the tunnels, together with another appearance of the white ball of death. But the rest… uninteresting procedural to keep the viewers interested in what is happening next with 6. The undercover story was bullshit, though, because it brought nothing. Either 313 thinks 6 spied on her and wants him out of her live, or 6 explains everything to get a bit of a love story into the story. But doing nothing is a waste of time. And this was pretty much the biggest problem in this episode.
Which was, surprisingly, still good. I still like the mystery part of the story and I still like the “duel” between 2 and 6. Especially when 6 mentioned to work against everything, what 2 does and says. Other than that the episode had some interesting points: Not to mention the question about number 1 (I don’t believe there is no number 1), but the deal with the tunnel and the execution-style eradication of unwanted village inhabitants. And the fact that more and more people seem to dream (or have visions about their old life) – which marks one big question: Why is 6 the only one, who wants to find out if there is a possibility to escape? Even 11-12 starts to believe, there is more to everything, but he is doing nothing.
At least the flashback story got an interesting turnout. Though I have absolutely no interest in the bits and pieces from 6’s early life (if it is his early life), but the acting was good in here. But I don’t think that the flashback story has any meaning into the story at all, which lets me ask myself why the writers did bring that story into the show. It must have some significance…
The Prisoner is already a miniseries, and when the writers waste their precious time with stand-alone and filler stories, then they didn’t really have good ideas to keep all the six parts interesting, which is a shame, because the plot is awesome. 6,5/10

Episode 04: Darling
Well, now I am really confused. An episode between stand-alone stories (the matchmaker thing) and a secret about the main story arc (Lucy’s [Hayley Atwell] involvement, who was recruited by 2 to play mind games with 6). And everything gets more confusing with the story about the hole and the disappearance, probably death of 832. It is nice to bring the recurring characters into an important story arc, but why is it so confusing now? Psych games are now replaced with mind games now.
Finally the flashback story is connected with a story in the village, and it was quite surprising that Lucy a.k.a. 4-15 was 6’s girl for the future – even though it was all part of one of 2’s plans. But the flashback story lost all meaning, when Lucy came into the village and played a blind girl and the result of 6’s matchmaker. The flashback story was just interesting enough in the last episode, which obviously was intended to prepare the story of this episode, but now the flashbacks are not interesting anymore. I don’t even care about the explosion of 6’s house in New York. And I surely don’t care if Lucy survived the explosion (well, she did, as long as the flashbacks are REALLY flashbacks… I am thinking of Lost right now, which confuses me again), because she could have easily planted the bomb to fake her death or let 6 believe that she is dead or something else, whatever.
It seems unbelievable, that 6 wants to marry 4-15, after one day and night of meeting (though he knew her as Lucy before); this story was a bit stupid. And the relationship story between 6 and 313 (together with the kiss at the wedding), well, I don’t want to talk about it, because it seems like a filler to the finale and a story for the shipper.
Only 11-12’s story seems interesting, and finally he steps forward with his intuitions, but his story could be told a bit faster, because there are only two episodes left…
By the way, I noticed something, which confuses me even more: The episode’s cliffhangers are totally not concluded in the next episode. In “Harmony”, we had 6 in the psych hospital, in the next minute of the next episode he was out; in “Harmony”, he was in the tunnels, in the next minute of the next episode, he was happy somewhere else – what is with the open and unresolved cliffhangers? Do they have a meaning in the bigger story or is it just very bad writing? I hope there is something explainable coming… 6,5/10

Episode 05: Schizoid
Waah, now I am totally lost. Either the 6 in New York is crazy, ill, sick, and like the episode title schizoid, then the series has a really boring conclusion, but if not, then I want to know how everything fits together. This episode was even more confusing than the last one, and it kills the fun I had with the series during episode 1 and 2. Still complex, but I am losing interest, when I see scenes, which are completely
out of logic and probably even out of synchronicity of the story.
Now the writers bring us doubles, a two-times 6 and another 2 and nobody knows who is who, are they really doubles, or just imaginations in each other’s heads and minds. And with each other’s minds I mean that the confusing is happening in the illusion’s minds… Yeah, I really am lost.
At least I am getting into 11-12’s story, even though I am about not to see through this story. Not only do I not understand why 2 gave 11-12 the key, but I couldn’t get the sense of the actual story and of 11-12’s mother – is she now dreaming about the real world or about the village? Does she know about everything or is that just an illusion in somebody’s mind? Or am I getting crazy and I secretly watch the series finale of Lost without knowing the two previous seasons?
The idea with the doubles is good, and sometimes I thought about clones, astral illusions or something like that, but with every new scene the writers have something new to offer: The towers are in real the Summakor offices? Which 6 is now in the “office” and beating the crap out of the windows and which 6 is in the Village? Are there mind exchanges happening? How did 313 get to the Summakor office without being chased by the white ball of death? Did she really manage to get to the towers? Damn, with all these questions, no answers and confusing stories it is no fun to watch the episodes. Because there is no clue of what might be the bigger game in this episode, when it is not all a dream of 6 or something like that.
By the way: What was up with 147 and his wife? Did they already forgot the “disappearance” of their daughter? There is absolutely no aftermath of this story. And 4-15 is not going to be missed as well.
Seriously, I like all the complexity, but the series goes on my nerves in this form. 4,5/10

Episode 06: Checkmate
Hm, okay, I am trying to put it together: Everything was a mind game, the consciousness not really playing tricks, but manipulating it. Consciousness can be transformed into another place, while “normal” life goes on – basically: the consciousness of the people can be separated from the people. The consciousness notice its missing “host” (the people) and has dreams (that’s probably why 6 had the dreams from his early life at the beginning of the miniseries) – the dreams might be the connection between the separated consciousness and the people, so that a lost consciousness can return to its “host” – , wants to return, but cannot and gets crazy (like 6 did – kind of). It creates an enemy (the big white ball of death) and so it tries to put itself together. Basically: The consciousness of the people can “think” on their own without being connected to their “hosts” (the people). And now the biggie: Even though I didn’t understand the last three episodes and all the things about the consciousness (especially with Helen [Rachael Blake] in the center of everything – kind of), this is my own resume of the series and it might not be right, because I saw barely clues to what I just wrote. But I think this is the easiest way to describe the whole mini series. I just don’t understand why there were two 6s and two 2s in the last episode. I could explain it with 6, but with 2?
Seriously, even after the finale the plot is still confusing. I could write more stuff about the whole consciousness thing, but I don’t know if I even interpret it right, I already lost my thoughts writing together my own thesis. I can’t put all the things together I saw, especially the flashback scenes with 6/Michael and Lucy during the first four episodes (what has this to do with everything?) – whose consciousness is really controlling the village – 2/Curtis or Helen (after her death in the village, all the holes came up, which lets me believe that Helen kind of lost control over her consciousness, because she was the one who most dreamt stuff – in the village and in real)? Or is 11-12 behind everything (he died, too, and all the holes came up – by the way: It is interesting that 2 is holding a funeral for his son, but not for his wife; this one lets me think about that Helen’s consciousness wasn’t really a part of the Village, but a connection for 2 between the Village and the real world, which means, again, that Helen was the bridge between the world of conscious and the world of being awake). Oh my god, I am so confused right now.
A few words to the episode: It was… a good one, at least a few of my million questions were answered, and I think the viewers have to think for themselves now, how to interpret the series. Interesting is that the episode picked up some of the cliffhangers from the last episodes. 6 getting into the crazy house in “Harmony”, in here his conscious is in the crazy house, fighting his demons (the big white ball of death); 313’s fate totally confuses me (especially the ending scene – is she taking Helen’s position now? Is she he bridge between consciousness and the real world now?), and why the writers brought 147 into the real world as a driver, I don’t know – this scene was confusing as well. And why 2 killed his head with a grenade I don’t know. And the biggest thing: Even though it was clear that there is no number 1, I secretly think 6 was 1. When everybody already screams “6 is the one”, I translate it to “6 is 1″ – and in theory he could be 1 now, after he “takes over” the village.
I have to think about that now, maybe rewatching the mini series, maybe putting my thoughts together again. Maybe I understand then. But for now the writers managed to get to the point: Don’t conclude the mystery story, so the viewers have to think on their own. I thought hard, and I am not happy about my results. 7/10

Season average is 6,67. I definitely will rewatch this, just for the sake to understand the whole thing. And I will post another entry with more thoughts about the ending, the conclusion and everything in it, around Christmas time or so. When I was thinking about this show over the night, I still was fascinated and flashed with everything I saw. And I want to know, if the writers wrote together some unexplainable shit, not caring about the meaning of the conclusion, or if everything has a deeper meaning in religion, myths and so on.
By the way: I was already looking for the original series. I will watch this some time, but first I have to find the episodes…

Max (Clive Owen) and Uncle Freddie (Ian McKellen)

Martin Sherman’s 1979 stage play Bent, which originally starred Ian McKellen in the West-End and Richard Gere in Broadway, is about a homosexual man sent to the Dachau concentration camp in 1930s Nazi Germany. The 1997 film version was adapted for the screen by Sherman and directed by actor and theatre director Sean Mathias. Finally getting a DVD release in Australia, Bent is an astonishing film not just for the incredibly powerful story it tells but for its remarkable production design. Mathias gave the film an intentionally theatrical look rather than attempting to disguise the film’s origins as a stage play. Factories and quarries are used to represent Berlin and Dachau and the whole film has a stylised feel to it that strongly evokes the cinema of Derek Jarman and Peter Greenaway.

In this film version Clive Owen stars as the lead character Max and brings to the part the type of intensity and complexity that would later distinguish him in films such as Closer, Gosford Park and The Children of Men. Owen has always had a sort of icy charisma and slight sleaziness to him, which gives him an engaging and unpredictable quality that allows him to play likeable bad guys and dodgy good guys. In Bent our sympathies do lie with Max because he is the victim of one of the most horrific and systematic acts of persecution that humanity has ever endured, but he is nevertheless a highly flawed characters largely due to his opportunism. Nevertheless, over the course of the narrative Max does evolve into a more compassionate human being and it is his displays of empathy and connection with fellow homosexual prisoner Horst (Lothaire Bluteau from Jesus of Montreal) that provide wonderful moments of defiance to the dehumanising nature of the camp.

Bent is a remarkable film that is completely captivating. It is expertly crafted so that, not unlike Steve McQueen’s 2008 film Hunger, it is a film of incredible visual beauty that enhances the power of the bleak narrative rather than contrast against it. While the confronting subject matter of Bent may not be a huge motivation for people to seek it out, it is worth making the effort because it is one of the great films of the 1990s.

© Thomas Caldwell, 2009

Read more reviews at MRQE

As promised, my final thoughts on The Prisoner.

Short Version (Spoiler Free): The ending was better than the original ending (which isn’t hard), but the interstitial episodes were worse than the original interstitial episodes (which also is not hard). Final verdict: decent.

Longer Version (Contains Spoilers): Well.

When I wrote about the problem of genius in movies, I referenced Mr. Scott’s “transwarp beaming” in the new Star Trek movie. Transwarp beaming is supposedly a genius breakthrough, but it doesn’t seem any more “genius” than flying faster than light or teleporting to a planet. In a universe where all tech is handwaved, calling another piece of handwaved tech “genius” tells the audience nothing.

I had a similar reaction to the middle (middling?) episodes of The Prisoner. Everyone in the Village acts weird – including the one “normal” man, Number Six. We don’t know who’s acting weird because they’re crazy, and who’s acting weird because they’re hiding something, and who’s acting weird because that’s how they always are. As a result, the moments meant to shock – like 1112 stabbing 909 in the neck – just confuse us. Was that supposed to happen? If so, why? If not, what went wrong? We never know, and the show won’t bother to tell us.

Add to this the fact that the Village follows no consistent physical laws and all tension goes out the window. Are Six, Sixteen and the Winking Lady going to find the ocean over that sand dune? Maybe. Is Six going to finish rifling through this apartment before Two shows up? Could be. Is a fiber-optic camera watching Six right now? Probably. There’s no situation that can not be changed, as if by magic. So our heroes are either in constant danger or no danger at all. The visual and narrative cues we would rely on to tell us if they were aren’t available here.

Oh crap! Everything's normal!

The best episodes of the original series – and as much a fan as I am, I must admit they weren’t all gems – hinged around two compelling questions: why did Six resign? and who is Number One?. Simple questions, but exploring them and their ramifications made compelling drama. Why did Six resign his intelligence agency post? What did he know that was so valuable that he’d be thrust into this Village-prison to uncover it? And why won’t he save himself a lot of heartache and just say why? Similarly: if Number Two isn’t in charge, then who is? And why do the Number Twos keep changing? Bizarre little enigmas, especially for primetime television.

The new Prisoner briefly addresses both of these questions in the third episode, “Anvil,” and then abandons them. Six resigned (we learn in the flashbacks with Lucy) because he learned something he didn’t like about Summakor. And there is no Number One in the Village. Problem solved! Next!

Of course, removing these tensions pulls the teeth from the rest of the series. We have no idea why Two is keeping Six in the Village. And we have no idea why Six would engage Two on his own terms, instead of spending every waking minute walking toward those ghostly twin towers on the horizon. So the exchanges between them have no venom, the battles no suspense, and the odd little satires of suburban life no satirical edge.

The finale, “Checkmate,” revisits the interesting questions about the social order that the original series was known for. Can you fix someone against their will? If you can, should you? How aware are the Village residents of the “super-conscious” life that Mr. Curtis’s wife imagines them in? And what of the people who die in the Village – 1112, Lucy, 147’s daughter? This was fascinating. You could have built a whole series around this. Instead, you get protagonists toeing the sand uncertainly or screaming melodramatically.

If I were showing this to someone who’d never seen it before, I would skip “Harmony” and “Anvil” entirely. The rest, keep as they are.

NOM NOM NOM

Quand la chaîne du câble américain AMC annonça voilà quelques temps déjà qu’elle lançait très officiellement un remake télévisuel du Prisonnier, série phare de la fin des années soixante pour laquelle le terme « culte » semble avoir été créé, on put lire ça et là deux types de réactions. Tout d’abord celle d’un public lambda n’ayant pas vu la série originelle, donc peu ou pas marqué par la saga. Ces spectateurs-là s’en foutaient un peu, attendant sans engouement particulier de voir ce qu’on allait leur offrir. Et il y eut la réaction des fans, des connaisseurs, des amoureux, ceux pour qui les dix-sept épisodes de l’œuvre matricielle forment un monument intouchable et indépassable. Voulue, créée, produite, scénarisée et réalisée en grande partie par Patrick McGoohan, alors mondialement connu pour son rôle de l’agent secret John Drake dans la série Destination Danger et qui s’adjugea au passage le rôle-titre, Le Prisonnier est forcément une œuvre à part.
Après les nombreuses rumeurs au cours des années passées sur la possible adaptation de la série sur grand écran (1), le serpent de mer cinématographique prenait finalement son essor sur l’étrange lucarne qui hante nos salons. Puis arrivèrent les premières informations : la série ne reprendrait pas le décor de l’original, préférant un nouvel environnement à la surexploitation d’un lieu devenu mythique (2), le numéro 2 serait le même tout au long de la série alors que ce rôle très symbolique se voyait incarné par un nouvel acteur à chaque épisode.
D’ailleurs cette nouvelle version n’en comptera que six, épisodes, rejoignant en cela la volonté première de McGoohan qui dut « rallonger » son œuvre plus qu’il ne le voulait afin d’en faciliter la vente (et donc la production même) aux Etats-Unis.
Des marques importantes de respect, une nouvelle vision et non une basse copie mercantile et servile, une actualisation d’un feuilleton qui fut en avance sur tout le monde.
Et puis avouons-le, lorsque l’on apprend qu’en plus l’unique numéro 2 sera joué par le grand Ian McKellen, quand même, on se dit que ça a de la gueule et ça rassure.
La série fut diffusée sur trois soirées à raison de deux épisodes par jour. Une « salve » du genre à marquer le coup et à attirer les spectateurs potentiels qu’il faut bien pouvoir arracher à leurs shows habituels. Le Prisonnier possède comme toute grande œuvre un rayonnement que les années n’ont pas su entamer et les plus réfractaires comme les plus curieux ne purent facilement résister à l’envie de voir enfin ce qu’allait apporter cette nouvelle vision en dehors du rôdeur – la grosse boule blanche – aperçue dans la longue-bande annonce afin de tranquilliser tout le monde.

Un homme (Jim Caviezel) se réveille dans un désert de dunes. Il y découvre « le village », une cité où les habitants se désignent par des numéros au lieu de noms et vivent sous l’autorité bienveillante du numéro 2. Comment est-il arrivé là ? Il l’ignore et découvre que partir ne sera pas facile, personne autour de lui ne semblant croire qu’il puisse exister un « ailleurs ». Bien décidé à s’enfuir, le nouveau numéro 6 va se lancer dans une bataille pour retrouver l’existence qui était la sienne, ce qui l’amènera à découvrir le secret de ce lieu étrange.
Si le résumé de cette nouvelle version sonne comme l’exact reflet de son modèle, autant vous avertir tout de suite que la comparaison s’arrêtera là et que quelques minutes suffiront pour vous convaincre qu’un bon sujet sans vision solide derrière n’amène qu’à la déception. Car ce Prisonnier 2009 n’est que cela au final, une déception amère – encore que pas tout à fait surprenante – au regard des moyens déployés.
Le village ressemble à une station balnéaire figée dans les années 50 sans qu’il n’apporte un supplément d’âme, les personnages sont creux, souffrant d’un manque de caractère flagrant. Au premier rang desquels nul autre que le héros, numéro 6, partagé sans cesse entre ce qu’il doit faire, se laissant plus porter par les événements que prêt à se retrousser les manches pour se sortir de là. Même le numéro 2 laisse un certain goût d’inachevé tant il ne semble pas faire grand chose à part se balader en costume blanc. Un super méchant ramené à l’état de « El gringo », on a connu plus ambitieux.

Ajoutez à cela une forme aussi languissante et mal maîtrisée que le fond (les enchaînements de scènes laissent parfois à penser que le monteur devait travailler sous l’influence de substances illicites) et vous obtenez ce que beaucoup attendaient et/ou redoutaient : un effroyable ratage, un enterrement grand luxe pour un projet qui partait avec une montagne trop haute à escalader. La décence, le devoir de réserve ainsi qu’une certaine honnêteté nous obligent à passer sous silence la résolution du tout, volontairement alambiquée mais fumeuse à laquelle le spectateur déjà à moitié endormi par les cinq heures et demie précédentes ne prêtera que peu d’attention. Là où McGoohan jouait avec les attentes de ses spectateurs et transformait son travail en “énigme allégorique” inscrivant la série dans les annales de la télévision autant que dans les consciences, cette nouvelle version ne se hissera jamais qu’au niveau d’un Lost ou d’un Prison Break, deux plaisirs coupables dont plus personne ne parlera quand ils auront disparu des écrans.
Car qu’on le veuille ou non, chaque image, chaque action, chaque faux pas de la copie est inconsciemment comparé à l’excellence de son modèle, une œuvre si forte qu’elle reste une référence incontournable quarante-deux ans après sa création.
Bonjour chez vous.

(1) Suite à leur collaboration fructueuse sur Braveheart, Patrick McGoohan soutint la mise en chantier d’une version avec Mel Gibson dans le rôle-titre.
(2) La ville de Portmeirion qui servit au tournage existe bel et bien sur les côtes du Pays de Galles > http://www.portmeirion-village.com/

Julien Taillard

> Site officiel de la minisérie

Trailer de la mini-série Le Prisonnier version 2009 sur AMC


Trailer de la série originale

Sadly, AMC’s version of THE PRISONER lived down (way down) to my very low expectations. I can honestly say this was not your grandfather’s PRISONER — and that’s not a good thing. The series was as dry as the desert that surrounded the new Village on all sides.

Caviezel and McKellen

The original was all about alienation and rebellion in the face of conformity. The Village itself represented the rigid social system of Britain, and 6’s struggle to resist mirrored the counter-culture movement of the late ’60s. This PRISONER, however, clearly has been filtered through the refracting lens of LOST, and the result is a distorted version of the modern touchstone, rather than a reflection of the social dreads of the early 21st century. The initial two hours of P2009 were obsessed with piling up “mysteries” instead of story elements, and the middle chapters served purely as bald-faced filler to mask a few sequences that would “justify” the addle-minded finale. The elements that were retained only serve to heighten the differences. 6 still meets a taxi driver first, and then goes to a shop to buy a map, but in the modern version, the encounter with the shopkeeper is an excuse for a sight gag about the map unfolding to unwieldy size.

But it was not all bad. I thoroughly enjoyed the photography and high production values. But while everything looked fantastic, the actual storytelling was crap. Director Nick Hurran was less interested in telling a story than making sure there were lots of pretty pictures onscreen. The biggest story mistake turned out to be shifting the emphasis away from the eponymous prisoner and onto his jailer. In the original series, 2 was constantly replaced without warning, essentially making him (and sometimes her) a dehumanized, faceless bureaucrat; in 2009, McKellen played No. 2 for the entire run, and great pains were taken to put a human face on him. He was given a troubled family life, and the entire Village revolved around his clan. This inversion of the central conceit failed utterly. Ironically, that disastrous shift led to the miniseries’ greatest triumph: casting Sir Ian McKellen as the sinister No. 2. The majestic actor inhabited his white suits with predatory menace, and 2 clearly delighted in playing cat-and-mouse with 6. James Caviezel, meanwhile, apparently took playing a mystery man as license to avoid giving him a personality. 6 may have claimed he was not a number, but Caviezel avoided giving him a face. Compare 2009’s bloodless 6 with Patrick McGoohan’s snarling, caged animal version. And while Caviezel says, “I am not a number,” repeatedly, where was McGoohan’s defiant motto: “I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered!”

And then there was the ending. There was no way to top the original’s mind-bender, so apparently the-powers-that-be decided not to even try. As a result, the finale veered so wildly into nonsense that it almost seemed to have been tacked on from a different series. The gritty first hour bore no resemblance to the trippy last installment. The entire enterprise ended up feeling more like a reimagining of LOST rather than PRISONER. A reimagining made by people who don’t “get” LOST, I might add. It is possible to be mysterious like LOST and intriguing like the ’60s PRISONER without being incoherent. The first five installments were so deathly dull, confounding and alienating that it was not surprising that the denouement would be a total cop-out; I simply wasn’t prepared for how much it would be a cop-out.

“The Village is in all of us,” mused No. 2, who went on to “explain” that the Village was some kind of experiment in mind control operated by the Summakor corporation. No. 2’s wife, Helen, was a biochemist who theorized that there are different layers to the mind and that it was possible to transport other people into that dreamscape and “fix” their mental traumas by making them live in the Village. Against their will, no less. This wild detour into vaguely-worded mumbo-jumbo left me confused as to whether they were chalking up the Village to pseudo-science or just plain magic. No. 2 kept his wife sedated because her dreams maintained the stability of the Village — which implied the Village was in her mind. But then she was murdered by her son, 11-12, who only existed in the Village. Huh? The big reveal did not make sense, and it did not work, at all.

The motive for placing 6 in the Village turned out to be simple revenge, because, as Lucy intoned, “No one resigns from Summakor.” So, unlike the original, there was nothing special locked in 6’s mind from his days as Michael; Summakor was just a disgruntled former employer. Was this miniseries an ode to medical experiments on unwilling human subjects? My best guess is that it was a rant against evil corporations that think they know what’s best for individuals. But who can say what it was really about, since the vague scripting was apparently intended to confuse viewers rather than entertain.

How ironic that AMC’s motto is, “Story Matters Here,” because story -– a tale with a beginning, middle and end — did not matter to this remake of THE PRISONER.

So after a long spell without the pacifier, Joker and I had had enough, it was either get the TV installed or there were going be nightly bonfires on the front lawn and burning tires until someone fixed the problem.  But of course there was no one else and so I called up and got them to hook up our direct TV ourselves, and like magic, our conduit of media was once again connected to the universe we crave.   And just in time too.  Sunday night A&E aired the first of it’s episodes updating the classic British TV show ‘The Prisoner”.  I got into the original some years ago when Sci-Fi was just getting it’s wings and wasn’t afraid of airing stuff late at night that didn’t include bad 80’s horror shows or Girl’s Going Wild.

The original series was  the brain child of actor/ writer/ director Patrick McGoohan, the star of the hit British spy show ‘Secret Agent’ and George Markstein, a story editor on the series.  Not content with just continuing his career as a an actor shoveling out run of the mill action shows, McGoohan used his pull and fame to craft a deep and dark piece of work.  Falling somewhere in the vast expanse between Ayn Rand’s ‘Anthem’ and the James Bond series of movies/books, the show explored themes like paranoia, individuality, and defiance,  a poster child for trippy 1960’s unrest.  I came upon it at that perfect time in my life when I was exploring similar ideas in the books I was reading and it just clicked very hard with me.

And the final episode has a Beatles music cue that would blow your socks off.

So it was with no small enthusiasm that I sat down to watch the remake the other night.  And it was pretty damn good.  Although some things have changed, the Village being much larger and now isolated in the middle of a vast desert as opposed to next to the sea.  But the core ideas are all still present.

James Caviezel now takes the lead role as Number Six, a man who wakes up in the isolated sands outside of The Village with no idea how he got there.  Caviezel does a workable job, emitting a constant aura of confusion and angry distrust of everyone he meets, but he doesn’t have that heavy brow emphasized glare or the feel of pent up explosive danger of McGoohan’s version of the character.  The decision to change Number Six from an ex-secret agent to an information analysis is an interesting one, sacrificing a man prone to action for an extremely observant protagonist, we’ll have to wait and see how this plays out in the episodes to come.

Playing foil to Caviezel’s Number Six is Sir Ian McKellen, who hams it up as he is often fond of doing as the villainous Number Two.  But even chewing scenery Magneto-style isn’t enough to really take anything away from such a masterful actor and he comes across  as both a believable protector of his fellow Village citizens and sinister face to the secret plot that enslaves them all.  I bought it, and as a fan of the old show, I felt the casting of Number 2 was nearly as important as the lead, so I was pleased by what I saw in McKellen’s performance.

Scaramouch, Scaramouch, will you do the Fandango?

Six’s fellow Villagers all still have numbers for identities instead of real names and there’s an ongoing attempt to convince him that they are living a perfectly happy existence in The Village.  Of course it wouldn’t be a show if everything was really peachy, and it becomes clear very quickly that their harmonious front is a cover for something much more sinister and/or strange.  Ideas of alternate realities immediately sprung to the minds of those watching with me, and I can’t really argue with that kind of logic.  The Village does seem to be in it’s own place and time, and the strange phantom twin towers in the distance raises many questions about the remote locale.  But part of the fun of the Prisoner has always been trying to explain what was really going on.  Much of the same theories people have built around ‘Lost’ were applied to ‘The Prisoner’, things like it being a kind of purgatory or the previously mentioned alternate reality theories.  None of it was really explained in the TV show, McGoohan certainly wasn’t telling, and it’s been way too long since I have read the Alan Moore written comic mini-series for me to recall if it was covered there.

And it’s mostly irrelevant.  The Prisoner, to me at least, was about the man himself and his struggle with his captors and fellow Villagers to dig out the truth and remain a free man.

So I’m in so far, here’s to hoping the rest of the episodes landed on the DVR.

Ian McKellen, who played Gandalf in the epic movie Lord of the Rings, uses the Bible as toilet paper when he stays in a hotel room.   Denny Burk explains his reason for defacing certain pages in God’s holy Word.

Here’s another brief article on the issue.

A miniseries shown on AMC, starring Jim Caviezel and Ian McKellen. Yes, Jesus and Magneto(or Gandalf). It’s a remake of an older version which I can’t compare because I haven’t seen it. The structure is sort’ve of Lost-ish with flashbacks from one reality to another, but The Prisoner is more dreamy and trance-like. I like the concept of the film which begins with a man who finds himself in a world where only a small village in a desert exists. His main purpose in the story is to figure out how to escape. But I think too much emphasis is put on the culmination of the ah-ha realization at the end without helping us enjoy the ride there.

Review: AMC’s The Prisoner

November 18th, 2009

“There’s something thrilling about honesty.”

There’s a moment in the final hour of AMC’s remake of The Prisoner where I started to realize where its real problem lies. This is not to say that I haven’t been realizing the show’s problems from the word go, as the first five hours of the show were highly problematic, but when Ian McKellen’s 2 utters the above line I realized that this is where the intentions of the miniseries went awry.

There are problems with the thematic content of this miniseries, but the real problem is how the writer chose to structure this story in order to create a sense of mystery that was ultimately more vague than it was exciting. In the eyes of the writers, the climax of this story is when the story becomes clear to the audience, and the purpose of the rest of the miniseries is to effectively buy time and confuse us until we’re so desperate for clarity that when we receive it we give ourselves over to the truth. And, to some degree, the strategy worked: the final hour was, in fact, the best of this miniseries primarily because it was finally revealing and engaging with the larger thematic issues being discussed.

However, the problem with this strategy is that the cloudiness of the first four and a half hours of the miniseries not only made us hunger for thrills but also destroyed any sense of thematic consistency and, as a result, destroyed audience interest. While the theme presented at the end of the miniseries is actually compelling, it was so wholly absent for the first four hours (in particular) that it ends up depending entirely on the audience’s willingness to slog through an abstract and experimental four hours where the writer keeps adding new elements to the series when it’s in some way convenient for them as opposed to when it feels earned or natural.

While the miniseries eventually creates a compelling image of modern society, it’s an image that does little to make the first hour hours any better, and in some ways makes them even more irrelevant. It results in a miniseries that is the absolute worst sort of failure, where an intriguing idea and a couple of strong performances are executed in such a way to rob them of any potential to move their intended audience.

The miniseries is the story of Summakor, a company led by a man named Curtis who uses his wife’s biochemistry research on the unconscious to develop a simulated utopia of the mind wherein individuals could travel to an ideal society and become “fixed” for their present lives. The utopia, controlled by his wife’s mind, is run by Curtis’ own counterpart within the simulation of sorts, and is supplied with potential patients by the surveillance research completed by Michael, who after trying to resign from the company is thrown into the simulation himself. It is that moment, when Michael (now as 6) finds himself in the middle of the desert with no idea of how he got there, that begins this miniseries, and this is precisely the problem.

See, 6 isn’t actually interesting. Part of the blame lies on Jim Caviezel, who gives a lifeless performance when he’s asked to speak softly and an outright awkward one when he’s forced to raise his voice. However, much of the blame comes from the fact that the character has no life to him, lacking both a sense of humour and a thought that is in any way unrelated to the Village and his current predicament. The miniseries eventually has him perform a number of odd jobs, each more mundane than the next, and because the character has no nuances or subtleties it’s as if they were unable to get the real actor and instead used a stand-in so that they could film what was happening around them.

The script gives us no sense of why Michael/6 does anything he does other than when he blankly exposits it or, even more problematically, when another character (415, 313, or 2) spells it out for us. There are points in the miniseries where 6 will randomly pop up into a scene to interrogate 313, or question 1112, and I’m left wondering what drove him to make this speech. The answer is never clear, and the editing of the miniseries is such that things just move from one beat to the next without ever showing us how, or more importantly why, certain things are taking place in the way that they are.

Now, I understand the reluctance to reveal details of the plot up front: the show is trying to sell itself on mystery, so having 6 arrive confused and disoriented and to make the Village particularly amorphous and challenging makes perfect sense. However, if this is the case, we need to want to watch the show’s protagonist operate in this environment, and the miniseries fails to make the character the least bit compelling. It slowly parcels out any information that could possibly make his character interesting by turning it into a mystery of its own, the scenes with Lucy in New York designed to pique our interest in the plot rather than actually create interest in this character. I understand that 6 isn’t able to know everything about Michael’s life, or it would defeat the purpose of the entire exercise, but if we had been shown more of his past and given a better sense of his character we might have been able to better understand his character’s motives even if he isn’t quite sure what’s going on.

And I’m not even convinced that the plot should have remained a secret. If the purpose of the miniseries was to make us consider the types of themes that the finale of sorts brought to the surface, I don’t know why those themes couldn’t have been introduced first before then turning this into a character study of Michael, Curtis, Lucy, Sarah, and everyone else. I understand that mystery was a key element of the original series, but this theme didn’t feel as if it really needed mystery to work, and I probably would have found the episodes they delivered far more compelling if I understood what was going on. The story of a husband whose wife has become trapped inside her own mind, unable to enjoy the child she created in that mind that she could never have in real life, would have been just as compelling if we weren’t forced into the position of 1112, unaware of the whole story. By forcing us to know as much about the plot as its two most “out of the loop” characters, it creates mystery where it should be creating dramatic interest, and has bored us into submission by the time it decides it wants to be interesting.

A lot of this does have to do with the fact that the miniseries format seems to have been horribly misused in this instance, especially around the middle of the series. The freedom of a normal series structure is that you have time to investigate various different elements of a story, allowing more time for the viewer to become accustomed to an environment or to a set of characters. This can lead to a slower pace, certainly, but it can also really delve into the world the writers have created. This so-called utopia had a lot of elements taken for granted, such as the question of religion (which was present but non-denominational), or the question of governance, and as such there was a chance for them to slow down for a moment and allow 6 to stop rushing from one point to another and actually experience the world in a way that allows us, as an audience to understand it further.

What was so fascinating about this miniseries is that it actually at points started to do this, and yet refused to slow down in order to make it a successful strategy. It’s as if they decided that, instead of doing a full series, they would simply have a few episodes of a traditional series but refuse to have 6 actually slow down to experience any of it. It resulted in an absolutely bizarre pacing struggle, where 6 never stopped moving and yet what we was moving to was neither as exciting as one expects in a short-form miniseries nor as thorough as one expects in a more traditional series structure. Stories like 6 teaching at a school, or working as an undercover, or discovering a lost family, or being placed into an arranged marriage, were the types of stories that might have been interesting if there was ever a sense that they weren’t just a transitional piece of misdirection. And because of the miniseries structure, Michael never stopped to ask why any one particular event was happening, because that would have slowed things down too much and limited the impact of the big picture, which remained a broad question of “Why am I here?” that rarely changed as each episode passed.

It was only when things started to come together in the end that the miniseries started to be more successful, as the New York and the Village began to connect with one another in a legitimately intriguing way. By the time we got to “Checkmate,” I was confused less about what was going on (which I’d argue is counter productive) and more about what was going to happen (which, to me, is the perfect source of tension). When the two worlds collided through more than just a boring conversation between Michael and Lucy in his own memory, the show was finally telling us something about its key themes. Summakor went from some sort of faceless corporation to a clear part of our narrative, and 313 went from an undefined female love interest to a legitimately tragic character whose pain is now comprehensible (and present at all, really). When all of that happens, the story suddenly becomes really interesting, and I’m guessing that if you watched the finale first, the first five hours of the miniseries would probably be a whole lot more interesting – if honesty is so thrilling, why not open with it so that the boring introduction is the least bit compelling?

There were some interesting elements to be salvaged here. I thought Ian McKellen was great throughout, even if the character of 2 became problematically expository at various points within the narrative, and Curtis’ story is probably the most complete story provided to any of the characters (perhaps helped by the fact that it becomes clear the quickest). And I liked the idea that the leader was 2, as opposed to 1, because the idea of being whole (of being one soul) was unattainable to those who have essentially been split into two in order for them to improve their lives. And the idea of the Dreamers, people who aren’t as easily assimilated into this new utopia, working as a sort of resistance to the sense of order has some real potential to it. I think there’s a really intriguing miniseries to be told about that environment, one which could deal with the same themes that writer Bill Gallagher wants to deal with here, but this just wasn’t it in any way.

Some broad stories like this suffer from a weak ending, but I thought this one was compelling: Michael, who is responsible for this program starting as a result of his Big Brother-like observations within Summakor, is forced to choose between destroying the Utopia or attempting to take over and fix what Curtis was unable to sustain before him. In the end, he chooses the latter because of what he sees Sarah turning into, and when he sees that 147’s real life counterpart is closer to getting to see his daughter as a result of the process being undertaken, and he chooses to believe that helping people (even when they don’t ask for it, as is implied) is worthwhile. It may be a prison, but like any prison system it’s one that people believe can reform people, and that some believe can be changed to truly be a utopia of sorts. And so Michael sacrifices himself as Curtis once did, and 313 gives up her life in the village to serve as the new host, drugged into a state of unknowing.

But a satisfying ending doesn’t make the rest of the miniseries any more interesting, except from the perspective of analyzing the ending more carefully in the context of the rest of the story. However, while Daniel Fienberg has written an extensive analysis that makes the story seem really compelling, I wanted the show to be that compelling. If these kinds of ideas are so interesting, then why weren’t they present throughout the miniseries in a way that went beyond a scattered collection of disconnected and “weird” story beats? While Daniel’s right to point out that you could write extensive essays on the theme of the miniseries, you could also (heck, I sort of just did) write extensive essays about how poorly it organizes itself to actually capture those themes in an entertaining piece of television.

And while we do give points for intention, when the execution is this muddled and confused I can’t really suggest that any but the most morbidly curious seek out this miniseries for entertainment purposes. If this had been executed, it could have been another notch in AMC’s belt – as it turned out, it’s an intriguing oddity that’s more failure than success and more idea than execution.

Cultural Observations

• Jace over at Televisionary has an interview with the writer, Bill Gallagher, which reveals both that he “wrote small” for the miniseries (which makes about as much sense as it sounds) and that he never intended for the glass towers seen by the dreamers to in any way represent the World Trade Centre. The first I can sort of understand, even if it does explain a number of the show’s problems, but the latter baffles my mind: it’s one thing not to see the connections with really broad philosophical constructs (there’s some of Plato’s “The Cave” in here, as Jace points out), but it’s another to miss something so culturally relevant to the show’s New York setting.
• Considering that the actress who played 313 looked a bit like January Jones, there were a few times where I imagined the cast of Man Men (Jon Hamm, Jones, Elisabeth Moss, etc.) replacing the non-McKellen cast members, and I have to tell you that it became a far more interesting show as a result.
• That being said, I did think that the cast was solid other than Caviezel, especially Lennie James and young Jamie Campbell Bower (who is playing Weymar Royce in the Game of Thrones pilot for HBO).
• A legitimate question: I have to wonder if AMC always intended to air the miniseries over three nights. The episodes are clearly distinct from each other, which meant that they could have easily spread it out over six nights (Sunday-Friday) or over six weeks like a traditional series. I have to wonder if the quality of the opening episodes might have made this decision for them, or if they felt there was some other reason to air two hours a night during an extremely busy sweeps period.

Be seeing you. Te observamos

Number 2. Número 2

Cuarenta y dos años después la cadena británica ITV conjuntamente con Granada Television y Out of Africa Entretaiment han realizado un ambicioso remake  de la famosa serie “EL PRISIONERO”, creada y protagonizada por el actor Patrick McGoohan en 1967. El original poseía 17 capítulos. En ella McGoohan interpretaba a un agente secreto que es raptado y llevado a una isla conocida como la Villa.  En Estados Unidos el canal American Movie Classics (AMC) ha distribuido esta nueva versión homónima y la estrenó el pasado domingo 15 de Noviembre. De momento no hay fecha confirmada de estreno en otros países, pero saldrá al mercado de DVD el próximo mes de marzo aquí en EEUU.

EL PRISIONERO

Es una miniserie de 6 episodios. Está protagonizado en los principales papeles por  James Caviezel que da vida a número 6, Ian McKellen a  2 y Jamie Campbell Bower que en la serie es 11-12 y le vais a ver en breve en los cines de todo el mundo haciendo de Caius en la nueva entrega de la saga Twilight, New Moon. Entre los personajes femeninos hay que destacar a Ruth Wilson y Hayley Atwell que son las siempre inquietantes 313 y 415. La serie comienza con el capítulo llamado…

“The arrival”-”La llegada”

Cuando un hombre misterioso se despierta en las montañas, ve como un hombre es perseguido y acaban matándole. Antes de morir le revela su nombre es 93. Trata de seguir huyendo pero acaba llegando a un misterioso lugar llamado La Villa. Allí dejará de tener un nombre y pasará a llamarse 6. La Villa es una especie de enorme carcel, de la que no se puede salir. En donde todo el mundo conoce a todo el mundo. Nadie posee nombre. Su máximo dirigente es número 2. Este posee una mujer que yace en estado catatónico en una cama, hasta que 2 le pone tres pastillas en la boca, resucita durante unas horas y vuelve a caer en coma. Además las cosas en casa de número 2 se complican porque el joven 11-12 empieza a cuestionarse lo que dice número 6. El único recuerdo que tiene número 6 de su vida en New York es una mujer llamada Lucie. Por más que lo intenta no hay de qué escaparse porque no hay realidad más allá de la Villa. De repente un buen día hay un atentado en una cafetería donde trabaja la amiga de 93, una de las pocas personas que cree a número 6, y antes de morir le dirá la clave: “Sigue a las torres”

“Harmony” -”Armonía”

En la Villa número 6 encontrará a su hermano 16. Pero a pesar de tener recuerdos sobre él, negará su existencia. Por ese motivo le obliga número 2 a acudir al psicoanalista. Este capítulo gira en torno a lo que es real o no. Así 6 se plantea que su casa no es su casa, su hermano no es su hermano. Así descubrimos a través de los recuerdos que tiene de su última cita con Lucie que trabajaba como analista de datos para una compañía llamada Encore y ha dimitido. Pero todo será todo un constructo su imaginación? El sigue soñando con la imagen de la playa.

“Anvil”- “Yunque”

En este tercer capítulo número 2 le propone un trato a 6, y ambos saben que es una trampa. Le propone dar clases en el colegio. El director es 955 del colegio, número 2 encarga a unos de sus agentes 909 que le investigue con la ayuda de 6. Lo que 909 no sabe es que 2 le propone a 6 que le investigue.

“Darling”- “Cariño”

Número 6 se levanta y encuentra una tarjeta de una agencia de contactos. La pareja que le encuentran  no es otra que Lucie, sólo que se llama 4-15. Pero 313 comienza a sentir celos y se siente traicionada, así comienza a ser manipulada por 2 y la necesidad de matar a 6 crece en su interior. 6 acaba encontrándose una noche en el restaurante de la Villa con 4-15, le confiesa que siente que se han conocido con anterioridad. Así realidad y ficción vuelven a mezclarse una vez más.

“Schizoid” -”Esquizo”

Número 6 sospecha que número 2 ha matado a 4-15 tanto dentro como fuera de la Villa. Mientras 12-14 quiere ver a su madre y número 2 le ofrece la llave de la habitación donde yace catatónica. Número 6 comienza a tener problemas con todo el mundo en la Villa, todos dicen que se comparta de un modo extraño, de forma agresiva hasta que descubre que hay dos número 6, y este le dice que mate a número 2.

“Checkmate”- “Jaque mate”

En este último capitulo 313 descubre que número 6 se muere. Este acude a ver a número 2 y este le plantea todo un dilema vivir en la Villa o morir. Así que comienza una verdadera cuenta atrás. Pero encontrará un aliado en 147. Número 6 trata de convencer a 12-14 para que abandone a sus padres y deje la Villa.

Un servidor tiene recuerdos vagos de la serie original. Sólo se acuerda del detalle del globo y de que nadie podía huir de la isla. Así que por ese motivo no puedo compararla con el original. Sólo os puedo adelantar que la trama deja de tener un trasfondo de espionaje. Así que es mucho más que una puesta al día, es toda una vuelta de tuerca.

Dirige esta radical puesta al día el británico Nick Hurran, su currículo es eminentemente catódico, así que no os puedo dar muchas pistas. Pero lo que os puedo adelantar es que ha hecho un producto televisivo con una gran factura, muy cinematográfica. Es más la influencia de directores como Tarsem Singh se dejan ver tanto en el montaje, como en el diseño artístico, fotografía o en la banda sonora creada por Christopher Willis. Así la imaginería es muy curiosa. La mezcla de estética rústica con la minimalista, de aires muy futuristas como la que se puede ver dentro de la consulta del psiquiatra hacen que el espectador esté todo el rato descolocado, y lo que es mejor no da pistas sobre lo que nos deparará el final. Es muy de agradecer que los efectos sonoros y visuales estén al servicio de la trama.

Impresionantes son las localizaciones donde han rodado. Sabe sacarles todo el rendimiento posible, haciendo que parezca un lugar ajeno y desconocido, con un marcado carácter irreal. Así las imágenes del desierto pertenecen al desierto de Namibia, el resto ha sido íntegramente rodado en Sudáfrica, concretamente en Ciudad del Cabo y localidades aledañas como Worcester, el tunel de Huguenot situado en las montañas de Toitskloof o el Resort de la playa de Monwabisi situado en  Khayelitsha. Las escenas del club son del interior del teatro Bijou de Ciudad del Cabo y las de la empresa al Centro Internacional del Convenciones de Ciudad del Cabo.

La serie funciona. Ian Mckellen consigue crear un personaje sumamente inquietante, no deja de ser una suerte de Gran hermano que lo controla todo, es manipulador, dentro y fuera de su familia, tiene a toda la Villa bajo su mando. Es un gran villano, digno del mejor Benjamin Linus, que últimamente anda en momentos de decadencia en “Perdidos”. Ni el menor detalle escapa a su control.

Las relaciones entre los personajes son tortuosas. Nadie saben en quien confiar. Nadie tiene claro si pueden creer que existe un mundo más allá de la Villa. Todos tienen sueños de una realidad diferente fuera de la Villa. Lugar aparentemente idílico, pero que en cuanto escarbas un poco te das cuenta que no lo es tanto. Eso sí, todos tienen cubiertas sus necesidades. Lo malo es que para sobrevivir en ella tienen que acabar traicionándose unos a otros. El argumento posee más dobleces, porque no puedes fiarte de tus sentimientos, ya que cabe la posibilidad de que alguien te los haya manufacturado. Este aspecto me recordó a los implantes de los replicantes en “Blade Runner”.

Los homenajes al original son obvios y directos, por ejemplo en el episodio llamado “Esquizo” podréis ver la famosa bicicleta colgada del techo del pub, o por ejemplo en el primer capítulo se puede ver como emerge del agua el enorme globo blanco y engulle a uno de los personajes. La gradación de los enigmas está bien y hacen que te sientas atraído. Como ver un ancla enorme en el desierto. No pude evitar recordar ese plano tan curioso de “Encuentros en la tercera fase” de Spielberg en el que aparece un barco en el desierto. Los derroteros de esta nueva versión son realmente sorprendentes, así que os aconsejo el visionado de este remake, es una buena puesta al día.

Pero si sois seguidores de Los Simpson en uno de los capítulos hay una estupenda parodia en la que el propio McGoohan ponía voz a su personaje Número 6. Homer es secuestrado y enviado a una isla por descubrir secretos en su página web.

LOS SIMPSON HOMENAJE A “EL PRISIONERO”

A man wakes up on a desert plateau. The staccato pops of automatic fire draw his attention; looking over a ridge, he sees an old man in an outmoded jacket tumbling down a hill. He picks the old man up and carries him out of the sun. The old man dies; the younger man buries him. Alone, the younger man staggers across the desert until he finds:

The Village.

The notion of a remake of The Prisoner, Patrick McGoohan’s legendarily inaccessible 1967 BBC series, thrilled me more than it bothered me. I don’t like remakes. I don’t like the idea of dredging the same river for new fish. But the original Prisoner, for all the thunder of its premise, lacked something in execution. McGoohan wanted the audience to draw their own conclusions, but a little more explicitness couldn’t have hurt (“yes, Patrick dear, but what do the monkey masks mean?”). And toward the end, the show drifted from challenging-weird to just weird-weird. The same ideas, given a fresh start and a proper budget, would devastate.

Number Six (Jim Cavielzel) stumbles through the Village. Exhausted from walking in the desert all day and afflicted by hallucinations of life in New York, he falls off a rooftop. He awakes in a clinic – The Clinic – under the warm gaze of Dr. 313 and the blue-eyed fatherliness of Number Two (Ian McKellen). “Why are you keeping me here?”, Six demands. Two shrugs: “I see no locked doors.” This is the insidiousness of the Village: it responds to direct confrontation with gentle redirection. Aside from Number Two, no one denies the existence of a world outside – Isaac Newton, Alexander Graham Bell, David Beckham, Manhattan. But they don’t understand why it’s so important to Number Six. They just want to help.

The beauty of the original Prisoner was the distinct visual and auditory style of the Village. Shot in Portmeirion, Wales, the use of gay colors, cheery announcements and signs in Albertus typeface all contributed to the air of stiff, enforced conviviality. AMC’s The Prisoner has a style all its own as well. Identical 60s-era bungalows, duplexes and diners form neat little rows in the middle of a vast desert. The occasional flashback to New York or to static-ridden surveillance footage jars Six out of his attempts to focus. There are no walls and no guards: there are the simple limits of sand and sky. But Number Two keeps control in other ways. He can’t suppress every citizen’s desire for escape or their search for something more, so he gives it to them: the Escape Resort! The nightclub More! And just to remind you that this world isn’t right, there’s the occasional touch of weirdness for its own sake, like the soap opera Wonkers or Brian Wilson’s “In Blue Hawaii” or the twin therapists, Number 70.

And no, they don’t have anything that’s not a wrap.

I love Ian McKellen as the new Number Two. He brings a sinister warmth to the bland pronouncements that he bestows on people: “Every day above ground is a good day.” He lives in a pristine opulence that the rest of the Village aspires to. And yet behind everything there’s an air of instability. Everyone gets very still whenever he enters a room, as if he and Mommy were just having a screaming argument in the kitchen downstairs and it’s imperative that we be good. He carries a grenade with him everywhere, pulling it out of his pocket once or twice an episode and tossing it to make a point. He is the capricious tyrant, just as likely to bestow prizes – a free vacation, a medal for service – as punishments. It takes a brilliant actor to pull that off and still appear sane.

Jim Cavielzel as Number Six, I’m not as sure on. He plays crazy very well, while McGoohan was always proud and stiff. This is essential: Number Six is the man on the fringes of society, and people on the fringes are “crazy,” even if they’re not disordered. When he’s trying to convince 313 or Two that his memories of a world before the Village are real, he fumbles for the thread of his own thought. He lacks the thunderous contempt that McGoohan’s Six had for the other conspirators in the Village, but that’s for the better. Cavielzel’s is a more sympathetic Six. He bites back, but he doesn’t bark.

What doesn’t quite work for me are the slow-mo shots of Six running through the desert, dropping to his knees when faced with some implacable object – the twin towers, the weird anchor – and screaming. They seem a bit too forced. The horror of the Village comes from its cheerful banality and its absolute impermeability to logic, sprinkled with the occasional bit of grotesque: a giant bubble bouncing down the street and absorbing someone. The horror shouldn’t be something that we sit and watch with flashing lights: hey kids! Here’s where the horror is!

I watched the first two episodes, “Arrival” and “Harmony,” last night (and thanks to Sylvia M. for being a gracious host). So far we already know more about Number Six in two episodes than we ever did in the prior series: he worked for a company, Summakor, that collects CCTV footage to analyze trends in human behavior. We already have a hint of why he resigned as well. Interestingly enough, no one in the Village seems to want to know why: a major plot point from the original series. But this cute and accessible woman he picked up on the streets of Manhattan in flashbacks – Lucy – won’t let up on it. But if she’s the only one who’s curious, why can’t Six leave the Village? And if Two wants to know, why hasn’t he asked yet?

Ultimately The Prisoner is not about Number Six. We are not supposed to see ourselves in Number Six; we are supposed to see ourselves in the rest of the village. The Prisoner is about how the institution of society deals with a man who will not conform. Perhaps he’s not conforming because his brain is chemically imbalanced; perhaps it’s because no one around him can supply what he wants. Or perhaps he has memories of a past that no one shares and every time he tries to pursue them, a giant bubble attacks him.

Regardless of why he feels that way, he can’t fit in. He rejects all attempts to make him fit in. So how do we respond? Some of us watch him with sad compassion. Some of us write him off (“she’s a crazy”; “he’s an old drunk”). If he gets too loud or violent, we lock him away. And if he persists in being unmutual, we gently nudge him to the far edge of the herd.

Two more episodes tonight and two on Tuesday. Expect my final thoughts on Friday. Be seeing you.

Number 147 (Lennie James) and his wife, 21-16 (Renate Stuurman) in The Prisoner. Photo copyright of Granada/AMC

When some people arrive in a new city or town, one of the first things they do is jump into a taxi. After all, the person behind that wheel knows all there is to know about the local main streets and back roads, right? Nowhere is that perhaps more important than in AMC’s six-part miniseries The Prisoner. As a cab driver in The Village, Number 147 is the one to seek out when looking to go from A to B in this exclusive community. There is so much more to him, though, than just his driving skills, as actor Lennie James, who plays 147, explains.

“At the start of our story, my character is absolutely content and accepting of the rules of The Village in which he lives,” says James. “He is a guy who will gladly tell you what you can and cannot say, where you can and cannot go, and what you can and cannot do. And within the confines of The Village, this man has found complete happiness with his wife [12-16. played by Renate Stuurman] and their child. 147 can’t believe how lucky he is to not just love his wife, but have his wife love him and then bless him with a child.

“In some ways it was a challenge to play a guy who is so content, but what I enjoyed most about the role was playing someone who really has no knowledge of his potential. 147 has no sense of what he can and cannot do, and from early on in the six episodes, is a man who constantly surprises himself.”

The original 60s Prisoner series focused on an ex-Secret Service agent (Patrick McGoohan) who wakes up in a remote seaside locale called The Village. His name has been replaced by a number, Six, and those in charge are intent on finding out the truth about why he resigned from his job. This re-imagined version of the program has its own Number Six (Jim Caviezel), who, like his predecessor, has a profound impact on certain villagers that he meets, including James’ 147.

“Besides 147’s wife and child, my character’s other main relationship is with Number Six,” notes the actor. “When Six arrives in The Village, 147 acts as his guide in more ways than one, and his relationship with Six becomes, literally, life-changing. It changes everything about what he thought his life was and what he comes to realize his life could be. It’s all due to the chance meeting, really, of Six getting into 147’s taxi as opposed to 135’s as it were.”

Keeping an eye on everyone in The Village, especially Six, is Number Two (Ian McKellen). Like his fellow villagers, he makes use of the local taxis, and at one point calls upon 147’s services. “One of the scenes I really enjoyed shooting is one with myself and Ian McKellen, where his character is in the backseat of my character’s taxi,” recalls James. “The whole thing is played through the rearview mirror, and technically it was tricky because you have to look as if you’re not looking at each other. Our two characters communicate exclusively through that mirror and have quite a bit to say to one another. I loved doing that scene, not only because I loved working with Ian, but also because of what was going on in it, which was something worthwhile.”

The Italianate resort village of Portmerion in Gwynedd on the coast of Snowdonia in Wales served as the setting for the original Prisoner. Going for a very different type of look, the producers of the 2009 remake chose to have James along with the rest of the miniseries’ cast and crew shoot in South Africa.

“The location was absolutely fantastic for the story, but it did hold some challenges for us as a cast and crew,” says the actor. “We filmed all our exteriors in a place called Swakopmund, a turn of the century village where the desert meets the sea in Namibia. As Portmerion was in the original Prisoner, this place was very much an extra character that gave the miniseries a particular type of feel.

“Swakopmund is a holiday destination, mostly for Germans, but when we were there it wasn’t holiday season, so we were shooting in a sort of ghost town. There were a lot of empty houses and empty streets, all of which certainly added to our head space as far as playing the villagers. Again, though, there were times where everybody just felt like they were a long way from home.”

How familiar was the actor with Patrick McGoohan’s incarnation of The Prisoner before he began working on this version? “I’m not old enough to have seen the series when it was first broadcast, but it was on a loop, it seems, during my childhood,” he explains. “So I was very aware of it and must have seen, if not all the episodes, most of them at various times while growing up.

Number 147 finds his life of contentment in The Village turned upside-down. Photo copyright of Granada/AMC

“I didn’t go back and revisit the series for this production, though, because Bill Gallagher’s [miniseries writer] scripts were so specific as well as different and I didn’t want to put anything in the way of that.”

Born in Nottingham, England and having spent many of his younger years in South London, James once dreamt of giving a very different type of performance in front of an audience. “Like most English boys, I wanted to be a rugby player,” says the actor. “When I was growing up, rugby wasn’t a professional sport, but it was something that I wanted to play at the highest level I could. However, when I realized that I wasn’t good enough, and before acting came into my life, I wanted to at least pursue a career that was sports oriented, such as a physiotherapist or occupational therapist.

“As far as acting, I actually followed a girl who I really fancied into an audition. She wanted to be an actress and the director said I couldn’t stay in the room unless I auditioned.  So I did and I got offered a role.”

A Raisin in the Sun, Two Gentlemen of Verona and Macbeth are among James’ theater credits, while on the big screen he has starred in such films as Outlaw, Sahara, Snatch and Les miserables. On TV, the actor has appeared in several made-for-TV movies as well as guest-starred in shows on both sides of the pond including A Touch of Frost, Cold Feet, Spooks, Lie to Me and Three Rivers. James is probably best known for his regular roles in the British series Out of the Blue and the apocalyptic U.S. drama Jericho.

“Out of the Blue was an ensemble cop show and I loved it,” he enthuses. “It was one of my first big jobs and the first time I worked with Bill Gallagher. We did two seasons of it and, as I’m going to go on to talk about Jericho, one of the things both shows have in common is that they ended, I think, before their time. I’m guessing that whoever made those decisions, in retrospect, probably wouldn’t have done the same thing again.

“My character in Out of the Blue was a guy called Bruce Hannaford, who was kind of an uptight detective and a perpetual bachelor who dressed well and had a rather inflated opinion of himself. It was a great part to play in amongst a terrific cast including John Hannah [D.S. Frank Drinkall], Neil Dudgeon [D.C. Marty Brazil] and John Duttine [D. I. Eric Temple]. I had a wonderful time doing the series and made some very good friends along the way. The same can be said for Jericho, which was, again, a gift of a part for me, in amongst some fantastic actors.”

Of all James’ roles, The Prisoner was one of his easiest to have booked. “The part was pretty much offered to me,” says the actor. “I met with the people I would be working with just to see whether or not we were on the same page, and we were. As I mentioned, I worked with Bill Gallagher before, so it was one of those really nice audition processes where your prior work is taken into consideration and people are gracious enough to offer you the role and not ask you to jump through too many hoops.”

With some people in the entertainment industry, making sure they are always in the public eye is the definition of having a successful career. James, however, is among those who prefer to take a more down-to-earth approach to the profession.

“For me, it’s about the job,” he says. “These days there is a generation of actors, some of whom seem to be getting into the business for the perks as opposed to the actual work. I very much enjoy the moments between the director calling, ‘Action,’ and, ‘Cut,’ when you’re making the [acting] choices. And the actors who I admire and aspire to be like are those who enjoy that, too, and for who fame and celebrity are by-products and not the aim.

“I truly love what I do and feel blessed that I’ve been allowed to continue doing it for the past 20 or so years.”

Steve Eramo

The Prisoner continues tonight, Monday, November 16th @ 8 p.m. EST/PST and concludes at the same time on Tuesday, the 17th. Watch for an interview with Jamie Campbell-Bower (11-12).

As noted above, all photos copyright of Granada TV and AMC, so please no unauthorized copying or duplicating of any kind. Thanks!

Hello! It’s Sunday. And Sundays, well, Sundays are boring, right? Right.

Went and saw 2012 yesterday, as promised. It was, well… Hmm.

My first reaction to it: Ehhhh. Not horrible, but not great. It’s exactly what’s advertised on the tin, I’ll put it this way. You’ve got a lot of real actors doing some cartoon shit while the world goes to hell all around them. The cast, when you think about it, is actually quite impressive. Also, Woody Harrelson’s in the mix too.

My second reaction to it: Why the fuck didn’t this come out in the middle of the summer?

Third reaction: Comedy of the year, hands down.

Especially in a year when, if you think about it, the big comedy was… what? The Hangover? Right? Get serious. I never saw the movie, I won’t lie, but for a lot of reasons. Primarily, things like the trailer. Did you see it? It looks like it was made for retarded boys. But, you know what’s even worse than the trailer? Listening to people who actually liked the movie. They sound like retarded boys, don’t they? Anyway.

But I really feel like 2012 deserves a good proper Counterforce review. It really does. It’s really our kind of movie, and I mean that in the best and worst possible ways. I don’t know that I’m the man for that job. Benjamin Light, I’m looking at you. Are you the man for that job?

Anyway, I went and saw the film yesterday with Conrad Noir and walking out of the theater, still buzzing from all that ridiculousness, we saw this:

And we thought, “Dear God, who gave that man wings.” Much less Wings Of Desire and much more Red Bull: The Movie.

But then we got into a little conversation, talking about this and that and action heroes of the 80s, mostly cause we’ve been watching a lot of that horrendous/wonderful action movie fare from that decade, and we were talking about how action stars back then were so… foreign seeming. And maybe that contributed a lot to their allure. Maybe it also made some of the ridiculousness easier to stand, too?

For example there, Benjamin Light and were discussing a week or so ago what a remake of The Terminator would look like – since the franchise is up for sale, and should be sold to Joss Whedon, of course, cause why not? – And I brought up the question, “Does the killer robot from the future have to be Austrian?” Commander Light emphatically assured he that it indeed had to be. I’m taking his word for it.

Anyway, so Conrad and I, discussing action stars today, talking about guys like Dwayne Johnson, and how, in our minds, he’s not really latched on with America. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy the idea of a “non-conventional” action star quite a bit, i.e. a non white guy running around screaming at people, doing high kicks, and blowing copious amounts of shit up. So why hasn’t “The Rock” caught on with us? I posit two possibilities:

1. In a grab for “credibility” or attempting to “not being as big a joke as he is,” he ditched his silly little wrestling moniker, “The Rock,” and went with his real name: Dwayne Johnson. Except, we can’t root for a guy named Dwayne.

2. Not foreign enough? Perhaps? I suggest investigating this has merit. Especially since it seems American action-loving fans get a bigger hard on from a ponce like Jason Statham than Dwayne Johnson.

Then, walking out of the theater, Conrad and I were looking at the various posters on display, the coming soons and the current releases. Part of me still wants to see This Is It. I’m a Michael Jackson fan, I won’t hide it.  But I’m also a huge Richard Matheson fan, and while I have serious reservations about the movie, I also kind of want to see The Box.

But I don’t know that I trust Richard Kelly anymore. Donnie Darko was okay when it first came out, before you put it through any real tests of serious thought or logic and saw through it’s masturbatory philophosizing. It’s a glorified remake of Last Temptation Of Christ that doesn’t fully pan out. But Kelly also went on to make – speaking of Dwayne Johnson – the gloriously bad Southland Tales.

Look, I’m not going to talk about the Philip K. Dick pastiche that was Southland Tales here. I’m just… not. I’m not going to do it. All I’ll say is I went into that movie wanting to like it. And I sit here now feeling like I’m a veteran of that war. It’s like Richard Kelly is George W. Bush and I was some dumb kid who supported the Iraq war until I went into the fucker and got my bits and pieces all cut off. Now I’m shell shocked.

But, yeah, there’s The Box, directed by Richard Kelly, starring Cameron Diaz and James Marsden, based on the Richard Matheson story, “Button, Button,” and was previously adapted into an episode of The Twilight Zone. We’ll see if I ever see it.

And again, here we are. It’s Sunday. Tomorrow’s the start of the “work week.” I’d love to Weeks In Review here at Counterforce, but lately it’s just me rambling and I’d feel bad directing the two and a half readers of this site back to more of me rambling. Poor fuckers. Oh yeah, the season finale of Mad Men was last Sunday. And we had a Friday the 13th happen this past week as well. There you go. Oh, and: Young women having sex with sea creatures. Now there you really go.

But again, here we are. It’s Sunday. Let’s see, let’s see, let’s see… Oh! Tonight was the airing of the latest Doctor Who special over in the UK, “The Waters Of Mars,” the start of the end of David Tennant’s run as #10. You can catch it online if you’re good, if you’re very good, and it’s dark. And a bit sad. And leaves you kind of sweaty and breathless too.

Also tonight is AMC’s remake of the classic 60s show, The Prisoner. I’d watch it, but I’m not sure I want to see my childhood get raped so thoroughly and with such production values. Ian McKellen is a good choice for just about anything, but Jim Caviezel? I think I hate you for that, AMC. Honestly, Jim Caviezel makes Keanu Reeves look like Marlon Brando to me.

Oh well, here we are. The weekend’s almost over. I went to the movies to watch the end of the world as we know it and…

The Prisoner

http://www.amctv.com/originals/the-prisoner/premiere/

Tomorrow at 8 pm on AMC the new remake of The Prisoner premieres. I’ve been waiting this from the  moment I saw the commercial for it a week ago. If you like movies like The Matrix, Mad Max, Watchmen and the Truman Show or TV shows like Lost and Alias (which i do) then you’ll love this. Staring the talented Ian Mckellen of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy and Jim Caviezel of The Count of Monte Cristo and Deja Vu this show promises to be the TV Event of the Year! (And that’s a pretty damn big promise)

This show original premiered in September 1967 and it sent ripples though the Media World influencing TV, music, movies, and art for decades. And lucky you (if you’re interested) you can watch full episodes online at their site.

In the new show a man, played by Jim Caviezel, wakes up in a strange world where only “The Village” exists and there is nothing else. He has lost everything, family, friends, and even his own name. Referred to as the number Six, he tries to escape and get back to his precious New York. His biggest advisory Two, played by Ian Mckellen, does everything in his power to convince Six that this is the world and there is nothing else out there, that he is mentally ill and” there  is no out; there is only in!”

I love shows and movies that tackle the philosophical ideas of defining reality, right and wrong, freedom, and madness. I think my favorite definition for real comes from The Matrix when Morpheus explains what the Matrix is to Neo; he says “if  real is what you can feel, smell, taste and see, then ‘real’ is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain”. In that case who’s to say we aren’t in the matrix and The Village is all around us?

Don’t forget to tune in tomorrow at 8 and  ask yourself “Who’s watching you?”

-Thomasa

No, Frodo, for the last time: you can NOT just toss it down a storm drain.
Awwww, man!  I hate this quest!

(Ian McKellen and Elijah Wood)

Picture by: dunno source Caption by: EWAdams via Advanced Lol Builder

» Recaption This!

» View All Captions

Mañana, 15 de Noviembre, comienza a emitirse el remake de nuestra querida serie sesentera The Prisoner.  Con un presupuesto de 10 millones de libras, esperamos que AMC e ITV hayan hecho algo bueno, y no la bazofia que suele encontrarse en los remakes.

Aunque todos los “entendidos” del tema siempre auguran una maravilla de remake, debido a que AMC produjo Mad Men y Breaking Bad. En el nuevo trailer podemos ver algunas escenas calcadas a las de la serie original:

AMC ha lanzado el primer capítulo de la novela gráfica del remake de The Prisoner, disponible en su página web:

Capítulo Primero

Apt Pupil fue la peli que hizo Bryan Singer en 1998 justo después de Usual Suspects y que le significó su reconfirmación como estrella de Hollywood.

En esta peli un joven quinceañero se entera que su vecino es un ex oficial de la Gestapo y fascinado por las historias que puede contarle sobre la Segunda Guerra Mundial abusa de su sed de chantaje con revelar su secreto a las autoridades locales hasta tal punto que se le devuelve y desencadena una serie de eventos que marcan su vida y su carácter.

Esta peli tiene un terrible registro de producción. Basada en una novela de Stephen King se buscó producirla en cine a principios de los 80’s pero dos actores que se contrataron para realizar el papel de Dussander murieron. Cuando se lanzó la producción en forma en 1987 tenía tanto lastre financiero que el proyecto se canceló. Después de casi quince años los derechos volvieron a King y fue gracias a él que la peli se hizo con Singer quien redujo la historia, la violencia y cambió el final para finalmente tener el producto que podemos apreciar hoy en día.

La obra no deja más que admiración por un monstruo de la literatura norteamericana como lo es Stephen King. Qué impresión la influencia que es este señor en Hollywood (además que es de mis autores favoritos) y el listado tan extenso de pelis basadas en sus obras. De esta, una notable actuación del actor fetiche de Singer, Ian McKellen quien de la mano de su colega Brad Renfro fueron rotundos ganadores ese año en festivales independientes.

Excelente fotografía a cargo de Newton Thomas Siegel un importante engranaje en el equipo de Singer desde siempre, que lo ha acompañado a lo largo de su carrera cinematográfica e incluso televisiva en el capítulo que Singer dirigió de House M.D. ( si es buena esta serie? Debería seguirla? No se cada vez me parece que me estoy perdiendo de algo verdaderamente importante pero nunca lo tengo muy claro).

Finalmente, el dramatismo se complementa con una cara reconocida en este blog: John Ottman. Compositor de Valkyrie, The Invasion, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, X-Men 2, The Cable Guy, Usual Suspects y Public Access (estas últimas pertenecientes a la opera prima de Singer).

Una buena peli, Singer no desentona, por el contrario entretiene con su trama bien lograda. Me la quería ver hacía mucho tiempo y por fin la pasaron en Cinemax.

No more Sir Ian McKellen pentru urmatorul film “X-Men”. Actorul a declarat ca nu va aparea in cel mai nou film cu mutanti, si anume “X-Men Origins: Magneto”, pentru ca este prea batran sa mai interpreteze rolul lui Magneto.

Filmul va avea acelasi fir narativ ca si in cazul primului film de genul “X-Men Origins” dedicat in totalitate lui Wolverine (Hugh Jackman).

Ian McKellen a participat in 3 filme X-Men pana acum, interpretand rolul maleficului Magneto. Pentru ca acest film va fi dedicat in totalitate personajului sau, actorul in varsta de 70 de ani nu crede ca mai poate face fata.

I am sooo looking forward to this.  Hopefully it does justice to the original.  Starts this Sunday at 8/7c on AMC.

For a further taste, don’t forget about the 2009 Comic Con exclusive comic of The Prisoner.  Be seeing you.