We have seen AMC’s The Prisoner. You should too.
Welcome To Your Home From Home
Patrick McGoohan’s “The Prisoner” is the grand-daddy of intellectual TV. A bold anti-establishment experiment in surreal story telling, The Prisoner taunted the mind with all sorts of existential pondering, while effectively delivering a unique tale of adventure and intrigue. The setup is simple: a spy(McGoohan) angrily resigns from his post and is subsequently kidnapped and taken to ‘The Village,’ a bizarre mash-up of architectural motifs from around the world, and around history. Instead of names, everyone in The Village has a number – McGoohan’s is 6. Number 1 is in charge of The Village, but we never see who he is – we only see the Number 2’s, a new one every week. A psychological game of cat and mouse plays out as the masters of The Village attempt to find out why 6 resigned. The episodes bordered on science fiction as the wardens of The Village employed seemingly otherworldly technology in an attempt to pry this information from 6’s head, and contain him – one of the show’s most enduring images being Rover, a flexible white sphere that served as village sentry.
The Prisoner has since crossed into the realm of classics, and has served as inspiration for numerous shows like Nowhere Man, Babylon 5, and LOST. Several attempts were made to bring The Prisoner to the big screen, including a few initiated by McGoohan himself, but none came to fruition until now.
AMC’s six part mini-series ‘The Prisoner’ premieres tonight, and runs marathon style for the following two days. It is NOT a remake of McGoohan’s series, but rather a new story made with the Kafkaesque story telling conventions of the original. Some aspects will be familiar, there is a number 6 (Played by Jim Caviezel) but this time he is an amnesiac. In the original, 6 awakes in a mock up of his own apartment – fully aware of who he is, but with no clue of where he is.
Arrival
AMC’s The Prisoner opens with Caviezel awakening in a craggy desert, disoriented. He ambles about and eventually comes upon an ailing elderly man, suffering from exhaustion and exposure, who tells him to let the others know that he escaped. Fans of the original will be thrilled to know this guy is dressed in a suit very reminiscent of McGoohan’s wardrobe. Caviezal’s 6 wanders into the oasis-like civilization of “The Village” and is shocked to find that the residents are unaware of any world outside of the strangely uniform complex. Like 6, these people do not seem to have a memory of life before The Village – unlike him, they have long ago surrendered to the notion of The Village’s ruler Number 2, played by Ian McKellen, that there is nothing outside of The Village.
Number 2 wastes no time in establishing his Machiavellian tact, obsessively badgering 6 to accept his life in The Village with increasingly harrowing psychological mind games. 6, however, remains buoyed by a secret class of Village-dwellers called ‘dreamers,’ who see flashes of their previous lives and puzzle over their meaning. As 2 becomes more and more intent on breaking him, 6 becomes more and more determined to break free – and only one of them can win. For 6, it becomes a challenge of human spirit, while 2’s motivation seems imbued with secret knowledge and secret advantages.
The Prisoner is a fitting tribute to the original. The original transcended its own concept and became an almost introspective experience. As 6 challenged the diminishment of his identity, the audience too became engaged in his existential dilemma. This sort of ‘psychological softening up’ made the paranoia and starkness of 6’s losses seem strangely transcendent.
AMC’s The Prisoner is truly a modernized take on McGoohan’s motif. Where McGoohan was writing a show that seemed targeted to ‘movement’ generation of the late 60’s, when folks were so easily throwing themselves at whatever label seemed to fit, AMC’s new The Prisoner seems more to be twanging the collective neurosis of the post-9/11 world – complete with a ghostly visage of twin towers that hang ubiquitously on the horizon . Instead of guarding his identity, this time 6 is determined to prove that ‘he’ exists – the him that is not Number 6, that is – and the proof is in revealing that the world that percolates in his subconscious is more than just fantasy.
NEXT: “Who Is Number One?” – Final Thoughts on AMC’s The Prisoner
Who Is Number One?
Fans of the original Prisoner, and I am one of them, need to understand that while AMC’s new take is the ultimate love letter to the original series, it is not that story. I am amongst the group of die-hard Prisoner fans who have said things like “No Portmeirion, No Prisoner” (and if you don’t know what that means, don’t worry) – the thought of changing major details of the plot was simply offensive to me, and why anyone would ever want to use anything other than the wonderfully weird locales of the original was simple dumbfounding.
Performance wise, Caviezel’s Number 6 is a contrast to McGoohan. Smooth, pensive, and a built bewildered, this 6 is nothing compared to McGoohan’s mindful and gruff material. To be honest, there are not many actors that could pull off McGoohan’s 6 – convincingly. If anything the contrast makes Caviezel stand on his own. Caviezel is definitely watchable, and whether you are a fan of the original or not you’ll quickly be drawn to this subtle and intelligent character. McKellen makes the perfect Number 2. Unlike the original, there is only one Number 2 – and McKellen carries the part beautifully.
There are numerous tips of the hat to original Prisoner fans. Not the least being the episode titles, which are single word interpretations of titles from the original: Arrival, Checkmate, Harmony, Schizoid, etc – not in that order. Familiar imagery pops up in unexpected places, including the iconic penny farthing.
AMC has created a new ‘Prisoner’ in every way here, and most strikingly in one: this Prisoner has definite closure. I don’t want to spoil the ending of the original series for anyone, but suffice to say it is an ending as daring as the show itself – and should be beheld to be believed. With AMC’c Prisoner, the writers have shown a sensitivity towards a need for closure. By the time you reach the end of The Prisoner’s sixth hour, you will know what the village is. Fans of the original who harbor even the slightest tinge of skepticism will likely bristle at this revelation, but in the context of what the writers and producers seem to be going for it is as complete an ending as anyone could ever hope for.
Above all, The Prisoner succeeds in capturing the same rare qualities of the original; beginning as a compelling adventure of the human spirit, and quickly becoming a compelling odyssey of mood, paranoia, and fierce individuality. For the next three days, tivo your run-of-the-mill network programming and focus on The Prisoner.
The Prisoner will premiere at 8PM est over three nights:
Nov. 15, Sun. – episodes “Arrival” and “Harmony”
Nov. 16, Mon. – episodes “Anvil” and “Darling”
Nov. 17, Tue. – episodes “Schizoid” and “Checkmate”
For some spoilerish clips and pics from The Prisoner, click here.
Has The Prisoner confused you? Subscribe to our feed and watch for our “Prisoner: The Day After” breakdowns and recaps.
Follow Us
I liked The Prisoner better when it was Lost and, for that matter, I liked Lost better when it was The Prisoner.
Lol, fair enough. I think the writer here had an interesting dilemma: draw enough from the original to be familiar, but avoid any interim interpretations of the narrative style.
I liked The Prisoner better when it was Lost and, for that matter, I liked Lost better when it was The Prisoner.
Lol, fair enough. I think the writer here had an interesting dilemma: draw enough from the original to be familiar, but avoid any interim interpretations of the narrative style.
Did this reviewer actually watch the original? I thought this re-imagined version was soap opery and dull. I am not going to watch the whole thing. You really cannot improve on the original.
Ha! Probably more times than is sane. I agree, the original will never be topped – and I don’t think I put forward the idea that it was. Rather, what I see in the new “The Prisoner” is as good a tribute you could make to the original without treading on the spawn it has produced over the years. Tonight’s first episode is the best, and more like the original than any of the others: 6 goes to work for number 2.
Did this reviewer actually watch the original? I thought this re-imagined version was soap opery and dull. I am not going to watch the whole thing. You really cannot improve on the original.
Ha! Probably more times than is sane. I agree, the original will never be topped – and I don't think I put forward the idea that it was. Rather, what I see in the new "The Prisoner" is as good a tribute you could make to the original without treading on the spawn it has produced over the years. Tonight's first episode is the best, and more like the original than any of the others: 6 goes to work for number 2.
The absurdity of the “escape attempts” ruined the entire experience for me.
Give me any 6 year old and let me present them with only the following information:
You’re in the middle of a big hot dry desert. You want to cross it. Give me your plan.
And I guarantee that at a minimum they come up with “BRING FOOD AND WATER.”
So someone explain to me why this never occured to 6 on THREE CONSECUTIVE dashes he made into the desert with nothing but the clothes on his back supposedly expecting to “escape” to the other side?
I could accept, maybe, the idea that he was just so flustered and disoriented on the first attempt that such an incredibly basic thing slipped his mind. But then after ending up lying in the sand and having to be retreived and hauled back to town by the doctor to come up with “escape plan #2” and have it once again consist of “I’m going to run off into the desert with no food or water or supplies and just hope I get across to something eventually”???
And then after that fails, to do it AGAIN with those two other doofuses trying to find the ocean? (Although in that last attempt the lady did, brilliantly, bring *her purse*. Chock full no doubt of desert survival supplies like lipstick and tissues and probably her little village ID card.)
Gah.
The absurdity of the "escape attempts" ruined the entire experience for me.
Give me any 6 year old and let me present them with only the following information:
You're in the middle of a big hot dry desert. You want to cross it. Give me your plan.
And I guarantee that at a minimum they come up with "BRING FOOD AND WATER."
So someone explain to me why this never occured to 6 on THREE CONSECUTIVE dashes he made into the desert with nothing but the clothes on his back supposedly expecting to "escape" to the other side?
I could accept, maybe, the idea that he was just so flustered and disoriented on the first attempt that such an incredibly basic thing slipped his mind. But then after ending up lying in the sand and having to be retreived and hauled back to town by the doctor to come up with "escape plan #2" and have it once again consist of "I'm going to run off into the desert with no food or water or supplies and just hope I get across to something eventually"???
And then after that fails, to do it AGAIN with those two other doofuses trying to find the ocean? (Although in that last attempt the lady did, brilliantly, bring *her purse*. Chock full no doubt of desert survival supplies like lipstick and tissues and probably her little village ID card.)
Gah.
This ponderous and glacially slow remake, to quote another reviewer, “sucked sand.”
Whoever got the idea they could possibly top the original version, even with those two amazing actors?
Well, they didn’t, and it was pointless to even try.
I tried, I really did, but…no. Forced myself to watch entire first hour, struggled to stay awake thru hour #2. Not bothering tonight.
No water? What? Caviezel musn’t have been a Boy Scout. ;)
This ponderous and glacially slow remake, to quote another reviewer, "sucked sand."
Whoever got the idea they could possibly top the original version, even with those two amazing actors?
Well, they didn't, and it was pointless to even try.
Despite both Gandalf and Jesus, I too threw in the towel after less than an episode. My willing suspension of disbelief snapped a cable. Nobody in the village has a name or nickname, just a title? Not even a “Lefty” or a “Fartsalot”? I can’t believe that any kind of mental manipulation would be that total.
And those houses were creepy. The tour – the whole thing – reminded me of “Pleasantville”.
I tried, I really did, but…no. Forced myself to watch entire first hour, struggled to stay awake thru hour #2. Not bothering tonight.
No water? What? Caviezel musn't have been a Boy Scout. ;)
Despite both Gandalf and Jesus, I too threw in the towel after less than an episode. My willing suspension of disbelief snapped a cable. Nobody in the village has a name or nickname, just a title? Not even a "Lefty" or a "Fartsalot"? I can't believe that any kind of mental manipulation would be that total.
And those houses were creepy. The tour – the whole thing – reminded me of "Pleasantville".
I have to chime in with the people giving this remake a thumbs down.
The original was something of an allegory about man against an ever more technological society. Patick Magoohan was a number, becuase his identity was meaningless to the village. His fight was to maintain that identity against their efforts to minimize that identity. In the end, he won the right to his identity–but anyone who has seen the original and sat through the two episode ending will recall that winning his identity ultimately did not change his life. He simply returned to London in a final scene that suggested he had simply returned to his original “village.”
This remake is simply a surealistic who dunnit. There is no great message. There is no hidden meaning. This is a pathetic homage written by someone who needed a pay check in these hard times. Whoever wrote this is definitely NOT a freeman.
The smart move is to turn off this show. Otherwise, stand by while we issue you your number.
Be seeing you
I have to chime in with the people giving this remake a thumbs down.
The original was something of an allegory about man against an ever more technological society. Patick Magoohan was a number, becuase his identity was meaningless to the village. His fight was to maintain that identity against their efforts to minimize that identity. In the end, he won the right to his identity–but anyone who has seen the original and sat through the two episode ending will recall that winning his identity ultimately did not change his life. He simply returned to London in a final scene that suggested he had simply returned to his original "village."
This remake is simply a surealistic who dunnit. There is no great message. There is no hidden meaning. This is a pathetic homage written by someone who needed a pay check in these hard times. Whoever wrote this is definitely NOT a freeman.
The smart move is to turn off this show. Otherwise, stand by while we issue you your number.
Be seeing you
I’ve never seen the original Prisoner series, so I started watching this without the bias of comparing this show to something else.
While this Prisoner does not exactly copy the original, I would suspect that it shouldn’t need ot copy the original. It’s a remake. 40 years later. It’s not going to be the same.
It’s a TV show. Entertainment. Is there supposed to be a message in there somewhere? Or, can we just watch it in all it’s weirdness and be entertained?
Yeah, he doesn’t pack a suitcase or backpack and head off into the desert. Like he knows where he is. To awaken in some strange surreal world, what would any normal person do? Are we over analyzing just a tad bit? Why yes we are.
Ok, so he doesn’t take water or supplies on his escape attempts. Big deal! There’s a freakin gigantic white ball that appears out of nowhere and captures anyone who tries to escape! And you’re all worried about him not taking water with him? Wow.
Shoulda kept watching there ol’ Grant. They did find the ocean, only to have the giant white ball take 6’s brother away. A subsequent visit to the same spot the next day, only revealed endless desert to 6. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
Ian McKellen plays 2 very well. He is polite, yet you sense there is some evil hidden in there. Likewise Caviezel plays the revised part of 6 very well. Loved 313, would love to be her “prisoner”. LOL!
An excellent show that is quirky enough to keep you interested in what will happen next.
I've never seen the original Prisoner series, so I started watching this without the bias of comparing this show to something else.
While this Prisoner does not exactly copy the original, I would suspect that it shouldn't need ot copy the original. It's a remake. 40 years later. It's not going to be the same.
It's a TV show. Entertainment. Is there supposed to be a message in there somewhere? Or, can we just watch it in all it's weirdness and be entertained?
Yeah, he doesn't pack a suitcase or backpack and head off into the desert. Like he knows where he is. To awaken in some strange surreal world, what would any normal person do? Are we over analyzing just a tad bit? Why yes we are.
Ok, so he doesn't take water or supplies on his escape attempts. Big deal! There's a freakin gigantic white ball that appears out of nowhere and captures anyone who tries to escape! And you're all worried about him not taking water with him? Wow.
Shoulda kept watching there ol' Grant. They did find the ocean, only to have the giant white ball take 6's brother away. A subsequent visit to the same spot the next day, only revealed endless desert to 6. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
Ian McKellen plays 2 very well. He is polite, yet you sense there is some evil hidden in there. Likewise Caviezel plays the revised part of 6 very well. Loved 313, would love to be her "prisoner". LOL!
An excellent show that is quirky enough to keep you interested in what will happen next.
I enjoyed the series alot, though keep in mind i never saw the 17 of the what was supposed to be a 36 episode long original series. the only problem i had was understanding the ending…
6 goes and spends all of his time trying his hardest to get back to the real world… then at the end… 2 blows his freaking head off with a grenade and gives “The Village” to 6 and he takes it… then 313 who is substituting for the late wife of 2 lets out a single tear… thats what i dont understand. why the tear????? any response is helpful.
6’s escapes werent too hard to accept for me by the way. he runs into the dessert without packing food or water (no doubt because it would only weigh him down… yeah right lol) but really… he made it to the two giant towers without food and water during the first escape and was stopped by rover so im not very skeptical of why he didnt bring essencials the second and third time he tried to escape ;)
I enjoyed the series alot, though keep in mind i never saw the 17 of the what was supposed to be a 36 episode long original series. the only problem i had was understanding the ending…
6 goes and spends all of his time trying his hardest to get back to the real world… then at the end… 2 blows his freaking head off with a grenade and gives "The Village" to 6 and he takes it… then 313 who is substituting for the late wife of 2 lets out a single tear… thats what i dont understand. why the tear????? any response is helpful.
6's escapes werent too hard to accept for me by the way. he runs into the dessert without packing food or water (no doubt because it would only weigh him down… yeah right lol) but really… he made it to the two giant towers without food and water during the first escape and was stopped by rover so im not very skeptical of why he didnt bring essencials the second and third time he tried to escape ;)
This was inexcusably bad. The writer & director should have been replaced. I don’t mind remakes & re-imaginings, but you should at least make an effort to present something intelligent & credible. None of the spirit & fun of the original are present in this rip-off.
This was inexcusably bad. The writer & director should have been replaced. I don't mind remakes & re-imaginings, but you should at least make an effort to present something intelligent & credible. None of the spirit & fun of the original are present in this rip-off.
I was looking forward to this. I never made it to the second night, because I thought it was horrible. Great idea for a remake, but terrible execution.
I was looking forward to this. I never made it to the second night, because I thought it was horrible. Great idea for a remake, but terrible execution.
like the show
like the show
I agree with you Doc, this show’s a new take on the classic, but i thought that the storyline was so jammed with stuff, like the holes, the dreamers, the towers and the “other places” that it simply wasn’t enough to have 6 episodes. The way the story was told had a depressive pace and a lot of the scene were of 6 waking up dizzy by all the drugging going on around him. I’d could’ve been better, i’ve see worst do-overs (if you can call it that), but i’d could’ve been a lot better. The final episode was the highlight of the show, and not because it provided some answers, but because Jim and Sir Ian kicked some serios acting ass!
I agree with you Doc, this show's a new take on the classic, but i thought that the storyline was so jammed with stuff, like the holes, the dreamers, the towers and the "other places" that it simply wasn't enough to have 6 episodes. The way the story was told had a depressive pace and a lot of the scene were of 6 waking up dizzy by all the drugging going on around him. I'd could've been better, i've see worst do-overs (if you can call it that), but i'd could've been a lot better. The final episode was the highlight of the show, and not because it provided some answers, but because Jim and Sir Ian kicked some serios acting ass!
I am quite agreen with the write's says about the experiencial knowledge of better living.For home improvement I have glance those sits.I found they benifit for life. I want to buy something to home see for use. Hope you give me a good views
I found the story predictable.