Defending criticism of the new show (criticisms welcome)
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 7:05 pm
Hello, all. I thought it might be fun to have a thread where we look at criticisms folks have of the new show and evaluate them in a quasi-orderly manner.
I was hoping the thread won't devolve into "I like this cause I like this style" or "I think this is dumb because it's dumb," but rather evaluating whether the decisions made by the producers and writers make sense.
A few to prime the pump:
1. KITT was a Mustang. Well, Pontiac doesn't make a Trans-Am anymore. The producers wanted a muscle sports car. With the exception of the Dodge Charger (which has 4 doors and feels less like a sports car....this coming from me, a Dodge fanboy), the Corvette (which has no back seat, which you'd probably need in a Knight Rider show), and the Camaro (which is what Bumblebee was), the Mustang is the only muscle car out there. In today's show business climate, you need a car company to sponsor the show in order to get the budget required to make a good quality show. That means going with a car in, or about to be in, production. Given the criteria, the Mustang is the most logical choice.
2. Kilmer's delivery as KITT was rather flat. Well, I think it's important to note that KITT 3k is, in many ways, apparently an infant. He hasn't been thoroughly tested, which suggests he hasn't been on-line for very long. Much of what he did in the pilot was done according to a pre-programmed check list, which suggests he hasn't had time to learn how to do lots of adapting, which suggests he hasn't been on-line for very long. The FBI knew that Graiman was working on "a new KITT," which suggests....
So this KITT, moreso than KITT 2k it seems, is a tiny baby infant. He hasn't interacted with humans much, as shown by his 'surprise' that Sarah's fear was irrational and unfounded (note how she said, "welcome to the world of human beings"...I think that's a story beat there). So he hasn't had time to develop much of a personality. As such, he's more flat. But, in my opinion, in a charming way.
3. Why show the CGI of the bullets hitting KITT? Well, remember this KITT doesn't have a molecular bonded shell. Instead he has nano-tech enhanced repair abilities. The CGI shots show that in fact, yes, these bullets are damaging the car, but are almost immediately being repaired. It sets up the fact that if KITT's computer goes off-line, the car is vulnerable.
4. Why not have a molecular bonded shell? Well, from a production stand-point, it's sort of a hokey magical Star Trek thing ("ah..molecular bonded shell...ok"), whereas the nano-tech deal has a mechanism behind it (nanites) that the audience can at least kind of get behind. And from an in-story stand-point, maybe prolonged exposure to a molecular bonded shell can be hazaardous?
5. If Graiman was so important, why wasn't he mentioned in the original show? Well, do we have to be told in the pilot? Maybe there are mitigating circumstances. Maybe Graiman didn't want his work to be known because of his 'paranoia' (as Sarah suggested his wife called it). There are any number of ways that could be explained. Again, we probably don't need that info in the pilot (as you probably couldn't go into enough detail to please the hardcore fans, and the info you had time to give would only confuse non hardcore fans).
6. Why is there no mention of Mike and his mom in the original show? Well, maybe there were mitigating circumstances. They were hidden for their protection, after all. Maybe there was some specific reason...some specific danger...one of such magnitude that Bonnie, KITT, even Devon might not have been able to know about Jennifer and Mike. Since the original show pretty much deals with Michael interacting with one of those folks...we the audience might not have been around at a time when he could talk about it. Hence, we never heard. Maybe the writers could even tie this story into some seemingly random and inconsequential thing in the original series.
So, I guess we're not going for "The Mustang is good because I like Mustangs" or "I hate KITTs voice because I don't like how flat it is." Rather, let's look at these things from an objective standpoint and see if they make sense.
Sound fun?
I was hoping the thread won't devolve into "I like this cause I like this style" or "I think this is dumb because it's dumb," but rather evaluating whether the decisions made by the producers and writers make sense.
A few to prime the pump:
1. KITT was a Mustang. Well, Pontiac doesn't make a Trans-Am anymore. The producers wanted a muscle sports car. With the exception of the Dodge Charger (which has 4 doors and feels less like a sports car....this coming from me, a Dodge fanboy), the Corvette (which has no back seat, which you'd probably need in a Knight Rider show), and the Camaro (which is what Bumblebee was), the Mustang is the only muscle car out there. In today's show business climate, you need a car company to sponsor the show in order to get the budget required to make a good quality show. That means going with a car in, or about to be in, production. Given the criteria, the Mustang is the most logical choice.
2. Kilmer's delivery as KITT was rather flat. Well, I think it's important to note that KITT 3k is, in many ways, apparently an infant. He hasn't been thoroughly tested, which suggests he hasn't been on-line for very long. Much of what he did in the pilot was done according to a pre-programmed check list, which suggests he hasn't had time to learn how to do lots of adapting, which suggests he hasn't been on-line for very long. The FBI knew that Graiman was working on "a new KITT," which suggests....
So this KITT, moreso than KITT 2k it seems, is a tiny baby infant. He hasn't interacted with humans much, as shown by his 'surprise' that Sarah's fear was irrational and unfounded (note how she said, "welcome to the world of human beings"...I think that's a story beat there). So he hasn't had time to develop much of a personality. As such, he's more flat. But, in my opinion, in a charming way.
3. Why show the CGI of the bullets hitting KITT? Well, remember this KITT doesn't have a molecular bonded shell. Instead he has nano-tech enhanced repair abilities. The CGI shots show that in fact, yes, these bullets are damaging the car, but are almost immediately being repaired. It sets up the fact that if KITT's computer goes off-line, the car is vulnerable.
4. Why not have a molecular bonded shell? Well, from a production stand-point, it's sort of a hokey magical Star Trek thing ("ah..molecular bonded shell...ok"), whereas the nano-tech deal has a mechanism behind it (nanites) that the audience can at least kind of get behind. And from an in-story stand-point, maybe prolonged exposure to a molecular bonded shell can be hazaardous?
5. If Graiman was so important, why wasn't he mentioned in the original show? Well, do we have to be told in the pilot? Maybe there are mitigating circumstances. Maybe Graiman didn't want his work to be known because of his 'paranoia' (as Sarah suggested his wife called it). There are any number of ways that could be explained. Again, we probably don't need that info in the pilot (as you probably couldn't go into enough detail to please the hardcore fans, and the info you had time to give would only confuse non hardcore fans).
6. Why is there no mention of Mike and his mom in the original show? Well, maybe there were mitigating circumstances. They were hidden for their protection, after all. Maybe there was some specific reason...some specific danger...one of such magnitude that Bonnie, KITT, even Devon might not have been able to know about Jennifer and Mike. Since the original show pretty much deals with Michael interacting with one of those folks...we the audience might not have been around at a time when he could talk about it. Hence, we never heard. Maybe the writers could even tie this story into some seemingly random and inconsequential thing in the original series.
So, I guess we're not going for "The Mustang is good because I like Mustangs" or "I hate KITTs voice because I don't like how flat it is." Rather, let's look at these things from an objective standpoint and see if they make sense.
Sound fun?