# The new KNIGHT RIDER, 2/17...what do you think?



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

Have they relaunched the series successfully, or was this a very sad mistake?


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

I forgot it was on tonight. Will find it and watch it later.


----------



## Jolt (Jan 9, 2006)

Its pretty good so far.


----------



## FuzzyDolly (Dec 29, 2002)

So far so good, but we're only 1/2 way thru. I was the perfect age for the original Knight Rider. I like that they paid homage to the original Kitt with the dismantled pieces in the garage. I also like that they aren't trying to recreate the original, but have taken it into a whole new direction. I'll be waiting for the series.


----------



## FuzzyDolly (Dec 29, 2002)

MickeS said:


> I forgot it was on tonight. Will find it and watch it later.


They're replaying it next week. Same Bat time, same Bat channel.


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

FuzzyDolly said:


> They're replaying it next week. Same Bat time, same Bat channel.


Better double check on that.

I think it's SATURDAY when they'll do the repeat showing, not Sunday.


----------



## robpickles (May 19, 2005)

Guess I'll be watching the re-run. Forgot it was on tonight as well.

Rob


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

gastrof said:


> Better double check on that.
> 
> I think it's SATURDAY when they'll do the repeat showing, not Sunday.


He didn't say "same Bat day."


----------



## minorthr (Nov 24, 2001)

I think they are trying for a record amount of commercials in a 2 hour show.


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo (Sep 2, 2003)

I enjoyed the first hour of it, but then I caught up to real time and decided to surf for a while.  A little campy at times, but I watched enough of the original as a kid to spark my interest today.

I'm really annoyed at the local station that has to drop to standard def. to run the stupid weather delay text crawls. Do we really need to do that 50% of the time?


----------



## voidptr (Feb 8, 2002)

NBC sure gets a lot of use out of the Montecito sets..


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

Not bad. Nowhere near the level of cheese of the original, which is probably good. But, I will say that, if it were standing on it's own, I wouldn't give it the time of day. Since it's "Knight Rider", I'll watch.

But the plane at the end? I was getting serious TKR vibes--and those vibes are never, ever good.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Ugh. Bad. This makes the original seem like Shakespeare compared to this.

KITT as a mustang was the LEAST objectionable part of this crapfest.

I'd rather watch Team Knight Rider than this, and that's saying a lot.


----------



## wmm_16 (Jul 10, 2003)

I persoanlly loved it. Is it going to be a series, or was this a one time thing?


----------



## Hot4Bo (Apr 3, 2003)

I actually like this tonight. Justin Bruening is....um......YUMMY!!! LOL


----------



## DrWho453 (Jul 16, 2005)

Depending on the ratings tonight and during the repeat, it will either be a series or not. They want it to be a series but if the ratings are not there it will not become a series. I liked it, there some parts that were kind of slow and then they had enough commercials in it to make a series from them. I recorded it but ended up watching it live since nothing else was on. I think it could make for a good series but that plane bit was a bit too much like team knight rider. I like the chamelon effect of the car. 

Anyone know why the mustang had a cobra symbol on it? They used to have a mustang emblem on them. I thought the cobra was a different model.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

I liked it. Its kinda hard to get use to KITT being a Mustang. I wouldn't mind it being picked up as a series. I really thought they did a good job casting the new voice of KITT.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

I liked it. I would definitely watch a new series...

One thing I appreciated is that they didn't get too carried away with the morphing...


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

unicorngoddess said:


> I liked it. Its kinda hard to get use to KITT being a Mustang. I wouldn't mind it being picked up as a series. I really thought they did a good job casting the new voice of KITT.


Val Kilmer? ehhh I think their first choice would have been better, but he'll do.

Good show and I would watch it if it becomes a series


----------



## nineatesix (Aug 22, 2000)

Local paper today said KITT was voiced by Val Kilmer? Can anyone confirm? Originally it was to be Will Arnett of Arrested Development, but that a last minute switch occurred.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Test said:


> Val Kilmer? ehhh I think their first choice would have been better, but he'll do.
> 
> Good show and I would watch it if it becomes a series


That was Val Kilmer??? WTF???


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

DrWho453 said:


> Anyone know why the mustang had a cobra symbol on it? They used to have a mustang emblem on them. I thought the cobra was a different model.


Shelby Cobra is a Special Edition of the Mustang.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

nineatesix said:


> Local paper today said KITT was voiced by Val Kilmer? Can anyone confirm? Originally it was to be Will Arnett of Arrested Development, but that a last minute switch occurred.


Will Arnett does voice overs for GM advertising... so it was a conflict of interest.

So yes, it was Val Kilmer... 
And the fact that it was done later in the editing prociess, is probably why the voice of K.I.3.T was so dominant out of the center channel.


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

nineatesix said:


> Local paper today said KITT was voiced by Val Kilmer? Can anyone confirm? Originally it was to be Will Arnett of Arrested Development, but that a last minute switch occurred.


CONFIRMED...Arnett couldn't do it because he had a contract to voice the commercials for GM, VERY last minute this came up and he had to back out. Val Kilmer stepped in...I'll look for a link

edit: here is where I read it first
http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/02/06/val-kilmer-is-kitt-in-knight-rider-replaces-will-arnett/


----------



## crunch3k (Sep 17, 2004)

It's OK...I like the cast and the car technology, the plot and dialog is a bit contrived and cheesy. 

REALLY tired of seeing the "MY DAD IS BETTER THAN YOUR DAD Tomorrow 9/8c" and the NBC Bug....especially during the darker scenes, it's really distracting!


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

nineatesix said:


> Local paper today said KITT was voiced by Val Kilmer? Can anyone confirm? Originally it was to be Will Arnett of Arrested Development, but that a last minute switch occurred.


Arnett had to back out due to conflict of interest (he's the voice of GMC Trucks iirc), Kilmer came in and recorded in the last week or so.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

ebonovic said:


> Will Arnett does voice overs for GM advertising... so it was a conflict of interest.
> 
> So yes, it was Val Kilmer...
> And the fact that it was done later in the editing prociess, is probably why the voice of K.I.3.T was so dominant out of the center channel.


Ya, it sounded "plugged in" like when the mother on the Sapranos died and they dubbed her in.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Amnesia said:


> I liked it. I would definitely watch a new series...
> 
> One thing I appreciated is that they didn't get too carried away with the morphing...


See, and I thought they DID get carried away with it. They seemed to wedge it in there just to show "oooh, look at the really cool effect we can do!"

The cast wasn't bad, except for Val Kilmer. Someone somewhere along the way apparently told him to talk like he'd imagine a computer would talk like. That was the worst part of all... William Daniels' KITT had a sense of humor and was very human, while Val Kilmer's KITT was just annoying as hell.

The rapid fire scene changes were annoying as heck. I believe someone at the studio or the network figured that people would stop paying attention if a scene lasted longer than 30 seconds. I don't think there was a single scene in the entire two hours that lasted for more than 2 consecutive minutes. Ironically, doing that was actually what got me to stop paying attention to the movie.

The plane at the end was a clear case of something that sounded good on paper, but completely impractical for use on an ongoing basis (if it makes it that far). Like they'd be able to land a cargo plane just anywhere, particularly if they plan to use it like the semi in the original series, where sometimes they entered and left the semi multiple times in a single episode.

And of course, the whole movie was like a 2 hour Ford infomercial. It was bad enough having the non-stop product placement in the movie itself, they had to go and do the Ford commercials with Justin Bruening making it all the more obvious. If I wanted that much Ford marketing, I would've spent another day at the auto show.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

So was it Will Arnette that did the promos though? Because the promos came out a while back ago (the one that starts out as a car commercial) or was that Val Kilmer too???

And you would think with someone like Val Kilmer, his name would've been in the opening credits. It wasn't.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

unicorngoddess said:


> So was it Will Arnette that did the promos though? Because the promos came out a while back ago (the one that starts out as a car commercial) or was that Val Kilmer too???
> 
> And you would think with someone like Val Kilmer, his name would've been in the opening credits. It wasn't.


The first promos went out with Will Arnett's voice, yes, including the promo that seemed like a car commercial, with him running down a list of features, the first of which sound fairly normal and the later ones rather fantastic. (I think it may have been this one that got some attention at GM, because with his voice, it DID seem like a GM commercial, except that it features the Ford Mustang Shelby Cobra edition in it.)

Later promos switched to Val's voice.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

LoadStar said:


> The first promos went out with Will Arnett's voice, yes, including the promo that seemed like a car commercial, with him running down a list of features, the first of which sound fairly normal and the later ones rather fantastic. (I think it may have been this one that got some attention at GM, because with his voice, it DID seem like a GM commercial, except that it features the Ford Mustang Shelby Cobra edition in it.)
> 
> Later promos switched to Val's voice.


Okay. Yeah, then I can see why GM wanted to pull him because that first promo did in fact seem JUST LIKE a car commercial...at least until he started talking about how bullet proofing and such came standard 

Of course I had no idea Will Arnett did voice overs exclusively for GM...all those voice over guys sound the same to me


----------



## voidptr (Feb 8, 2002)

Langree said:


> Arnett had to back out due to conflict of interest (he's the voice of GMC Trucks iirc), Kilmer came in and recorded in the last week or so.


If I was a producer, I would have turned around and asked Mike Rowe at that point.

There's probably a reason why I don't work in TV though.


----------



## Slider10 (Aug 5, 2003)

I thought the show was okay and I'd watch it if it became a series. I think KITT's responses in the first half were extremely computerized and nowhere near the 'human' responses of the original.

The Hoff was in it, big plus. Normally I'd give a show like this three or four episodes to prove itself, but I guess I need to wait a few months for episodes to be produced if this becomes a show. They're doing this BSG-style.


----------



## pjenkins (Mar 8, 1999)

this show was a total carbon copy of the original, same cheese w/updated technology. being a fan of the original knight rider, and of cheese, i will continue to watch should it make its way to be an ongoing series


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

LoadStar said:


> See, and I thought they DID get carried away with it. They seemed to wedge it in there just to show "oooh, look at the really cool effect we can do!"


What I meant was that at least they didn't have KITT morph into, say, a Ford Focus.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

It was GREAT IMO!

But it was more like a 2 hour pilot than a movie. So I hope they make it a series...


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

Well, I got about 1 hour and 45 mins in and Im dealing with rain fade from a bad storm we were having tonight.

But hey, I definetly like it, I will certainly watch if they make it a series. I didn't know about the switch to Val Kilmer but I knew that wasn't Will Arnette, I would prefer Will Arnette, but whatever.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

This is definitely something that would have been 3x times better if it were edited down to a single hour (I know that would never have been considered, just sayin') because, as mentioned, the ads were excessive and there were simply too many blank look shots used. I know Ms. Pottier can act (check out Grindhouse, among other things) but damn, she really wasn't given any worthwhile direction here. Most folks are just being spiteful internet geeks when they say this, but her part _really_ was all blank expression. LOL.

Anyway, to continue the diatribe, all the attempts to create a universe with characters and plot points believable enough to work as a sequel to the original series came across to me as cringeworthy. While David Hasselhoff's cameo was extremely cool as an idea, it was totally lame as written/shot/edited.

That said, I thought the ideas and execution behind the KITT elements (yes, even the morphing) were excellent. Loved Val Kilmer as the voice.

Despite the negatives, I'd certainly set the Season Pass for it if the series ever gets greenlit.

And, yeah, Deanna Russo is TOTALLY adorable.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

They lost me after the car chase along the cliffs after the car turned into a Mustang and they gave the helicopter the slip.

As one who never watched the original, how did they resolve the series 20 years ago? Did the inventor have a little one-year old girl back then? And what happened to the mother (Mrs. Inventor)?


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

hanumang said:


> While David Hasselhoff's cameo was extremely cool as an idea, it was totally lame as written/shot/edited.
> 
> And, yeah, Deanna Russo is TOTALLY adorable.


If they left it has him being just a figure in the shadows like right before the commercial break it would have worked better, BUT I think 1 of 2 things may have happened...

1. They decided to leave it hanging where Michael "The Hoff" Knight could come back and be the head of the foundation.

or more likely...

2. No one keeps "The Hoff" in the dark

edit: is Deanna Russo the daughter of the inventor?


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

voidptr said:


> If I was a producer, I would have turned around and asked Mike Rowe at that point.


Dang, Mike Rowe would've made a *amazing* KITT, mostly because I don't think he could've butchered the job as badly as Kilmer did. And yeah, he does enough voice over stuff that he would be used to it, and he also already works for Ford (though in their Truck division).



getreal said:


> As one who never watched the original, how did they resolve the series 20 years ago? Did the inventor have a little one-year old girl back then? And what happened to the mother (Mrs. Inventor)?


The whole "inventor" angle is new to this series. The original never really referred to a specific inventor. The first episode of the original series started with KITT being just completed by a whole team of unseen Knight Industries workers.


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

voidptr said:


> If I was a producer, I would have turned around and asked Mike Rowe at that point.


Hmmm... Both Daniels and Rowe have their trademark snarkiness, but Rowe's snarkiness is just different..... I got to mull that over.

The only objection I can think of in my head is that if you brought Rowe in for his KITT like snarkiness, he wouldn't be playing KITT, he'd be playing "Mike Rowe the Snarky Car."

--Carlos V.


----------



## Zen98031 (Sep 29, 2005)

Overall I enjoyed it. There were some parts that had me cringing, but it was not too bad. Definitely will tune in if it becomes a series. Was a big fan of the original series. Hard to imagine it was 25 years ago. I never think of myself as being as old as I am. 

Mitch


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

getreal said:


> As one who never watched the original, how did they resolve the series 20 years ago? Did the inventor have a little one-year old girl back then? And what happened to the mother (Mrs. Inventor)?





LoadStar said:


> The whole "inventor" angle is new to this series. The original never really referred to a specific inventor. The first episode of the original series started with KITT being just completed by a whole team of unseen Knight Industries workers.


Actually, Charles Graiman being the inventor of the Knight Industries Two Thousand was a retrocon to the original series.

In the original pilot, KITT was the brainchild of the brilliant but eccentric billionaire Wilton Knight (a real Admiral Nelson type).
While other inventors helped with some of the components (in particular the molecular bonded shell), Wilton Knight was KITTs creator. Devon Miles oversaw final assembly and testing of KITT.

(So, if Graiman invented KITT, whos responsible for the KARR debacle?)

And who exactly was Traceurs mother? 
Obviously not Michael Knights wife, Stephanie Mason.
She was referred to as Jennifer. Could that have been Jennifer Knight, Wiltons daughter?
Was Mike Traceur born back when Knight was Michael Long or after the events of the series?

(And I thought that Jenny Andrews was the only illegitimate child of Michael Long.)

As for the show, it wasn't the big bag of suck I expected it to be but I would only rate it as fair.

(Plus a stock Shelby Mustang would be able to outrun that chase car with ease. It shouldn't have been necessary to pin them in.)


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

I agree that this was not as bad as I thought it would be. I was surprised actually that I didn't hate it.

So Sydney Tamiia Poitier's character is a lesbian, right? Just want to make sure I got that right. 

Is Bruce Davison THAT old? They had him hunched over and walking around like he's 80 years old.

I had no idea that was Val Kilmer's voice. And I thought he was fine. I'm actually surprised to see all of the Val hate. Sheesh!

I did not like the idea of a body double. That plot device was totally there to fool the audience. Why the heck didn't Charles Graiman just run into the garage and jump into KITT to escape???

Justin Bruening has an unnaturally large mouth.

The collision at the end was cool.

I don't believe Deanna Russo's character is a scientist or teacher (or whatever she is supposed to be) for one second. Not because of her performance, but the writing. She wasn't intellectual enough.

Did Mike say "Cholo" just after they left the Montecito parking garage when the car morphed?

The Hoff's appearance was neat. Say what you will about him these days, but he was an icon for me growing up on "Knight Rider"...and it was cool to see him briefly as Michael Knight again. Gotta love nostalgia!

So this is the only episode? Just a TV Movie at this point? That must be why I couldn't set up a Season Pass.


----------



## FuzzyDolly (Dec 29, 2002)

Is it wrong that I really enjoyed the mustang/focus commercials? I thought they were pretty funny. My wife thought they should have made Kitt a female.

As for the show... I also enjoyed it quite a bit. I'd definitely watch a series.

jyoung...they explained the reason that Kitt didn't outrun the Edge. It was because his prime driective is the preservation of human life, and if he caused the Edge to go faster than it was, the Edge would go off the side of the cliff.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

JYoung said:


> Actually, Charles Graiman being the inventor of the Knight Industries Two Thousand was a retrocon to the original series.
> 
> In the original pilot, KITT was the brainchild of the brilliant but eccentric billionaire Wilton Knight (a real Admiral Nelson type).
> While other inventors helped with some of the components (in particular the molecular bonded shell), Wilton Knight was KITTs creator. Devon Miles oversaw final assembly and testing of KITT.
> ...


Eh, the inventor angle is not necessarily a "retcon" to me. Wilton Knight being the "creator" of KITT is much like Bill Gates being the "creator" of Windows. Sure, Bill has had plenty of influence, and he probably even did some coding on the earlier versions, but he just happens to own the company that created the product.

As for the kid angle, how old is the guy playing Mike? Knight Rider was on a long time ago--and it's not like the show ended with everybody dying or Michael leaving the foundation. He could have had a relationship after the show ended.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

atrac said:


> So Sydney Tamiia Poitier's character is a lesbian, right?


Yup


atrac said:


> Is Bruce Davison THAT old? They had him hunched over and walking around like he's 80 years old.


According to IMDb, he's 62.


atrac said:


> Just a TV Movie at this point?


Yes, but I imagine that it will be a fall series.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

While the movie wasn't bad, but it wasn't that good either. It basically was a 2 hour Ford commercial and most people I've talked to who saw it agree with that. I think I enjoyed the 4 commercial spots a bit more than the actual movie. 

Having watched the original series, this movie was probably on par with some of the lower quality episodes of that series. Considering it was a "pilot" it should have been better.

It's kind of sad that the thing that got my heart pumping the most was the theme song. Well the very beginning part, then it morphed into a cacophony of noise.

Having Hasselhoff show up should have been exciting, but the exchange between the two Mike's seemed forced and they didn't interact very well.

I really don't see this being picked up as a series, but what do I know.


----------



## Dmtalon (Dec 28, 2003)

morac said:


> While the movie wasn't bad, but it wasn't that good either. It basically was a 2 hour Ford commercial and most people I've talked to who saw it agree with that. I think I enjoyed the 4 commercial spots a bit more than the actual movie.


I haven't watched yet, just recorded. However I truly wish that they would just advertise within the shows ONLY, and drop the stupid commercials. Transformers, was a big GM commercial. I think product placement, if integrated RIGHT into a show is a lot better than an actual typical "up sounded" POS commercial (up sounded meaning raised by 10db to "get your attention" or in my case %$#@ me off) Most of us, here at least, skip them anyway.

But, do one or the other, not both!


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

ebonovic said:


> Will Arnett does voice overs for GM advertising... so it was a conflict of interest.
> 
> So yes, it was Val Kilmer...
> And the fact that it was done later in the editing prociess, is probably why the voice of K.I.3.T was so dominant out of the center channel.


What kind of stupid contract did he sign with GM??? 

An actor does commercials for one car company so they are excluded from acting in any movies that use a competing car in the plot??? That seems pretty retarded....

I'm pretty sure actors that participate in advertising for Pepsi aren't contractually banned from ever drinking a 'coke' on film....


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

I don't really feel that the show was a 2 hour car commercial. I have a feeling, if it hadn't been for the abundance of actual Ford commercials, nobody would have really noticed how many other Fords were used in the production. The fact that every commercial break started with a Ford commercial, though, along with how KITT and Mike played into many of them, tied the commercials back into the show.

And, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the SUV at the end a GMC Yukon (or other GM equivalen)? It could have been a larger Ford SUV, but it really felt like a Yukon, and the brand markings had been removed (unlike the rest of the cars, where the made especially sure the brand markings were nice and shiny). I wonder if Ford had a rule--any cars that get wrecked have to be GM.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

Adam1115 said:


> What kind of stupid contract did he sign with GM???
> 
> An actor does commercials for one car company so they are excluded from acting in any movies that use a competing car in the plot??? That seems pretty retarded....
> 
> I'm pretty sure actors that participate in advertising for Pepsi aren't contractually banned from ever drinking a 'coke' on film....


I know as TiVo users we don't watch ads...but did you see any of the ads? Part of the deal with Ford was that they could use KITT and his voice in Ford commercials. If it had just been the show, it might have been a little different (and that's probably how Arnett thought it would be to start with). But the voice of KITT was the star of almost every Ford commercial last night.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

doom1701 said:


> I know as TiVo users we don't watch ads...but did you see any of the ads? Part of the deal with Ford was that they could use KITT and his voice in Ford commercials. If it had just been the show, it might have been a little different (and that's probably how Arnett thought it would be to start with). But the voice of KITT was the star of almost every Ford commercial last night.


No I didn't watch them....

Ok, that makes more sense. He does GM voice overs so doing ford commercials would be a conflict....


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

doom1701 said:


> Eh, the inventor angle is not necessarily a "retcon" to me. Wilton Knight being the "creator" of KITT is much like Bill Gates being the "creator" of Windows. Sure, Bill has had plenty of influence, and he probably even did some coding on the earlier versions, but he just happens to own the company that created the product.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KITT

I think that Wilton Knight had a more hands on role than did Bill Gates.
He designed KITT and in particular, the molecular bonded shell.
Saying he didn't is like saying Admiral Nelson didn't design the Seaview or Andy Probert designed the Enterprise and not Matt Jefferies.

I'd settle for Graimon being the creator of the first KITT CPU though and working closely on the original KITT.
(There was an episode of the original Knight Rider where an assistant programmer of KITT managed to take control of him.)



doom1701 said:


> As for the kid angle, how old is the guy playing Mike? Knight Rider was on a long time ago--and it's not like the show ended with everybody dying or Michael leaving the foundation. He could have had a relationship after the show ended.


Knight Rider ran from 1982-1986 and Michael said that 25 years ago, someone told him "One man could make a difference."
If the kid was born after the events of the series, he'd barely be 21 or so now.
Not really enough time to do a full tour of duty as a Ranger and then become a bum.

And what did happen to the Foundation and Knight Industries after the series?
What happened to Dr. Bonnie Barstow and Devin Miles?
(Yes I know that Edward Mulhare passed away.)
(And do we really care what happened to April Curtis?)


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

Well, I'm willing to live with the idea that Mike was born to one of Michael's bangs of the week, and leave it at that.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

JYoung said:


> What happened to Dr. Bonnie Barstow and Devin Miles?


Devon was murdered in the Knight Rider 2000 movie (aired in 1991).

Interestingly, the model number of the new car in that movie was the Knight 4000 which would make it actually newer than the Knight 3000 in this movie.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

morac said:


> Devon was murdered in the Knight Rider 2000 movie (aired in 1991).
> 
> Interestingly, the model number of the new car in that movie was the Knight 4000 which would make it actually newer than the Knight 3000 in this movie.


I know that but I think that's now out of continuity.
Otherwise we'd be cryofreezing criminals, police would be using stun guns, James Doohan would have been in ten Star Trek movies, and Dan Quayle would be finishing up his second term as President of the United States.


----------



## plateau10 (Dec 11, 2007)

OK, Star Wars has canon. I'll even reluctantly accept Terminator canon arguments. But Knight Rider canon I have to draw the line. As someone who was a huge fan of the original series and managed to miss everything else, I really enjoyed the movie and I'm looking forward to a series.


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

I hope they replay it. The storm knocked out the local feed.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

I just finished it ( that at least gets a passing grade).

I liked it. I almost had to put on the C.C. to hear KITTS voice, but after reading posts here, and learning that it was redubbed after the fact, well maybe it will be better if/when they make a series. Also his voice was a step back from the orginal 25 years ago. I think they should of given KITT more attitude.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

doom1701 said:


> Well, I'm willing to live with the idea that Mike was born to one of Michael's bangs of the week, and leave it at that.


When I talked about all this being clumsy this is kinda what I meant, never mind all the retconing with KITT's 'inventor.'

Unless I was totally hearing things, they mentioned that Ranger Mike was born (just?) prior to Michael Knight becoming KITT's driver 25 years ago. And that's why 'dad' left them and the family was moved, along with Dr. Graiman, to wherever we see them in this movie (Arizona?). Since I saw the pilot to (the original) Knight Rider on Sleuth a while back, none of that makes any sense. I'll buy it - because, as mentioned, nostalgia is a powerful thing - but it's still clumsy.

Personally, I would have been much happier if Ranger Mike _was_ the son of one of the weekly guest stars.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

Fl_Gulfer said:


> I hope they replay it. The storm knocked out the local feed.


Hopefully you caught this after you posted it - though I can't blame you if you missed it, as it was mentioned earlier in this thread when people were still trying to get over Will Arnett not being KITT's voice - but this is scheduled to be re-aired on NBC this coming Saturday. At 9pm ET/PT, IIRC.


----------



## minorthr (Nov 24, 2001)

OK this show sucked. Well maybe not completely sucked but it was bad. Had I not grown up with Knight Rider I would have shut it off after the 30th commercial break. It was basically a 2 hour infomercial for ford. Every vehicle in the show was either a Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Land rover or Volvo. In the Knight Rider world those are the only cars that exist. 

Also there were way to many commercials and I mean way to many.

The one good thing was they kind of kept the theme song.

And I'll be watching it if its a series simply because I loved the original series I even had a Knight Rider big wheel with one of those spin out levers


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

minorthr said:


> OK this show sucked. Well maybe not completely sucked but it was bad. Had I not grown up with Knight Rider I would have shut it off after the 30th commercial break. It was basically a 2 hour infomercial for ford. Every vehicle in the show was either a Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Land rover or Volvo. In the Knight Rider world those are the only cars that exist.
> 
> Also there were way to many commercials and I mean way to many.
> 
> ...


How could commercials bother you, you don't have a TiVo? 

As far as the product placement went, it didn't bother me. The only part that was stupid was the little ford crossover SUV in the high speed chase with KITT. Give me a break, like that thing could keep up with KITT at 100 MPH+.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

hanumang said:


> Unless I was totally hearing things, they mentioned that Ranger Mike was born (just?) prior to Michael Knight becoming KITT's driver 25 years ago. And that's why 'dad' left them and the family was moved, along with Dr. Graiman, to wherever we see them in this movie (Arizona?). Since I saw the pilot to (the original) Knight Rider on Sleuth a while back, none of that makes any sense. I'll buy it - because, as mentioned, nostalgia is a powerful thing - but it's still clumsy.
> 
> Personally, I would have been much happier if Ranger Mike _was_ the son of one of the weekly guest stars.


I didn't hear a time frame specified.
Trying to make this fit in the original series though, let's try this out:
Michael Knight impregnated his true love, Stephanie Mason when they were touring as rock singers. (Season 2 of the original series)
She gives birth to a boy but has to give him up as she's in the witness protection program (and yes, a Rock band singer is a terrific cover for that  ).

The ever cautious Devon takes the boy and places him in hiding with Jennifer and Dr. Graimon.



FuzzyDolly said:


> jyoung...they explained the reason that Kitt didn't outrun the Edge. It was because his prime driective is the preservation of human life, and if he caused the Edge to go faster than it was, the Edge would go off the side of the cliff.


Uhm no. All KITT had to do was get to some open road and they could easily out run them at 200+ MPH.
This is really an example of the writers trying to be too clever for their own good.
The same sort of thinking that had Sonny Crockett in his Ferarri Testarossa unable to outrun to guys driving a Chrysler K Car. He had to lose them by driving under a semi trailer.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

JYoung said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KITT


Oh, and yet again, the Internet proves that there are people with *WAY* too much time on their hands.


----------



## DrWho453 (Jul 16, 2005)

Adam1115 said:


> The only part that was stupid was the little ford crossover SUV in the high speed chase with KITT. Give me a break, like that thing could keep up with KITT at 100 MPH+.


Of course it could keep up with KITT. They neglected to tell or show you that the SUV had the Supped up police engine in it so it could keep up with cars in High pursuit.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

JYoung said:


> I didn't hear a time frame specified.


In the interest of full disclosure, I don't believe they mentioned 25 years during the bit revealing who Ranger Mike's father was - that was me incorporating stuff from two other bits (the Brit bad guy talking about the Urban Legend, and Hasselhoff himself at the funeral) - but they definitely did mention that Ranger Mike was born, and the family was relocated, before Michael Knight became KITT's driver.

And, yeah, I would have been much happier with your proposal...


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

DrWho453 said:


> Of course it could keep up with KITT. They neglected to tell or show you that the SUV had the Supped up police engine in it so it could keep up with cars in High pursuit.


Actually none of that scene made any sense.

KITT said he could drive around 620 miles (to Vegas) in a little over 3 hours, which would put his top speed at around 200+ mph. He could easily outrun nearly any car on the road. And Kitt didn't really need to outrun the van, just get far enough ahead to do the morph thing without the bad guys seeing.

Even if he couldn't outrun the van, he also said he could get about 100 miles per gallon. So he could just keep driving until the van ran out of gas.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I enjoyed the show and will definately watch it if it becomes a series. There were quite a few things I really liked and some, well, I could live without.

One major problem was some of the cheesiness. The whole five minutes to open one door of a hotel room was driving me nuts. Having all the bad guys picking a room and then slooooooowly opening it...argh!!! And they put a commercial in the middle of all that. bleh.

The car crash at the end was cool. The morphing was interesting. Have Kitt become an Element or something. I even liked that there was no protection while Michael was driving because the nano were turned off or something. I agree with whoever said that Michael and Michael had no chemistry in the end scene. I thought for a minute that he was just CGI'd in.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

BTW, if this goes to series, Mike's mechanic friend needs to go.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Oh, loved the fact that he had a Woomba. Wish it was souped up tho.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

JYoung said:


> BTW, if this goes to series, Mike's mechanic friend needs to go.


100% agreed. Problem is, as soon as he showed up early in the movie, I figured "wacky mechanic friend that will tend to Kitt in the series".


----------



## DrWho453 (Jul 16, 2005)

betts4 said:


> One major problem was some of the cheesiness. The whole five minutes to open one door of a hotel room was driving me nuts. Having all the bad guys picking a room and then slooooooowly opening it...argh!!! And they put a commercial in the middle of all that. bleh.
> 
> The car crash at the end was cool. The morphing was interesting. Have Kitt become an Element or something. I even liked that there was no protection while Michael was driving because the nano were turned off or something. I agree with whoever said that Michael and Michael had no chemistry in the end scene. I thought for a minute that he was just CGI'd in.


Yea, I agree they really played the door opening a little too much and I think (at least to me anyway) it became obvious that none of the guys unlocking the door would be entering the room with the inventor. I had already expected michael to walk in. I think this type of entrance has been done to death with other movies or tv series where they make you think the bad guy is coming in and all of a sudden its another good guy or the bad guys find an empty room.

I loved the car crash that was pretty cool though pretty risky in that the inventor could have been hurt badly or even killed. He could have done what police are trained to do which is to spin a car out. It is pretty dangerous since you have to make sure the car is not going to hit oncoming traffic and you have to make sure you speed up and not hit the brake to prevent getting in the accident yourself. Wouldn't have been as exciting or interesting but it would have been safer. But then again it is knight rider and who wants safety?

I thought the morphing was cool and I liked the spoiler look when it travels at high speed. That was one of the things I liked towards the end of the original series was when KITT went into super pursuit mode. I loved the look of the super pursuit kit. Too bad it only happened near the show's end instead of early on.


----------



## SnakeEyes (Dec 26, 2000)

My only complaint has already been voiced


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

DrWho453 said:


> Yea, I agree they really played the door opening a little too much and I think (at least to me anyway) it became obvious that none of the guys unlocking the door would be entering the room with the inventor. I had already expected michael to walk in. I think this type of entrance has been done to death with other movies or tv series where they make you think the bad guy is coming in and all of a sudden its another good guy or the bad guys find an empty room.


Usually soap operas do that trick 

About KITT's morphing...the first thing I said to my husband when I saw that was, "I wonder if he can morph into an '83 TransAm?" Because that would be funny.


----------



## minorthr (Nov 24, 2001)

Adam1115 said:


> How could commercials bother you, you don't have a TiVo?
> 
> As far as the product placement went, it didn't bother me. The only part that was stupid was the little ford crossover SUV in the high speed chase with KITT. Give me a break, like that thing could keep up with KITT at 100 MPH+.


Of course I have a tivo but it doesn't warp time while I'm watching something live 

The thing with the edge keeping up even my wife was like how can that suv keep up with that mustang.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

The crash at the end actually bugged me a little bit. I'm willing to overlook it, because when you're talking about a series like Knight Rider (old or new), you've gotta be willing to let physics go out the window.

But the idea that KITT, even if he is a heavy car, would not budge when a giant SUV slams into him at high speed is just a little over the top. Nanotech or not, the law of inertia has to come into play somewhere. But having KITT move at all would have wrecked the scene, so I understand why they did it the way they did.


----------



## DrWho453 (Jul 16, 2005)

unicorngoddess said:


> Usually soap operas do that trick
> 
> About KITT's morphing...the first thing I said to my husband when I saw that was, "I wonder if he can morph into an '83 TransAm?" Because that would be funny.


That would be funny though I don't think Ford would like that. I think would be funny if it started morphing into other things like an airplane or truck. Oh wait, I am getting confused with a working chamelion circuit in the Tardis. Never mind.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

It shoulda morphed into a 1972 Ford Pinto Hatchback


----------



## DrWho453 (Jul 16, 2005)

doom1701 said:


> The crash at the end actually bugged me a little bit. I'm willing to overlook it, because when you're talking about a series like Knight Rider (old or new), you've gotta be willing to let physics go out the window.
> 
> But the idea that KITT, even if he is a heavy car, would not budge when a giant SUV slams into him at high speed is just a little over the top. Nanotech or not, the law of inertia has to come into play somewhere. But having KITT move at all would have wrecked the scene, so I understand why they did it the way they did.


I agree. I was like ok so KITT doesn't budge during the crash not very credible but I will live with it. At least they didn't have a helicopter falling off a damn with three angles chasing after it, starting the generator up, activating the main rotor, and tail rotor, and then pulling the helicopter out of a fall inches before they hit the ground. I am sorry as interesting as it was to see them try that, there is no way that would work and was too outrageous for me.

I don't mind giving up logic and real world physics as long as its not totally ridiculous. Oh well, enough ranting, back to our regularly scheduled program.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

doom1701 said:


> But the idea that KITT, even if he is a heavy car, would not budge when a giant SUV slams into him at high speed is just a little over the top. Nanotech or not, the law of inertia has to come into play somewhere. But having KITT move at all would have wrecked the scene, so I understand why they did it the way they did.


Maybe KITT can change his density. It's not completely unbelievable if the nanotech is supposed to be manipulating things at the molecular level.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

doom1701 said:


> The crash at the end actually bugged me a little bit. I'm willing to overlook it, because when you're talking about a series like Knight Rider (old or new), you've gotta be willing to let physics go out the window.
> 
> But the idea that KITT, even if he is a heavy car, would not budge when a giant SUV slams into him at high speed is just a little over the top. Nanotech or not, the law of inertia has to come into play somewhere. But having KITT move at all would have wrecked the scene, so I understand why they did it the way they did.


The part that bugged me on that end chase was that Mike kept slamming into the side of the SUV to try to run it off the road. You would see the side view mirrors smash and shatter....then in the very next scene the mirror would be back.

And it couldn't have been the nanos because KITT was turned off at the time.


----------



## fog00 (Jan 3, 2007)

morac said:


> Maybe KITT can change his density. It's not completely unbelievable if the nanotech is supposed to be manipulating things at the molecular level.


To increase it's density, it would either have to decrease its size, or create matter and I am pretty sure that is against the law.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

morac said:


> Actually none of that scene made any sense.
> 
> KITT said he could drive around 620 miles (to Vegas) in a little over 3 hours, which would put his top speed at around 200+ mph. He could easily outrun nearly any car on the road. And Kitt didn't really need to outrun the van, just get far enough ahead to do the morph thing without the bad guys seeing.


Sounds like KITT got one of those faulty Pentium chips to do his math as according to Google Maps, it's 540 Miles from Stanford University to Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas (and the Montecito is across the street from Mandalay Bay as all good viewers of _Las Vegas_ knows).
So unless KITT decided to take a detour through Sausalito, I don't see where he came up with the 620 figure.



hanumang said:


> In the interest of full disclosure, I don't believe they mentioned 25 years during the bit revealing who Ranger Mike's father was - that was me incorporating stuff from two other bits (the Brit bad guy talking about the Urban Legend, and Hasselhoff himself at the funeral) - but they definitely did mention that Ranger Mike was born, and the family was relocated, before Michael Knight became KITT's driver.
> 
> And, yeah, I would have been much happier with your proposal...


Well, if Mike was conceived before the original pilot, it wouldn't have been necessary to hide him as he would have been the son of Police Officer Michael Long, who was killed in the line of duty outside of Las Vegas.

Although there was that one villain played by the stentorian John Vernon who figured out Michael Knght was really Michael Long.
I forget if he died in that episode or not.


----------



## bareyb (Dec 1, 2000)

On impulse I did a manual recording of it just out of curiosity. I found myself still watching after an hour. I never did finish it, but I'm surprised it was as good as it was. I'll probably catch the rest later. Did anyone notice in the opening scenes they showed the engine, and it was the engine from a 1987 Corvette and NOT a Mustang? Only reason I know is because I used to have one. So that was the only fairly glaring technical error. Otherwise, everything the car could do makes perfect feasible sense.   

I don't "think" I'd watch a series, but it was fun for a one time thing. We'll see...


----------



## Bardman (Aug 26, 2002)

bareyb said:


> Did anyone notice in the opening scenes they showed the engine, and it was the engine from a 1987 Corvette and NOT a Mustang?


I took it that these were parts from previous KITT car(s), as there was also a steering "wheel" and something else reminiscent of old KITT.

IIRC, there was also some dialog about "another trans am? No, a mustang"


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

crunch3k said:


> It's OK...I like the cast and the car technology, the plot and dialog is a bit contrived and cheesy.


i thought the dialog made the show...the kitt interactions were almost like the old days.



JYoung said:


> (Plus a stock Shelby Mustang would be able to outrun that chase car with ease. It shouldn't have been necessary to pin them in.)


that annoyed me to no end...i guess they want to sell their suv or something!



unicorngoddess said:


> Usually soap operas do that trick
> 
> .


for those not aware, Mike is an All my Children cast member and if you've ever watched it, it just doesnt seem right seeing him in this show.


----------



## Pralix (Dec 8, 2001)

The minute they bring back "super pursuit mode" the show is done...


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Pralix said:


> The minute they bring back "super pursuit mode" the show is done...


There needs to be a turbo boost...along with the sound effect.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

bareyb said:


> Did anyone notice in the opening scenes they showed the engine, and it was the engine from a 1987 Corvette and NOT a Mustang? Only reason I know is because I used to have one. So that was the only fairly glaring technical error. Otherwise, everything the car could do makes perfect feasible sense.


They wouldn't need an engine from an 87 Mustang anyway. What they would need is an engine from an 87 Pontiac Trans Am. (I believe 87 would be an accurate year though since I believe the show ran through '87)


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

doom1701 said:


> I don't really feel that the show was a 2 hour car commercial. I have a feeling, if it hadn't been for the abundance of actual Ford commercials, nobody would have really noticed how many other Fords were used in the production. The fact that every commercial break started with a Ford commercial, though, along with how KITT and Mike played into many of them, tied the commercials back into the show.
> 
> And, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the SUV at the end a GMC Yukon (or other GM equivalen)? It could have been a larger Ford SUV, but it really felt like a Yukon, and the brand markings had been removed (unlike the rest of the cars, where the made especially sure the brand markings were nice and shiny). I wonder if Ford had a rule--any cars that get wrecked have to be GM.


Yes, I made it out to be a Yukon Denali (not 100% on the model).

Overall, I didn't think it sucked as much as I thought it was going to. I'd certainly give it a chance if they make a series of it.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

I just skimmed through it again, and I also noticed that the cop vehicle that pulled up after the big collision was a Chevy--with a very, very obvious Chevy emblem.

And I didn't find any place where they mentioned Mike being born to Michael Long. Graiman they said they put into hiding (yeah, good hiding--he's making public appearances, his daughter is a high profile professor?) right after the first KITT was built, but Mike and his mom were given no time frame--they were just put into hiding at the "request of Mike's father".


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Weird, I had no idea there was a new Knight Rider until 1 minute ago. Off to usenet so I can check it out.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

doom1701 said:


> And I didn't find any place where they mentioned Mike being born to Michael Long. Graiman they said they put into hiding (yeah, good hiding--he's making public appearances, his daughter is a high profile professor?) right after the first KITT was built, but Mike and his mom were given no time frame--they were just put into hiding at the "request of Mike's father".


Yeah, she says "your father is Michael Knight" though I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean, exactly. As in did she not know about his 'past life' as Michael Long? Or was she simply talking in shorthand?

Regardless, while I might be off on the exact details, the whole thing - at the risk of being overly geeky - still comes across as clumsy to me.


----------



## getbak (Oct 8, 2004)

doom1701 said:


> And, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the SUV at the end a GMC Yukon (or other GM equivalen)? It could have been a larger Ford SUV, but it really felt like a Yukon, and the brand markings had been removed (unlike the rest of the cars, where the made especially sure the brand markings were nice and shiny). I wonder if Ford had a rule--any cars that get wrecked have to be GM.


After the crash, when they walk up to check on the inhabitants, you can clearly see the Chevrolet "bowtie" logo on the steering wheel (in front of the undeployed air bag). It made me laugh that the only car that got wrecked was the GM product, while pretty much every other vehicle shown (including the Volvo and the limos at the funeral) was a Ford product.


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

Adam1115 said:


> It was GREAT IMO!
> 
> But it was more like a 2 hour pilot than a movie. So I hope they make it a series...


It was designed as a backdoor pilot. FWiW, It was okay, but I did have some problems with it.

1: The whole thing was one long Ford Commercial. In the original series they did not push it down our throats that it was a Trans Am. It was a car and that was it.

2: Val Kilmer's Voice. I hated it. It really need William Daniels. I don't know Will Arnett from Adam, but I miss William's voice.

3: The quick cuts just annoyed me. But I guess that is a current fimic style these days.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

doom1701 said:


> I just skimmed through it again, and I also noticed that the cop vehicle that pulled up after the big collision was a Chevy--with a very, very obvious Chevy emblem.


sooooo let me get this straight...there was a shootout and 2 cars zoomed away from the scene at 400mph....yet the woman cop and friends come from the OPPOSITE direction when there's the accident? how did they get there so fast?

oh and i hate that it's mike! it should be michael!


----------



## danplaysbass (Jul 19, 2004)

I thought the execution was pretty good. The production value and effects were pretty good. I really liked the soundtrack. I'll give it a shot...


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

I enjoyed it. Val Kilmer's "Kitt" didn't bug me as much as I thought it would. Could have used a bit more sarcasm in general though, ala William Daniels.

I'm not excited about Michael Knight Jr., or the hot nano-chick. But they'll do, I guess. I'd watch it if it were a series. But I'm a sucker for the 70's remake.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

It is pure coincidence that Top Gear had re-aired the episode where they had both a Shelby Cobra Mustang (2007) and a Rousch Mustang comparison run on their test track Monday night. The Rousch beat the Sheby by 3 seconds, IIRC.

This is one show that had no need to be remade. Val Kilmer's KITT had no chemistry at all with the new guy. Granted this might be because of the last minute casting change but still... I'd imagine Will Arnett having much more fun with the role. 

...and that doesn't even mention the story or plot.


----------



## DrWho453 (Jul 16, 2005)

SciFi just announced that Knight Rider got high ratings so it looks like a strong possibility of a series coming next season.

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=1&id=48751


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

I had to download it but I enjoyed it....then again I'm a sucker for anything Knight Rider!


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

As a Trans Am guy of course I think it's sacrelig that they're using anything besides a Trans Am. But since there are no new Trans Ams for them to use I can kind of understand. It would have been cooler if they would have used a concept Trans Am like they did for the Camaro in Transformers. That might have gotten enough excitement for them to bring it back.

I haven't watched this yet, but it sounds like it's not nearly as terrible as I thought it would be. I'll give it a watch.

tk


----------



## kdelande (Dec 17, 2001)

newsposter said:


> for those not aware, Mike *was* an All my Children cast member and if you've ever watched it, it just doesnt seem right seeing him in this show.


FYP.

KD


----------



## mclark11 (Feb 19, 2003)

I did not like the actriss playing the daughter. I saw her smirking during the whole show. She was thinking this is really stupid or this is geeky fantastic. Either one made me cringe.
My wife came in halfway in the show and also noticed that the actress was bad... She could not really explain why but it could be her smirkiness...
I don't think the show can be a hit. They should make it movie specials. Maybe 6 per year. Anymore than that and it would get very tiresome..


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

kdelande said:


> FYP.
> 
> KD


actually my wife tells me that he married the actress playing babe for real...so they both left the show


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

I don't see how the daughter could survive if this gets picked up.....Mike has to be single and having her baggage would not be good.


----------



## bigray327 (Apr 14, 2000)

Loved the car. Loved the cheese. Loved the chick.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

pmyers said:


> I don't see how the daughter could survive if this gets picked up.....Mike has to be single and having her baggage would not be good.


i thought she was partial brains behind Kitt?


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

newsposter said:


> i thought she was partial brains behind Kitt?


no...she was the partial brains behind the encryption for that Prometheis project.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

I bet they kill off dad so she has to step in as system support ala Bonnie.


----------



## jcoulter (Aug 27, 2005)

getbak said:


> After the crash, when they walk up to check on the inhabitants, you can clearly see the Chevrolet "bowtie" logo on the steering wheel (in front of the undeployed air bag). It made me laugh that the only car that got wrecked was the GM product, while pretty much every other vehicle shown (including the Volvo and the limos at the funeral) was a Ford product.


That's exactly what we talked about at work today. Everything was a Ford product except for the one vehicle that gets completely demolished. They even went so far to install an aftermarket grill in it. If this does become a series I hope this practice becomes less obvious.

All that aside I loved the show! As I was ~10 when this show originally aired I was looking forward to it.

Maybe they will resurrect "A-team"???


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

jcoulter said:


> Maybe they will resurrect "A-team"???


They're hoping to - as a feature film.


----------



## FuzzyDolly (Dec 29, 2002)

pendragn said:


> It would have been cooler if they would have used a concept Trans Am ...


In one of the tv movies they used the Banshee concept which later on became the most current generation of f-body.


----------



## DrWho453 (Jul 16, 2005)

Well I just transferred Knight Rider to my laptop and re-watched the first part of it. I was able to see the original KITT in the garage. When I had on the TV because it was so dark I could only see the steering wheel and license plate from the original kit so it was interesting to see that had the car in the garage.

The other thing I was able to do was I as able to pause the screen when the daughter asked for the name of the car and it showed the biography of the car on the screen. I saw that it had 23 redundant cpus and 32 terabytes of memory. Talk about your supercomputer on wheels


----------



## Sadara (Sep 27, 2006)

I'm not able to read through 4 pages of posts right now.

I do like it, we enjoyed it and we hope they do make it into a series.


----------



## mrmike (May 2, 2001)

DrWho453 said:


> The other thing I was able to do was I as able to pause the screen when the daughter asked for the name of the car and it showed the biography of the car on the screen. I saw that it had 23 redundant cpus and 32 terabytes of memory. Talk about your supercomputer on wheels


It also had testing performed for High Velocity Breaking.

Oops.


----------



## Todd (Oct 7, 1999)

After watching it, all I keep thinking is...seriously, KITT can't outrun a Ford Edge???

lol


----------



## mrpantstm (Jan 25, 2005)

How exactly did the female cop get reinforcements and get in front of the accident? That um doesn't work for me.

Exactly what I expected. Not sure I'm interested in watching a Ford commercial every week.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

Does anyone know if the extreme Ford product placement was just for the TV movie or will it be a recurring theme? I seem to remember Viper using nothing but Dodge cars/trucks. It didn't work for me in that show either.


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

I liked the show...

The biggest disappointment for me was the car...Mustang???

This would have been a great opportunity for KITT to finally grow up and become a supercar, and for Chevy to show off the new 2009 Corvette ZR1 Now thats a bad ass car.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Does anyone know when/if there will be word on a series???


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

andyw715 said:


> The biggest disappointment for me was the car...Mustang???
> 
> This would have been a great opportunity for KITT to finally grow up and become a supercar, and for Chevy to show off the new 2009 Corvette ZR1 Now thats a bad ass car.


A Corvette is the most I would have wanted it to be. But I'm totally fine with a Mustang. Like the Trans Am, I'm glad it is a somewhat pedestrian car. To me it shouldn't stick out like a sore thumb.


----------



## mrpantstm (Jan 25, 2005)

ClutchBrake said:


> A Corvette is the most I would have wanted it to be. But I'm totally fine with a Mustang. Like the Trans Am, I'm glad it is a somewhat pedestrian car. To me it shouldn't stick out like a sore thumb.


The Trans Am stuck out like a sore thumb plenty. The mustang isn't particularly daring either. Nothing overly cool about it. The Lamborghini Reventón looks cooler and way more advanced than KITT! 

(Course it's ridiculously expensive.)


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

mrpantstm said:


> The Lamborghini Reventón looks cooler and way more advanced than KITT!


But that *does* stick out like a sore thumb. Can you imagine it trying to hide by changing its color?

Bad guy #1: What happened to that black Lamborghini?
Bad guy #2: I don't know---all I see is this silver Lamborghini...


----------



## DrWho453 (Jul 16, 2005)

unicorngoddess said:


> Does anyone know when/if there will be word on a series???


Apparently from today's news (found in this thread http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=385272&highlight=nbc), NBC is going to do away with the fall schedule and will now have year round schedules of shows. They said that since Knight Rider did so well in the ratings it will most likely be in the schedule that will be released in April.


----------



## mrpantstm (Jan 25, 2005)

Amnesia said:


> But that *does* stick out like a sore thumb. Can you imagine it trying to hide by changing its color?
> 
> Bad guy #1: What happened to that black Lamborghini?
> Bad guy #2: I don't know---all I see is this silver Lamborghini...


Well I think any car, even a VW Beetle, isn't terribly disguised by changing color. To me, that's the lamest addition to the show.

And sticking out like a sore thumb is the point. If you watch the old show, despite being a man with no past, Micheal Knight was never low key. Nor in car or style. KITT wasn't the best kept secret either.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

mrpantstm said:


> Well I think any car, even a VW Beetle, isn't terribly disguised by changing color. To me, that's the lamest addition to the show.
> 
> And sticking out like a sore thumb is the point. If you watch the old show, despite being a man with no past, Micheal Knight was never low key. Nor in car or style. KITT wasn't the best kept secret either.


I remember a number of times in the old show where KITT "disguised" himself simply by changing his license plate (he had a revolving fake plate).


----------



## mrpantstm (Jan 25, 2005)

morac said:


> I remember a number of times in the old show where KITT "disguised" himself simply by changing his license plate (he had a revolving fake plate).


Well yeah, that's incredible deceptive!  

Bad guy #1: What's the license plate?
Bad guy #2: KITT-001
Bad guy #1: No, we're looking for KITT-000


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

mrpantstm said:


> Well yeah, that's incredible deceptive!
> 
> Bad guy #1: What's the license plate?
> Bad guy #2: KITT-001
> Bad guy #1: No, we're looking for KITT-000


[Geek mide]
KITT's actual license plate was "KNIGHT".
The plate it switched to (only used once by the way) was "KNI 667".

(Which was horribly out of sequence for California license plates at the time)


----------



## Indiana627 (Jan 24, 2003)

I just finished watching it last night. I thought it was pretty bad. Val Kilmer was terrible as KITT's voice, but I'll cut him some slack since he did his voice overs pretty late in the game. I thought the acting was terrible too. Mikey Jr. was horrible.


Spoiler



(Nice how he groped his dieing mother and then the look on his face when she died was some of the worst acting I've ever seen.)


 The FBI agent was bad acting too. Just bad, bad, bad IMHO.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

mrpantstm said:


> The Trans Am stuck out like a sore thumb plenty. The mustang isn't particularly daring either. Nothing overly cool about it. The Lamborghini Reventón looks cooler and way more advanced than KITT!
> 
> (Course it's ridiculously expensive.)


Close your eyes and imagine this with me...well, wait...leave them open.










[val kilmer]Hello Mike.[/val kilmer]

Nah, I don't think it would work.

ETA: Although I bet William Daniels could pull it off nicely.


----------



## MasterOfPuppets (Jul 12, 2005)

Mr. Feeny has more important things to do than worrying about voicing a car. 

I can't help but get a good chuckle out of those who want stunning realism out of Knight Rider.

I'm not sure why people are complaining that a Shelby Mustang is a boring car either. But hey, what the hell do I care. I'd take one over a Trans Am any day of the week, and three times on Wednesday.

I thought it was enjoyable. Sure, it seemed like a commercial at times, but not the entire time. I'll watch it as a series. I was a big Knight Rider fanboy back in the day...loved my toy KITT, which would talk if you pressed down on the license plate.

I also hope they ease off the morphing a bit in the future.

I didn't really like the plane at the end, but we'll see if it grows on me in the future.


----------



## kmccbf (Mar 9, 2002)

The plane was dumb. The plane was old. I could see using a plane if you are going to take KITT to different countries. But I would prefer a return of the Semi. 

I also was bothered by KITT remaining rock solid during the wreck. Having it move would have been fine, and easier make it more likely that the father would have survived. 

I like the relationship between the old and new Michael at the end, mainly because it was obvious that there wasn't any chemistry between them. They both looked uncomfortable and should have after all Knight had been absent the whole time while Mike was growing up and Mike just recently found out who his father was.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

kmccbf said:


> The plane was dumb. The plane was old. I could see using a plane if you are going to take KITT to different countries. But I would prefer a return of the Semi.
> 
> I also was bothered by KITT remaining rock solid during the wreck. Having it move would have been fine, and easier make it more likely that the father would have survived.


My thought was that they would definitely return to the semi. I bet they just drag out the plane for special occasions.

The wreck was the only thing I found uber lame. Heck, I think it would have been cooler to have had them hit KITT really hard and throw or flip it only to have it repairing itself in realtime (a la gunshots).


----------



## Gai-jin (Feb 28, 2000)

LoadStar said:


> And of course, the whole movie was like a 2 hour Ford infomercial. It was bad enough having the non-stop product placement in the movie itself, they had to go and do the Ford commercials with Justin Bruening making it all the more obvious. If I wanted that much Ford marketing, I would've spent another day at the auto show.


I actually thought those commercials were a nice touch. Still obviously commercials, but when FF through, they catch your eye enough to make you think you're missing the show. Then you watch the commercials, and there's at least some relation to the show, so it's not as bad as watching a regular commercial.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

kmccbf said:


> *The plane was dumb. The plane was old. I could see using a plane if you are going to take KITT to different countries. * But I would prefer a return of the Semi.
> 
> I also was bothered by KITT remaining rock solid during the wreck. Having it move would have been fine, and easier make it more likely that the father would have survived.
> 
> I like the relationship between the old and new Michael at the end, mainly because it was obvious that there wasn't any chemistry between them. They both looked uncomfortable and should have after all Knight had been absent the whole time while Mike was growing up and Mike just recently found out who his father was.


I agree with the return of the semi, but I thought the plane was a nice touch. They DID say something about a problem in Europe in the scene before, too, so maybe it was supposed to be an international mission.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Gai-jin said:


> I actually thought those commercials were a nice touch. Still obviously commercials, but when FF through, they catch your eye enough to make you think you're missing the show. Then you watch the commercials, and there's at least some relation to the show, so it's not as bad as watching a regular commercial.


Those commercials could have also been considered a really big spoiler though. Hmm...if we see Mike and know he's with KITT in these commercials then we OBVIOUSLY know he's going to take up the foundation on their offer to be KITT's new driver...

But did anyone doubt that. He'd kinda have to if it was gonna be picked up as a series 

But stil...for all the spoiler nazis...


----------



## Gai-jin (Feb 28, 2000)

JYoung said:


> [Geek mide]
> KITT's actual license plate was "KNIGHT".
> The plate it switched to (only used once by the way) was "KNI 667".
> 
> (Which was horribly out of sequence for California license plates at the time)


It really should have been 448. (GHT on a touchtone phone) Then again, that was before typing on a phone keypad was common.


----------



## brnscofrnld (Mar 30, 2005)

TonyTheTiger said:


> I agree with the return of the semi, but I thought the plane was a nice touch. They DID say something about a problem in Europe in the scene before, too, so maybe it was supposed to be an international mission.


They were def in Europe at the end of the show. Look at the buildings on the horizon, they looked European to me.


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

Would it have been over kill for the inventor to use that 25 year old molecular bonded paint/shell they invented for old kitt on the new kitt? This way he would be protected incase the computer had to reboot???


----------



## kmccbf (Mar 9, 2002)

Test said:


> Would it have been over kill for the inventor to use that 25 year old molecular bonded paint/shell they invented for old kitt on the new kitt? This way he would be protected incase the computer had to reboot???


Good point - Why didn't they?

Or maybe they did use a lesser quality version of it. There was not nearly enough damage to KITT during the ramming scene and that might account for why there wasn't. But then the SUV had to have the same paint, it also held up to well.


----------



## TheGreyOwl (Aug 18, 2003)

brnscofrnld said:


> They were def in Europe at the end of the show. Look at the buildings on the horizon, they looked European to me.


Yes, just before the car left the plane, they said they were sending him on a mission in Hungary.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

TheGreyOwl said:


> Yes, just before the car left the plane, they said they were sending him on a mission in Hungary.


I totally missed that, but if that is the case then I love the plane idea. That gives them the ability to go alot more places than just Southern California.


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

I think getting rid of the molecular bonded shell of the original KITT makes storylines a little easier. There were numerous storylines in the original series where KITT had to suffer some sort of damage, and they had to come up with some crazy reasoning for it. The old KITT was too safe to really make you feel like there was any real tension.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Test said:


> Would it have been over kill for the inventor to use that 25 year old molecular bonded paint/shell they invented for old kitt on the new kitt? This way he would be protected incase the computer had to reboot???


I think that you can make the arguement that at least two of the three people that Wilton Knight entrusted the parts of the formula to are dead.

Of course, Garth Knight and his mother know it......


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

JYoung said:


> I think that you can make the arguement that at least two of the three people that Wilton Knight entrusted the parts of the formula to are dead.
> 
> Of course, Garth Knight and his mother know it......


...and they used up the last of it repainting GOLIATH!

edit: 
haha man that was a great show...


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

A friend suggested that as a nice touch to the original, William Daniels should have played Graiman. Since he created the original KITT, he would have recorded his own voice. I like it.


----------



## Sherminator (Nov 24, 2004)

Watched the second showing with the wife last night, she felt it paid homage to the original whilst taking the show in a new direction.

A few things:

The bad guys: Blackriver? More like Blackwater.
Once KITT had abandoned the SUV, shouldn't Sarah have jumped into the driver's seat? If Blackwaterriver was properly on top of their game, it wouldn't have been beyond the realms of imagination for their chopper to fly low to spot any cars with no-one in the driver's seat, OK, they're not expecting the car to morph (just yet), but it could have been something that they gleaned from the computers display.
Where did KITT obtain the material to replace the shot out glass left on the road?​


----------



## Mike Farrington (Nov 16, 2000)

I had no intention of watching the new Knight Rider, but was sucked in since there really wasn't anything to watch last night.



Sherminator said:


> [The bad guys: Blackriver? More like Blackwater.


An obvious reference. I'm surprised they didn't wink at the camera as well.



Sherminator said:


> Once KITT had abandoned the SUV, shouldn't Sarah have jumped into the driver's seat? If Blackwaterriver was properly on top of their game, it wouldn't have been beyond the realms of imagination for their chopper to fly low to spot any cars with no-one in the driver's seat, OK, they're not expecting the car to morph (just yet), but it could have been something that they gleaned from the computers display.


I wondered the same thing, but figured that KITT had to go to his base configuration for his super speed, the extra wings, and possibly whatever scanning functions the red cylon-style lights provide.



Sherminator said:


> Where did KITT obtain the material to replace the shot out glass left on the road?


It must have a store of raw materials. After all, it is able to generate one or two rear spoilers when needed.

I don't get why KITT just couldn't turn off it's communications. Can hack into the car when the transceivers are off. I guess one shouldn't think to hard with shows like this.

I was hoping for a theme that kept to the original a bit more. It started off with the familiar bass-line, but then it lost me.


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

30 minutes in I deleted both the episode and the SP. Especially hated how KIT morphs into another type of car. Bye, bye.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

gossamer88 said:


> 30 minutes in I deleted both the episode and the SP. Especially hated how KIT morphs into another type of car. Bye, bye.


How did you make a season pass for a movie...?


----------



## brnscofrnld (Mar 30, 2005)

gossamer88 said:


> 30 minutes in I deleted both the episode and the SP. Especially hated how KIT morphs into another type of car. Bye, bye.


I don't remember him morphing into another type of car. They were all mustangs with various paint jobs and wings. If it was morphing into a completely different model car or SUV, then that would have been weird.


----------



## Sherminator (Nov 24, 2004)

I also thought that the show revealed the local Sheriff's allegiance too soon. If they had shown him calling the bad guys after the scene where Revi points out that the hard drives were missing, it would have made for better story telling IMHO.

And Hard Drive? that's as bad as my Mom in Law calling it the "CPU".


----------



## bareyb (Dec 1, 2000)

Sherminator said:


> And Hard Drive?


Is there a more modern term than "Hard Drive"? What do you call them?


----------



## laststarfighter (Feb 27, 2006)

Damn, I just could not make it through the whole thing. The writing was so bad. And KITT has zero personality. Deleted after about an hour


----------



## Skyler (Oct 9, 2002)

bareyb said:


> Is there a more modern term than "Hard Drive"? What do you call them?


"Computer" is the entire box which typically contains a hard drive, optical drive, motherboard, CPU chip, RAM, and power supply. Some non-tech-savvy people refer to the whole box as a "hard drive" or a "CPU".

In Knight Rider they were clearly using the term incorrectly when they said "They took the hard drives" and then they showed the non-dusty footprint of a whole computer missing from a dusty table top.


----------



## brnscofrnld (Mar 30, 2005)

Skyler said:


> "Computer" is the entire box which typically contains a hard drive, optical drive, motherboard, CPU chip, RAM, and power supply. Some non-tech-savvy people refer to the whole box as a "hard drive" or a "CPU".
> 
> In Knight Rider they were clearly using the term incorrectly when they said "They took the hard drives" and then they showed the non-dusty footprint of a whole computer missing from a dusty table top.


Maybe there were large external hard drives sitting on the counter...

I'm just say'in


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

I watched this Saturday night. All I can say for it is, if I wasn't watching it in HD I would have turned it off. 
Bad Bad Bad.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

I also assumed that they meant external hard drives since anyone with that much secret data should have it backed up. They should probably also be running an off site backup as well. 

It was impossible to set up a season pass for this anyway. I forgot for a minute that this was just a made for tv movie at first and I was frustrated as to why I wasn't able to set up a SP before I realized that was why. 

Also, he never morphed into a different car. The nanotechs allowed him to change color but he remained a Mustang throughout.


----------



## Tangent (Feb 25, 2005)

I've got mixed feelings about this... It was fun enough to watch, but they made some stupid / cheap mistakes that pulled me right out of the story. Some have already been mentioned:

The "high speed breaking test". Somehow I doubt they were really planning to test KITT's ability to fall apart at high speed. This is a particular pet peeve of mine since I visit several car message boards and some people interchange "break" and "brake" there too. There's no excuse for poor grammar or spelling on a million dollar production...

Everyone referring to the hard drives. My job is PC tech support and I have to deal with some people trying to sound more savvy by using techie words they don't understand all day. Not only would most people have looked at the spot where something used to sit and thought "PC" or "computer", but where were the cables that used to be plugged into it? For that matter, what kind of self-respecting brilliant computer scientist would allow computer equipment to sit in such filthy conditions anyway?

The magical appearance of the FBI agent from the wrong direction after the final chase. Did her back-up just beam her into their approaching car, or were the bad guys taking a scenic route that led them back towards the motel they just left? I'll just go ahead and try to ignore the stupidity of the SUV just plowing into KITT even though he'd slid to a stop a good 2 to 3 seconds ahead of them on an otherwise deserted road. The slightest swerve would have let them avoid the collision...

What I haven't seen mentioned is how the bad guys seem to have morphing technology too. In the chase near the beginning where they're in the helicopter, all 3 of the external shots showed a different model helicopter! They have 4 if you count a later scene. The first shot clearly showed one with retractable landing gear. The second, a newer narrow bodied model with skids and a large dome on the nose like for camera equipment. The third showed a Vietnam era Huey which is a wider bodied craft. Later they were shown landing a newer narrower bodied one, but without the camera dome. If they're going to use cheap stock footage, can't they at least take the minimal effort to make sure they're matching helicopters?

I didn't have a problem with Val Kilmer doing the voice, I just don't like how they replaced the 80's KITT's sass with the "I am incapable of emotion" schtick. I'm betting that if this gets picked up as a series that KITT discovering emotions will be a recurring plot point...

Why oh why must techno-centric shows still refuse to do even the slightest research? Hiring one guy to look through their dialog would cost practically nothing compared to their overal budget and it would do so much to improve the show...


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

Tangent said:


> Why oh why must techno-centric shows still refuse to do even the slightest research? Hiring one guy to look through their dialog would cost practically nothing compared to their overal budget and it would do so much to improve the show...


I agree with you, except it seems to be common. I think they figure 'most people' won't notice. And they're right. You notice because you're in the industry.

I'm guessing that a doctor watching House M.D. would be appalled at the 'mistakes', where I would never notice...

Same with a cop watching a police show, etc...


----------



## Einselen (Apr 25, 2006)

Adam1115 said:


> I'm guessing that a doctor watching House M.D. would be appalled at the 'mistakes', where I would never notice...


I am no Dr so I am not sure how accurate House M.D. is but I do know for a fact they have at least one Dr. that is on staff to help with the medical cases and that aspect of it. Also don't forget that sometimes directors would like to skew things to add drama so I am sure there is time in which the director will know in House that this procedure would be impossible or something but they would rather do it to hype it up. Or this procedure would cause no harm but they write it all up like the person could die from it.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

"Hard drive" is a common-enough euphemism for the data stored on one's system ("do you back up your drives?") that I fail to appreciate how its use in the movie was a _mistake._


----------



## Tangent (Feb 25, 2005)

Adam1115 said:


> I agree with you, except it seems to be common. I think they figure 'most people' won't notice. And they're right. You notice because you're in the industry.
> 
> I'm guessing that a doctor watching House M.D. would be appalled at the 'mistakes', where I would never notice...
> 
> Same with a cop watching a police show, etc...


Yeah... My wife worked in the medical field for years and she just couldn't watch ER because of everything they got wrong that she'd notice. It's the stuff like the helicopter changing models in every shot and the FBI agent coming from the wrong direction that are the worst. Even the "only people in the industry would notice" stuff is not really excusable, it's lazy writing. I've seen a few movies that got details right when it didn't matter to the plot and it was a refreshing change. Heck, even the Matrix Reloaded used a real hacking exploit instead of the typical Hollywood OS...



> "Hard drive" is a common-enough euphemism for the data stored on one's system ("do you back up your drives?") that I fail to appreciate how its use in the movie was a mistake.


But they didn't just take the data or the drives with the data on them, they walked away with the entire PC leaving an empty spot on the desk. Saying that somebody took the hard drives in that context is like looking at an empty parking space and saying that somebody stole your engine. Sure, the engine was taken too, but pretty much everybody would say that the _car_ was stolen. Occasionally somebody will say things like "my hard drive is broken" when referring to generic PC problems, but compare that to the number of people you've heard say "my computer is broken". It just seems like a glaring case of a non-tech writer trying to sound tech savvy without doing any research. IMO, a good writer will never have you thinking "who _talks_ like that!?"


----------



## Sherminator (Nov 24, 2004)

pmyers said:


> I don't see how the daughter could survive if this gets picked up.....Mike has to be single and having her baggage would not be good.


That, and part of the charm of the old show was the Bond/Moneypenny style relationship that Michael Knight had with Bonnie.


PJO1966 said:


> A friend suggested that as a nice touch to the original, William Daniels should have played Graiman. Since he created the original KITT, he would have recorded his own voice. I like it.


Like Data & Noonien Soong in ST:TNG, but as WD had requested that he was not credited for the voice of KITT in KR:2000, I presume that he no longer wished to be associated with the Knight Rider franchise.


----------



## Sherminator (Nov 24, 2004)

Just seen the trailer for Drillbit Taylor, and got to thinking how the Dodge Charger would have looked better as KITT than any Mustang.

My opinion only.


----------



## Sherminator (Nov 24, 2004)

Or maybe an '09 Challenger?


----------



## chrispitude (Apr 23, 2005)

That would have been much better. The Mustang just doesn't work for me.

- Chris


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

I just watched this, I enjoyed it.



unicorngoddess said:


> There needs to be a turbo boost...along with the sound effect.


That was always my favorite part of the original series... you knew it was coming every episode, and I was looking forward to it this time.

Another thing I miss is the watch he talked into. Seeing the earpiece in this version... it makes so much sense, and makes the watch seem silly, but at the time, the watch was cool.

And the daughter: she had that dot on the middle of her neck.. very distracting. couldn't stop looking at it.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

bruinfan said:


> IAnother thing I miss is the watch he talked into. Seeing the earpiece in this version... it makes so much sense, and makes the watch seem silly, but at the time, the watch was cool.


See, I thought the earpiece was stupid and way too obvious. At least the watch was an average everyday accessory and no one every wondered why he was wearing it as opposed to, "Hey, why do you have that big earpiece sticking out of your ear? You must be up to something!"


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

unicorngoddess said:


> See, I thought the earpiece was stupid and way too obvious. At least the watch was an average everyday accessory and no one every wondered why he was wearing it as opposed to, "Hey, why do you have that big earpiece sticking out of your ear? You must be up to something!"


every third person you pass on the street is wearing a bluetooth earpiece nowadays. It's modern and relevant.

and the watch... he had to push a button to talk... and hold it up to his mouth... talk about obvious


----------



## Snowman (Oct 27, 2004)

Sherminator said:


> And Hard Drive? that's as bad as my Mom in Law calling it the "CPU".


Yes, hard drive. You see, had your laptop with $500k of financial transactions not yet posted, been in the trunk when your car was stolen, how would you phrase it? The car being stolen is the least of your worries. Yes, they stole the hard drives, which were encrypted. Sure, they didn't dismantle the computer just to take the hard drives, but the data is what they were after and the data is stored on the hard drive.

"They stole my computer"
"Was there any important data on it?"
"Yes, very important data"
"So, why didn't you just say they stole your very important data and not have dragged this conversation on?"

Me thinks you're picking nits that need not be picked.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

Snowman said:


> "They stole my computer"
> "Was there any important data on it?"
> "Yes, very important data"
> "So, why didn't you just say they stole your very important data and not have dragged this conversation on?"


That makes no sense and is not realistic. Data could be in a few forms.

I think the term hard drive came from a writer who was lacking in tech knowledge. I've worked with quite a few people who refer to the "box" of a computer as the hard drive.


----------



## Tangent (Feb 25, 2005)

Snowman said:


> "They stole my computer"
> "Was there any important data on it?"
> "What? You know that I work on top secret artificial intelligence projects, what do *you* think?!"
> "Oh, sorry. I just like to drag out conversations."


Fixed


----------



## Snowman (Oct 27, 2004)

Langree said:


> That makes no sense and is not realistic. Data could be in a few forms.
> 
> I think the term hard drive came from a writer who was lacking in tech knowledge. I've worked with quite a few people who refer to the "box" of a computer as the hard drive.


Okay, the data could have been on the hard drive, a flash drive, a tape, a cd, a DVD, or any variety of media types. However, he explicitly said it was on the hard drives.

Okay, so if your car is stolen while your child is inside, do you call the police and say "my car was stolen" or do you tell people that your child was taken or that your car was stolen?


----------



## kmccbf (Mar 9, 2002)

I guess I'm one of the few that didn't have a problem with them saying "hard drive." I just assumed that the computers were on the floor where they had moved them to take out the drives and that is why there were empty spaces on the table. You couldn't see the floor. 

Of course I think given that they had a van, it was night, and the location was remote, it would have been easier to just take the boxes. He seemed to have so many computers it it would have taken way to long yank the hard drives...that I did have problem with. 

As far as their spotting KITT from the air based on the knowledge from the data. It was obvious to me that they hadn't yet gotten that information yet. Then there is the question. - Why wasn't that information also encrypted?


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Why would they take the whole computer? Makes no sense. Just take the hard drive(s).


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

I'm not sure what it says about a show that the biggest discussion topic is about the "hard drives".


----------



## Tangent (Feb 25, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> Why would they take the whole computer? Makes no sense. Just take the hard drive(s).


*Stealing entire computer:*

- Yank out cables
- pick up
- walk away.

- Plug into your own monitor keyboard and mouse at your place later

*Stealing hard drive:*

- Hope case is secured by thumb screws and doesn't require tools to open
- pop off front panel if it's in the way of removing drive
- unplug cables from hard drive
- hope hard drive is not mounted with screws and remove it
- hope computer only has one hard drive and not multiple in possible RAID array (hope you have your own RAID controller if it is)
- walk away with your valuable data that's no longer inside the protective case you could have just walked off with.

- If single drive only (unlikely if this is important data) install as slave in your own PC. If in likely RAID array, dig up controller card, configure, and install drives in your own spare PC.

The only possible advantage to removing a hard drive alone is if you'll be observed walking out of the building and need to hide what you're taking with you which was not the case here.



pmyers said:


> I'm not sure what it says about a show that the biggest discussion topic is about the "hard drives".


The most compelling part of the show was the goofs.


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

When are they going to start the series?


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

NBC has announced that Knight Rider will be a series. It will air in 2009 on Wednesday nights at 8 pm.

http://www.channelcanada.com/Article2161.html


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

Cool!


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

The only thing that gives me any hope on this series is the fact that Gary Scott Thompson will be the showrunner.
Which will probably mean a lot of "turn off your brain and watch the HD T&A".

At least they can get more mileage out of the Montecito sets.


----------



## jerobi (Sep 28, 2000)

2009, eh?

I guess they'll have plenty of time to punch up the scripts.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

No, it's actually debuting _this_ Fall (Sept/Oct 2008)


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

I watched it a couple of weeks ago. It wasn't too bad. 

If they really want to make it good, they need to have more lame cover versions of popular songs playing in the background like the original.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

hanumang said:


> No, it's actually debuting _this_ Fall (Sept/Oct 2008)


favs and new shows starting dates will be here when available

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=389729


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

DougF said:


> I watched it a couple of weeks ago. It wasn't too bad.
> 
> If they really want to make it good, they need to have more lame cover versions of popular songs playing in the background like the original.


I'm not sure but I think that the original broadcast versions used the original songs.
But rights issues forced them to replace them with sound alikes for syndication and DVD.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

So did anyone watch? Thoughts?


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Adam1115 said:


> So did anyone watch? Thoughts?


This is the thread for the TV movie, not the series. It seems people are posting their thoughts in this thread instead.


----------

