New KITT debate

Archive for discussions from 2006. Please post new discussions in the appropriate forum.

Moderators: Matthew, neps, Michael Pajaro

Nismogtr21
Recruit
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:17 pm

New KITT debate

Post by Nismogtr21 » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:45 am

There was a heated arguement over at IMDb over what the new KITT should be. The general consensus was that it should be the original Trans Am, and if not, the new Camaro. There was even a very cool photoshop of the new Camaro as KITT, I'll post it as soon as somebody can tell me how.

Here is my post from that board, tell me what you think.

>>You people are hilarious. So you want the car of the future to be a blocky, retro Camaro that looks like it's from the 70's? Although that Camaro photoshop as KITT was sweet, the car itself isn't aerodynamic enough to be the supercar that KITT is. And the idea that Michael should be moping around in a car from the 80's to fight crime is hilarious. KITT should be a supercar, nothing less. So what if rednecks can't afford to buy them and make fake KITTS of their own, lol. (JK!!)

And why do people keep bringing up this idea that KITT had to be mainstream looking to blend in? There was never any intention like that. If anything, they used the T/A because it stood out and looked sleek and sexy, and wasn't that expensive. KR had a really tight budget, so they couldn't use Italian sportscars. The T/A was one of the better looking cars of the 80's, and even it had some mods done to make it look more futuristic. All the other cars in it's price range were not suitable looks wise for "the car of the future", ie Datsuns and RX-7's and whatnot. So this notion that KITT had to blend in is being pulled out of someones ass. Brush up on your Knight Rider 101 before spewing *beep* like that, please.<<

Everybody keeps saying the same thing, that KITT had to blend in...yeah, it sure was incognito with that SPM, for sure! Like I said, for the budget they had, the T/A was the coolest, most futuristic and aerodynamic car they could have. The movie will have a much bigger budget, and to use something mundane as a Mustang or Camaro, nice cars, by the way, just not "car of the future" material.

I PRAY that they use a supercar. We want this movie, as KR loyalists, to be a hit, so we can get more of the same, and if that means twisting our arms a little to make the mainstream audiences happy, so be it. Somebody who never saw KR won't wet his pants when he sees an 80's Trans Am on the big screen, talking. It will be comical, actually. But put that smartass talking AI in a sleek, exotic sportscar, and he will cry mommy.

User avatar
JL
Operative
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2002 1:01 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Philly

Re: New KITT debate

Post by JL » Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:22 am

Nismogtr21 wrote:So what if rednecks can't afford to buy them and make fake KITTS of their own, lol. (JK!!)

Oh, yeah, you're really going to win friends and influence people that way. :roll:

Everybody keeps saying the same thing, that KITT had to blend in...yeah, it sure was incognito with that SPM, for sure!

And a lot of people here think Super Pursuit Mode was ridiculous.

I don't get why you think KITT needs to be something really exotic. Part of the appeal of the show was that you had the hero driving around in what appeared to be a normal production-line Detroit sports car, but it had this high-tech dashboard and could do all these amazing stunts. Would half of the jokes about Michael trying to explain KITT to people be as funny if KITT were a Ferrari or a Porsche?

User avatar
Michael Pajaro
Advisor
Posts: 3082
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 1:01 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Michael Pajaro » Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:50 am

I only half agree with you Nismogtr21.

We want this movie, as KR loyalists, to be a hit, so we can get more of the same, and if that means twisting our arms a little to make the mainstream audiences happy, so be it.


I'm with you on that. I don't want the movie to be watered down for the mainstream, but it's been 25 years. For Knight Rider to be a living, thriving franchise I think it has to evolve with the times.

So this notion that KITT had to blend in is being pulled out of someones ass. Brush up on your Knight Rider 101 before spewing *beep* like that, please.


You lost me here, and I assure you my Knight Rider 101 skills are EXCELLENT. I think you're missing the point. part of the charm of the show was that people could "relate" to KITT. You saw Trans Ams all the time in real life. If you wanted to get one yourself, it was a very attainable car. (I had a Firebird for many years.) People could connect with a Trans Am in a way they couldn't with a Ferrari or a Batmobile.

User avatar
Knight Rider Archive
FLAG Assistant
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2002 1:01 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: London, England
Contact:

Post by Knight Rider Archive » Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:56 am

I think you're missing the point. part of the charm of the show was that people could "relate" to KITT. You saw Trans Ams all the time in real life. If you wanted to get one yourself, it was a very attainable car


...So much so that Pontiac eventually wanted to distance themselves from the show ("Black T-Top!"). "Concept" cars like the various Batmobiles, or even the Knight 4000 are fun, but not as much fun as something "real", like James Bond's vehicles -- all customised, real-world vehicles.

User avatar
J-Knight
FLAG Recruit
Posts: 374
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:59 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Renfrew, Scotland

Post by J-Knight » Mon Oct 02, 2006 2:47 pm

Yeah I saw The Bad Guys green XKR once from James bond and it was Bleeding Exellent. Just putting my input in there lol :lol:
Devon-"Shall we drink to the start of.."
Michael-"Of what?"
Devon-"One mans Dream"

User avatar
James_kr
FLAG Assistant
Posts: 894
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 4:49 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Post by James_kr » Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:38 pm

I like the look of the camaro concept. It has a perfect place for the scanner and looks great painted black but... I still think KITT should be as he was when they finished the show, its still an awesome car! Nobody wants to see a car that is really random and may be too over the top with gadgets!
K.I.T.T: "Dog go away"

User avatar
LuvKITT
FLAG Recruit
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 5:55 pm
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: North Carolina, USA
Contact:

Post by LuvKITT » Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:40 pm

I'm not even getting into this one...lol.

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Post by FuzzieDice » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:56 pm

Seems like this topic is rehashed SO many times that I decided that as long as KITT isn't a stupid jellybean-looking car (ie. bubble like most of the cars on the road these days, and has some style, curves, sharp lines, etc.) and that they do the AI's personality right (hopefully William Daniels will reprise the role) then it'll be fine with me in the end. I actually liked KR2000, and throughout KR even when KITT wasn't in his body, KITT was more than just a car. The AI was an entity of it's own. No matter if he was in a black Trans Am, a "Red Tomato" exotic for a day that melted off when ready to run, a Banshee-looking car, a '57 Chevy or even inside a TV box. KITT was (and always will be) KITT.

I personally would like to see KITT as the Trans Am of the 80s, and nothing else. But that's my view. That is because that is what I know KITT as MOST of the time. Like Herbie. At least in the new movie he was basically still LOOKED (and very much acted like) Herbie. Same with the General Lee.

Some cars are so popular and well-known that you can't just put them into something else and expect people not to know the difference. Even those who haven't been born yet when KR aired would know the difference. KITT has been around lately. People know KITT.

But those of us that saw all the episodes and the movie, I for one realize KITT is more than just the car.

Maybe they should start with a new car but don't have an AI for it so Michael puts KITT's AI in it after the car is destroyed. But then the new driver and KITT do the assignment, and come back and the new AI is finally ready and put into the car, and KITT gets a new body too - looks like the old one but with updates. And he can say like "It's good to be back home again, Michael." and the cars could live happily ever after.

Maybe the new car would be KARR reincarnated. And then they can do a TV series and have KITT come back occasionally or something and KARR be the main focus this time.

Don't I WISH! :)

Nismogtr21
Recruit
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:17 pm

Post by Nismogtr21 » Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:38 am

Seems like a clarification is in order. The part of my post that is typed between >>> and <<<< wasn't intended for you guys, it was the paragraph that I posted on a movie website. That's why, Michael Pajaro, I think you were confused, I didn't tell you or anyone here in particular to brush up on their KR101. It was on that site, if you visited it yourself, you'd have a good laugh as well.

They wanted the new KITT to be a Subaru, for crying out loud. That's what I was commenting on.

User avatar
Michael Pajaro
Advisor
Posts: 3082
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 1:01 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Michael Pajaro » Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:47 am

Thaks for the clarification, but I'm not confused. The KR 101 comment is a throwaway. No big whoop. The meat of your text is that you believe KITT (externally) should be an exotic supercar. I disagree.

Nismogtr21
Recruit
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:17 pm

Re: New KITT debate

Post by Nismogtr21 » Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:49 am

JL wrote:
Nismogtr21 wrote:So what if rednecks can't afford to buy them and make fake KITTS of their own, lol. (JK!!)

Oh, yeah, you're really going to win friends and influence people that way. :roll:

Everybody keeps saying the same thing, that KITT had to blend in...yeah, it sure was incognito with that SPM, for sure!

And a lot of people here think Super Pursuit Mode was ridiculous.

I don't get why you think KITT needs to be something really exotic. Part of the appeal of the show was that you had the hero driving around in what appeared to be a normal production-line Detroit sports car, but it had this high-tech dashboard and could do all these amazing stunts. Would half of the jokes about Michael trying to explain KITT to people be as funny if KITT were a Ferrari or a Porsche?


Dude, stop living in the '80's. This was all peaches and cream back then, but most of the KR storyline and premise would be nothing but cheez wiz now. People want to see something exotic in the car of the future. And the fact that they used an everyday sportscar had NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING, to do with the storyline. It was just the fact that the T/A was the most sleek, futuristic and COOL car that the producers could afford with the tight ass budget they had, THAT'S IT!. If they were given a billion dollars to produce the show, do you really believe in your right mind that they would use a PONTIAC??! NO.

I love the black T/A too, but the premise that a bunch of scientists would stuff the most sophisticated technology inside a Camaro is utter stupidity.

The best selling cars in America are from Japan, GM is going bankrupt, Toyota has passed the big 3 in terms of sales and profit, and they are going to use a pushrod V-8 muscle car to showcase the technology of tomorrow, ok that makes a lot of sense. People will be laughing out the door of the theaters.

We can take all of this with a smirk because we know that part of the charm of KR is it's cheeziness, like how KITT was able to see the other side of a mountain and display it on his monitors for Michael, but to the laymen, this would be total idiocity.

More than anything, the new movie must make SENSE. It needs to be taken seriously.

Oh, and one final thought. Your arguement, that would the jokes be funny if KITT was a Ferrari or Porsche. Give me one episode, scenario, anything, where it mattered if KITT was a mainstream, everyday Trans Am. Please, enlighten me. The jokes were "the car drove itself!"..."the car talks!!!"....when was the fact that KITT was a T/A ever relevant?

Hmm.....you guys get caught up in your nostalgia, and don't look at things from a broader perspective.
Last edited by Nismogtr21 on Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

Nismogtr21
Recruit
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:17 pm

Post by Nismogtr21 » Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:56 am

Knight Rider Archive wrote:
I think you're missing the point. part of the charm of the show was that people could "relate" to KITT. You saw Trans Ams all the time in real life. If you wanted to get one yourself, it was a very attainable car


...So much so that Pontiac eventually wanted to distance themselves from the show ("Black T-Top!"). "Concept" cars like the various Batmobiles, or even the Knight 4000 are fun, but not as much fun as something "real", like James Bond's vehicles -- all customised, real-world vehicles.


Ok, so then please, PLEASE, I beg of you, tell me how many times have you seen an Aston Martin DB on the streets.

I never said KITT should be a CONCEPT CAR, I said, he should be an EXOTIC CAR, something sleek, powerful, sexy, not something mainstream. He can be a Ford GT or a Vette Z06, or what the heck, a Lambo. These are, by definition, "real world" cars, no?

Nismogtr21
Recruit
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:17 pm

Post by Nismogtr21 » Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:23 am

FuzzieDice wrote:Seems like this topic is rehashed SO many times that I decided that as long as KITT isn't a stupid jellybean-looking car (ie. bubble like most of the cars on the road these days, and has some style, curves, sharp lines, etc.) and that they do the AI's personality right (hopefully William Daniels will reprise the role) then it'll be fine with me in the end. I actually liked KR2000, and throughout KR even when KITT wasn't in his body, KITT was more than just a car. The AI was an entity of it's own. No matter if he was in a black Trans Am, a "Red Tomato" exotic for a day that melted off when ready to run, a Banshee-looking car, a '57 Chevy or even inside a TV box. KITT was (and always will be) KITT.

I personally would like to see KITT as the Trans Am of the 80s, and nothing else. But that's my view. That is because that is what I know KITT as MOST of the time. Like Herbie. At least in the new movie he was basically still LOOKED (and very much acted like) Herbie. Same with the General Lee.

Some cars are so popular and well-known that you can't just put them into something else and expect people not to know the difference. Even those who haven't been born yet when KR aired would know the difference. KITT has been around lately. People know KITT.

But those of us that saw all the episodes and the movie, I for one realize KITT is more than just the car.

Maybe they should start with a new car but don't have an AI for it so Michael puts KITT's AI in it after the car is destroyed. But then the new driver and KITT do the assignment, and come back and the new AI is finally ready and put into the car, and KITT gets a new body too - looks like the old one but with updates. And he can say like "It's good to be back home again, Michael." and the cars could live happily ever after.

Maybe the new car would be KARR reincarnated. And then they can do a TV series and have KITT come back occasionally or something and KARR be the main focus this time.

Don't I WISH! :)


I totally understand your point, but remember, the Beetle fit Herbies role, it was a cartoony, goofy looking car, that fit that role for Herbie, and the Charger was the perfect car for a couple of backwood country boys. Obviously it wouldn't make any sense for them to drive Ferrari's or Porsches. But KITT is the car of the future.....so how does it make any sense to fit him inside a 25 thousand dollar car? Use some logic.

User avatar
Michael Pajaro
Advisor
Posts: 3082
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 1:01 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: New KITT debate

Post by Michael Pajaro » Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:54 am

Nismogtr21 wrote:Hmm.....you guys get caught up in your nostalgia, and don't look at things from a broader perspective.


Methinks YOU are the one who is confused now. We've been discussing "what kind of car should KITT be in a movie?" on this board for at least 5 years now. Maybe even 10. And I have always, ALWAYS said that KITT should be CURRENT year model. When we discussed it in 2001, I said KITT should be a 2002 car. When we discuss it this year, I say he should be a 2007 model. I am not stuck in the 80s at all. Quite the contrary, I have said time and time again that the movie franchise should be updated for modern audiences. I think it would nice to see a glimpse of the 82 car, but KITT should primarily be a current car. Other people prefer to see them keep the old car entirely. I respect that opinion, but I disagree. My point to you is that I am not blinded by nostalgia.

And I also don't think you have a realistic view of how movies get made. Knight Rider has the potential to be the greatest automobile-product-placement of all time. Automobile manufacturers could be paying between $30 and $50 million in fees and publicity to get their car in this movie. (That's what Variety estimated the value of "The Green Hornet" movie product placement would be, and I have to believe Knight Rider would be similar.) From a financial standpoint, it doesn't make sense for them to cast KITT as an $80,000 vehicle which the mass-market can't afford.

The Fast and the Furious films have already proven that people will get hyped up about inexpensive cars which have been modified. Same thing with The Italian Job and the Mini Cooper. The Knight Rider movie could do absolutely fine with the new Camaro, or some other "attainable" vehicle as KITT.

I understand and respect your opinion; it's certainly intriguing to think about what could KITT be like as a more exotic (but still real) vehicle. I just think your logic as to why it has to be that way is flawed.

User avatar
Knight Rider Archive
FLAG Assistant
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2002 1:01 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: London, England
Contact:

Post by Knight Rider Archive » Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:53 am

Nismogtr21 wrote
Ok, so then please, PLEASE, I beg of you, tell me how many times have you seen an Aston Martin DB on the streets.


Actually, I've seen quite a few Aston Martins on the road. I live just outside of London, and work in Central London, and you'd be surprised at some of the vehicles you see on the road in these parts. I've saw a Vanquish just a couple of days ago.

Nismogtr21 wrote
I never said KITT should be a CONCEPT CAR, I said, he should be an EXOTIC CAR, something sleek, powerful, sexy, not something mainstream. He can be a Ford GT or a Vette Z06, or what the heck, a Lambo. These are, by definition, "real world" cars, no?


A lot of people feel that because it's a movie, K.I.T.T. should be a concept car. Hell, I bet the idea has even occurred to the producers, since other attempts at Knight Rider reunions and spin-offs have used "concept" vehicles. Yes, he should be sleek, powerful, and sexy, but I think he should also be American, and as Mike said, current. I think product placement will play a part, and I don't have a problem with that either.

User avatar
James_kr
FLAG Assistant
Posts: 894
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 4:49 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Post by James_kr » Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:01 am

i give up, the debate has gone on way too much, let's just leave it up to the movie makers to how they want the movie to be made.
K.I.T.T: "Dog go away"

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Re: New KITT debate

Post by FuzzieDice » Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:45 pm

Nismogtr21 wrote:....when was the fact that KITT was a T/A ever relevant?


Pilot episode: The criminal said to go after a black "Trans Am".

Trust Doesn't Rust: KITT said "That other car is going to give Trans Am a terrible reputation."

Inside Out (I think it was?), where they are speeding through, KITT trying to drive as Michael is fighting this guy in the back seat. Two cops are at roadside out of their cars and watch as KITT speeds through. One cop says to the other "What WAS that?" The other cop says, just as amazed, "A Pontiac!" Now THAT was my favorite, being a big fan of the 80s Pontiacs (and an owner of an A-Body model) myself! :)

And "logic" doesn't enter into this. It's all about entertainment. I'm just stating what would be entertaining to ME. It may not even happen - but as long as I watch a movie and enjoy it and am entertained, no matter what form KITT is in (as was the gist of my post in the first place), then I'm entertained. Whatever they do, so be it.

I just don't get why we are still discussing what KITT SHOULD be because while it keeps getting rehashed, in the end, they'll do whatever Glen Larsen has in mind anyway. And I always found what shows I've seen of his to be very entertaining so far.

User avatar
Michael Pajaro
Advisor
Posts: 3082
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 1:01 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Michael Pajaro » Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:08 pm

Fuzzie Dice, I think Nismoftr21's point is not that they never said KITT was a Trans Am, but that the specific car was not relevant to the story line. In other words, KARR could have just as easily said "that other car is going to give Lamborghini a terrible reputation". The basic plot would be completely unchanged.

However, in the pilot episode there is sort of a symbolic gesture that just as Michael Long was reborn as Michael Knight, Michael Long's car was reborn as the Knight 2000. (Canon which would have to be altered a bit when the story of KARR was introduced.) If Michael Long was basically an "ordinary" man who would now do something extraordinary for The Foundation, to keep the parallels it makes sense that Michael Long's car should be ordinary as well.

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Post by FuzzieDice » Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:46 pm

Actually, Michael Long's car was not made into the Knight 2000 because Devon said that the similarities are only superficial or something like that. And then in 2nd season episode when Michael lost his memory, they showed him a newspaper article that said that they found Michael Long's body next to his car. So therefore, KITT could not have been previously Michael Long's car.

User avatar
Michael Pajaro
Advisor
Posts: 3082
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 1:01 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Michael Pajaro » Fri Oct 06, 2006 1:31 pm

I believe what Devon was saying is that the car has changed so much that it might as well be a completely different car. In the official novelization, Devon calls KITT the "reincarnation" of Michael Long's car. The novel isn't completely canon, but it does give insight into what Larson was thinking about the car.

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Post by FuzzieDice » Fri Oct 06, 2006 8:09 pm

Well, I was going mostly by the 2nd season Knightmares where they show that the newspaper article said the cops found Michael Long's "body" next to his car.

Then again, they didn't say if they used a simlar car as a front as well...

However, there's some indication of them building KITT for months before Michael Long was shot.

Who knows... doesn't matter as it was an entertaining series and hopefully the movie will be too.

Nismogtr21
Recruit
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:17 pm

Re: New KITT debate

Post by Nismogtr21 » Fri Oct 06, 2006 11:25 pm

FuzzieDice wrote:
Nismogtr21 wrote:....when was the fact that KITT was a T/A ever relevant?


Pilot episode: The criminal said to go after a black "Trans Am".

Trust Doesn't Rust: KITT said "That other car is going to give Trans Am a terrible reputation."

Inside Out (I think it was?), where they are speeding through, KITT trying to drive as Michael is fighting this guy in the back seat. Two cops are at roadside out of their cars and watch as KITT speeds through. One cop says to the other "What WAS that?" The other cop says, just as amazed, "A Pontiac!" Now THAT was my favorite, being a big fan of the 80s Pontiacs (and an owner of an A-Body model) myself! :)

And "logic" doesn't enter into this. It's all about entertainment. I'm just stating what would be entertaining to ME. It may not even happen - but as long as I watch a movie and enjoy it and am entertained, no matter what form KITT is in (as was the gist of my post in the first place), then I'm entertained. Whatever they do, so be it.

I just don't get why we are still discussing what KITT SHOULD be because while it keeps getting rehashed, in the end, they'll do whatever Glen Larsen has in mind anyway. And I always found what shows I've seen of his to be very entertaining so far.


Ok, now, take away the "Trans-Am", and enter any other car name, would it have made a difference in the show? Absolutely not.

I've said time and time again, the fact that it was a Trans-Am didn't matter, that was the car they used. Larson wasn't like, man, I GOTTA use a Trans-Am, nothing else!

If I'm not mistaken, he was going to use a 240Z, until he saw the new Firebird parked in his neighbors garage.

Nismogtr21
Recruit
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:17 pm

Re: New KITT debate

Post by Nismogtr21 » Fri Oct 06, 2006 11:32 pm

Michael Pajaro wrote:
Nismogtr21 wrote:Hmm.....you guys get caught up in your nostalgia, and don't look at things from a broader perspective.


Methinks YOU are the one who is confused now. We've been discussing "what kind of car should KITT be in a movie?" on this board for at least 5 years now. Maybe even 10. And I have always, ALWAYS said that KITT should be CURRENT year model. When we discussed it in 2001, I said KITT should be a 2002 car. When we discuss it this year, I say he should be a 2007 model. I am not stuck in the 80s at all. Quite the contrary, I have said time and time again that the movie franchise should be updated for modern audiences. I think it would nice to see a glimpse of the 82 car, but KITT should primarily be a current car. Other people prefer to see them keep the old car entirely. I respect that opinion, but I disagree. My point to you is that I am not blinded by nostalgia.

And I also don't think you have a realistic view of how movies get made. Knight Rider has the potential to be the greatest automobile-product-placement of all time. Automobile manufacturers could be paying between $30 and $50 million in fees and publicity to get their car in this movie. (That's what Variety estimated the value of "The Green Hornet" movie product placement would be, and I have to believe Knight Rider would be similar.) From a financial standpoint, it doesn't make sense for them to cast KITT as an $80,000 vehicle which the mass-market can't afford.

The Fast and the Furious films have already proven that people will get hyped up about inexpensive cars which have been modified. Same thing with The Italian Job and the Mini Cooper. The Knight Rider movie could do absolutely fine with the new Camaro, or some other "attainable" vehicle as KITT.

I understand and respect your opinion; it's certainly intriguing to think about what could KITT be like as a more exotic (but still real) vehicle. I just think your logic as to why it has to be that way is flawed.


Mike, when I say they or you guys, you automatically assume I'm talking about you. The people I'm talking about, they know who they are, and if you know you aren't the one that my comments reflect on, then theres no need to clarify yourself :wink:

You're absolutely right, about product placement and such.

I guess I should be more clear. I'm thinking the new movie should be a futuristic, 007, world is in danger, type of movie. Not some dude driving around in a high tech car saving kittens stuck on trees. So it would be fitting the car is fast, high tech, and sexy to boot.

FuzzieDice
KRO Podcaster (retired)
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:55 pm

Post by FuzzieDice » Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:25 pm

This discussion has been had SO many times even when the movie was nothing more than a rumor.

It'll be what they make it. If one isn't entertained, then they aren't entertained. If they are, then they are.

Many didn't like The Fast and The Furious, but I loved it and have the DVD. Many didn't like Knight Rider 2000, but when I saw it again after years, when I got the Season One DVD set, I actually liked it quite a bit. KITT was still cool, even as a '57 Chevy or even a Big Red Tomato.

If they make him a jellybean with a different voice, all I gotta say is it better be entertaining.

Heck, I even found Stealth (the movie) entertaining and I have that DVD as well. I think EDI was cool!

The KR shows were all entertaining. I watched two of them again last night.

We'll see what happens.

User avatar
jup
FLAG Operative
Posts: 1747
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 1:01 am
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: SD, CA. USA | Web site: http://www.jupircbot.8m.com (jup's KR game project 'ghosts' here)
Contact:

Post by jup » Sun Oct 08, 2006 2:08 am

J-Knight wrote:Yeah I saw The Bad Guys green XKR once from James bond and it was Bleeding Exellent. Just putting my input in there lol :lol:


On a slightly off-topic note, I just saw a TV ad for the newest James Bond movie. It went somewhere I wasn't expecting...right to the roots of where Bond became 007...the Hotel Royale. I guess having franchises start all over is becoming a theme for the new generation, recently.

Locked