A few questions that have bugging me.

This forum contains discussions about all things Knight Rider.

Moderators: Matthew, neps, Michael Pajaro

stevefawcett
Operative
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:30 am

Re: A few questions that have bugging me.

Post by stevefawcett » Fri Apr 15, 2011 4:58 pm

I hope Paul you do not leave as I have never met ANYONE with the knowledge you have and you are kind to help out too.
Was a great pleasure to meet you in London and to get to know you

Steve

User avatar
Lost Knight
FLAG Special Ops
Posts: 2716
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 7:45 pm
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 0
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: A few questions that have bugging me.

Post by Lost Knight » Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:24 pm

Steering this thread back on track...

Skav wrote:Michael Pajaro touched upon an interesting point.

How many of you actually consider KR2000 "canon"? I think that's an interesting question considering the movie contains Michael and KITT.

KR2008 was the best attempt at reviving the franchise (IMO!) and I do now consider that "canon". I'm not fond of the Mustang, and in retrospect, that car is quite ugly, especially it's dual scanner. I don't consider TKR "canon". I remember quitting watching the show after about 3 or 4 episodes.

My opinion of "canon"? What is heard of and seen on screen.


I agree with the assessment that what is canon is what is seen AND heard on screen. But it does become a very tricky and slippery slope when you think about it. For instance, the difference between revisionist history and an extension/continuation of the facts established in the Pilot. On one hand, it sounds simple to say that as long as no previously established facts are contradicted or 'overwritten,' then it is canon. But as was mentioned earlier, this did occur with K.A.R.R. remaining intact after he exploded in "Trust Doesn't Rust," among other examples.

I do consider Knight Rider 2000 canon despite the fact that most of us don't like the movie. And the reason is because it's a logical extrapolation of the series, and it does not contradict any previously established facts in the original series (nevermind the bizarre future technology and laughably inaccurate predictions right now). But simply having Michael, K.I.T.T. and Devon in the story isn't enough in and of itself to make the movie canon. I've said it many times in the past so I'll try not to repeat myself too much, but I liked the attention to detail on how Michael inevitably burnt out, and how he decided to pick up a '57 Chevy which was his car as a teenager (probably because of a mid-life crisis). Devon's role became even more important and the Knight Foundation grew to be a much larger organization. Michael and K.I.T.T. couldn't ride forever, and ultimately the Knight 2000 became obsolete and K.I.T.T. got shelved in moth balls for a decade. Yep, as far as these characters are concerned, this movie always felt like a sequel to me.

The 2008 backdoor pilot, on the other hand, I mostly consider revisionist history. Why? Well mainly my problem is with the Charles Graiman character although ALL the characters are a problem, really. We can always say he was lurking around in the background in the Pilot (maybe one of those scientists running in and out of the warehouse for all we know), but it just didn't make any sense to me why he would be an original designer/creator of K.I.T.T. when it was clearly established that Wilton Knight was. The Jenny character fits in absolutely nowhere, thus Mike Traceur can't exist without rewriting history, either. So we are left with no choice but to assume that she and Michael met off-camera, and given Traceur's age, it still doesn't fit well with Michael being engaged to Stevie. And don't get me started on the subsequent series which even rewrites the backdoor pilot, let alone the original series.

Team Knight Rider and Knight Rider 2010? Although I've never seen either of these, everything I've heard and read about them seems to either have nothing to do with the original series, or makes their own revisionist history. This forces us to either pick and choose which incarnation of the universe is canon, or not to accept any of them. As they all contradict each other, I don't see how they all can exist in the same universe. In fact, the entire Knight Rider universe seems better suited as a time-travel story, with all the incarnations ignoring each other.

Going back to my original point, what are really the grounds that separate revisionist history with proper canon? The original series contradicted itself a few times, but it's considered canon. Glen Larson, the creator, only wrote the first episode and supervised the remaining twelve leaving it to other writers, yet their stories are considered canon. So canon isn't dependent on one writer, including original characters in a story, or even contradicting its own facts. I guess the problem with the backdoor pilot then is the fact that NOTHING added up at all, as opposed to a particular fact here or there that can possibly be overlooked.
“Gimme maximum turbo thrust and blast me outta here, will ya!?”
:kitt: :dash4:

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: A few questions that have bugging me.

Post by Michael Pajaro » Sat Apr 16, 2011 4:46 pm

Lost Knight wrote:Team Knight Rider and Knight Rider 2010? Although I've never seen either of these, everything I've heard and read about them seems to either have nothing to do with the original series, or makes their own revisionist history. This forces us to either pick and choose which incarnation of the universe is canon, or not to accept any of them. As they all contradict each other, I don't see how they all can exist in the same universe.


Knight Rider 2010 had no connection to the original series whatsoever.

Team Knight Rider however was treated as a direct sequel series, taking place in the same universe as the 1982 series. It had FLAG (although they called it Foundation OF Law And Government) and made references to Michael Knight, KITT, a talking Trans Am, Devon Miles... TKR was very specific about the original series. The one key
plotline that they MAY have done some revisionist history with was that Jenny thought she might have been Michael Knight's daughter. They never really came full out and proved it, but it was certainly the intention. The timing doesn't quite work out right for Jenny to be Michael KNIGHT's daughter, but she could have been Michael LONG's daughter.

You can pick KR2000, TKR, or KR '08 as being canon with the original series, but I agree the 3 sequels can't exist together.
Join me at Las Vegas Car Stars!
May 14-16 • Las Vegas, NV
http://lasvegascarstars.com

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: A few questions that have bugging me.

Post by Michael Pajaro » Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:45 am

I have to correct myself... TKR's Jenny thought her father was Michael Long, so that does fit in fine with the timeline.

In terms of staying true to the original canon, this is how I would rank the various sequels - number 1 being most true to canon:

1. Knight Rider 2000
2. Team Knight Rider
3. Knight Rider '08
4. Knight Rider 2010

Team Knight Rider had many direct references to the original series, and they did not undo any canon so that's why I rank it so high. If I was only looking at the 2-hour pilot for Knight Rider '08, I probably would have put it at number 2. I really don't have any problem with Graiman not being mentioned in the original series. It's a minor point to me, and the movie did refer back to the original show a bit. But then they redid the legend of KARR. Now technically, KARRE can exist in the same world as KARR without any conflict. But from a fan perspective, they blew it. All they needed to do was throw in one line of dialog saying it was the same CPU from Trans Am KARR and they would have been golden. So I'm knocking them down a peg.

In terms of the spiritual successors to the original show, I rank the sequels this way:

1. Knight Rider '08
2. Knight Rider 2000
3. Team Knight Rider
4. Knight Rider 2010

I think there's a big gap between numbers one and two. Even with Hasselhoff, Daniels and Mulhare, I still think they missed the boat with KR2000. Knight Rider '08 recaptured a lot of the fun from the 80s show and was getting better.

And I almost want to put KR2010 above TKR because at least it was still a love story between a man and his car. But there's just so much wrong with that movie I can't bring myself to do it.
Join me at Las Vegas Car Stars!
May 14-16 • Las Vegas, NV
http://lasvegascarstars.com

User avatar
Nicholas Knight
Operative
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:29 pm
antispam: No
What year did the original Knight Rider start: 1982
Location: Knight Tech Inc.

Re: A few questions that have bugging me.

Post by Nicholas Knight » Sun Apr 17, 2011 8:19 pm

It kinda ironic to me -- Kr 2000 had the "substance" , but not the "feel" of Knight rider, where Kr 2010 had the "feel" and not the "substance". Kr 2k8 had so many ways it could've did lil things to "wink" at the fanbase, examples:

If Sarah's old flame who made the Nanotech virus last name was Miles.

When KI3T changed his voice to female, it could've been the KI2T voice.

When Mike told KI3T to go "Old School" have him turned to the KI2T.

Had Graiman's "old flame" to be Jennifer Knight.

Stuff like that would've probably could've saved the series, IMO...
Knight Tech Inc. -- Where everyone makes a difference.

Post Reply