knight rider online

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 5:37 am**

although I'm surprised this is not going to be a major Hollywood $300 million budget type movie

seeker78 kindly tell me the last couple movies that had a 300 million dollar budget? The last movie to have a 300 million dollar budget that I have found in years was Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End.

Here's a breakdown of production budgets for some of the more successful movies to come out over the years.

Spider-man 3 - 258 million
Spider-man 2 - 200 million
Superman Returns - 250 million
POTC: Deadman's Chest - 225 million
The Chronicles of Narnia - The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe - 180 million
Shrek the Third - 160 million
Shrek 2 - 150 million
Mission Impossible III - 150 million
Beowulf - 150 million
Batman Begins - 150 million
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - 150 million
Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix - 150 million
Transformers - 150 million
Ratatouille - 150 million
War of the Worlds - 132 million
National Treasure : Book of Secrets - 125 million
I Am Legend - 120 million
Cars - 120 million
Live Free or Die Hard - 110 million
Happy Feet - 100 million
Lord of the Rings (Fellowship) - 93 million
LOTR - Two Towers - 94 million
LOTR - Return of the King - 94 million
Finding Nemo - 94 million
The Incredibles - 92 million
The Matrix - 63 million
The Matrix Reloaded - 150 million
The Matrix Revolutions - 150 million

The average production budget is between 94-150 million dollars and increases mostly upon the success of it's previous release (if applicable). So the figure you are quoting is incredibly inaccurate in regards to how much money it takes to make a "Major Hollywood" type movie these days. Budgets do matter as well as star power but I think people would agree that story and direction and not the production budget is what seperates a movie from the type you watch once and the ones you want to see again and again.

Research is key when quoting statistics. I hope this broadens your understanding of production budgets and the movie making business.

As far as Popular Mechanics goes, I know they like to do a lot of hypothetical ideas like explaining the technology of Star Wars but in this instance if they really were "messing" around, publishing those ideas were entirely unecessary since they know that two brands are in competition with one another, it's just not productive other then to start conflict between older fans of the original show and the ones who choose to support the new one. Very unprofessional in my opinion. I am not convinced it is not a ploy to garner acceptance of NBCU's backdoor pilot by stating that their choice of KITT is superior to the older model. It is more likely they were paid off just like the other media outlets to aid in NBCU's media campaign.

This is the sort of discussion you have with your friends that you never actually talk about in public.

=VK=

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:51 am**

Regarding the Popular Mechanics article...
I will say it again, for anyone who cares to listen. There are many things about the current KR TV reincarnation that the producers take very seriously. The Popular Mechanics article was not one of them. When asked for background by PM for the article, they just came up with the most outlandish things they could think of. You don't really need inside information to realize that--quadraphonic sound? That format disappeared 20 years ago. This is a bunch of guys sitting around laughing their asses off. Don't take it seriously.

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 10:25 am**

Shapeshifter wrote:Regarding the Popular Mechanics article...
I will say it again, for anyone who cares to listen. There are many things about the current KR TV reincarnation that the producers take very seriously. The Popular Mechanics article was not one of them. When asked for background by PM for the article, they just came up with the most outlandish things they could think of. You don't really need inside information to realize that--quadraphonic sound? That format disappeared 20 years ago. This is a bunch of guys sitting around laughing their asses off. Don't take it seriously.

Quadraphonic sound was a failure and it did disappear in the 80's. That’s it, I am canceling my subscription to popular mechanics this is an insult to knight rider and their credibility

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:07 am**

CJaguar442 wrote:
Shapeshifter wrote:Regarding the Popular Mechanics article...
I will say it again, for anyone who cares to listen. There are many things about the current KR TV reincarnation that the producers take very seriously. The Popular Mechanics article was not one of them. When asked for background by PM for the article, they just came up with the most outlandish things they could think of. You don't really need inside information to realize that--quadraphonic sound? That format disappeared 20 years ago. This is a bunch of guys sitting around laughing their asses off. Don't take it seriously.
Quadraphonic sound was a failure and it did disappear in the 80's. That’s it, I am canceling my subscription to popular mechanics this is an insult to knight rider and their credibility

Well, that reaction may be a little extreme. I think, it's all in good fun.

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm**

i was being sarcastic

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:48 pm**

LOL... I have a subscription to popular mechanics magazine, and that HAS to be the most ridiculous article I ever read in it. Every once in a while, PM will try to be humerous among all the different serious articles to just mix things up a bit...

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 1:08 pm**

Did the Knight RIder article actually appear in print, or just in that online blog? Although Popular Mechanics is certainly responsible for their online content, "the medium is the message". I wouldn't expect a blog entry to be as factual as a printed magazine article.

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 6:09 pm**

Michael Pajaro wrote:Did the Knight RIder article actually appear in print, or just in that online blog? Although Popular Mechanics is certainly responsible for their online content, "the medium is the message". I wouldn't expect a blog entry to be as factual as a printed magazine article.

Well, I kept looking for it to show up in the actual magazine, but it hasn't yet. So I'm gonna go ahead and bet on that this is just in the blog... Unless it shows up in the Jan. issue, which I haven't received yet...

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 6:40 pm**

seeker78 wrote: From what I can tell, people who say that are for the most part assuming that all Knight Rider fans are also car enthusiasts, or that a Knight Rider movie would only appeal to car enthusiasts, or, worst of all, that one cannot be a true Knight Rider fan without knowing about engines and drivetrains. Those of us who don't know much about engines or whatever don't really care what kind of engine kitt has or what kind of drivetrain. You can't see that from the outside. Originally, Revolution Studios was saying that Knight Rider movie would appeal to car enthusiasts, and they supplied an example as fans of The Fast and the Furious. So that's why I question the idea that Knight Rider is somehow a car enthusiast's show. A lot of nerds watched that show, man. Until recently I didn't think jocks/gearheads were into it at all.

You underestimate nerds then. You don't have to be a gearhead or a jock to get why what's under the hood is important even to a fictionalized version of a car. You know since, the car is still actually using the engine inside it. It's entirely logical as to why a rear or all wheel drive car is needed and why a vehicle that's basically a "family sports car" would be an even worse choice than the Shelby Mustang. I'm no where near being a car nut, not even an enthusiast (though I know some basics and a thing here and there) and I still know why a four cylinder, front wheel drive car would be a poor choice. Others have stated reasons also but you seem to be defensive about it and refuse to get why people are against it.

Oh and the Fast and the Furious movies sucked and have brought nothing but annoyance from the idiots it inspired to start street racing.

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:47 pm**

PHOENIXZERO wrote:
seeker78 wrote: From what I can tell, people who say that are for the most part assuming that all Knight Rider fans are also car enthusiasts, or that a Knight Rider movie would only appeal to car enthusiasts, or, worst of all, that one cannot be a true Knight Rider fan without knowing about engines and drivetrains. Those of us who don't know much about engines or whatever don't really care what kind of engine kitt has or what kind of drivetrain. You can't see that from the outside. Originally, Revolution Studios was saying that Knight Rider movie would appeal to car enthusiasts, and they supplied an example as fans of The Fast and the Furious. So that's why I question the idea that Knight Rider is somehow a car enthusiast's show. A lot of nerds watched that show, man. Until recently I didn't think jocks/gearheads were into it at all.

You underestimate nerds then. You don't have to be a gearhead or a jock to get why what's under the hood is important even to a fictionalized version of a car. You know since, the car is still actually using the engine inside it. It's entirely logical as to why a rear or all wheel drive car is needed and why a vehicle that's basically a "family sports car" would be an even worse choice than the Shelby Mustang. I'm no where near being a car nut, not even an enthusiast (though I know some basics and a thing here and there) and I still know why a four cylinder, front wheel drive car would be a poor choice. Others have stated reasons also but you seem to be defensive about it and refuse to get why people are against it.

Oh and the Fast and the Furious movies sucked and have brought nothing but annoyance from the idiots it inspired to start street racing.

This is an exellent showcase why Knight Rider was a hit series and still popular, there's something for everyone

I guess I'm a mixture of a car and computer guy, I've always been interested about cars and had also one of those 80's homecomputers at the time when Knight Rider was in it's 1st round on tv, those were the days

I guess I'm "old school" car guy since I don't much like the Fast & Furious movie and especially the tuning-style in it, the overdone redicilous spoilers & gfx, wild paintjobs, oversized wheels & rims, etc. just isn't my cup of tea... KITT didn't like much either of his appearance in CustomKITT episode

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:27 pm**

HungarianKnight wrote:

WOW!

All I can say is wow! This is the best Christmas present for a Knight Rider fan.

And don't worry about the dash. This is is a joke or something. The steering wheel is labelled as "mama"

Sorry to correct you but the steering wheel is not named "mama" but "momo". Its a very well known and expensive brand from italy. Obviously they havent spared money on making the interior look good but I would rather if they took off the momo logo and put the knight foundation logo there. I guess momo didnt allow them to take off their logo.

Posted: **Thu Jan 03, 2008 10:53 pm**

PHOENIXZERO wrote: You underestimate nerds then. You don't have to be a gearhead or a jock to get why what's under the hood is important even to a fictionalized version of a car. You know since, the car is still actually using the engine inside it.

I think the main thing that matters is if it is believable on screen. No helicopter has ever broken the sound barrier, but you have to agree that it looks realistic on Airwolf.

It's entirely logical as to why a rear or all wheel drive car is needed and why a vehicle that's basically a "family sports car" would be an even worse choice than the Shelby Mustang.

I don't think that's true, first of all, "family sports car" is an oxymoron, if it is a sports car it is not a family car. Secondly, if you can do more or less the desired result, as I said before, I don't care about the drivetrain.

Observe:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=daQNuKjTKv8

Yes, I did notice he calls it a family coupe, but the point is, to look at the video and see stunts being done with a FWD vehicle.

Others have stated reasons also but you seem to be defensive about it and refuse to get why people are against it.

Call it what you will,

, others have their views and I have mine, if a car looks "kitt-like" I'm all for it, regardless of what the drivetrain is.

Oh and the Fast and the Furious movies sucked and have brought nothing but annoyance from the idiots it inspired to start street racing.

My point exactly, the idea of going solely for that group almost ruined Knight Rider. Michelle Rodriguez is hot though.

Posted: **Fri Jan 04, 2008 12:11 am**

seeker78 wrote:Secondly, if you can do more or less the desired result, as I said before, I don't care about the drivetrain.

Well, there's something I think we can finally agree with. I feel like I'm beginning to sound like a broken record here, but as I've been saying numerous times, the actual performance/drivetrain of any given vehicle I feel is irrelevant. I believe appearance is the most crucial aspect for the car in a fictitious story, THEN comes practicality, cost, etc. The original '82 Trans Am had a 305 Crossfire engine with 150 horsepower if I remember correctly, and the producers simply yanked the engine out and put in a Chevy 350. Then came all of the extra stunt cars which had different needs, such as initial take off, top speeds, tight handling for sharp turns, etc. The point being is that with a proper budget, the car of choice can be manipulated to do what's required on-screen. Do most of us look at classic K.I.T.T. and say, "Why would they pick that Trans Am? It's a garbage engine with only 150 horsepower"? I think not.

And that brings me to another point. The original series had an advantage when it came to the car of choice as it had no reputation to precede it. A Mustang could have been picked in 1982 by Glen Larson and we would have all grown up feeling that K.I.T.T. should always be an aggressive looking muscle car. While the choice of a Trans Am has naturally attracted some Trans Am enthusiasts over the years, these fans would have been replaced with Mustang enthusiasts probably arguing the very same points if a Corvette or Trans Am was chosen.

The original series worked on many different levels because it mixed a lot of great elements together unconventionally, where most other productions wouldn't think to use the same approach. I feel like the Back To the Future movies, for example, had a similar approach by turning a car into a time machine, and a very unique car at that, the DeLorean DMC-12. The car became a character like K.I.T.T. did and most people didn't look at it and say, "What an ugly looking car with a garbage engine," etc. They saw it as the time machine it was on the big screen.

The telepic has a disadvantage because it's building upon an already established franchise with the pressure of pleasing a lot of hardcore fans of the original car. In NBC Universal's defense, situations like this will always be an uphill battle no matter what car they chose. Ultimately my problems concerning the choice of the Mustang are geared more toward the reasons why NBCU chose it more than even the car itself. I resent the fact that as a fan I have to force this idea of acceptance to the Mustang because of a simple business deal. But, nevertheless, I'm still going to watch, because aside from what I consider a colossal misstep that NBCU has taken with the car, I'm confident they will get at least some of the other aspects right. One advantage NBCU does have, however, is that it should be very difficult to make a movie that is not as good as Knight Rider 2000, Knight Rider 2010 and Team Knight Rider. There's nowhere left to go but up. But only time will tell.

Posted: **Fri Jan 04, 2008 3:33 am**

Michael Pajaro wrote:It was everything it should have been. Imagine if you didn't know they were making a TV-Movie. They have the background music, then you see the scanner under the car cover... it's a great unveiling. And I loved simply hearing "Hello Mike". The tiny fact that he doesn't say "Michael" is a small example of how this is a NEW Knight Rider, for a new time.

I admit I was disappointed to see the analog gages on the dash. I'll even go so far as say I was very disappointed. But overall I really liked the tone of the teaser.

Its one of them things I will have to learn to love..I didnt liek that he didnt say the intire name...BUT the kid is suppossed to be a michael Jr SOOOO I guess it's ok:)

Posted: **Fri Jan 04, 2008 3:36 am**

capridrifter wrote:
Michael Pajaro wrote:It was everything it should have been. Imagine if you didn't know they were making a TV-Movie. They have the background music, then you see the scanner under the car cover... it's a great unveiling. And I loved simply hearing "Hello Mike". The tiny fact that he doesn't say "Michael" is a small example of how this is a NEW Knight Rider, for a new time.

I admit I was disappointed to see the analog gages on the dash. I'll even go so far as say I was very disappointed. But overall I really liked the tone of the teaser.
Its one of them things I will have to learn to love..I didnt like that he didnt say the intire name...BUT the kid is suppossed to be a michael Jr SOOOO I guess it's ok:)

Posted: **Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:44 pm**

seeker78 wrote: Observe:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=daQNuKjTKv8

Yes, I did notice he calls it a family coupe, but the point is, to look at the video and see stunts being done with a FWD vehicle.

Yes and saw his reliance on the handbrake and those were done in a straight line, if he had be maneuvering through obstacles things would have been much trickier, not to mention actual cornering around said obstacles which if big enough and/or done in a tighter space could be much more dangerous. Granted, stunt drivers are well trained to do this sort of stuff, but again they too would need to rely on the handbrake way too much which leaves a lot less room for error. I think there's a good reason why most cars that do stunts in movies are rear wheel drive and I'm pretty sure it's not just because of what it looks like. Rear wheel drive isn't perfect either but for what they're doing, it's a much better (and safer) choice than FWD.

Only exception is for cars built specifically for the move, such at the Batmobile from the Burton Batman movies which, at least in the first movie could only go in a straight line for fifteen seconds when the fuel would run out and pretty much go in a straight line. But that was fine since the car didn't do much in way of stunts in the first movie. At least nothing like what would be required in a show like Knight Rider.

My point exactly, the idea of going solely for that group almost ruined Knight Rider. Michelle Rodriguez is hot though.

Yes, but thankfully I doubt many of them will be able to afford it.

And yeah she is, but I wouldn't want to be riding in the same car as her if she's driving.

If only that Viper was a four seater.... I'd probably be able to forgive them for choosing easier while making calling the show Viper Rider. >_> <_< But hey, NBC would finally get what they wanted with the original Viper.

EDIT: Fixed my quoting mistake.

Posted: **Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:46 am**

In response to my comment that a big budget movie could get Will Smith, the venerable Victor Kross wrote:

victor kros wrote: Here's a breakdown of production budgets for some of the more successful movies to come out over the years.

I Am Legend - 120 million

Research is key when quoting statistics. I hope this broadens your understanding of production budgets and the movie making business.

It does (clearly, instead of "300 million", which was a wild guess, I should have said "$100 million"), but it also supports my idea for Will Smith. You said you guys have $100 million already, and I Am Legend, which starred Will Smith, only had $120 million. So, another $20 million and you can get young Mr. Smith!

But it's ok, as I said before, I trust Larson and yourself to make a good Knight Rider movie, and I will definitely be in the theater for that one, no question!

btw are we going to get a trailer for Knight Rider in the theaters with a black car with a red scanner driving across the desert toward the viewer, with the Knight Rider theme in the background??? You know that would be standing ovation material, right??? Just like when the opening bars of the Star Wars theme play in a trailer!

You must advise Larson of that!!!

victor kros wrote: As far as Popular Mechanics goes, I know they like to do a lot of hypothetical ideas like explaining the technology of Star Wars but in this instance if they really were "messing" around, publishing those ideas were entirely unecessary since they know that two brands are in competition with one another, it's just not productive other then to start conflict between older fans of the original show and the ones who choose to support the new one. Very unprofessional in my opinion.

Indeed, it is unprofessional, but as you stated in the beginning of the paragraph, this is a magazine not exactly noted for professionalism. We should not confuse it with, say, Scientific American.

However, I can understand why you're criticizing it, because you understand the audience of Popular Mechanics to be a subset of the audience for Knight Rider, and you're probably right about that.

Those of us who are not members of said subset don't read Popular Mechanics regularly, and if we saw the article in question, we would see it for the joke that it is.

But keep up the good fight...

Posted: **Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:54 am**

Lost Knight wrote: Well, there's something I think we can finally agree with. I feel like I'm beginning to sound like a broken record here, but as I've been saying numerous times, the actual performance/drivetrain of any given vehicle I feel is irrelevant. I believe appearance is the most crucial aspect for the car in a fictitious story, THEN comes practicality, cost, etc.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!! THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's exactly what I am trying to say when I say "fwd is an esoteric property" or words to that effect!

I agree with everything else said here, too.

But, nevertheless, I'm still going to watch, because aside from what I consider a colossal misstep that NBCU has taken with the car, I'm confident they will get at least some of the other aspects right.

Yep. I too will watch at least the "backdoor pilot". No guarantee I will watch the others, but at least that one.

knight rider online

NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser

Re: NBC Airs 15 second teaser