Just want to say the mini-series starts tonight. I'm old enough to have watched the original mini-series when it aired; it was epic. Have the new one set on DVR.

(05-30-2016, 07:04 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Just want to say the mini-series starts tonight. I'm old enough to have watched the original mini-series when it aired; it was epic. Have the new one set on DVR. I have seen where Snoop Dogg is not a fan.

I'll be watching, always liked time-period miniseries. And the part about Snoop would be a good p&r topic, cause I would comment on that in here but wont.


update edit: watched it last night and was good. Got some familiar faces from other movies & shows I liked, with Forrest Whitaker being the biggest named actor in it. Lawrence Fishbourne was the narrator, and even saw a cameo of LAvar Burton as a slave being carted away.

As to what Snoop said, whatever. I like Snoop, but if this series got Whittaker & Fishbourne on board, then that says a lot more to me than what Snoop said. I would comment more on that but might borderline p&r.

I must say that the first episode held pretty true to the original.

(05-31-2016, 05:08 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I must say that the first episode held pretty true to the original.

Wife and I found it to be well produced. 

I'm not sure why you would remake it. The original was a big deal, hailed by all, and Alex Haley - who wrote the book it was adapted from and I think was a consultant on the mini series - is a very good writer. But why remake it? Which, I guess, why remake anything - which is a legit question too - but as silly as remaking movies is there is a precedent for it and a different director et al may put a different spin on a story. But Roots is a true story, so I would think there isn't much to spin, and it was so well done first time - why not just re-air the the original? Has a mini series ever been remade? What did the people redoing Roots say they hoped to accomplish?

(05-31-2016, 08:50 PM)xxlt Wrote: I'm not sure why you would remake it. The original was a big deal, hailed by all, and Alex Haley - who wrote the book it was adapted from and I think was a consultant on the mini series - is a very good writer. But why remake it? Which, I guess, why remake anything - which is a legit question too - but as silly as remaking movies is there is a precedent for it and a different director et al may put a different spin on a story. But Roots is a true story, so I would think there isn't much to spin, and it was so well done first time - why not just re-air the the original? Has a mini series ever been remade? What did the people redoing Roots say they hoped to accomplish?

I'm thinking about rewriting the book. I'm gonna put my spin on it.

(05-31-2016, 08:50 PM)xxlt Wrote: I'm not sure why you would remake it. The original was a big deal, hailed by all, and Alex Haley - who wrote the book it was adapted from and I think was a consultant on the mini series - is a very good writer. But why remake it? Which, I guess, why remake anything - which is a legit question too - but as silly as remaking movies is there is a precedent for it and a different director et al may put a different spin on a story. But Roots is a true story, so I would think there isn't much to spin, and it was so well done first time - why not just re-air the the original? Has a mini series ever been remade? What did the people redoing Roots say they hoped to accomplish?

Autobiography of Malcolm X is one of the greatest books I've ever read.  Hands down.

I also am old enough to have watched the original mini series. And I remember what a big deal it was. So for me, this is more like remembering something from my past. But I think it has been pretty well done so far.

(05-31-2016, 07:41 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wife and I found it to be well produced. 

(06-01-2016, 02:53 PM)Beaker Wrote: I also am old enough to have watched the original mini series. And I remember what a big deal it was. So for me, this is more like remembering something from my past. But I think it has been pretty well done so far.

I too have enjoyed it and see many similarities. A couple things I don't remember was when they tried to overthrow the ship and the focus on Kunta's Muslim faith. Maybe I just wasn't as aware back then. 

(06-01-2016, 02:18 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Autobiography of Malcolm X is one of the greatest books I've ever read.  Hands down.

It is. I read that thing in 3 days or so. Devoured it.

(06-01-2016, 09:39 PM)jason Wrote: It is. I read that thing in 3 days or so. Devoured it.

Same here.  I've been enthralled by a lot of books, but rarely to that point.  Read it independently in college and remember missing parties to stay at home to finish it.  

Unfortunately some people who think they're above others would never pick it up based on thier preconceived notions when it would change their outlook were they intellectually capable of finishing it.  The conclusion would greatly benefit people who think Muslims are 'savages'.  Sadly those people are too ignorant to even ingest information they incorrectly label as divergent to their pinhole worldview. 

(06-01-2016, 10:00 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Same here.  I've been enthralled by a lot of books, but rarely to that point.  Read it independently in college and remember missing parties to stay at home to finish it.  

Unfortunately some people who think they're above others would never pick it up based on thier preconceived notions when it would change their outlook were they intellectually capable of finishing it.  The conclusion would greatly benefit people who think Muslims are 'savages'.  Sadly those people are too ignorant to even ingest information they incorrectly label as divergent to their pinhole worldview. 

I read it on my own one summer at college myself. Everybody seemed to be gone that week, and I just sat around and crushed it. The Spike Lee movie came out 4-5 years before that, so I kinda had the jist of it already. I still loved it. I remember I read Fidel Castro's autobiography right around the same time. Its called A Totally Free Man. It's a good read too. Much shorter though... very stream of consciousness at times.

The thing I remember about the original was that it showed naked boobies on network TV during prime time.

That was incredible for the 1970's.

(06-06-2016, 12:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The thing I remember about the original was that it showed naked boobies on network TV during prime time.

That was incredible for the 1970's.

There were no naked boobies showed this time around.  That's the whole reason why I watched it.

We are such a prudish society anymore. 

(06-06-2016, 12:34 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: There were no naked boobies showed this time around.  That's the whole reason why I watched it.

We are such a prudish society anymore. 

You watched it because there were no boobies?

Prude.

I have mixed feelings over the new remake. As not seen it yet. As really IMHO, the original is the original. You can never compete against it.

(06-10-2016, 09:48 PM)Passepartout Wrote: I have mixed feelings over the new remake. As not seen it yet. As really IMHO, the original is the original. You can never compete against it.

******Spoiler Alert*******


They don't show any boobs in the remake.  Not even Beaker's boobies.