It took me 3 tries to watch the pilot episode. Its like a series based on the Adrian storyline only with Nikita in Adrians place and a new character Alex in Nikitas place. The rest of the cast is a spoof gone wrong. (like if a spoof tried to be serious)
I started watching LFN again from ep1...even with that show being so OLD its still so much better. Nothing compares to the michael/nikita chemistry
Agreed 100%! There is nothing menacing about the new show. Someone said something like "Nikita 90210" and that hits the nail on the head. I don't understand why they leave some characters in (Nikita, Michael, Birkhoff) and then change the names on others (Madeline/Amanda Operations/Percy) what is the point of that? I love the international feel of the original, you never knew exactly where they were. I've tried watching it and it's so crappy and I had been watching the original series all summer that I have to go back to finishing up seasons 4 and 5 just to erase the dung that is the new show out of my mind.
shareRipley, FYI the original character from the original movie that LFN is based on is Amanda, LFN changed it to Madeline. There was no character named either Percy or Operations in the original. Look up La Femme Nikita the movie from 1990 and watch it. Your perspective on both the current Nikita and LFN will change.
shareI've seen the French movie, I've seen the American remake, I've seen LFN and about five first episodes of Nikita, and I don't think it made a difference in my perspective - I think the new Nikita is a lightweight version.
shareI agree, the premise of Nikita being Adrian is stupid. When our Nikita ended she was sending Michael off to raise his son and she was going to be new Operations. They should have continued that storyline. Oh well, no matter what they did they could never replace Michael and Nikita. Even just touching hands they generated heat.
shareYou, and the other people who have posted in this thread have simply missed the point of the new TV series "Nikita". It is NOT a continuation, nor even a reboot of "La Femme Nikita", it is a reinvention! Why do you think they cast an Asian actress instead of some Caucasian blonde actress?
If you don't like "Nikita" because it isn't like "La Femme Nikita" that's like you not liking apples because they aren't oranges. They aren't the same because they aren't supposed to be the same.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. - Mark Twain.
Very true. And I am really enjoying it.
"It's not hard to bring Michael and Nikita together.
It's hard to drag them apart." S.W.
Thank you!
I enjoyed "La Femme Nikita", but I'm not going to judge the new "Nikita" series based on the old series. The new series is not supposed to be the exact same story as the old series.
One noticeable advantage of the new series is that while Peta Wilson was very good in her action scenes, you can tell that Maggie Q has had real professional martial arts training.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. - Mark Twain.
Give me a f_uckin break. If they didn't want to be compared to the rest of the franchise, they should have made a new IP and not a re-anything.
As to the topic, yes it is definitely a disgrace. Hopefully it'll get canned.
And so Governor Devlin, because even the cost of freedom can be too high, I REFUSE your pardon!
I'm wasting my time because you are obviously too stupid to understand.
Using the same fictional character names, does NOT necessarily mean that there is much in common to compare. For example; anyone can legally write a Sherlock Holmes story now, but that does NOT mean that anyone has ever written anything that can compare to the work of Arthur Conan Doyle.
Some people feel that the "La Femme Nikita" TV series was NOT as good as the original "La Femme Nikita" film.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. - Mark Twain.
PUULLEEZE. If they didn't want the brand recognition and the existing fanbase, they would have made an new work. So f_uck the CW and f_uck anyone who defends that train wreck of a show.
And so Governor Devlin, because even the cost of freedom can be too high, I REFUSE your pardon!
Okay, be a pathetic baby!
Sit home and cry as you keep watching reruns of a TV show that got canceled years ago, and is now finished!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. - Mark Twain.
Yes I'll be watching the real thing and not some piece of crap imitation hack job.
And so Governor Devlin, because even the cost of freedom can be too high, I REFUSE your pardon!
The new show is on the CW a TEEN channel!
Section 1 or whatever they are calling it in "nikita" is a dark place. They deal in death. Not the place for some candy coated version on the CW where on commercial breaks you get previews for gossip girl, remake of 90210, and all the other teen crap on there.
"nikita" is a watered down version of LFN calling it "nikita" is a disgrace. They wanted the brand. They have destroyed everything from Luc Besson's movie and LFN show. This version of Nikita is comparable to Paul Anka's version of Smells like teen spirit...the words are all the same but the emotion and the grit of what made it real is gone.
If you re-imagine something you try to do it better like LFN did. The CW version sucks and sucks hard.
If there is any "Justice" in the Universe so will yours!!!!!
Dark_Raven7000
You, and the other people who have posted in this thread have simply missed the point of the new TV series "Nikita". It is NOT a continuation, nor even a reboot of "La Femme Nikita", it is a reinvention! Why do you think they cast an Asian actress instead of some Caucasian blonde actress?
If you don't like "Nikita" because it isn't like "La Femme Nikita" that's like you not liking apples because they aren't oranges. They aren't the same because they aren't supposed to be the same.
It is NOT a continuation, nor even a reboot of "La Femme Nikita", it is a reinvention!
"IF" this is so why take the names of Michael and Birkhoff from our show?
Why not create new names for your show?
Don't bother replying to this as I know I "Own" you on this one!!!
Dark_Raven7000
new Nikita is just a bunch of pretty people who cannot act and have poor dialogues. its crap, like most of TV shows nowadays.
shareI'm not trying to nitpick, but what is the supposed difference between reinvention and a reboot; the makers intent? In my personal opinion, everything based on known characters/a known premise with the same names is a reboot, which most often at least *tries* to reinvent something about the original source.
Everyone has their opinions but IMO Shane can at least show a bit of emotion and is very good at saying things without speaking a word. I'm sorry but seeing Roy in what scenes I have of LFN is like watching a plank of wood.
"It's not hard to bring Michael and Nikita together.
It's hard to drag them apart." S.W.
Everyone has their opinions but IMO Shane can at least show a bit of emotion and is very good at saying things without speaking a word. I'm sorry but seeing Roy in what scenes I have of LFN is like watching a plank of wood.
I don't have to defend it, a lot of people like it. lol And besides, this isn't exactly a "remake" of the same thing. More of a revamping I guess you could say. And no it's not pathetic it's just my opinion. I personally don't like stoic faces in all circumstances. If other people do then yay for them. Even someone that wrote an article online didn't like Shane at first but has now changed their opinion and mentioned the emotion he shows at times. Sorry, but not everyone likes the same thing.
http://www.tvovermind.com/cable/thecw/nikita/10-reasons-nikita-changin g/34652
There is, of course, a faction of people who compare West to Roy Dupuis, and to them I can only say something that took me a long time to learn: there’s no comparison, because West’s Michael is an entirely different character than Dupuis played. They’re really only similar in name and perhaps a few other details. For one, this Michael has a sense of humor; Shane himself has said he’s probably managed more smiles in the series so far (which I can still count on one hand) than Dupuis may have in the entire original TV series. This is to say nothing of his banter with Birkhoff (Aaron Stanford). This Michael is also more emotional, and imbued with more of a soul. With all that’s going on in his head, it’s great to see the character be able to display that and make us feel it as well, instead of being consistently stoic. I watched five seasons of that and I don’t need to see it again.share
Exactly!!
And yes your pathetic show is a remake of "ours".
We all know you will "Never" accept that as fact, but you can't change the "Truth" into a "Lie".
As for Shane West... I still think someone needs to give him an Ex-Lax so he can take a dump.
As for even coming close to the acting ability of Roy Dupuis... don't even go there.
Peta Wilson and Roy Dupuis had what I call the "It" factor.
That's where you can play scenes without saying a word and express feelings to each other.
Shane West tries to do that, but only looks like he has to take a dump!
Dark_Raven7000
I hate when people say that ... it's like saying that the only way you can act and get a character across is acting emotional. and also because anyone whose watched la femme nikita for an extended period of time will know Michael is nothing like a plank of wood. he's not stoic or emotionless. he's just trying to survive in an impossible situation.
he's section's poster boy because what section really wants is to turn people into killing robots because that way they're easier to manipulate so michael has kinda of twisted himself up from a anti-war protester (or whatever he was before coming into section, he certainly wasn't a killer) to someone who has a hard time reacting emotionally, thus making it easier to do his job. this is of course helped along by what happens to Simone, his first wife.
you start to see more of him and realise just how much he feels and how emotional he really is as his relationship with Nikita develops. In a way she's his salvation from a life of emotionless hell. But his evolution and what he is and the difference between the way he acts and what he feels isn't spoon fed to you, you don't get to see it in big, bright letters in every episode. the great thing about Roy's acting is that it lets you discover the character and trust that in time you will understand him ...
note that i'm not trying to knock down Shane in any way. Actually I think he's quite a decent actor but Roy Dupuis he is not.
ask the spokesperson, I don't have a brain
I totally agree! This man was no plank of wood!
Yes he was quiet,but he did what he had to do to survive Section. He knew how ruthless Section was.
The emotion he conveyed through his eyes... blew me away. He didn't have to speak,his eyes said everything. He deeply loved Nikita. She was everything to him and he would do anything to protect her.
I have never been so deeply touched by an actor as I have been by Roy Dupuis's portryal of Michael. So whoever thinks his acting is a plank of wood,I suggest you rewatch the series...his portrayal of Michael was brilliant.
Who the hell is bashing Roy Dupuis's Michael?? The man can act...have u seen the bloopers or any behind the scenes? He's totally not like Michael in real life..
Roy Dupuis was excellent as Michael..I don't think anyone can replace him or Peta Wilson's Nikita, that's why this new show I'm not able to look at it..I watched the pilot and was not impressed at all and haven't gotten to givin it a second chance...They should have just called it somethin' else...used different characters and used the same plot...of course people would compare it to the original series!
Alias series was pretty similar to LFN and some people were comparin both...but they were different characters and one can accept that..with this new show they could have had Alex as the star instead and used the same plot and everythin or have Maggie Q play another character with similar traits as Nikita and have her own romance or whatever with someone else...WHY OH WHY did they have to use Nikita and Michael names??? I may have accepted it if they were different..other people from different part of Section or somethin...
Here's a youtube video of LFN cast interviews from the season one dvd's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_Pjr7Es-hs&feature=related
Roy talks about how he wasn't going to play Michael as a killer with a smile on his face.
It's a short good interview where he explains why he played Michael the way he did. This man is amazing.
thank you! i've been looking for these 2 clips for the longest time. they don't really come up when you do a lfn search on youtube.
ask the spokesperson, I don't have a brain
[deleted]
Some of this is a matter of taste, but what we need to consider when talking about Dupuis' acting abilities is the question if Michael was believable when he was playing a part, which he very often did (like in Obsessed, War etc etc etc). In my opinion he was, and it was outright PAINFUL to watch Obsessed, seeing how the woman fell for him and knowing it was all an act on his part.
I've always enjoyed shows where much of the action and emotions is conveyed by a lot of close face shots and glances. One other show that did this particularly well was NYPD Blue. Little was said, but a lot was indicated, and it was enough.
Then he's not playing Michael correctly.
I watched a little of the New show and from what I saw of Shane.
Someone needs to give him an Ex-Lax so he can take a dump.
It should be a "Crime" for Shane West to even play the part of
Michael.
As for those out there who don't think Michael had a sense of
humor, have "Never" watched the Series.
Dark_Raven7000
"Everyone has their opinions but IMO Shane can at least show a bit of emotion and is very good at saying things without speaking a word. I'm sorry but seeing Roy in what scenes I have of LFN is like watching a plank of wood."
Are you serious? Shane West had basically ONE LOOK throughout the entire series -- a scowl. It was comical after about the first 5 episodes, and got increasingly annoying after that. And his voice was like listening to someone gargle gravel, after having smoked a couple packs of cigarettes.
Furthermore,, there was NO chemistry between Nikita and Michael in the new series. NONE. Each character was so one dimensional, and so predictable, and so annoying, that I felt like I wanted to heave every time they were on screen together. Q is a horrible actress -- wooden, ugly, and a jack hammer deliverer of her lines. NO subtlety whatsoever. NOT engaging; just flat out annoying. And West was about the same. The new Nikita was a cheap substitute at best. The plots made no sense; reality went out the window in just about every "fight" scene; Alex was a joke; Amanda was inhuman. In short...new Nikita is lousy any way you slice it, even not comparing it to LFN.
"Love isn't what you say or how you feel, it's what you DO". (The Last Kiss)
I have no idea what they did since the first few episodes of the new Nikita, but to me her and Michaels chemistry was like that of friends or even siblings. That might be a plus, considering how the rest of their reinvention didn't work, for me at least. I don't know how it turned out later.
sharei started watching the "new" nikita not ever having seen the old one. i stopped after episode 3 because the superlame storyline didn't appeal to me and i got really bored. i'd say a different approach is a good thing whenever they dig up an old show. but this show i just don't like. no need to compare to anything ...
i rather watch reruns of dark angel :D
however i started watching LFN and at least it keeps me interested enough. can't stand michael though. but operations rocks my socks off ;D
cheers
Greetings Nicolecker,
Give it time... At first I didn't like Michael either, but he grows on you.
And you find yourself waiting for Michael and Nikita to get together again
and when they do it's like someone set off fireworks or something.
We used to joke that we kept a fire extinguisher near the tv so it wouldn't
go up in flames.
As for getting to know the "Real" Michael. You have to watch "Every" episode
in order and Every season.
Dark_Raven7000
So far I haven't seen so much as 1 episode of LFN but I started watching Nikita just cause it came right after The Vampire Diaries, my current favorite show.
I feel thou like ti's safe to say neither show has much common with the original film besides a name. The movie was an attempt at a realistic depiction of a female assassin, while both are clearly going for more of a Comic Book like feel.
"SLaughter is the best medicine"
<<The movie was an attempt at a realistic depiction of a female assassin, while both are clearly going for more of a Comic Book like feel. >>
LOL. Yes, the movie was lauded for it's realism.
You're kidding, right?
LFN (with Peta) was a shell of the original movie(s) that inspired it (La Femme Nikita and Point Of No Return). First, they wussed out saying "Nikita" was wrongly accused of killing someone, then, it goes on to become ALIAS.
This new Nikita is following Luc Besons' original story much truer and is taking off from there.
Making Nikita "wrongly" found guilty of murder dilutes the character and the story in a few ways.
1. Since she actually is not a killer, she doesn't have the "killer" in her.
2. Section is either stupid or suffering a lapse in intel by recruiting her because of she is not actually a killer
3. Who's my daddy? Turns LFN into a soap opera.
As I said above, the CW's NIKITA is truer to it's parental movies.
Luc Besson said in a recent interview he did this past Nov. that he does not like Nikita and does not want his name associated with it.
shareI don't think any of you have watched the current Nikita lately. It's better than when it first started. It's pretty underrated, IMO. If you ask me, it's just as good as the "La Femme" series.
shareI HAVE watched just last night and it was AWEFUL and just DUMB.Plus it is NOT underrated it is OVERRATED.Especially the BAD actors that play Micheal & Nikita.Neither one of them can act at all and it is nowhere near as good as the ORIGINAL tv show.It is just a bad copy of that show.
shareWell when you have Warner Brothers putting out all that money to Promote the New Nikita Show ReallyWildKitty. I guess you have to pay a few people under the table to get it to be the best and maybe even "Fudge" a few numbers to make it look good.
I don't care if the New Nikita Paints the New Nikita Gold and she acts standing on her head.
The New Nikita will "Never" beat the Nikita of La Femme Nikita the Series in Acting, Passion, Charisma, and last but "NOT" Least.... The "IT" Factor!
Peta Wilson has it. The New Nikita doesn't.
I Repeat! We are Not Going Away!!!
Dark_Raven7000
I don't think any of you have watched the current Nikita lately. It's better than when it first started. It's pretty underrated, IMO. If you ask me, it's just as good as the "La Femme" series.
___________________________________
Yes, you are right- I have not watched the series lately, although I gave the show a chance and I watched it from the beginning. " Nikita" is a decent show from my POV- but it's not on the same level like "LFN", and no, I don't say that because I hate " Nikita". I just feel than "La Femme Nikita" posses a soul,posses something,which makes me return and watch the show again and again- "Nikita" doesn't do that to me. For me " Nikita" is more a " Die hard" show- more action, less plot.
On the second thought,there are 2 things-well,actually 4,which make "LFN" better showthan "Nikita"- Eugene Robert Glazer,Alberta Watson,Roy Dupuis and Peta Wilson- these 4 people-especially Eugene Robert Glazer and Alberta Watson, are LFN".About "Nikita",I have a feeling there is only one important character- Nikita. The show could go on without almost all of the others and even if I really respect Xander Berkeley's performance, killing his charatcer shows exactly that for me- Nikita is the only one important for the show,the others are somehow like a ...supporters for her plot. It's not like that in "LFN" - season 5,after Madeline's death,show how important is every one of the character- season 5 of "LFN" is not like the other seasons.
___
Doctor Who: Human beings. You always manage to find the boring alternative, don't you?
[deleted]