Talk:List of The Prisoner episodes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] McGoohan's seven episodes that "really count"

• What does this mean? When did McGoohan identify these episodes? What made them special? What is the source for this statement? 24.131.202.30 16:55, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not clear as to why you've posted this here, as I cannot find the statement in any of the existing messages on this page, but as I have said it on some other Prisoner-related Wiki talk pages, here goes. The source is Matthew White and Jaffer Ali's book, The Official Prisoner Companion, Warner Books, 1988 (and I feel certain that I've encountered it elsewhere, but my collection of P sources are not readily handy; off the top of my head, I suspect Dave Rogers' book). That was the phrase they attributed to McGoohan, with the addition that he would "toss the rest into the rubbish" (again, I think his--or their--exact words, but this time I won't guarantee that it's absolutely ver batim, but very close; certainly "rubbish" was used). As best as I can interpret this (White & Ali left it at that), he thought that these seven episodes are the core of the programme, and the rest were hacked out to fill the commitment to ITC and are worthless. Ted Watson 19:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe this was mentioned in the interview with Warner Troyer. I think it was originally something along the lines of "I thought the concept of the thing would sustain for only seven". There was a later, follow-up remark to Alain Carrazé and Hélene Oswald reprinted in "Le Prisonnier: (Huitième Art, 1989)": "There are seven I consider completely true to the concept. The others on occasion were stretching it a bit." I know that Prisoner Film Librarian Tony Sloman has his own opinion of which those seven are, based on his view of how much care, energy and enthusiasm that McGoohan had for the particular episode. I have a feeling that he named some, but not all of the seven. Simon Coward 09:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request to merge individual episodes

• Oppose. Star Trek and Doctor Who warrant individual episode articles, and the episodes of this series have been deeply studied and analysed. It would be a disservice to chop the articles down into bite-size pieces to fit this list. 23skidoo 17:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose per 23skidoo. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

My apologies for saying this so late. I added the merge request. The article List of The Prisoner episodes is almost empty. It contains headings for every episode, but almost no text. I was inspired by the Episodes of Lost (season 2) article, where every episode is deeply studied and analysed.

In addition to that, I notice that in the The Prisoner article, there is a link to every episode, as stand-alone article. Does this mean that the List of The Prisoner episodes article is obsolete? --Pål Drange, 0909.1.march.2006

[edit] So-Called "Alternate Order"; plus Pre-empted for "Danger Man"?

There is no explanation in the text here as to what the alternate order along the right side of the template is supposed to be, or where it is from, or anything. In fact, one order that should be here but is not is the one that was the standard for many years. This was : "Arrival," "Chimes," "A,B,& C," "Free," "Schizoid," "General," "Returns," "Dance," "Forsake," "Funeral," "Checkmate," "Harmony," "Change of Mind," "Hammer," "Girl," "Once," and "Fall." (Anyone not able to understand those abbrs. does not know the series well enough to take part in this discussion). With the exception of the skipping of "Living in Harmony," it was the CBS-TV order (summers '68 & '69 and late at night 20 years later with "Harmony"), as well as that of the MCI video release and public TV showings. This is all USA, I admit, but some sources (e.g., the White & Ali book, 1988, referenced in the main article and others relevant to this programme) indicate this order has been used practically everywhere that the show was seen during the same period. Further note that it matches the initial UK sequence through #8, and that most of these same sources state that the latter portion of that original run was dictated by what was and was not yet completed. This is corroborated by the fact that, with the internally mandatory exception of "Once Upon a Time," the last four episodes shown are also the last four that were filmed, after the departures of George Markstein and many crew members (supposedly due to the reduction from 26 to 17 total episodes and the jettisoning of a break period) as reflected in the on-screen credits. This means that that order simply isn't all that important. So just what is the "alternate order" shown here and doesn't the "standard" one have, if anything, more right to be displayed than the original UK?

New point: So many sources have flatly stated that, to buy McGoohan time to write and film "Fall Out," the show was pre-empted for two consecutive weeks near the end, with the two "Danger Man/Secret Agent" episodes from that programme's aborted final season (both set in Japan and subsequently re-edited into a feature film, "Koroshi") filling in. This seems quite plausible, especially given statements attributed to the late Kenneth Griffith concerning the finale's shoot being so hurried that Pat asked him to write his own speech, yet no episode guide that specifies original UK airdates leaves such a gap, including this one. I've never encountered a source explicitly refuting this claim. The three variations are: it is said to have happened, nothing is said one way or another, nothing is said but given airdates don't allow for it to have happened. Can anybody here verify whether or not it actually did happen? Ted Watson 20:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry if being insistent offends anybody, but I feel that resolving the question of the "identity" of the so-called "alternate order" running down the right side of the template is mandatory. It does appear to be somebody 's idea of an internally chronological sequencing, but as the text above it acknowledges that there is no consensus on one such order, that works against it being posted anyway, even if attributed to a specific source, which it is not. Besides, the simple fact of the matter is that there are flat contradictions in the series that do not jibe and cannot be reconciled, making such an order therefore impossible. I also repeat that I feel that what was for so many years the standard order, one often attributed to ITC itself, should be posted. I beg someone to please respond. Ted Watson 19:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Additional orderings noted. Thank you very much. Now if only somebody could verify--one way or the other--the alleged preemption via Koroshi.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbrittreid (talk • contribs) 13:20, 27 June 2007

The list of airdates doesn't show any interruption, except for the lack of an episode on Christmas Eve 1967, which pushes the remaining six episodes back one week from when they might have been broadcast. IMDb says Koroshi was broadcast January 5, 1968, but I don't see how doing a couple episodes of Secret Agent buys McGoohan any time; rather, it adds to his to-do list. Asking on alt.tv.prisoner might turn up something, if the newsgroup is still active.

—wwoods 07:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

"...it adds to his to-do list." Huh? Do you mean to suggest that you think the two Danger Man episodes were made just then? Not so--They were done before official production work on The Prisoner began. During that shoot, Markstein mentioned the "spy resigns, gets kidnapped to resort-like prison, etc." scenario, which led to McG convincing Grade to cancel DM in favor of TP. We are talking about a pair of episodes that at this time were nearly (if not fully) two years old, which certainly would have bought Pat time to work on Fall Out. The question now is, given that this apparently didn't happen, how did it get reported as flat fact?

One other thing: In those additional orders, what is "1st," and how does KTEH (I presume a USA TV station) qualify? Ted Watson 20:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I put a key down at the bottom: "1st" is the original-air-date order. I included that so someone can get back to that order after resorting; clicking on the "Original Air Date" column puts "December 10" first and "October 8" last! We could save the width of the "1st" column if we changed the date format to YYYY-MM-DD, though I find that a bit harder to interpret. The "KTEH" order is sufficiently notable to be included in that FAQs, and is "reportedly approved by McGoohan."

—wwoods 14:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

O.K., but isn't "1st" redundant, since that IS the order they are listed here, as indicated by the "airdate" column (that is why I didn't see that interpretation)? Do you mean that because of my query you added that key (I am certain it wasn't there when I first found the additional orders)? BTW, why no comment about the two DM episodes, either denying my reading of your comment or acknowledging that you had the timing (of when they were filmed) wrong? Ted Watson 20:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

But if you resort the list in, say, the "6 of 1" order, and then want to re-resort it back in the air-date order, you need that column. Sorting the list alphabetically by air date isn't interesting, though as I said, we could put the dates in numerical form and then it'd work.

I did put the key in when I made it a sortable table — check the diff.

I didn't have anything else to say about Danger Man; all I know is what you've said, and what I read in the FAQs.

—wwoods 21:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Once I found this list, I used it to go to a handful of the episodes that I check almost every day (before that, I clicked on links to them within the main series article), one of which is Fall Out at the very bottom, of course. Furthermore, when I found the extra orderings, I would swear I looked for a key to those headings. Given all this, I do not see how I could have missed it, but apparently I did--I am not even going to check that "diff" link to confirm it.

I am sorry but I can make no sense out of your first paragraph here. I said nothing about resorting the list, just that the one labelled "1st" among the orderings on the right is redundant given that by definition it is the same as the airdates to the left, and I meant simply that it should be removed, especially since you made some comment about limited space. Nor can I understand your phrase "alphabetically by air date," as these are, again by definition, two different things.

I just checked the linked "FAQs," specifically the Danger Man section, and he seems completely unaware that the 30 min. run and the 1 hour run are really two separate programmes. In the first, Drake is a(n apparently American) troubleshooter for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), while in the latter, he is an agent for a British intelligence organization called M-9 (not as some have written, "MI-9," unless in the real world's MI-5 and MI-6 the "I" is silent, and therefore may be here, as well). This is all fundamental and well-known, hence his credibility with me is low (he did include a disclaimer concerning an American bias, and could have easily had another about having limited knowledge of DM due to its peripheral relevance, but did not). Ted Watson 20:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh! A sortable table can be reordered by the reader. If you click the little dingus next to the column labels, you can resort it in ascending or descending order by that column. So readers can pick whichever order they prefer, or check the others and then go back.

—wwoods 21:43, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

{| class="wikitable sortable"
! A !! B !! C
|-
| 1 ||  2 || Z
|-
| 2 || 10 || Y
|-
| 3 ||  1 || X
|}

Interesting, and I will set it to the order that I'm used to, the one I called "standard," thanks. But it still doesn't make any sense out of "alphabetically by air date" for me. I'm not even sure you were trying to. Sorry if I seem dense. Ted Watson 18:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

To me, the dates show as 'Month_Name Day, Year', e.g. "December 10, 1967", so sorting by that column gets me

December < February < January < November < October, which isn't anyone's idea of a sensible order. Perhaps you have your preferences set to a different date format?

—wwoods 15:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

My own preferences aren't at issue here. I just don't understand what you are trying to say. It keeps coming across gibberish. Let me make this clear: alphabetical order (i.e., using the initial letters of some words, presumably the episodes' titles) is one thing, original air date order (i.e., the chronological sequence in which somebody has telecast the series) is something completely different, yet you said "alphabetically by air date." If you are referring to alphabetizing by the names of the months in the airdates, that is at best an absolutely ludicrous concept and I have no idea why you would bring it up. Between that and the fact that your quoted phrasing is not the best way to communicate that idea, it didn't occur to me until just now. Since you did mention it, let me state my preference. I go with the order that---

1. The US network CBS ran them (except for ...Harmony) in the summers of 1968 & '69, and again in late night (with ...Harmony) circa 1990.

2. Many US public TV stations (but not necessarily PBS affiliates) ran them, beginning in early 1977, continuing throughout the 1980s and sporadically since.

3. MPI Home Video released them here.

This is the order that I gave in my post that launched this thread. One other thing: in your first post here, you said the original UK airdates shows only one interruption, Christmas Eve '67. Actually, 19 November is also skipped. Doesn't help the Koroshi thing, of course; just for the record, and so you don't make that mistake with somebody else and spread misinformation. Ted Watson 20:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Obviously I've failed to make myself clear... The table is now "sortable", which means a reader can reorder the rows by clicking on the little box in any of the column heads. Which gives him the opportunity to resort the list of episodes according to any of the suggested 'proper' orders. However, while the computer code is smart enough to put a column of numbers in the correct order (click on column "B" in the toy table above) it doesn't do as well with dates, so clicking on the "Original airdate (UK)" column sorts the list alphabetically by date. Which I found mildly amusing, even though, as I said, it "isn't anyone's idea of a sensible order".

As I understand it, it's possible to set Wikipedia to display linked dates in various formats: Go to the My preferences link at the top right of any page, and go on from there to Date and time. I haven't bothered to specify a preference myself, but I wondered if perhaps you had, and that was causing the confusion. That's what I meant by "your preferences"; nothing to do with your preferred viewing order.

—wwoods 08:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I see that I failed to make myself clear on one point---I do understand about the table here being sortable (after putting it in my preferred order, when I click on one episode title and go to its article, upon coming back it here reverts; so your argument for "needing that column" goes out the window). I had not checked that Preferences---thank you for pointing me to it. So when you said "alphabetically by date," you did indeed mean the absurdity I described? If so, why did you bring it up? Ted Watson 20:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)