MacGyver : How exactly is this MacGyver?

How exactly is this MacGyver?

First we didint learn his first name till the last episode, 7 years. You want to lay that down in the first 5 minutes? No, stop it.

Mac worked alone. Hes a lone wolf and thats how mac liked things.

Jack Dalton and mac were not partners...not like this. And if they were partners Jack should be well aware that mac hates guns....why would he toss him down one?

Thornton was 2 things. A father figure to mac and the giver of tasks. OK you changed the role to female.......how you gonna work in that father figure?

Where the heck was the duct tape? Did mac do a single mission without at least a few feet of duct tape? That made mac....mac.

Action/fighting. MacGyver fought with his mind, using the environment and what he found around him. He hardly ever used his fists and he would never agree with someone being shot. Yet in the new show hes hitting someone in almost every scene.

Did the producers even watch the original show? Or did they get something sorta kinda close but still miles away and slap the MacGyver name on it?

If your going to make a reboot at least make it feel in some way closely related to the original.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Just a minor correction for the last line of your post. This was not a spin-off. A spin off series will take one character (or a couple) from a show and develop an entirely different show around them. This they are calling a reboot. I have dubbed it a reincarnation. Had they done a regurgitation of the original, it would have been much better. MacGyver used his wit to get out of sticky situations, NOT his grit.

This was too predictable as with other shows doing the same thing, blow 'em up, shoot 'em up, beat 'em up. There was no real MacGyvering being done at all.

DL Bach

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

You are correct. I will edit my post. Thank you. Dang pre coffee brain not thinking....

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I do understand.

DL Bach

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

The biggest change I have hard time with is the accidental killing. When does he ever take a life?

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Blown quiet a few trucks and vehicles up in the original with bad guys in them he isnt superman or batman only thing he never liked in the original was using a gun because of the childhood inncident.Otherthan that he does whatever he can to get the job done.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I liked in original when he ducked and overconfident haker lady jumped out window, tough if she wouldn't she would beat out crap of Mac.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I started watching MacGyver TOS because it was recommended to me as "Oh, it's so wonderful, he doesn't use guns!!!" But I eventually realised that while he doesn't use guns, he used a lot of other things that endangered lives, and to hell with the bad guys who might or might not die thanks to his actions.

I was left utterly unimpressed that Mac "refuses to use guns" when rockets, homemade IEDs, poison gas, and anything else he chooses will do the trick for him. I'm sorry, but it just made me really sad that people should have fallen for that line that the show was "good" because he didn't use guns. Killing is killing, and if you do it with a knitting needle instead of a bullet, you still just killed them.



~~~~~
Because supporting your thesis is tough, but throwing adjectives is easy.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Relax dude. It's not like Mac flipped out on random killing sprees. Those bad guys who might or might not die thanks to his actions, they were trying to kill Mac and/or people he was trying to help.

One other thing, it's a fictional tv show,


You can't palm off a second-rater on me. You gotta remember I was in the pink!

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Let me guess- you haven't missed a Sunday in Church for 30 years, right?

Freako. Chill the hell out.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

BUT! He did use an AK in the very first Episode, they wrote the "not liking guns" part in later.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Not that I am crazy about this show but they don't want it to be exactly like the original. They want to do somethings differently. So far not so great

---

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

well at least they should have kept the core of what macgyver is wich is a lone wolf who dont like violence or guns and gets out of trouble with his pocket knife,duck tape and chewing gum.... all they had right was the pocket knife the rest does not represent what macgyver is at the core and for growing up and watching the show ,this is nbo way a representation of what it should be

The difference beteween genius and stupidity... genius has its limit

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Personally, I don't have a problem with them re-imagining the character and his interactions with Jack and the others.
I do have a problem however with the quality of the show. And, oh boy it's bad.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

On the plus side (for me), it was better than Bull. lol

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

This I agree with

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I thought that turning Pete into a woman was a good choice, it did up the diversity level. As to the 'father figure' - she could still be a mentor, without being male.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

The moment you start talking about "diversity levels" you out yourself as a worthless individual.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

No, just a white Mama to children of colour who sees through their eyes. How would you like to go to a school where 80% of the students look 'alike', but not like you? How would you like to live in a community where no one else looks like you, but all sure as heck look like each other? The idea of the all female Ghost Busters was stupid as all get out. The reason they were all male in the original is because it was sort of a 'buddy movie', and the idea of a group of comedians who often worked together who happened to be male. Had the new one been the children of the originals, at least one of whom happened to be female, it would have made a lot more sense.

The phrase 'diversity level' may just be a side effect of being interested in America as a whole, not just a bunch of old white men.... or it may be indicative of being in grad school and needing to communicate (speak & write) like a frickin' thesaurus. I'm also a retired Sailor and sometimes speak like one, much to my Mother's lament.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

You type a lot but all it means is "we need more diversity because diversity"

Quotas aren't good for anyone. All they do is force a racial mix even if it means producing a horrible picture. Nobody cares what color your babies are. It's not some special badge of honor that allows you to speak authoritatively on such subjects. It's like being the person who says "I have a friend who is black" to prop themselves up as an authority on race. Guess what, I know someone at NASA. That doesn't make me an astrophysicist.

As for ghostbusters, the movie probably would have gone over fine if they had made a better trailer, and Paul Feig could take criticism. Overall the movie wasn't bad and it probably could have made money.

Instead he tried to pull the race/gender/equality card and that tanked his movie hard. This is what happens when you social justice tards try too hard to push an agenda that clearly doesn't make any sense.

"Diversity levels" is a red flag statement. It tells me that you're more interested in diversity than you are in competence, effort, or achievement. A useless person.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Sorry, didn't realize I was dealing with a troll. Blocked, and um, enjoy the rest of your whatever.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I'm surprised they didn't replace macgyver with a black guy. They do it with every other remake/reboot. But whatever

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I'm surprised they didn't make him gay i mean gay is the new black and cmon its right there in his moniker macgayver. On a more serious note this show is a joke.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

What? I thought the new character WAS gay.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?


I'm surprised they didn't replace macgyver with a black guy. They do it with every other remake/reboot. But whatever


Examples?

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Jimmy Olsen in Supergirl.... Moneypenny in James Bond, the constant calling for Idris Elba to be cast as James Bond etc etc

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

And don't forget'Annie'

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

And Herimone is black now in the new Harry Potter play, but dont say anything or else your a racist!
Not to mention all the white comic book characters who are now black, Nick Fury being a prime example.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Yeah they are taking everything right? Eventually it will be 6 characters. We have nothing left soon.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I expected to be disappointed because of my deep affection for the original show. And indeed I was disappointed. The whole thing was just "meh", and I saw the twist the minute it happened. (No spoilers, in case someone hasn't watched their DVR yet.) That being said, just to be fair, I'll give it another try next week. If it's still on next week, that is.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?




(No spoilers, in case someone hasn't watched their DVR yet.)

You do realize you can mark-up spoilers, right?

The butler did it.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

If my memory serves me correctly, Macgyver never killed anyone. In the first 10 minutes, they ram a boat into the guys chasing them and blow them up. Completely lacks the spirit of the original.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

If Murdoc ever actually stayed dead, MacGyver's actions in Partners(throwing a rock into the windshield of the truck and causing Murdoc to drop the dynamite), the Widowmaker(holding up Murdoc's rope so that he accidentally cuts it and falls), and Cleo Rocks(electrocuting him and causing him to fall into a flaming pool) would have killed him.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

What are the odds that boat would hit them directly? Plus, did you wonder why Dalton, while he was 'waiting', didn't disable the other boat? There were so many scenes like that, that had me rolling my eyes.

The episode was awful and a far cry from MacGyver.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Oh stop the god damn he never kills anyone bandwagon crap we see enough of that in the dc movies. i cant even count how many times the original mac blows trucks and boats up with bad guys in them.even so this macguyver is not the damn 80s its a reimagined macguyver dont like it puty on ya damn prude caps and go rewatch the originals over and over or simply turn the damn channel.Some people are gonna enjoy this series as bad as it may be we hipsters who grew up watching the origianls are outnumbered like 100 to 1 so moan on not gonna fix anything.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I have to agree with Progeekzy! I'm a fan of the original and by Jesus this version SUCKED!!!!

I HATE all these "REBOOTS"! Here I thought that it was going to have the original Pilot with a "NEW" Actor. Female Thorton? WTF? Sorry.

I hope and pray that RDA isn't going to play "Harry". Mac never referred to Harry as his Grandpa. He always called him Harry.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?


I HATE all these "REBOOTS"! Here I thought that it was going to have the original Pilot with a "NEW" Actor.


I'm not sure what you're saying. The original pilot of this show that was scrapped because of the negative reaction?

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I don't remember MacGyver ever saying he was a "lone wolf" on the original show. He may have done things on his own, but that didn't mean he refused help or assistance when it was offered. True, the original wasn't a team show, but I do remember him sort of teaming up with the guest stars or Pete.

I didn't like Jack Dalton being rewritten as a former CIA agent who defends MacGyver by killing, so in this area, I agree with you. Jack Dalton should have been the civilian roommate, whether Justin Hires played him or someone else.

I don't think of Pete as a father figure. It seems more like Mac and Pete were friends to me and if anything, Harry was his father figure.

MacGyver used duct tape to tape Vinnie Jones' mouth.

Ok, fair enough, MacGyver was more physical this time around but there was still plenty of improvising/MacGyvering. I don't think Mac holding his own in a fight is sacrilege, as he is a government agent who goes on dangerous missions. You'd think someone like that would have a little bit of hand-to-hand training.

As I saw it, the pilot episode was pretty close to a season 1 episode of the original, other than the team aspect. Keeping in mind that in season 1, Mac wasn't quite established as an inoffensive boyscout who would never drink, curse, kill, or womanize.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I suspected from the ads that this version would disappoint and was right.
The original MacGyver was more serious and thoughtful and did not try to be a semi-super-hero.
He did not try to lead or join a government/quasi-government or even private team to fix the wrongs of the world. He did not need a secret identity or life nor a roommate for relief. The original had some girl friends but romance was not a substantial part---this version looks like it will lead that way. The original could have serious moments that were not out of place for the character---I doubt this one will.
This MacGyver is playing in the mold of Scorpion, Chuck and Limitless---the latter the worst of all playing a buffoon.
Chuck and Scorpion had no 'original' to compare with so could survive longer. Limitless did and could not have continued in violent mode of the movie but having a doofus and government agent blew its chances.
Off hand, I think 'Elementary' is one series that pulls off a sequel well.

Bottom line, lucky to last one season.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Limitless was pretty amazing...this is poorly written, dull trash.

All it does is make me want to watch the original again/more, which I have now added to my Amazon queue lol

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Please do not put Chuck in the same league as Scorpion, Elementary, or Limitless. Chuck is an excellent series.

All great and precious things are lonely.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Burn notice is kind of inspired by Macgyver. And the new Macgyver is more like a copycat of Burn notice.

The Macgyver that I know, works alone. Always thinking, always calm and he hates gun. The show starts slow to tell a story and you get 1 climax event.

The new Mac is more of a shoot em up run and gun action show

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I think you hit the nail on the head. Burn Notice was very much a modern MacGyver and it worked. This really is more like weak attempt at Burn Notice, down to his sidekick being an older Ex-CIA agent. Granted in BN it was only a decade age difference, not 20+ years. It's almost like they said, let's remake Burn Notice but use the characters and premise of MacGyver. The internal voice dialogue that was such a big part of both MacGyver and Burn Notice fails big time in this, what little there is anyways.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

I agree with most of what you said, but this guy hates guns also. And he was always calm and apparently thinking, so that part was not bad.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Although I didn't watch macgyver all the time I definitely see NO COMPARISON to the original. And the only comparison is the name. And that's it!

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

This where the 80ties. The A-Team had lots of guns and machine pistols, and nobody ever died.

McGyver had lots of luck with his adversaries. They always stand besides a door or over a bridge or he has an fire extinguisher ready. The stories where written in way hey didn't needed to use guns. Sometimes the bad guys where just bad in protecting their assets and he could shove them all in a room with a hard locked door :)

But this is 2016. If you are in a failed country trying to defuse a bomb and four guys with weapons enter your room, then you need a sidekick that kills them all.

They let the partner do the dirty work. When Mac got a gun, he face slapped the guy with it (and they had the banter about it). So if he can he doesn't kill someone, but he had no problems with the driver dying in the explosion of his own bomb.

Yes, the pilot was mediocre, simplistic and you saw all the plot points 10 miles away.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Grew up with the original, but I also loved more recent shows like Burn Notice. So I was hoping for something with the heart of the original, but with an updated 2016 feel. But after watching the pilot I saw nothing that resembled that fun, energizing show I grew up with. There was no spark or energy that made MacGyver, well MacGyver. Why use the name of a classic loved series from the 80's/90's, and not embrace what made that show great.

I just hope this dies fast, and the makers of the new A-Team series don't bother bastardizing another classic 80's TV show.

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?


I just hope this dies fast


Why not hope the show improves instead?

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Because there are much better shows on the air now and even the reruns of the original show, which I've seen dozens of time, are way more entertaining then this first episode was.

Why watch something that has no rhythm, that as far as I could see, was missing the whole spark of its namesake?

Re: How exactly is this MacGyver?

Why?
Because the word "improves" means to make better, meaning that it would GET the rhythm and spark it's missing now. That's why it's strange that you prefer it to be cancelled than to improve.
Top