posted
As many of you know, I'm a die-hard fan of Highlander: The Series, and to a lesser extent, the Highlander film which started it all. Well, I was very dissapointed by Highlander's 6th season, and by Endgame. Let's hope TPTB do it better this time around: (I edited this post from A-I-C-N to correct some really atrocious spelling ... McCloud?! Hello?!)
quote:I have some new information on HIGHLANDER 5 : THE SOURCE. It's common belief that Connor MacLeod (Christopher Lambert) is dead - not so, seems he will probably be in the next movie according to the producers of Highlander : Endgame speaking to fans at the convention. "Lambert has SIGNED, as has Adrian Paul, as well as with Elizabeth Gracen (Amanda), Paul Wingfield (Methos), and the person who plays Joe Dawson (in this case, the actor is Jim Byrnes). Panzer/Davis have asked Timothy Dalton to play a role in the film once the script is written. Also Roger Daltry (Fitz*) might appear in a flashback."
Producers via the convention claim that Christopher Lambert can "actually return for the next one - as long as the next film is set before 2002. In 'Endgame' he was killed - but only in that time period. Producers were also mulling over the idea of bringing back Adrian Paul's love interest, Faith - depending or not on whether or not fans want her back, seems the vote was to get her back".
It was said though that Lambert will also be involved in a couple of other films next year, hinting that his role in HIGH5 might be small. Lambert told Deb's CL Site, "I am currently working on a romantic action movie called "The Piano Player" and I'll be doing my 4th movie w/ Russell Mulcahy in February it is a sci-fi thriller led "Absolon". And afer that I will be doing a French comedy "Janise and John".
Look out for HIGHLANDER 5...I'll be in touch when I hear more.
If anyone else out there has heard anything else, please post it. Personally, I thought Endgame was a dissapointment for a variety of factors, but given that it was the first movie of the TV universe (altho, in all honesty, Highlander III also should have been placed in the TV universe, big booboo, guys) I'm willing to cut it some slack.
*See, the whole thing about bringing back Connor to a time period before he died works really well. They did it a lot with Roger Daltry's "Hugh Fitzcairn", who was killed in his 2nd appearance on the show, then returned as Fitz in flashback episodes set in part of whole in the 4th, 5th, and 6th seasons.
[ September 17, 2001: Message edited by: Malnurtured Snay ]
posted
Alright...someone's going to have to explain this to me though...In Endgame, we find out that Conner has been locked up during most of Highlander: The Series, right? He doesn't get let out until Endgame. So, if he's in this movie in real time, not as a flashback character, the movie will have to take place either before the series started or sometime early in the series, right?
My guess is that they're going to use him as a flashback character only. Playing prequel again is going to get tricky.
posted
That's what I'm thinking, too, we'll see him as Connor sometime before he gets locked up in Endgame.
Of course, there's also the question of when he got locked up. He was walking around in the first episode of "Highlander", and there's a skip of a year between the 5th and 6th seasons. And of course, I can't speak for certain as to when Endgame takes place ... except that if Connor got locked up sometime during the 1st season (and we know he was there for 10 years), then Endgame takes place in 2003 or so (the first season took place in 1993).
posted
Yah...my guess would be that he got locked up sometime soon after we saw him in the pilot episode. The explosion in his shop must've happened soon thereafter.
My guess is we'll see another far back flashback in which Conner explains "The Source" to Duncan.
Quick question: was the gap between season 5 and 6 due to Duncan's experience with the dark quickening? Or was it something else? I didn't get to see much of the series...so I get lost easily
posted
To avoid twitching myself, I have conveniently decided that Highlander 2 never happened (actually I decided that about 5 minutes after I saw it for the first time and went "What the Hell?!?). So...Duncan kills Richie by mistake while he's trying to kill this legendary evil, right? Then he takes a year off from the game and when he comes back, he refuses to use a sword for a while. I remember seeing a conversation between he and Joe where Joe gives him his sword back.
posted
Actually, TPTB declared both Highlander II and III "non-canon", and part of Highlander I "non-canon." The events in Highlander I happened as shown, except it was a "mini-Gathering" ... that is, all the Immortals in the New York region decided to go after one another until they were all dead (at least, that's the most popular theory regarding why everyone was talking about it being "The Gathering" ... they all thought it was the Gathering!)
Yes, this Zoarstrian demon "Ahriman" comes around every thousand years or so. The previous "Champion" (it seems they're always Immortals) waited for centuries in a cave in the Highlands until Duncan walked into his cave -- newly Immortal -- whereapon the Champion decapitated himself and Duncan got his first Quickening. In the present day, Ahriman had been torturing MacLeod by taking the illusion of past enemies -- Horton, Kronos. During one particular event, Ahriman kept taking the form of Richie. Finally, Mac snapped, lashed out, and killed the real Richie coming to help. The sixth season (dreck) opened with Mac chopping his pony-tail off after spending a year in a remote monastary.
posted
Ok...I remember the ep where Mac killed Richie...he immediately realized what he had done. Didn't he fight with this stick kind of thing for awhile before Joe talked him into taking up arms again?
Overall, I thought the continuing storylines (at least the ones that I remember) from the series were pretty good. It gave an epic quality to the whole storyline.
The third movie was ok, but I never understood how they thought they'd get away with, first saying McCleod had won the prize, then saying, "Whoops, wait, wait...there were a whole bunch more immortals in a cave that you missed..."
quote:The Irish examiner has some fresh details on that HIGHLANDER 5 you mentioned yesterday. Producers are in negotiations with Sean Connery, who they hope will reprise his role as Ramirez. It's believed that the above-par script will entice him back.
The report also confirms your rumour that Timothy Dalton is in as the next villain.
I'm getting more and more excited about this film.
posted
I'll be excited about the guest appearances when I hear how they will be used. However, I have a bad feeling...
AFAIK, Connor only knew Ramirez for a year, tops, while they trained together. But Duncan wasn't even born at the time the Ramirez lost his head.
So, in order for Ramirez to be there one of two things has to happen ... 1) The movie has to take place before Conner died and Ramirez will appear in a flashback of Connors. I've already stated my wariness of a prequel movie. 2) Connor is in a Flashback of Connor's during a flashback of Duncan's....I would not be in favor of this.
I'm more than willing to admit there are other possibilities here...
posted
Well, we could also have a flashback of Ramirez v Dalton before Connor or Duncan. And a Connor/Ramirez flashback doesn't have to be a memory of Duncan remembering Connor remmering ...
quote:During an interview regarding his new series TRACKER, actor Adrian Paul was asked about stories circulating that he's been signed to do another HIGHLANDER film. "That's a wrong rumor," Paul replied.
HIGHLANDER executive producer Bill Panzer announced at the recent HIGHLANDER Reunion Convention in August (watch this space for a full report) that he and partner Peter Davis are developing a new feature based on the popular series dubbed THE SOURCE, but no director or cast have been named as of yet.
I'm suddenly remembering old rumors about the original concept of "Highlander 2", which would've explained where the Immortals came from (er, a better explanation than Zeist, anyway).
But look at the characters ... Methos, 5,000 years old ... Ramirez, certainly an old fellow ... and who better to narrate the tales of the first Immortals then Joe Dawson? I mean, if the bulk of the story is set even just a thousand years ago, then young (at the time) Immortals like Amanda and Fitzcairn would be around. Ok, Connor wouldn't show up for a few more centuries, but it's not unreasonable for him to appear in more "modern" dated flashbacks ...
And one last note, all that Paul quote means is he hasn't signed yet ...
posted
Oh, yah...he certainly may sign later on...I was just wondering out loud...
I'm kind of having the same premonition. "The Source" sounds suspiciously like the title of a movie that may foolishly try to explain why Immortals are immortal.
The feeling I got from the first movie was that they were simply an aspect of nature. Like plants and humans, they simply were. They had a natural drive to gather each others' knowledge and experience until there was only one Immortal who would possess the sum total of human experience.
I feel like any more detailed explanation sort of ruins it. Zeist sure as heck did...
[ September 19, 2001: Message edited by: Aban Rune ]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
