Talk:Knight Rider (film)

Question:
When asked about his role, he hinted that he would return as Michael Knight, but that Knight was taking over Devon Miles' position as the leader of FLAG. Incidentally, this is an unlikely possibility as Devon Miles was killed back in 1990's Knight Rider 2000, and actor Edward Mulhare passed away in 1997.
If Devon/Mulhare died... wouldn't it be logical for Michael Knight to take over? I'd call this obvious, not unlikely. // Gargaj 18:04, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. I mean, I'm not sure whether Michael Knight is legally the adopted son of FLAG's founder Wilton Knight, but he's certainly the closest thing to a descendant they have.
Incidentally, if this article is accurate, it gives me a bit more respect for David Hasselhoff. So many movies these days ignore, mock, or "re-imagine" a beloved television show from childhood instead of doing a straight-up adaptation (Disney's been the worst at this lately, with The Shaggy Dog re-interpreted as a genetic accident on a grown man instead of an ancient curse on a teenager, and the upcoming live-action Underdog turned into a real dog instead of an anthropomorphic one). The fact that he fought to keep the story true to the show and wouldn't do the movie otherwise is a good thing. - 24.131.38.46 00:15, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

--

Bloom snubs The Hoff's role : http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,23663,20323578-36557,00.html

The Poster

AICN thinks it's fake. Does anyone have any evidence to the contrary? --Maxamegalon2000 03:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Too many questions for my comfort, from a cursory Google. I was bold and removed it until we have something from Weinstein (AICN isn't terribly trustworthy). --JStalk 06:20, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rework and templates

Let me explain {{failed verification}} in the text, in case you're curious. The page linked to is simply podcasts of a radio show out of England, I'm assuming the show Hasselhoff appeared on to make this statement. However, it is temporal -- the page linked to is a moving target and has already forgotten the statement. We need a better citation.

That applies to the whole article, really. I'm having trouble citing this stuff through Google, I hope interested parties or original author can. I also deleted a lot of irrelevant fluff. --JStalk 19:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]