Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media Television News Entertainment

MacGyver Film In the Works? 290

Posted by timothy from the humbly-beg-for-qi-shu-in-some-role dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Looks like everyone's favorite Swiss Army knife-wielding action hero may be making an appearance on the big screen. The original series creator has announced plans are in the works for a MacGyver film. Serious questions abound: Will Richard Dean Anderson reprise the role? Will filming and editing somehow be done only using a paperclip, duct-tape, and TV remote?" And who, if not Anderson, would you want to play MacGyver?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MacGyver Film In the Works? More

MacGyver Film In the Works?

Comments Filter:

  • Duh! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Strange Ranger ( 454494 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:30PM (#23293388)
    And who, if not Anderson, would you want to play MacGyver?

    Me!

    (You insensitive clod.)

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by unlametheweak ( 1102159 )
      You took my comment. Now I can't say that without being labeled Redundant. Although it would make sense for the Hollywood types to choose somebody from the Slashdot crowd. From Wikipedia:

      The series revolved around Angus MacGyver (known to his friends as MacGyver or "Mac") who favors brain over brawn in order to solve desperate problems.
      So yes choosing somebody from the Slashdot crowd would be appropriate. No real acting necessary if they want realism.

      • Re:Duh! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Reality Master 101 ( 179095 ) <RealityMaster101@gmail. c o m> on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:47PM (#23293534) Homepage Journal

        So yes choosing somebody from the Slashdot crowd would be appropriate.

        Well, with the difference being that MacGyver was knowledgeable and intelligent. The typical Slashdotter only thinks they're knowledgeable and intelligent.

        • Hahaha. I suppose there is some amount of truth in that statement (and I take it to be more sarcastic than a real opinion [Hint to the mods not to Troll-label your post]). It really does depend on what you mean by "typical" though. It seems like most registered Slashdotters don't post (or at least not often), so it would be hard to make an accurate claim. There are some here that post quite frequently (almost daily), and those people seem to have intelligence (even if I disagree with their opinions), or at

        • Re:Duh! (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Strange Ranger ( 454494 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @03:02PM (#23293656)
          The typical Slashdotter only thinks they're knowledgeable and intelligent.

          Looking at the list of "MacGyverisms" [concentric.net],
          he was often just as misguided.

          I often wished some of his trickery would backfire uproariously. A self-spoof once in awhile can be fun. With the added excitement that there's no foregone conclusion that the trick will work.

        • Re:Duh! (Score:5, Funny)

          by RobertM1968 ( 951074 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @03:11PM (#23293714) Homepage Journal

          So yes choosing somebody from the Slashdot crowd would be appropriate.

          Well, with the difference being that MacGyver was knowledgeable and intelligent. The typical Slashdotter only thinks they're knowledgeable and intelligent.

          I would have modded you "Insightful" - but then I realized that (being a "typical Slashdotter") you are referring to me as well - and I know I think I'm knowledgeable and intelligent!!! ;-)

          • Re:Duh! (Score:5, Insightful)

            by unlametheweak ( 1102159 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @03:33PM (#23293858)
            It's ironic. As of this point in space-time the GP does have an Insightful moderation. It is also ironic that I very often get Insightful ratings (and appropriately IMHO) even though I don't (and never did) consider myself (very) knowledgeable and intelligent. It's a matter of degree.

            I have always found that there is so much to know (on any one topic, much less IT itself which is a HUGE matter which most amateurs and 'civilians' take for granted). I have for example spent lots of time and money formally studying 'IT' and everyday I am still learning something knew. I don't consider myself an expert and will never claim to be (on Slashdot or on my resumes). Claiming to be "knowledgeable and intelligent" is (to me) arrogance. As I've stated, it is a matter of degree and perspective.
        • Some slashdotters know that "the typical Slashdotter" is singular, while "they" is plural. Maybe they're the knowledgeable, intelligent ones. :-)

        • Re:Duh! (Score:5, Funny)

          by Brad1138 ( 590148 ) * <brad1138@yahoo.com> on Sunday May 04, 2008 @05:59PM (#23294828)

          The typical Slashdotter only thinks they're knowledgeable and intelligent.


          But... but......but I have Excellent Karma!?!
      • So some Slashdot moderator with a callous sense of humour rated my post redundant. Go figure!

        In some ways I like the perverse sense of humour, in other ways I hope the meta-moderators damn you to oblivion.

    • Re:Duh! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Eudial ( 590661 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @03:31PM (#23293848)

      And who, if not Anderson, would you want to play MacGyver?

      Me!

        (You insensitive clod.)
      You are aware that the role calls for a mullet, no? It's all in the mullet. You can't be MacGyver without it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by LoadWB ( 592248 )
        You insensitive clod... you beat me to the mullet. heheh I was watching the DVDs a while back, first time in years, and it suddenly hit me, as well as the disbelief that it had not already:

        MacGyver had a mullet!!

        But, of course, if anyone could pull it off, it would be MacGyver. Imagine SG-1 if Richard sported the MacGyver trademark. BOY HOWDY!
    • Sorry, Sylvester Stallone, you're already ruining... remaking...Death Wish [cinematical.com].

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by DaEmEoNd ( 1050118 )
      oh I know Mark Hamill!! =D
    • I say we go with Neil Patrick Harris. He would lack some of Richard Dean Anderson's charm, but would make up for it because, he's NPH!

  • Must be the right person (Score:3, Informative)

    by mikesd81 ( 518581 ) <.mikesd1. .at. .verizon.net.> on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:31PM (#23293398) Homepage
    There was a supposed to be a show a while back called Young MacGyver. I can't recall the actor, but the producers at least had someone cast. They can't run MacGyver by casting some moron like Ben Stiller or some other half bit comedian. AND definitely not Tom Cruise. Matt Damon maybe? Young Mac write up on imdb [imdb.com].

  • Murdoch! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:34PM (#23293418)
    If Harrison Ford can do another Indiana Jones, RDA can do another MacGyver.

    They need to bring back Murdoch as well and have it end in a fiery death sequence where Murdoch is shot 11 times, burned, drowned, run over by a semi, yet still lives on to battle Mac in a sequel!

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by DavidTC ( 10147 )

      RDA, up until about four years ago, was on Stargate SG-1, a show that required more action work than MacGyver ever did. He was running around big fields and alien hallways firing guns at things, instead of messing around with chemicals in a closet.

      Unless something has happened to him since then (Wasn't he just in the second SG-1 direct-to-video film?), he clearly can do the role of MacGyver.

  • Are You Kidding? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Skeetskeetskeet ( 906997 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:34PM (#23293420)
    If Harrison Ford can reprise Indy Jones at the age of 113 then dammit Richard Dean Anderson can play MacGyver!!!

  • Alternate Cast (Score:5, Funny)

    by gmuslera ( 3436 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:35PM (#23293426) Homepage Journal
    Rename the movie to MacGyver Brothers, and performed by Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage. Would love to see the extra-dvd content where they show how and where the movie they just acted was wrong.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by moderatorrater ( 1095745 )
      According to the legends, everything on MacGuyver could have been done, so why not have them show how it was right? In fact, have them make a mythbusters proving/disproving the movie anyway; it'll be a big boost to publicity for both shows.

      • Re:Alternate Cast (Score:5, Informative)

        by rkcallaghan ( 858110 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @03:45PM (#23293934)
        moderratorrater wrote:

        According to the legends, everything on MacGuyver could have been done, so why not have them show how it was right? In fact, have [Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage] make a mythbusters proving/disproving the movie anyway; it'll be a big boost to publicity for both shows.
        The Mythbusters have already done a MacGyver episode [discovery.com]. Several of the myths were busted, though many of them did have an element of truth to them, they could not be performed nearly so bare bones as Mac did.

        ~Rebecca

  • Whatever they decide (Score:5, Funny)

    by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:36PM (#23293430) Journal
    I hope they don't try to update the MacGuyver idea for the 21st century.
    Keep that 80's feel, with the big hair and aviator glasses.

    • Re:Whatever they decide (Score:5, Funny)

      by NotBornYesterday ( 1093817 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:43PM (#23293494) Journal
      Dude, those are coming back, I just know it ...

      • Re:Whatever they decide (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Dachannien ( 617929 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:45PM (#23293508)

        Dude, those are coming back, I just know it ...
        I suppose anything's possible. I mean, chicks like those bug-eyed clown sunglasses now*, so mullets and aviator shades could always make a comeback.

        * Who knows, maybe those actually are somehow cool, and I'm just getting old :P
        • They wear 'em for a reason: large glasses play tricks with your eyes to make their bodies appear smaller in proportion to their head(and smaller in general).
          In other words, big glasses make 'em appear bobbleheaded and doll-like.
          Yet another atrocious fashion trend, almost as bad as their stuffing their jean-legs into their UGG boots, causing their legs to look all fat :P

        • Re:Whatever they decide (Score:4, Funny)

          by Gryle ( 933382 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @04:11PM (#23294092)
          Mullets and aviator shades could always make a comeback
          Mullets can't make a comeback since they never went out of style to begin with.

      • Dude, those are coming back, I just know it ...
        Dude, they're already back.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Khyber ( 864651 )
      I find it quite funny that this man has managed to get himself modded informative with no information, just a hopeful statement and a stereotype from the 80s. This man must be a MacGuyver fan, hardcore!

    • MacGyver in 21st century tech wouldn't work anyhow (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Crazy Taco ( 1083423 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @05:14PM (#23294480)

      They need to keep it 80's because MacGyver with 21st century tech wouldn't work anyway. I think the 80's was probably about the only decade when a concept like MacGyver would work, for the following reasons:

      Things just aren't simple enough or accessible enough anymore. Think about the 80's... things were starting to get really high tech, PCs had just been invented, etc, but all that was still in the early stages. It was easy for Mac to hotwire or jury-rig a car, mess with a computer, oscilloscope or some other high tech piece of equipment, tie the wires of a car phone into a car security system, etc.

      On a modern show, what is Mac going to do? Almost everything is an integrated circuit these days. Intel cpus are made with 45 nm process. You can't just go in and mess with the wiring on something like that, or even repair it when it breaks. In fact, almost none of our technology can be repaired anymore. Most of it has to be scrapped, and a new factory chip put in, because no one can physically deal with the level of miniaturization we have now using just their hands. And going back to the car example, most modern cars have computers built into everything, including the tires. There's a lot less jury rigging that can go on with those. And the security systems, with chips inside keys, etc, etc, makes it a lot harder to just go hotwire one.

      The other issue MacGyver of the 21st century would have to deal with is the level of specialization required to do most anything. You can't just jump into a device and start messing with it, because as was stated above, most things are computerized integrated circuits. There are a lot more black boxes and many more types of engineers involved in almost any project, so knowledge of basic principles and a strong grasp of chemistry doesn't carry you nearly as far.

      That said, I think if they are going to have a 21st century MacGyver, they need to rewrite his back story a bit. I think in the show he had a physics (and maybe chemistry?) degree, but for this decade they'd better give him a compsci/computer engineering degree instead (perhaps still combined with his physics or chem degree). And they almost have to make him more hacker-ish. In the 21st century, 90% of what he does would touch computers, so if they make him a reverse engineering expert specializing in software (which is the easiest thing to circumvent/mess with/jury rig), he might be believable again. I've seen clips on youtube of people hacking those electronic signs over freeways and putting in their own personal messages, and there's really no end to what software you can hack at this point. So if they took that route, he'd be believable again.

      Lastly, though, I think they need to have RDA in the role, and I think it's good that he's probably in his 50s. Mac was always a lifelong learner, so you could convincingly say he went back to school in the interim and picked up the comp sci degree. Also, I don't think I would find a movie or show like MacGyver very convincing in this day and age unless the star was probably 45. There's just too much to know for some 28 year old to take the part and seem convincing, no matter how much of a buff action star he may be. So if RDA can work out and get into shape again (he didn't look the greatest in that superbowl mastercard commercial), I think he's absolutely the one who should be cast for this.

      • I take back what I said above about RDA and the mastercard commercial. Looking at this recent picture of him on wikipedia, he TOTALLY looks like he's in good enough shape for the movie. He looks way better than Harrison Ford even, so if Ford is ready for Indiana Jones, then I'm sure RDA can reprise MacGyver. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dean_Anderson [wikipedia.org]

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by 3waygeek ( 58990 )

        That said, I think if they are going to have a 21st century MacGyver, they need to rewrite his back story a bit. I think in the show he had a physics (and maybe chemistry?) degree, but for this decade they'd better give him a compsci/computer engineering degree instead (perhaps still combined with his physics or chem degree). And they almost have to make him more hacker-ish. In the 21st century, 90% of what he does would touch computers, so if they make him a reverse engineering expert specializing in software (which is the easiest thing to circumvent/mess with/jury rig), he might be believable again. I've seen clips on youtube of people hacking those electronic signs over freeways and putting in their own personal messages, and there's really no end to what software you can hack at this point. So if they took that route, he'd be believable again.

        Sounds good to me -- I have degrees in computer engineering, physics, and maths, and I've done a bit of reverse engineering. Maybe I should audition for the role.

      • "Things just aren't simple enough or accessible enough anymore..."

        So that was Diebold's plan all along! They heard about the upcoming MacGyver film, and being huge fans, decided to do their part to maintain the 80s status quo with low-tech, easily-hacked technology. It finally makes sense now!!!

  • MacGyver feels dated (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tangent3 ( 449222 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:37PM (#23293450)
    I've had the chance to watch a couple of MacGyver episodes recently and they feel dated.
    At the same time, the Bourne series comes to my mind as a modern version of MacGyver.
    So... Matt Damon as MacGyver?
    • I know what you mean about feeling dated. I watched an episode recently, and kept on thinking, Why doesn't he just grab his cell phone?

      • Because it's not 24?

        OTOH, Kiefer Sutherland might do well in the role, but I'd prefer to just bring RDA back. Strictly speaking, the plot doesn't require a lot of fast-moving action. Stargate was probably more stunt-intensive than MacGyver ever was.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by DannyO152 ( 544940 )
      That's a good choice. Ryan Reynolds?
  • He may look a bit grey now but that MacGyver movie could be done like Space Cowboys with Clint Eastwood.

    Us eighties kids have become older too you know. I just discovered a grey hair a week ago, damn was I shocked.

    • Re:Why sombody else than Anderson? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rob1980 ( 941751 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:56PM (#23293598)
      Indeed, he's not even 60 yet. His shelf life for this role is a little longer than some other traditional action heroes because it depends on him looking smart, rather than looking tough. If they're gonna do this within the next 3-5 years, get Anderson.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Jardine ( 398197 )
        Indeed, he's not even 60 yet. His shelf life for this role is a little longer than some other traditional action heroes because it depends on him looking smart, rather than looking tough. If they're gonna do this within the next 3-5 years, get Anderson.

        He left Stargate SG-1 to retire (though he's been back a few times). Part of the reason he left is one of his knees is bad enough that he was having trouble performing simple stunts like jumping into a cockpit.

    • I just discovered a grey hair a week ago, damn was I shocked.
      You can never find a toothpick when you need one.

  • nathan fillion (Score:5, Interesting)

    by astroqat ( 260166 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @02:52PM (#23293568) Homepage
    Mal from Firefly
  • Or, maybe not...

  • Age an issue. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @03:02PM (#23293646)
    The Macgyver character is a younger character unless we are making a movie about "Old Macgyver".

    So it would need to be a younger actor.

    The character is smart and a little light so you would need a younger actor who has a smart/little light persona or someone new.

    And RDA has a certain way of talking that he carries through all his characters (sort of the, heck i'm just a country bumpkin (while really being quite smart)). Do you take that away and re-envision macgyver or do you keep it and come across like a poor imitation of RDA?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by v1 ( 525388 )
      They also usually showed Macgyver being nimble and fast. That wouldn't be so believable in an older actor.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Afecks ( 899057 )
      Actually, a retired bitter MacGyver called back into action wouldn't be too bad. I like how RDA's character in SG-1 was always a little cynical. MacGyver has to change with the times just like real people.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by mikesd81 ( 518581 )
        What could work is if RDA took over for Pete Thornton's job (since Dana Elcar passed away 3 years ago) and possibly have Jared Padalecki play the new Mac (and by uncle, it RDA's Mac was an only child, HOWEVER, uncle sometimes can be a term used for a close friend of the family...) since he filmed a pilot for Young Mac in 03 [imdb.com]. He's probably off Summer time anyway between Supernatural seasons.
  • Another serious question: will whomever plays MacGuyver have the correct mullet haircut?
  • Most of the science on that show was phony.

    I'd rather be save by someone with a leatherman than that stupid boyscout knife.

    Swissarmy toy = corkscrew = LOL

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by grommit ( 97148 )

      Well, according to Leatherman, Mac did use a leatherman. They seem quite proud of that fact.



      http://www.leatherman.com/about-leatherman/history/default.asp [leatherman.com]
    • And a lot of the science behind what he does was proven plausible, just some extra steps had to be done in real life to make it actually work. Here [wikipedia.org].
      • That's 4 busted, 1 plausible, 3 pass.

        Not a good hit rate... but then it was never supposed to be - it's a TV programme.
        • But it proves it's not all phony science. Maybe incomplete, but the science is there.

        • Re:I can't describe how much i hate that show now (Score:4, Interesting)

          by mr_matticus ( 928346 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @08:21PM (#23295790)
          It's 4 pass, 1 plausible, and 3 busted. Add in the three "MacGuyver mini-myths"--all confirmed--and that's 8 to 3 right off the bad.

          One of the busted ones, furthermore, is indeed plausible. A 9hp engine is sufficient for a properly-built ultralight if you know what you're doing. Having not seen MacGuyver in close to 20 years, I have no idea what sort of design it was. However, powered gliders with scooter motors work--as do human-powered gliders (human own problems in the conducting of its tests: they're not always that scientific or well-thought-out.

          The other one, building an ultralight out of makeshift materials, really depends on the materials. The true obstacles is fasteners. That one may or may not be plausible (if he was in a junkyard, sure).

          The sodium one is just bad. MB got that right.

          But that's 9 to 2, maybe even 10 to 1 given a serendipitous setup. That's a pretty good hit rate for a TV show--probably as good as Mythbusters itself.
  • Will Forte is up for the job... MacGruber!
  • From Firefly, Mal "Capt. Tightpants" Reynolds, Nathan Fillion
  • Samuel L. Jackson
  • Wait, its been done...
  • ...then Major General Jack O'Neill.

  • On a shoestring budget? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @04:03PM (#23294044) Homepage Journal
    Insider reports suggest that the production is done with amateurish cameras and gerry-rigged equipment.

    The pay is also rumored to be quite low, as a sound technician has been seen improvising a trap to catch small game in order to feed himself, using nothing more than a piece of wire from his equipment and a twig.
  • It was filmed and developed using duct tape, eye-glasses, orange juice, shoe-polish, and paper-clips.
         

  • What About Kattee Sackhoff? (Score:4, Funny)

    by reallocate ( 142797 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @04:14PM (#23294110)
    Well... the obvious thing to do is to pass the MacGyver torch to a kid and let Anderson, if he's inclined, play his father and/or boss.

    And who says it has to be a guy? What about Katee Sackhoff??

    But, seriously, I won't buy tickets unless Marge Simpson's sisters are in it.
    • How about female, blond, and spacy? Reese Witherspoon did an amazingly interesting job in Legally Blond with both the technical aspects of the law; and the satire. Instead of a mullet how about a disarmingly, blond, geeky smile? And pink; don't forget the pink.

  • one obvious /.er (Score:2, Interesting)

    by zogger ( 617870 )
    Wil Wheaton

  • Burn Notice (Score:4, Interesting)

    by hack slash ( 1064002 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @04:24PM (#23294164)
    Has anyone else watched the 1st season of Burn Notice [imdb.com]? The main character is almost like a modern-day MacGyver, especially with his use of on-hand materials and with the voice-over narration of his MacGyveresque antics like RDA did in MacGyver. And just how many times can I say MacGyver in this MacGyver related post?

    I think Jeffrey Donovan would make a half-decent MacGyver (damnit, I said it again).

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by HomerJ ( 11142 )
      Yeah, I'm a fan of the show. It's one of those shows that doesn't take itself THAT seriously, without being corny.

      And yes, he always makes nifty spy stuff with various things. Not quite MacGyver, but in the same ballpark.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by toganet ( 176363 )
      You know, I hadn't made the connection, but I definitely see the parallels. I'm a fan of both shows (grew up wanting to be MacGyver) and I was thrilled when I heard USA had ordered more episodes of Burn Notice. Let's hope the writers can keep it up.
  • You get paid quite a bit for doing a movie. And i hear it can be fun too.
  • They've been talking about a Magnum P.I. movie for years. Obviously, that should come first.
  • This may be my geezer memory going, and imdb.com absolutely does *not* back me up, but I thought I saw early episodes of MacGyver as part of "CBS Late Night" which was what CBS briefly called the hodge-podge of bad movies and not-ready-for-prime-time (and often not-half-hour-multiple) TV shows that they ran after midnight (I remember Letterman being annoyed with the name, he was still at NBC at the time). I thought the actor was not Anderson?

    Someone straighten me out so I can sleep at night (I already slee
    • Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] doesn't back you up, either, and also mentions that the regular series ran on ABC (but was released on DVD by CBS for some reason).
  • One of the blokes from Mythbusters. And give them free rein over the gadgetry.

    If you can't get them, then hell, how about Tom Hanks?

  • prior commitments (Score:5, Funny)

    by MrKaos ( 858439 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @05:57PM (#23294802) Journal
    Richard Dean Anderson already has prior commitments not doing stargate, he won't have enough time to not do MacGyver as well.

  • Sean Connery (Score:3, Funny)

    by kitsunewarlock ( 971818 ) on Sunday May 04, 2008 @06:45PM (#23295100) Journal
    Because nothing is more American than Sean Connery. Teamed up with Samuel L Jackson (because, you know, he's in everything).

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close