Updated version of "Roots" airs on the History Channel:Is it as good as the original?

  • Yes, the updated version of "Roots" was in fact better than the original.

    I believe the updated version of "Roots" was not only as good as the original, but even better. While the original is a wonderful classic, I think that the new miniseries expanded on historical events, was even more accurate, and, with modern filming technologies, will be able to reach the younger generation where the original may fall short.

  • The updated version of "Roots" is not as good as the original

    As is the case with so many reboots, the updated version of "Roots" is not as good as the original. There is something about the raw unadulterated brutality of the original series that brings the whole slavery issue into its true and horrific focus. They should have left this one alone.

  • Roots will have a hard time living up to the original

    An updated version of "Roots" will have a hard time living up to the original. The original was a ground breaking television event, bringing the issues of slavery and race into millions of homes. The updated version cannot have the same impact. This is due in part to the original's impact as well as the passage of time and educating the public.

  • No, it doesn't have the same urgency.

    No, it is not as good. The original had an impact because at the time, there had been nothing like it. This just seems like a retread updated for those that cannot stand to watch old television shows. The original really drew you in and made you take notice. The sense of urgency is not present in the updated version.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.