La familia Robinson viaja por el espacio para encontrar una nueva oportunidad para la humanidad, y lucha para sobrevivir lo suficiente y encontrar el camino a casa.La familia Robinson viaja por el espacio para encontrar una nueva oportunidad para la humanidad, y lucha para sobrevivir lo suficiente y encontrar el camino a casa.La familia Robinson viaja por el espacio para encontrar una nueva oportunidad para la humanidad, y lucha para sobrevivir lo suficiente y encontrar el camino a casa.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 3 premios ganados y 17 nominaciones en total
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Rating: * out of ****
Based off the old 60's television series, Lost in Space certainly had the opportunity to be a suspenseful and imaginative sci-fi adventure, but it ends up feeling like little more than an overlong pilot episode for a failed television series. What the movie does have going for it are some occasionally nifty special effects and a fairly tense scene set on board an abandoned spacecraft packed full of hungry giant spiders.
What the movie has going against it is generally everything else. The cast is thoroughly unconvincing (even William Hurt and Gary Oldman), a good portion of the special effects are second-rate, and the subplot involving time rips and time "bubbles" feels tacked-on and pointless. This is a silly adventure film that lacks tension and fun, or even competent film-making and writing. I'm certain kids will probably enjoy the movie, but most everyone else will probably feel mentally adrift by the time the end credits roll.
Based off the old 60's television series, Lost in Space certainly had the opportunity to be a suspenseful and imaginative sci-fi adventure, but it ends up feeling like little more than an overlong pilot episode for a failed television series. What the movie does have going for it are some occasionally nifty special effects and a fairly tense scene set on board an abandoned spacecraft packed full of hungry giant spiders.
What the movie has going against it is generally everything else. The cast is thoroughly unconvincing (even William Hurt and Gary Oldman), a good portion of the special effects are second-rate, and the subplot involving time rips and time "bubbles" feels tacked-on and pointless. This is a silly adventure film that lacks tension and fun, or even competent film-making and writing. I'm certain kids will probably enjoy the movie, but most everyone else will probably feel mentally adrift by the time the end credits roll.
Dr. John Robinson (William Hurt) is taking his family into deep space to find a life-supporting planet for the human race. Things on earth are deteriorating, to say the least. Going along with him are his scientist wife Maureen (Mimi Rogers), his brilliant daughter, Judy (Heather Graham) and his equally intelligent children Penny and Will. Needing a good pilot, Dr. Robinson nabs hotshot airman Mark West (Matt LaBlanc) to fly their spaceship. Evil Doctor Smith (Gary Oldman) tries to sabotage the vessel but ends up getting caught on board. Amid the ensuing chaos, the ship goes off course and gets lost. Between battling spider-like creatures and their own killer robot, the Robinsons still hope to reach their destination. Will they? This movie starts off with a bang and ends with a whimper. The problem? Well, it is not the terrific cast. Hurt, Rogers and Oldman are wonderful in their respective roles, while Graham and LaBlanc delight the audience with their wit and charm as the couple who provide the movie's romantic elements. All other cast members are quite fine as well. The production looks nice, too, with great costumes, sets, and special effects. So, that leaves the uneven script. It starts off well, with a quick look at the Robinsons' quest and the plotting of Dr. Smith. There are even some great lines, such as the one Maureen hurls at John and Mark, as they are sparring. "If you guys are done hosing down the deck with testosterone..." had me laughing heartily. But, it all just fizzles somewhere in the middle and ends up being utter nonsense, a plot without a cause. What a shame. Those of us who loved the sixties television series deserved better. If you are partial to any of the cast members, from Hurt to Graham to Oldman, do make time for this film, someday. They are the reason to see this movie, for they are a joy to watch, even in a film as lame as this one.
I liked the movie, but I fear it suffered from the same disease that Star Trek The Motion Picture suffered from - too grandiose a concept, too grand an undertaking, too big an effects budget and enough plot for several movies. Lets see, we have the dysfunctional family becomes functional plot, we have the evil traitor in the med lab plot, the time travel plot, the metallic spider plot, the sexual tension between Dr. Judy and Major Don plot. This puppy had more subplots than a season of X-Files.
It was great to see Mark Goddard in a role with some meat on it. However Angela Cartwright and Marta Kristen were given extremely short shrift. And Bill Mumy and Jonathan Harris should have been involved. I know Jonathan Harris doesn't do cameos, but dammit, find him a role! And as for not getting Bill Mumy to play future Will Robinson - as far as I'm concerned, that singlehandedly reduced this flick from a great movie merely a good one. If they had enough money for the hideous yellow excuse for merchandising (how blatant can you get?), they sure had enough to hire the full original cast.
It was great to see Mark Goddard in a role with some meat on it. However Angela Cartwright and Marta Kristen were given extremely short shrift. And Bill Mumy and Jonathan Harris should have been involved. I know Jonathan Harris doesn't do cameos, but dammit, find him a role! And as for not getting Bill Mumy to play future Will Robinson - as far as I'm concerned, that singlehandedly reduced this flick from a great movie merely a good one. If they had enough money for the hideous yellow excuse for merchandising (how blatant can you get?), they sure had enough to hire the full original cast.
This remake of the successful '60's television show really is a waste of some good potential. It by no means is an horrible movie but the script isn't really interesting or spectacular and the character treatment is quite poor.
In a way this movie is a mixed bag. On the one hand it has some good actors in it and some of the special effects are really good but than again on the other hand the story is pretty shallow, the costumes are embarrassingly dreadful and some of the special effects are below average at best. Sounds weird, a movie that has both good and bad special effects in it. It's a bit weird, it's like they spend most of the time on the big special effects shots and after that they raffled the rest of the special effects. At times the movie is impressive to watch and at other moments it's just laughable bad to look at. Such as the CG character Blarp. He (or she?) looked absolutely dreadful and it made the movie even more ridiculous and bad to watch. But perhaps worst thing about the entire character is that it's a totally, completely unnecessary one that doesn't add anything to the story at all.
The movie has a solid cast. John Hurt certainly adds some believability to the silly moments in the movie and he deliverers some of the bad dialog good and even credible. Gary Oldman is of course also a great actor but he plays a bit of an uninteresting villain in this movie that doesn't get enough opportunity to shine. Matt LeBlanc is most of the time convincing in his role but he at times deliver some cheesy dialog which doesn't always make him believable as a tough space pilot. Mimi Rogers and Heather Graham also walk around in the movie but they get very little interesting to do. Good in her role was also Lacey Chabert. She's a good young actress, never really understood why she didn't appeared in more mainstream big Hollywood productions. She's an actress with great potential but somehow Hollywood never really picked this up. Maybe it has something to do with the failure of this movie?
Because yes, this movie is a bit of a failure. Not only in terms of how well it did at the box office and how well it was received by the crowd and critics but also certainly in terms of how the movie is constructed. The script is just disappointingly shallow and has some totally unlikely and unbelievable events in it, that at times don't even make sense. The story also uses too many elements from the first Star Wars trilogy and even a little bit from "2001: A Space Odyssey". It doesn't only uses story elements from that movies, it also rips off the looks of some of the spaceships, planets and city skylights. No, "Lost in Space" certainly isn't the most original science-fiction movie ever made.
The movie also lacks some good tension and action sequences. There are too many slow moments in the movie in which totally nothing happens. It's OK to have some slower moments in a movie but only when the script and characters are good and interesting enough to carry those slower moments. In this movie that really isn't the case.
This movie is not a complete disaster and the 4.6 rating here at the moment might be a bit too harsh. The movie does provide some good and entertaining moments. But if only the movie had a better and more original script, than this movie perhaps would had been a bigger success and certainly a better one to watch.
5/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
In a way this movie is a mixed bag. On the one hand it has some good actors in it and some of the special effects are really good but than again on the other hand the story is pretty shallow, the costumes are embarrassingly dreadful and some of the special effects are below average at best. Sounds weird, a movie that has both good and bad special effects in it. It's a bit weird, it's like they spend most of the time on the big special effects shots and after that they raffled the rest of the special effects. At times the movie is impressive to watch and at other moments it's just laughable bad to look at. Such as the CG character Blarp. He (or she?) looked absolutely dreadful and it made the movie even more ridiculous and bad to watch. But perhaps worst thing about the entire character is that it's a totally, completely unnecessary one that doesn't add anything to the story at all.
The movie has a solid cast. John Hurt certainly adds some believability to the silly moments in the movie and he deliverers some of the bad dialog good and even credible. Gary Oldman is of course also a great actor but he plays a bit of an uninteresting villain in this movie that doesn't get enough opportunity to shine. Matt LeBlanc is most of the time convincing in his role but he at times deliver some cheesy dialog which doesn't always make him believable as a tough space pilot. Mimi Rogers and Heather Graham also walk around in the movie but they get very little interesting to do. Good in her role was also Lacey Chabert. She's a good young actress, never really understood why she didn't appeared in more mainstream big Hollywood productions. She's an actress with great potential but somehow Hollywood never really picked this up. Maybe it has something to do with the failure of this movie?
Because yes, this movie is a bit of a failure. Not only in terms of how well it did at the box office and how well it was received by the crowd and critics but also certainly in terms of how the movie is constructed. The script is just disappointingly shallow and has some totally unlikely and unbelievable events in it, that at times don't even make sense. The story also uses too many elements from the first Star Wars trilogy and even a little bit from "2001: A Space Odyssey". It doesn't only uses story elements from that movies, it also rips off the looks of some of the spaceships, planets and city skylights. No, "Lost in Space" certainly isn't the most original science-fiction movie ever made.
The movie also lacks some good tension and action sequences. There are too many slow moments in the movie in which totally nothing happens. It's OK to have some slower moments in a movie but only when the script and characters are good and interesting enough to carry those slower moments. In this movie that really isn't the case.
This movie is not a complete disaster and the 4.6 rating here at the moment might be a bit too harsh. The movie does provide some good and entertaining moments. But if only the movie had a better and more original script, than this movie perhaps would had been a bigger success and certainly a better one to watch.
5/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
I don't think Lost in Space was a bad movie. Is it a movie to be honored the all-time best? No, it's not. There are flaws in this movie, but I don't care too much. The movie is about a family, the Robinsons trying to go to the other habitable planet in the galaxy. They do all right until the villain, Spider Smith tries to kill the family and he ruins the navigational system. Now the Robinsons are lost. The acting is OK. Some of the actors did a great job such as Matt LeBlanc and Gary Oldman. The rest did OK. The special effects are not as good as movies from the time period such as Armageddon or Godzilla. The effects are good, though. I was disappointed in the writing. Akiva Goldsman is a respected writer with talent. For a bad script, all the actors did a good job. The music is pretty good. I liked the electronic soundtrack. I give this movie a 7/10 because I liked the space scenery, the gadgets, and the action.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaDick Tufeld reprises his role from Perdidos en el espacio (1965) as the voice of the Robot.
- ErroresAs the Jupiter I is lifting off from Houston, the pyrotechnics used to simulate the rocket motor blast actually causes the entire top half of the ship model to jump up and separate from the lower half briefly.
- Citas
[Launching the Jupiter-1]
Major West: And the monkey flips the switch.
- Créditos curiososWhen the closing credits are ending you hear Penny's infamous line once more, 'This mission sucks!'.
- Versiones alternativasScenes where Penny, Judy and Maureen encounter a giant alien life-form on the planet they crash-land on was cut from the film but appear in some of the additional footage included in the DVD release. This footage includes:
- After escaping the planet, "Older Blawp" appears on the ship again after "baby blawp" hops onto Penny's shoulders. The older alien was removed in the final cut.
- More dialogue between John and Don before they get attacked by "future robot".
- The inside of the "time bubble" was originally sunny and orange, but was changed to cold and blue in final version.
- More dialogue between Smith, Don, John, and Judy in the "Hydroponics" garden on the "Proteus" after finding Blawp.
- Several scenes in the time bubble were cut including: scenes showing different time portals including "THUNDER PORTAL" and "SNOW PORTAL"
- ConexionesEdited into Lost in Space: Deleted Scenes (1998)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Lost in Space?Con tecnología de Alexa
- Why does Don West wear a helmet during the shoot-out with the spiders?
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 80,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 69,117,629
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 20,154,919
- 5 abr 1998
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 136,159,423
- Tiempo de ejecución2 horas 10 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
By what name was Perdidos en el espacio (1998) officially released in Japan in Japanese?
Responda