Perdus dans l'espace

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.

Although very fond of the original TV series from the 60s, especially the first season, it is by no means a perfect show and is pretty uneven. It was great and more when at its best (the whole of the first season) but it was near-embarrassing at its worst (the second half of Season 3).

Still it had memorable characters (Dr Smith a genre landmark character), a good cast (Jonathan Harris is unforgettable), an endearing campy charm, a dark seriousness in the first season without forgetting to be fun and inventive stories and monsters that made the most of an at the time unique concept. There are worse TV-to-film translations around than 1998's 'Lost in Space', such as 'My Favourite Martian', 'Dragonball: Evolution', 'The Last Airbender', 'The Dukes of Hazzard' and 'The Avengers' (1998).

'Lost in Space' however is still one of those films that has its moments and a few good qualities, but one where it has great talent on board yet manages to make one question its existence. Before those defending the film arrogantly accuse people of being too stuck in the past and refusing change, actually there is far more to the problem than it being a disappointing adaptation of the show, in fact that's the least of its problems and while not a terrible film on its own terms it's a long way from good (personal opinion of course).

That it has a darker tone than the show, although some critics may disagree, is not the problem necessarily, and actually people would have appreciated the bigger, opened up approach (with technology having advanced a lot since the 60s it was necessary). The first season had a serious, dark tone too (even if fans remembered the campy charm of Season 2 and the over-the-top silliness of Season 3 a little more, judging by the word campy is often thrown around describing the show). The difference was that it didn't take itself too seriously and still managed to be entertaining and inventive. The film version, to me and fans/critics (this is what is meant by this criticism, so contrary to it being a seemingly misleading criticism it's a valid one to me), strips away the fun, loses the charm, takes itself too seriously mostly and has very little imaginative or original about it. It just felt charmless and dreary.

Not without its bright spots. It is stylishly and atmospherically photographed and the Jupiter II setting is very cool and the most imaginative the film gets. Some of the special effects are good if never spectacular. The music score has creepiness and gives 'Lost in Space' some energy. 'Lost in Space' gets off to a promising start and gives one the impression "hey this may not be so bad after all", and there are a few nice adrenaline jolts in the action.

Casting has its high spots. The best of the lot is Gary Oldman, who actually looks like he's having fun and gives a different, darker and more menacing Dr Smith and it actually works (even though wildly different). Matt Le Blanc may have moments where he's a little smug, which is due to him having some of the worst of the dialogue, but he does have a likable charm too and has a few amusing moments. Jack Johnson is neither too cloying or grating and the characterisation of the Robot is spot on.

However, the rest of the cast don't work. William Hurt couldn't have been a blander choice for Professor Robinson, he sleepwalks through his role which cried out actually for the involvement of Bill Mumy. On the other side of the spectrum, Lacey Chabert irritates to a mind-numbing degree and, although the film does try to develop her with particularly those video diaries, she is little more than a stereotypical teen at the end of the day. Mimi Rogers has nothing to do and Heather Graham also grates and has non-existent chemistry with Le Blanc.

While 'Lost in Space' is not a bad-looking film on the whole, there are a lot of cheap-looking costumes and some noticeably poor special effects. Particularly for that interminable Space Monkey (Blarp? who is actually for me far more annoying than Jar Jar Binks) and for Smith's spider form (some of the worst spider effects on any visual media, almost as bad as spiders from low-budget SyFy/Asylum films and the infamously terrible ones in the 'IT' mini-series). Really hated the end credits too, they go well overboard with the nausea-inducing surrealism and the overbearing music and as an epileptic it made me feel uncomfortable.

Despite some intriguing moments and sporadic amusing moments early on, most of the script (especially for the characters played by Le Blanc and Graham and in the third act) is in 'Batman and Robin'-like cornball and cringe territory. Target audience is an issue, being too silly and trying too hard and failing to be cute for adults and with heavy-handed sermonising and family values to appeal properly to younger children, who will also find some of the ideas (like the time travel elements and most of the final third) going over their heads (and no this is coming from somebody who finds children's taste and intelligence for film under-estimated).

The film is far too long and drags to dreary degrees in most of its later stages. Most of the time things are taken too seriously and fun and charm can barely be seen anywhere. Then there is the final act which undoes 'Lost in Space' significantly, where things just get weird, tonally muddled, nonsensical and borderline incoherent, far more so than the second half of Season 3 of the show.

Overall, not THAT bad but very lacking in most departments. 4/10 Bethany Cox

Frankly, I don't think this movie is as bad as some people make it out to be. I like the early episodes of the original series (particulary the first six), when the show had a more serious tone (and before Jonathan Harris sabotaged it by turning up the comic antics as Dr. Smith) and it's nice to see the film stay closer to that serious tone and not emulate the more campy aspects of the series from its later episodes. The cast is good for the most part and I love the visual FX.

However, once the Jupiter 2 crashes on the planet and we get caught up in the time travel older Will Robinson bit, that's when the movie falls apart completely. And the biggest mistake of all is that the older Will Robinson is not played by original Will Robinson, Bill Mumy, even though he badly wanted to play the part. Having listened to the comments of the director on why he didn't cast Mumy on the DVD, I have to say his explanation doesn't wash. Especially when both he and the scriptwriter concede that the device of using the "older Will Robinson" didn't work on the screen as it did in writing. It never occurs to them that maybe the scene would have worked if this new character sprung on us was someone with a definable connection to the old show.

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.

Actually, I was quite surprised at how much fun I thought this movie was. Hardly perfect by any measure and, sure, there were some elements that were intrusive, but I found it to be quite faithful to the TV show - it used plots and elements from the early episodes. Even with the newer designs, they incorporated older aspects - the planet REALLY looked like a better version of one of their old sets.

Furthermore, Oldman managed to peg Dr. Smith perfectly, taking in all the old camp elements and putting them to very good use - even using some old catch phrases in different ways.

As diversionary, light sci-fi adventure goes, I thought this was great and I'm usually very picky about this kind of thing. It was fun and a pretty good kids' movie.

The only thing really missing was Billy Mumy.