Sign in to follow this  
prometheus59650

Lost in Space Finds Itself at Netflix.

Recommended Posts

"Danger! DANGER!!"

tumblr_mofiyk7Rdm1suadn1o1_400.gif

I just... don't know.

They've tried rebooting LIS a couple of times, and couldn't make it work for the present day.  There was the terrible 1998 movie and the aborted 2002 John Woo-produced remake (which I saw clips of at a convention in Pasadena, and the entire movie on a bootlegged DVD).  

I think part of the basic problem is the premise; the idea of a all-American white bread family shooting off for the stars just feels too... Kennedy-esque/1963/New Frontier-Camelot for the current cultural zeitgeist.  It worked for 1965, but I I'm not sure if it works as well today.   I remember the '98 movie tried to make the family a bit more dysfunctional, but they just came off as annoying people.  Here's hoping new writers might do better.

The article didn't specify details, but I wonder if they've ironed out some of the issues that made the two prior remake attempts misfire.  To be honest? I'm not optimistic.  I might watch the pilot, for old times' sake, but I'm not holding much hope for this one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this isn't a popular idea when talking about a Lost In Space project, but I really hope they will leave Dr. Smith out of this. Reason is simply so the focus can be on the family. As popular as Jonathan Harris made him on the show, it pretty much made 4 of the other cast members rather useless a good chunk of the time (especially Judy and Penny). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this isn't a popular idea when talking about a Lost In Space project, but I really hope they will leave Dr. Smith out of this. Reason is simply so the focus can be on the family. As popular as Jonathan Harris made him on the show, it pretty much made 4 of the other cast members rather useless a good chunk of the time (especially Judy and Penny). 

I agree.

Smith, as a character, is just too much of a pain in the ass for a stranded family of pioneers to keep around.   And how does he show his gratitude?  By backstabbing the Robinson family every chance he gets and basically doing everything they ask him not to do.   I don't know any family that keeps their own in-house villain around for kicks.  He would (and should) be airlocked.  

Granted, Smith was memorable (as portrayed by over baked ham Jonathan Harris), but only in the way that an exceptionally bad toothache is memorable.   If there is to be conflict in the new show, it should be the kinds of conflict that would arise organically within a family and not from some creepy old prankster who lives to screw everything up...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how they don't include Smith even though I agree. In reality they'd have marooned him on one of the planets they found.

Safer for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this isn't a popular idea when talking about a Lost In Space project, but I really hope they will leave Dr. Smith out of this. Reason is simply so the focus can be on the family. As popular as Jonathan Harris made him on the show, it pretty much made 4 of the other cast members rather useless a good chunk of the time (especially Judy and Penny). 

Sounds good to me.  :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how they don't include Smith even though I agree. In reality they'd have marooned him on one of the planets they found.

Safer for them.

The idea of keeping a traitor/saboteur/spy along with one's family (!) is counterintuitive to every protective instinct a parent/guardian has for one's children.  It'd be absurd to keep Smith around for several years since he apparently has no problem with screwing the Robinson family over every chance he got, and did so repeatedly throughout the show.  

Pretty much EVER bad situation I saw on the show from S2 on could be traced to Dr. Smith's fault, either accidentally or deliberately.  By pure logic, they'd have to strand him somewhere away from the group for their own safety (and they could've done so humanely), or... they'd have to simply kill him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smith could work in the same way as Gaius Baltar worked in the new Battlestar Galactica. Yes, he's responsible nice mess they gotten themselves but his culpability is hidden or offset by some useful or even essential capabilities. Think of the snarling villiany of John Collicos in the original BSG vs James Callis, who frequently reminded me of Dr Smith. An erudite, self-interested coward who was nevertheless endearing and ultimately redemptive. There were third season Lost in Space episodes where Smith was remarkably and contritely self-aware (see The Time Merchant). You certainly can't and shouldn't recreate the Jonathan Harris take on Smith but a creative reimagining with flashes of Harris could make him as compelling character as the new Baltar. Good writers and good actors can make the full ensemble work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lost in Space without Dr. Smith? To me - he's like the best part. Instead of removing him for fear that he makes the family look bland - write the family in a better manner.

The idea of keeping a traitor/saboteur/spy along with one's family (!) is counterintuitive to every protective instinct a parent/guardian has for one's children.  It'd be absurd to keep Smith around for several years since he apparently has no problem with screwing the Robinson family over every chance he got, and did so repeatedly throughout the show.  

Pretty much EVER bad situation I saw on the show from S2 on could be traced to Dr. Smith's fault, either accidentally or deliberately.  By pure logic, they'd have to strand him somewhere away from the group for their own safety (and they could've done so humanely), or... they'd have to simply kill him. 

Or simply make it less apparent that he is behind a lot of their problems? As Yorick highlighted - like BSG did with Baltar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say I've ever had much interest in Lost in Space.  I only saw it once or twice when I was a kid, so I have no nostalgia for it.  I did attempt a year or two ago to watch it from the beginning, but I only got about 15 episodes in and just lost all interest. It was feeling more like a chore really. 

I remember seeing the lousy movie, but I remember little of it. Some friends and I like to get together and watch bad movies every now and then...maybe the Lost in Space movie and Battlefield Earth would make a nice duo of awfulness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smith could work in the same way as Gaius Baltar worked in the new Battlestar Galactica. Yes, he's responsible nice mess they gotten themselves but his culpability is hidden or offset by some useful or even essential capabilities. Think of the snarling villiany of John Collicos in the original BSG vs James Callis, who frequently reminded me of Dr Smith. An erudite, self-interested coward who was nevertheless endearing and ultimately redemptive. There were third season Lost in Space episodes where Smith was remarkably and contritely self-aware (see The Time Merchant). You certainly can't and shouldn't recreate the Jonathan Harris take on Smith but a creative reimagining with flashes of Harris could make him as compelling character as the new Baltar. Good writers and good actors can make the full ensemble work. 

I think this is what makes it harder to swallow in the original LiS that they just didn't pull a "Martian" on him (leave him with a habitat and some seeds and leave him behind) Smith there was worse than dead weight. He was Gilligan essentially dragging the family into trouble or making a situation worse, and at least Gilligan didn't do it from a place or self-serving greed.

This Smith has to be more indespensible, so at least an argument can be made for why he stays. 

Edited by prometheus59650

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the article calls it a "comedy." It didn't start out that way, it evolved into it, when it became obvious that the trio of Will, Dr. Smith and the Robot worked for both writers and audiences and sort of devolved into that whole camp shtick later on.

Will I watch? I dunno. I've seldom felt compelled to revisit the original, even though I have fond memories of watching at as a young kid. It just didn't stand up the way, say, Star Trek or The Outer Limits did, or even The Invaders. All Irwin Allen's 60s shows are kind of cool, fun concepts that on an episode-by-episode storytelling level, just didn't stand the test of time. (No Time Tunnel jokes, Sehlat Vie!) :P

One of the best Robot designs ever, though.

This just makes me wonder what happened to the Space: 1999 reboot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the article calls it a "comedy." It didn't start out that way, it evolved into it, when it became obvious that the trio of Will, Dr. Smith and the Robot worked for both writers and audiences and sort of devolved into that whole camp shtick later on.

Will I watch? I dunno. I've seldom felt compelled to revisit the original, even though I have fond memories of watching at as a young kid. It just didn't stand up the way, say, Star Trek or The Outer Limits did, or even The Invaders. All Irwin Allen's 60s shows are kind of cool, fun concepts that on an episode-by-episode storytelling level, just didn't stand the test of time. (No Time Tunnel jokes, Sehlat Vie!) :P

One of the best Robot designs ever, though.

This just makes me wonder what happened to the Space: 1999 reboot.

I love the concept of a family "lost in space". It's not trained scientists or soldiers but just people trying to survive. I do wish they don't make it some "comedy".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something many may not know about, but there are actually two original Lost in Space pilots, one that was shown, but the original one did not include Dr. Smith in it (scenes fitting Smith in were added in or reshot). It was only after someone decided the show needed a catalyst of some kind to provoke things and such. Smith was never actually intended to be there to begin with. 

I too find it odd that they wouldn't have just marooned Smith somewhere early on. In the movie, John and Maureen actually talk of killing Smith but she talks him out of it with the old "we aren't murderers and what message does that send to our kids" argument. 

I agree that it was season 2 when the show went off the rails. Season 3 did try to fix the problem of too much Smith and Will but they never went all that far from it. Another issue with season 2 is how odd it was they were on the same planet for much if not all the season and they had all these people just coming upon them. I always found that weird for some reason. 

The movie wasn't that bad, but I didn't like how they had the family tearing itself apart. Casting was wrong too. LeBlanc and Grahm are fantastic in comedy, not SF/action, and Rogers wasn't old enough to be believable as the mom. I've also always been bugged by the studio planet set (same for the Genesis planet in ST3) and that shooting it in England made it to where Bill Mumy couldn't take part as the older Will (couldn't get enough time away from Babylon 5). I did however love the cameos by the other original cast. And despite Grahm being miscast, it was nice to see the most underused character from the show being made into an important member of the family instead of just helping mom set the dinner table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that it was season 2 when the show went off the rails. Season 3 did try to fix the problem of too much Smith and Will but they never went all that far from it. Another issue with season 2 is how odd it was they were on the same planet for much if not all the season and they had all these people just coming upon them. I always found that weird for some reason. 

As I recall, they never tried to trade with anyone for fuel or anything either, which seemed strange to me, but then, everyone always seemed to want them dead.

Also, I kind of like the movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lost in Space without Dr. Smith? To me - he's like the best part. Instead of removing him for fear that he makes the family look bland - write the family in a better manner.

The idea of keeping a traitor/saboteur/spy along with one's family (!) is counterintuitive to every protective instinct a parent/guardian has for one's children.  It'd be absurd to keep Smith around for several years since he apparently has no problem with screwing the Robinson family over every chance he got, and did so repeatedly throughout the show.  

Pretty much EVER bad situation I saw on the show from S2 on could be traced to Dr. Smith's fault, either accidentally or deliberately.  By pure logic, they'd have to strand him somewhere away from the group for their own safety (and they could've done so humanely), or... they'd have to simply kill him. 

Or simply make it less apparent that he is behind a lot of their problems? As Yorick highlighted - like BSG did with Baltar.

Baltar's misdeeds were more a result of his personal weaknesses than any deliberate malice; and he could get away with it because there were usually enough players to spread the blame or the 'guiding hand' of fate (his "Head Six/Angel") who would clear his name in time.   But even he was put on trial and tortured.  Not sure that would play in "Lost in Space."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lost in Space without Dr. Smith? To me - he's like the best part. Instead of removing him for fear that he makes the family look bland - write the family in a better manner.

The idea of keeping a traitor/saboteur/spy along with one's family (!) is counterintuitive to every protective instinct a parent/guardian has for one's children.  It'd be absurd to keep Smith around for several years since he apparently has no problem with screwing the Robinson family over every chance he got, and did so repeatedly throughout the show.  

Pretty much EVER bad situation I saw on the show from S2 on could be traced to Dr. Smith's fault, either accidentally or deliberately.  By pure logic, they'd have to strand him somewhere away from the group for their own safety (and they could've done so humanely), or... they'd have to simply kill him. 

Or simply make it less apparent that he is behind a lot of their problems? As Yorick highlighted - like BSG did with Baltar.

Baltar's misdeeds were more a result of his personal weaknesses than any deliberate malice; and he could get away with it because there were usually enough players to spread the blame or the 'guiding hand' of fate (his "Head Six/Angel") who would clear his name in time.   But even he was put on trial and tortured.  Not sure that would play in "Lost in Space."

Not unless it's a radical departure, but I doubt that's Netflix's style. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lost in Space without Dr. Smith? To me - he's like the best part. Instead of removing him for fear that he makes the family look bland - write the family in a better manner.

The idea of keeping a traitor/saboteur/spy along with one's family (!) is counterintuitive to every protective instinct a parent/guardian has for one's children.  It'd be absurd to keep Smith around for several years since he apparently has no problem with screwing the Robinson family over every chance he got, and did so repeatedly throughout the show.  

Pretty much EVER bad situation I saw on the show from S2 on could be traced to Dr. Smith's fault, either accidentally or deliberately.  By pure logic, they'd have to strand him somewhere away from the group for their own safety (and they could've done so humanely), or... they'd have to simply kill him. 

Or simply make it less apparent that he is behind a lot of their problems? As Yorick highlighted - like BSG did with Baltar.

Baltar's misdeeds were more a result of his personal weaknesses than any deliberate malice; and he could get away with it because there were usually enough players to spread the blame or the 'guiding hand' of fate (his "Head Six/Angel") who would clear his name in time.   But even he was put on trial and tortured.  Not sure that would play in "Lost in Space."

Not unless it's a radical departure, but I doubt that's Netflix's style. 

I think it's certainly possible to retool the the Robinson family (and their robot) and make them interesting enough on their own; thus, they wouldn't need a villainous, mustache-twirling lurk-a-bout living on the ship...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the article calls it a "comedy." It didn't start out that way, it evolved into it, when it became obvious that the trio of Will, Dr. Smith and the Robot worked for both writers and audiences and sort of devolved into that whole camp shtick later on.

Will I watch? I dunno. I've seldom felt compelled to revisit the original, even though I have fond memories of watching at as a young kid. It just didn't stand up the way, say, Star Trek or The Outer Limits did, or even The Invaders. All Irwin Allen's 60s shows are kind of cool, fun concepts that on an episode-by-episode storytelling level, just didn't stand the test of time. (No Time Tunnel jokes, Sehlat Vie!) :P

One of the best Robot designs ever, though.

This just makes me wonder what happened to the Space: 1999 reboot.

I love the concept of a family "lost in space". It's not trained scientists or soldiers but just people trying to survive. I do wish they don't make it some "comedy".

It could be fun, although I hope they mix comedy and drama!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the article calls it a "comedy." It didn't start out that way, it evolved into it, when it became obvious that the trio of Will, Dr. Smith and the Robot worked for both writers and audiences and sort of devolved into that whole camp shtick later on.

Will I watch? I dunno. I've seldom felt compelled to revisit the original, even though I have fond memories of watching at as a young kid. It just didn't stand up the way, say, Star Trek or The Outer Limits did, or even The Invaders. All Irwin Allen's 60s shows are kind of cool, fun concepts that on an episode-by-episode storytelling level, just didn't stand the test of time. (No Time Tunnel jokes, Sehlat Vie!) :P

One of the best Robot designs ever, though.

This just makes me wonder what happened to the Space: 1999 reboot.

I love the concept of a family "lost in space". It's not trained scientists or soldiers but just people trying to survive. I do wish they don't make it some "comedy".

It could be fun, although I hope they mix comedy and drama!

Comedic moments here and there, yes.  But I don't want it to descend into all-out camp.

And yes, that Space: 1999 reboot... whatever happened to that?  Guess they got stuck on a revised title...:giggle:

And yes, I agree; I loved LIS as a kid, but it didn't hold up to my adult scrutiny.   Some things are better left as fond memories.   "The Invaders" is an Irwin Allen show I can still get into, however; I did a rewatch of the entire show about 4 years ago, and it was even better than I remembered.   The opposite was true with LIS.  

And the B-9 (hehe) robot was also designed by Robert Kinoshita; who also designed the equally iconic Robby the Robot for the 1956 classic "Forbidden Planet".  He was a genius, that man...

574dd9094469b7d4cbbd42f0f121e4df.jpg

war2.png

^
Robby even guest-starred on the original LIS... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this