Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

Lost in Space (1998)

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> Lost in Space (1998) Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Lost in Space (1998) - 24/4/2012 9:14:52 PM   
Phubbs


Posts: 658
Joined: 3/4/2012
Hey you remember Matt LeBlanc? he was in 'Friends' for virtually the entire of the 90's and just like Jennifer Aniston he simply can't shake his 'Friends' persona, yes...him -_-

So this is an adaptation of the rather lame US TV series of the same name which always kinda seemed like a rip off of 'Star Trek' with kids. Being you typical 90's action flick the film is chock full of terrible cgi from a really nasty looking space alien monkey thing to lots of shockingly bad looking light/space effects.
There is a combination of model work which in places does look reasonable but alas most other areas of the film such as the sets are really poor and rubbery in appearance, whilst costumes are merely dull and unoriginal.

The plot is a complete jumbled jigsaw of a mess involving the age old notion of time travel, unfortunately you really have to have a tight plot to pull this off annnnd this doesn't. You don't care about any of the characters down to stale acting, Lacey Chabert looks as if she's been swimming the whole time and is oddly quite sexy with her squeaky voice, she was 16 at the time I believe, should I be locked up?. Even Hurt can't inject quality into this pantomime, Oldman fares somewhat better but there really isn't anything he could of done.

The original series was camp family space age fun so of course the film was never gonna be serious sci-fi but clearly they wanted it to be semi serious. This was the problem because the whole thing is basically a cartoon or as I like to think of it 'Batman and Robin' in space...with Matt LeBlanc who was clearly added to capitalize on his moment in the limelight. Just another attempted fast food franchise rolled off the Hollywood factory line, badly conceived, poorly made and vanished into obscurity.

< Message edited by Phubbs -- 24/4/2012 9:16:18 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Lost in Space (1998) - 26/4/2012 2:41:06 PM   
Emyr Thy King


Posts: 2177
Joined: 13/4/2006
From: The Grid
I wish I could summon up the strength and will to say more, but I can't. It's utterly woeful and nonsensical. Some wasted talent here with William Hurt and Gary Oldman. The latter I imagine had to undergo cognitive therapy to get over it. The CGI spiders are certainly dated and look horrible. The young kid's older self seem like a hairier version of Brian Thompson. The siblings were annoying, Matt LeBlanc was precisely that: blank. I think Mimi Rogers just sort of became background instrumentation. I could probably recall the ship's nuts and bolts before remembering her character. There's a cheap effort to try and rekindle nostalgia for the series with the Robinson pet family robot but no (they even used the voice!).

I'm curious, why did you want to dredge this one up? . Should've been left gathering space dust in the Oort cloud..

_____________________________

"This whole imbroglio is epiphenomenal"...."demigogic faux egalitarianism" - Will Self

(in reply to Phubbs)
Post #: 2
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> Lost in Space (1998) Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.016