by Ron Higgins

Jan 25, 2000

First of all, a disclaimer... I have never seen the <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Title?%22Lost+in+Space%22+(1965)">original TV series</A>. The only thing I knew about it before going to see this movie was that the TV series was "campy" and it had a robot in it that kept going, "Danger, Will Robinson". So, with that said, on with the review...

So, deep-space exploration has started, and a planet has been located that can sustain human life. The problem is that this planet is 10 years away using conventional propulsion technologies. However, wormhole technology has been developed that will make the trip virtually instantaneous. While this is great news, the downside is that the wormhole needs a "gate" on each side for the travel to work consistently. Without a gate on the other side, you never know where in the galaxy you'll end up!

Starring <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Name?Hurt,+William">William Hurt</A> as professor Robinson, <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Name?Rogers,+Mimi">Mimi Rodgers</A> as his wife, Maureen. The rest of their family consists of <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Name?Graham,+Heather+(I)">Heather Graham</A> as the older daughter Judy; <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Name?Chabert,+Lacey">Lacey Chabert</A> (from "Party of Five") as the younger daughter Penny; and <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Name?Johnson,+Jack+(II)">Jack Johnson</A> as the young son Will.

<A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Name?Oldman,+Gary">Gary Oldman</A> plays the part of the evil Doctor Smith.

Dr. Smith sneaks on board the spacecraft to sabotage the mission, but has a small problem and ends up still being on board after the mission has been launched. (oops)

So, with the help of fighter pilot Don West (<A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Name?LeBlanc,+Matt">Matt Leblanc</A>), they avoid certain disaster by engaging the HyperDrive, even though there's no gate on the other end, and end up in some completely random part of space. (Lost in Space)

The special effects were good, and the movie was loud (lots of sound), but the story line was weak, the characters weren't well developed, and from what I've heard about the original series, this movie was way too serious.

It borrowed the gate idea from <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Title?Stargate+(1994)">Stargate</A> and other movies, and the ship that they were traveling in (Jupiter) reminded me of the KITT car from <A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/Title?%22Knight+Rider%22+(1982)">Knight Rider</A> when all these pieces started popping up and out of the ship before it engaged the HyperDrive.

There was also a computer generated monkey-like character thrown into the script for no apparent reason.

Who is the target audience for this movie? Certainly not the Sci-Fi fans, since there is little substance here....Doesn't sound like it'd be fans of the original series, because it's so different....Maybe people will go see it because of Gary Oldman and William Hurt, I don't know.

I rate this movie a Wait For Rental. Unless you've got nothing better to do, I wouldn't bother. While I feel it's good to see movies on the "big screen", you need to weigh the fact that you're going to invest time and money to see this movie in a theater when you could be doing something else...

Copyright 1998 - <I>Ron Higgins No unauthorized publication or distribution without the consent of Ron Higgins.</I>

 

by Tom Kleewein

Jan 25, 2000

Despite the poor casting of Matt LeBlanc as Major West, "Lost in Space" is an exceptional film. Fans of the original series should enjoy it.

Unfortunately, the film had the potential to be much more than it was. As it is, however, it's a good start toward reviving the franchise. (Look for more "Lost in Space" films in the future!!!)

Overall, "Lost in Space" is a very good film, but it misses the mark on true greatness.

 

by Brian Lane

Jan 25, 2000

I loved this movie! It was exactly what I would expect from a big screen version of one of my favorite childhood TV shows. Great special effects, great sets, great ideas, loads of fun. If you're looking for a serious sci-fi, then go rent Contact, but if you are just looking for a fun movie experience, then go see Lost in Space

 

by Jason Blalock

Jan 25, 2000

Well, I've been having a bad week, so I thought going to a movie that would numb my mind for a couple hours would be good therapy. (a bit like a legal drug...) I was right. This is NOT high art. By any standard. However, I was, for the most part, entertained by it. All of the space F/X were great. The script, even though it was fairly clunky, had some good lines, especially the bickering between Will and Penny. And Gary Oldman, as the bad guy, was of course great. (you know what would be worth seeing? Both Gary Oldman AND Tim Curry as villians in the same movie...) It does have some problems. About 2/3 of the way through, the entire tone of the movie seems to change, and it introduces a REALLY whacked-out plot involving time travel. I don't know how much this will irritate other people, but it got to me -- I'm brutal on time travel moviesbooks. Up until then, I was having great fun. It still wasn't bad, I just had my disbelief brutally dissuspended. Also, while the space F/X were incredible, the CHARACTER graphics were not. Slork or whatever the little space-monkey thing is named was NEVER integrated into the movie. He looked like a cartoon that had been pasted onto the film at the last minute - a rush job? (and for that matter, he had no purpose at all except to look cute) Ditto for the bad aliens, but Stephen Hopkins is a good enough action scene director that I really found myself not caring the monsters looked kinda fake. Oh, and Bruce Boughton has a great score. (which, unfortunately, is ruined on the soundtrack release) Overall, I give it a "good" primarily because it IS fun, in a campy kind of way, and because the space effects (of which there are a lot) will REALLY lose out on the small screen. However, you wouldn't miss much if you waited and caught it at a second-run theatre.

 

by Lori

Jan 25, 2000

This was an excellent movie. Fast paced and energetic, it kept the attention of myself, my eleven year old and my fifteen year old. This picture followed the basis of the old series fairly well, without the camp. The special effects are spectacular, and altho it could use a little more character development, this is a movie with a finite period of time to use. Hopefully, like the Star Trek movies, there will be many more Lost in Space episodes to follow.

 

by Glenn 'Joe Lunch Box' Stern

Jan 25, 2000

First of all, in response to what some other critics have written about Lost In Space...No SciFi or Action/Adventure movie of this caliber should ever be recommended to be seen, for the first time, on someone's TV set in an acoustically poor living room. This is meant for big screen THX digital sound, hands down!! Secondly, no one should review this movie if they weren't a fan of the TV show. Some aspects that people might think were out of place, were done to tie to the TV show (like the Blawp which was the 90's Bloop, Penny's Debbie in the TV show). I was a big fan of the TV show as a kid, and was looking forward to this movie ever since I heard it was being made. I wasn't disappointed. The movie centers around the Robinson family just before and during their journey to a distant star system to setup another planet as the next earth. Problems occur and they end up lost in space. So, what makes this movie worth seeing??!!Many things. The adult actors are experienced and top notch. I think they adapted the story very well from the original TV show, into a mid 21st century setting. I liked how Major West was set into the mission. I thought Gary Oldman was a perfect Dr. Smith. And Penny was funny as a reluctant mission member. The way they got lost in deep space was much more believable than in the TV show. Sound effects throughout were well done. Visual effects were non-stop, and generally very good. Special kudos go to the designers of the interior of the Jupiter 2, it has to be seen to be believed. Costumes were cool, and the robot was so complex it deserved more screen time to fully appreciate the work they put into it. Some clever futuristic gadgets appear in the movie, too. I think young girls will get a kick out of the Penny character, and older boys will identify with Major West. Like almost every movie, there were things that weren't perfect or could have been done better. The alien spiders and the Blawp were too fake. Wil's 'genius' could have been used more. John and Maureen were a little boring. And the way the ship left the planet in the end, was a little hard to swallow. But, barring a few minor plot & character flaws, this was a fun, visually stimulating adventure for fans and non-fans of the TV show, alike. We have been starved, recently, for a good SciFi movie, and Lost In Space satisfies the appetite very well at this time. Go see it, and enjoy the ride. Let's hope this will turn into a series that is much more exciting and fun than the Star Trek movie series.

Remember, SciFi movies are for the open minded. If you hated them in the past, you probably will hate this one. Too bad for you.

 

by Mark Tisdale

Jan 25, 2000

To be honest, I am a fan of Lost in Space, having watched the reruns in the afternoons of my childhood, but I was prepared for this to be a really bad remake. Other Lost in Space fans may shoot me, but the original series was poorly done even for it's time. It ran the gamut from greatness to some of the worst episodes imaginable. So, it was frightening to imagine all the directions this movie could go.

As it works out, what we come out is a dramatic retelling of some of the best of the original series but with characters that are stronger than their counterparts and weaker. In particular, the female characters are much stronger this go round, and Prof. John Robinson isn't quite so perfect. To me, what made this movie great wasn't all the eye candy special effects(which were fantastic), but the story of a family that wasn't able to find one another until they got Lost In Space. See this movie because it is a very human adventure. And while you're there, enjoy everything else the movie has to offer from the eye candy (except for the Blarp/Blawp creature that you apparently have to be five to appreciate) to the twists and turns the plot takes.

 

by Mark O'Hara

Jan 25, 2000

Ever since my wife bought me a toy "B-9" Robot for our anniversary, I had wanted to see the newest incarnation of "Lost in Space."

Aside from the characters, it's not much like the campy 60's series. (Of course, I didn't exactly recognize the campiness at the time; I was too busy hiding my eyes during the alien scenes. "Lost in Space" was the only TV show scarier than the monster scenes in "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea"!)

Following the premise of the series occupied much of the running time. But it's a good premise: the Robinson family's animation is suspended while the Jupiter 2 cruises to a planet ten years away. Their journey is interrupted by a 90's version of B-9 -- only slicker, butch; but the booming voice is the same. Anyway, the adventures the family encounters after they are lost are worth watching: mostly smooth computer-generated critters, and a version of the vile Doctor Smith that made me and my 12 year-old son shiver. (No, I'm still not de-sensitized to the horror that monsters are supposed to instill!)

Though I like William Hurt immensely (no one could have played the reluctant travel writer in "The Accidental Tourist" better), he is miscast as John Robinson. OK -- the head of the family is a heady scientist, but Hurt I can't see as action hero. The rest of the cast is solid -- the ubiquitous Gary Oldman (is he British, or what?) is eminently dislikable -- though not nearly as goofy as his television counterpart.

Get ready for another franchise. "Lost in Space" is entertaining. I'd pay to see a sequel, especially with the chance it might have just a shade more camp and self-reflexive humor.

 

by David Wood

Jan 25, 2000

I'm bitter because I was just suckered again. But let me explain: Lost in Space is actually an interesting concept, literarily and sci-fi-wise; the effects were spectacular; William Hurt is an amazing actor (with a few great sci-fi movies under his belt - see Until the End of the World); Gary Oldman isn't so shabby either. And then we have Heather Graham. Did you see Drugstore Cowboy? Hmmm... but we digress. But as usual, there's a problem, and his name is Akiva Goldsman.

To my great amusement, they always put the writer's name in very SMALL print on posters and trailers. This goes along with the current thinking in American moviemaking, which is that the writer is really not a very important part of the process. This, in turn, explains why people like Akiva Goldsman continue to get work after writing movies like Batman and Robin.

Picture Akiva as Doctor Smith. It's a going to be a Fantastic Voyage. William Hurt and his sit-com family have to be delivered to an Alien World to begin the Evacuation of Earth. It's a dangerous mission, but all the necessary steps to avoid catastrophe have been taken. The Jupiter 2 Spaceship is so Advanced that it barely needs its rough-riding and crass pilot (Director Stephen Hopkins)... but then, as if with a soundtrack by the Beasty Boys, enter the screenwriter: SABOTAGE.

What's good about this movie? The visual effects team did an amazing, amazing job. The ship, the robot, the computers, the sets and props were all at a level of slickness worthy of a much different, better movie - and all while being eerily nostalgic of the original TV material. In fact, with the exception of that shameful Disney refugee of an alien delivered by the Henson people, the special effects team deserved to have their OWN movie. Since we're naming names, I have some guesses about who is responsible for this spurious burst of talent in what would otherwise be a complete loss: Norman Garwood (Hook, Brazil) and Ray Lovejoy (2001) are here. Unfortunately, this time their agents appear to have been asleep at the wheel. Don't worry guys, it happens to the best of us.

The movie they ended up with was actually good for about the first thirty or forty minutes. There are some exciting space fight scenes. The obligatory plot developments, featuring cameos by the still struggling ex-cast of the original Lost in Space (i.e. June Lockhart), are tolerable. There are hints of Time Travel. The suspense actually builds.

Then we get lost. Lost in the land of bad science and bad cliches. The actors (looking visibly embarrassed) do a pitiful job of clinging to what little bits of character they can find in their roles. Mimi Rodgers ends up having to do a bad impression of Louise Jefferson (you did not go, girlfriend); the poor kid from Friends ends up having to ruin what was otherwise a decent acting job by having to speak his lines; finally we culminate with a flourish by Mr. Goldsman that is practically Las Vegas Vaudevillian; an attempt to rip-off both the ending to Star Trek III and Return of the Jedi <B>at the same time.</B> No, Akiva, not even if James Kirk and Billy Dee Williams team up is it possible to achieve liftoff by flying into the ground. Ahh well, another perfectly good liberal arts education gone to waste....

 

by Robert Chappell

Jan 25, 2000

This "Lost in Space" is a faithful updating of the black and white pilot to Irwin Allen's original TV series. That alone will make it both commendable to and enjoyable by all those who enjoyed the original, with the altruistic Robinson family mission jeoparised by the dastardly activity of a truly malevolent Dr Zachary Smith. This is truly a big screen, big sound system viewing experience, and it should be partaken of in the cinema. However, spectacle is not all that you get. Although the story itself is no X-file, the dialogue has some truly lyrical moments, with the producers allowing their tongues to stay firmly in their cheeks with features such as a homage to "The Waltons"--"Good night John...", and a flareburst that looks remarkably like the face of Daffy Duck. It's inevitable that viewers of the TV series will get the most from this film. Gary Oldman puts all of the original menace of Dr Smith into his characterisation, while William Hurt gives us a much better developed Professor John Robinson that the late Guy Williams was given scope for on the small screen. Matt LeBlanc gives us the full testosterone treatment as Major Don West, although his greatest achievement is in re-creating the "I'll kill Smith" ethos of TV without ever actually saying those words. The lead characters have strong support from Heather Graham and Lacey Chabert as Judy and Penny, and there are charming cameos for TV cast members June Lockhart, Mark Goodard, Marta Kristen and Angela Cartwright. And the "voice of the robot" is still the very distinctive Dick Tufeld. The inevitable star character is Will Robinson, ably played by Jack Johnson and Jared Harris. It's not giving away anything that Will's interventions save the Robinson family. Cinematically, interesting and convincing special effects sit well in gothic lighting and set design, which is complemented by an atmospheric score by Bruce Broughton (fear not though old friends, the Johnny Williams original theme is reprised for the end credits!).Above all, despite this being a TV cult spin-off movie with some very disturbing undertones (the Robinsons are looking for a way for humans to escape the despoiled planet Earth, after all), this is actually a fun movie for all comers, both initiate and ingenue. Go along, expect nothing and have fun.

 

by Kurt

Jan 25, 2000

I personnally thought the movie was great! As did my wife and our best friends who joined us. I am a fan of the original series, but really only the first season black and white episodes. It seems as though it is geared towards Lost In Space Fans, but I think it will be enjoyed by just about anyone. It is a Sci-Fi, but it is also comical, and dramatic at times, which will draw an audience of various kinds. It is a movie I would have no problem taking my kids to see, (which seems to be very difficult to do anymore), but I would recommend for any age group. The special effects were fantastic, the new robot is awesome, the story, though based on the series' original pilot, was very good. I had my doubts before going, not knowing what to expect, but was very surprised at how much the people there were really liked it. Remember, it bumped titanic down to second place, only to assume that position itself, that kinda speaks for itself.

 

by Billy O'Hara

Jan 25, 2000

The special effects are great, especially the opening space sequences. The story is pretty good. Some of the dialogue is predictable, especially between Judy Robinson and the pilot, Major Don West. Other than that, the movie is pretty well written, but I still can't figure out the purpose of the monkey/mouse hybrid thing they threw in there. I don't even remember the thing was called.

It was definitely left open for a sequel. And, since it is the first movie to beat out Titanic, they'll probably make one.
-Billy O'Hara, age 13

 

by Terry Crouse

Jan 25, 2000

This movie is watchable only for its visuals and great sound. Otherwise, it's a total waste of money -- both for the audience AND ESPECIALLY the producers.

I have always been a fan of the TV series. It's great fun. The characters are idealistically portrayed and very entertaining, especially the moronic Dr. Smith. This is what made the show worth watching. In the movie, however, the characters absolutely, for lack of a better word, suck. They're a collection of big-time losers. Space-family Robinson has been completely trashed!

I don't see how any serial "Lost in Space" fans can possibly like this movie. It's nothing but a cheap cash-in on TV popularity, and for this reason it disgusts me. I think the screen play must have been written by a bunch of first-graders participating in some sort of Career-Day project.

Fortunately, the movie industry HAS been successfully able to produce some great special-effects movies lately ("Starship Troopers," "Titanic"), and with the promise of several more such films coming out in the next couple of summers, maybe the standards will be raised a little, so to speak, so that great visuals and big sound won't be the only draw.

 

by M.W. Claunch

Jan 25, 2000

WARNING! WARNING! WARNING!

I just came back from "Lost in Space." Lost is not the right word for it. This has to be one of the worst movies I've seen all year. It was insulting. Just how dumb do these people think I am??? It had the worst dialog I have heard in I don't know how long. Sure some of the effects looked cool, but I went to see a movie not a special effect company's demo real. In fact the demo would have been a much more enjoyable experience. I see in the instructions for filling out this review I'm supposed to put in "Spoiler" alerts. Well there was nothing to spoil because there was not plot. I'm mad at everyone who saw it that told me it was kinda dumb, but kinda fun. Are you kidding me??? Kinda!!! This is not a wait to rent or even wait for cable. If it ever shown on free TV I guess you could watch the first 5 or 10 minutes before changing the channel. I not only want my bargain matinee money back I was the two hours of my life back! Well I hope I've made this clear. DANGER WILL ROBINSON is right.

 

by Bill K.

Jan 25, 2000

Lost in Space (1998). Dir: Stephen Hopkins. Starring William Hurt, Gary Oldman, Mimi Rogers.

I can't believe that a fine cast is put to waste over a campy remake of a campy 60's T.V. show. But, money talks in Hollywood. The so-so special effects are the only thing worth mentioning. The plot iscornball, similar to the T.V. series. If you want to waste five bucks, this is the movie to see! My only advise to Hollywood is stop toying with T.V. remakes. It's a sign your losing your creative touch in producing movies that are worth the price of admission.

 

by Jason Whyte

Jan 25, 2000

"Lost In Space" is one of those kinds of movies that you can tell from looking at the poster that the movie already sucks. I feel bad for seeing a movie like this; it is so unoriginal and so contrived that at every moment, like the dismal "Men In Black", that I wanted to start talking back at the screen, criticizing it just like the man and the two androids on "Mystery Science Theater 3000" (Rent one of their videos if you don't know what I mean)

Ironically, the big dumb robot that Will Robinson (Jack Thompson) makes when on the spaceship looks like a MST3K creation? Coincidence? Nah; "Lost in Space" is actually based on an old TV series which I have never seen, about the world's most cliched family, who get marooned in some galaxy in space while trying to find another planet that can sustain human life. Pass the Nytol.

Yet the movie has that big-but-not-that-big cast: The sneering and boring William Hurt as the dad, the pretty but also boring Mimi Rodgers as the mom, the wispy voiced Lacey Chabert as the bratty daughter, the human question mark Matt LeBlanc as the ship's captain (just think Matt Dillion but twenty times dumber), and the strange inclusion of Gary Oldman as the sabateur of the ship who wants to destroy the Robinson family. Oldman is a gifted villian actor, but he's in the wrong movie. We need to get him back in movies like "Air Force One."

The movie's only redemming qualities include a few good effects and a good sound mix. It worked for "Independence Day" but not here. When you're lost, you're lost.

Grade: D

Technical Review

Picture: 2 A disappointing picture with blurred out colors, greyish blacks and poor contrast. The picture is problematic through and through.

Sound: 4 The sound mix is fantastic. Mixed in all three formats, the mix is pretty damn exciting. Only letdown is the fact that the movie is quiet and boring in most parts, so you never really get any jolt out of that (you did in "ID4" because the quiet sounds seemed real). However, the action scenes really kick in digital.

Photography: 4 Filmed in Panavision, a finely framed film which is not afraid to fill the whole frame with its compositions. Occasionaly here and there there is some bad framing, but oh well.

133 minutes. jwhyte2@hotmail.com. ICQ#4339199

 

by Richard LaFreniere

Jan 25, 2000

Although not what I expected, this movie is worth seeing with someone who also enjoys movies about Space, Time, and technology. I was rather impressed with the Special Effects in the movie...gave me a thrill to my ears; and, most importantly, to thank the Odeon for actually playing it in DTS formatinstead of the usual mono. The Story line is pretty self-explanitory to the movie title "Lost in Space".The Robinson family boards a vessel to embark on a mission to another world capable of supporting human life somewhere across the galaxy using their "Hyperdrive" (which for you trek fans, is equivilant to Warp 9.999999999975 How do I know that? well, at Maximum Warp in Star Trek, you still can't just fly through the Sun! It is a bit big to be reflected by the Warp Field!) A sabatour boards the vessel, and as you should know, messes things up pretty bad for the family, and causes the vessel to become lost somewhere in space. The only way back is to navigate to the new planet they originally were scheduled to arrive at. Combined with stunning effects, and a good DTS mix make this film, in my opinion well worth the money that went into it. True, Hollywood should not experiment around with classic television series, this one was made well in comparison...

 

by Travis Else

Jan 25, 2000

Yet another TV show turned into a movie, but not a bad one. This was an entertaining, action-packed, movie well directed by Stephen Hopkins. This movie also has a strong cast of characters and a souped up robot to contribute. I also noticed cameos from some of the characters from the original TV series in this movie. The movies only drawback is the script, which has some strong points in the first half, but falls behind in the last half in a confusing time travel plot. The characters in the script are well writen(except the Penny character), but the only character that resembles his original counterpart is Gary Oldman as Dr. Smith(go figure). The special effects add to the action scenes, but they aren't all that great in some scenes. For example, all the aliens are computerized and they aren't done that well, especially a monkey-like alien they find. If you get past the wierd ending, and that dumb monkey-alien, you should have a good time, but if you're somebody like Siskel and Ebert, don't waste your time. **3/4 out of ****

 

by Matt McDonell

Jan 25, 2000

This movie was good. I think the good guy was extremely hot. I wonder if he is available.

 

by Gary Schmidt

Jan 25, 2000

Is it just me, or did someone else notice how many of the things happening in this movie, including the set, were borrowed from other movies? i.e. Event Horizon, Starship Troopers. Event Horizon: 1. Before zooming into outerspace, the crew get into individual glass compartments 2. they find a long eerie spaceship 3. When scanning for life readings, they get some very unusual readings 4. when the aliens are trying to get to them, they hammer on the metal door just like the evil in EH did. And didn't we see enough space spiders in Starship Troopers to satisfy us, without having Lost in Space ressurect them for another movie? Also, from a logical standpoint, this movie does not make the cut. At times, the crew are holding the evil Dr. Smith at gunpoint. At other times Dr. Smith is allowed to roam the ship creating havoc. Then, sometimes when the crew zooms into outerspace, they rest in glass bubbles. At other times, they are held in place with magnetic chairs. At the start of the movie, the evil Dr. Smith speaks in a normal tone of voice. Later in the movie when he is discovered aboard the spaceship, he develops the whiny accent somewhat like the Dr. Smith had in the original TV series. I would be remiss if I didn't mention that this movie is about 45 minutes longer than I would have liked. A good movie like Titanic can be over 3 hours and still satisfy. A bad movie like LIS can seem too long after you pass the 90 minute mark. Lets just hope there's not a sequel. **1/2 out of *****

 

by John

Jan 25, 2000

Overall unentertaining movie. Only engaging cast member was the little boy-genius. Heather Graham, William Hurt, Mimi Rogers, Matt LeBlanc, and especially Gary Oldman all phone in their performances. The Party of Five girl is exceedingly annoying too.

 

by Shuan

Jan 25, 2000

I never viewed one episode of the 1960 T.V serires Lost In Space, i only went to see the film because of Heather -HOT!- Grahm (and the special effects). The movie didn't turn out that bad, i was expecting a clone of The Power Rangers, what i got was the exact converse. While the the title speaks for the plot, the action and acting was quite good, I especially like it when the little Robinson bottakes control of the robot through a computer to battle out mechanical spiders in a hostile situation.This is fun Sci - Fi action.

Gary Oldman is his old usual self, Matt LeBlank is a tough space craft commandor (proven in the opening scene), William Hurt plays the lead role as Will Robinson, Heather Grahm is his daughter, Mimi Rogers is his wife, and he has another two annoying kids (BIG FLAW).

Like I said the plot was simple, all the characters that i have just mentioned get Lost In Space thanks to you know who.

I won't give away anything (because im just here to tell you if the flick is good or not) but if you like Sci - Fi movies and are in the mood for a no logical good time, see this one.

DO IT FOR HEATHER!

GRADE: B

 

by Don Wozniak

Jan 25, 2000

Very good movie if you like action and adventure. Great performance by Gary Oldman who plays Dr Smith. Oldman has a great knack for playing bad guys.

 

by George Jobson

Oct 12, 2003

A 1998 remake of the old televison series which ran fromm 1965 to 1968 on CBS. Gary Oldman leads the cast of a space ship that got lost and must find it's way home. The cast is increidble and the special effects are wonderful. The film is loyal to the television series and that's a major plus.