Lost In Space
Lost In Space is exactly the kind of film that audiences these days need: a reminder of what we are missing. However, what we are missing is exactly what this film has. It's funny how audiences can be wowed by films like Titanic, and still attend a film such as this one as be entertained. I'm not bashing the audience, because they are entitled to their own opinion. However, from my perspective on things, I was hoping that this film wouldn't be the run-of-the-mill science fiction that it is. I guess that 1997 Oscar winner just raised expectations too much for me: instead of special effects ruling a film, it opted for story and characters.
Lost In Space is being released just barely after the release of another sci-fi film by the same company (New Line Cinema), Dark City. The latter film is a brilliant and thoughtful motion picture. It reminds us of how the science fiction genre can evoke frightening thoughts out of realistic details of everyday life. Lost In Space, however, is just what its title hints at, and I am afraid that audiences will opt to choose thrilling special effects over story.
What hinders Lost In Space's effectiveness the most is the lack of story, and it is a shame. The film, based loosely on the 1960's cheesy TV show, takes the main characters, throws them into a generic plot, and then grinds them up only to watch them turn into garbage. Of course, I think the funniest joke in this entire movie came at the very last moments (in the closing credits): if you watch long enough--that is, stuck around long enough to watch the end of the film--one of the credits is listed as: Written By Akiva Goldsman. Well, this should be your first sign of trouble, because Goldsman is responsible for last year's worst film, Batman & Robin. But I laughed, because all this time, I thought the script was written by a computer, which threw together plot elements from other movies, and then pieced them together using poorly written characters. Isn't that funny?
The plot, as much as I could make sense of anyway, goes as follows: the Robinson family is one of dysfunction and brilliancy. There's John Robinson (William Hurt, also appearing in Dark City) who spends most of his time with his career than his family; there's also Maureen (Mimi Rogers), who is trying to regain control of her family; there's also Judy (Heather Graham), a brainy scientist who is turning out to be more like her father than she would admit; Penny (Lacey Chabert) is the rebellious one of the family, but just like everyone else, she is extremely smart; and of course, Will (Jack Johnson), the brilliant (but small) kid who has a knack for taking first place in his school's science fairs. The Robinson family is requested (more like ordered) to take a spacecraft to a far-away planet and build a gateway which allows hyperspace travel. Along for the ride is Don West (Matt LeBlanc), a highly skilled pilot who really doesn't want to take the family on a picnic into space (until he sees Judy, of course). This gateway will coincide with the one in Earths' orbit, and it will allow people to travel instantaneously from one planet to the other. Why do this? Because Earth has only about a couple of decades to live.
Unfortunately, this hyperspace travel is dangerous, and without the gateways, one could easily find themselves in another part of the galaxy. It's no surprise that the Robinson family ends up getting lost. An evil Dr. Smith (Gary Oldman), who resents the project, boards the craft and programs the onboard robot to destroy the craft and the Robinson family soon after taking off. However, Dr. Smith gets stuck on board, and soon all hell breaks loose. The Robinsons soon find themselves hurtling towards the Sun, and can't pull out of the gravitational pull. They decide to enact hyperdrive, and go straight through the Sun. Alas, they end up "lost in space."
Of course, this is just the beginning. The family will encounter time warps, which launch them in the future; alien spiders, which detect heat and light; and of course, the usual family troubles. In fact, this latter element is so underdeveloped and cliche that it makes the sci-fi elements seem good. The director, Stephen Hopkins, commented on why he wanted to produce this film, "Lost In Space is a clever and sophisticated adventure story that touches on family issues, making it different from other sci-fi films." Well, if I ever met Hopkins, I would first ask if this script was the actual one he initially read. Clever? Sometimes. Sophisticated? Never. As for the family issues it does touch on, well, they are just incredibly cheesy (think Party of Five toned down for five year olds).
Perhaps this is Lost In Space's biggest error: while trying to renovate the 60s series for the 90s, it couldn't find the right balance between cheesy and seriousness. While trying to balance them, the story ends up mostly leaning towards cheesiness, and usually not intentionally. The Robot has been revamped for the 90s, but still has the voice of the 60s (Dick Tufeld). I still can't understand why this Robot character is supposed to be here. All he really does is provide scenes of technical triumph and the normal, "Danger, Will Robinson, Danger!" I know that without this character, the film would have progressed along different lines. But heck, almost anything would be better than this. The dark look of the film gives it a serious tone and mood, and it really doesn't fit together well. The music also tends to draw attention to itself by seeming nonexistent. In other words, the music is so wrong that most people will just tune it out. There are some moments that are very effective, such as when the sound is removed completely, and then interrupted by a big explosion. Of course, there just aren't enough of these moments to save the film.
The most crucial element (aside from the writing) is the acting, and Lost In Space is pretty bad in that aspect as well. There are really only two standouts: Matt LeBlanc and Lacey Chabert. Both are TV stars (LeBlanc for Friends and Chabert for Party of Five), and both know how to work this film. LeBlanc is given a very bland and uninteresting character, but he turns him into the comic relief. God knows the film doesn't need anymore, but LeBlanc has a cynical side to his wit which shows that he almost realizes how cheesy this film really is. And then there is the scene-stealing Chabert who is so effective that I was trying to figure out why she was in this movie. Chabert, with her helium-high voice and short stature, shines with a glow of energy that everyone else lacks. I'm not saying Chabert was excellent, but her performance was very good compared to the others. William Hurt, who did a magnificent job in Dark City, stays afloat through most of the film, but his character just drags him down. Mimi Rogers has a few good scenes, but her few good moments are topped by her many more moments of boredom. Heather Graham, who was just great in Boogie Nights, is flat and stale. Jack Johnson, as Will Robinson, is so painful to watch that you just want to kick him a lot. Then there is Gary Oldman. A very reliable actor who manages to come out of bad films unscathed has done just that. However, my respect for this man is beginning to waver, and I just hope he can regain his composure with his next outing. And if you can remember the 60s series, there are some cameos from the cast of that show, including June Lockhart as the principal (she played Maureen originally) and Mark Goddard as the General (he was the original Don West).
Tecnically, Lost In Space is a triumph. The special effects are top-notch, providing some visually stunning scenes. But, as we learned with Independence Day, special effects alone can not carry a film (by the way, after watching ID4 a few more times, I dislike it more than when I reviewed it originally). Lost In Space really hasn't learned anything from it. It mainly wants to profit on ID4's success. Why don't they look at Titanic's success, or Forrest Gump's, because both of those had a story to tell. Some of the scenes on Earth are remarkable and awesome, but they are usually cut short to show some of the actors. The alien bugs look fake, but I must give credit to the creators of the Gary Oldman alien effect. That is truly one of the best moments in the film. By the way, I was disputing with a friend over the time traveling rules, which call into play the script. I was trying to theorize whether or not a person would be able to be in the future and the present at the same time. In other words, if a person travels into the future, would they be able to exist as an older version of themselves? I don't think so, but my friend says differently. I guess this is just another of the many script problems.
Lost In Space is rated PG-13, which is rather unusual for a film directed towards families. It has always seemed strange to me when movies that discuss family-related issues are rated over a PG. Lost In Space contains some terror-filled science fiction moments, and some are actually quite frightening. While watching this movie, I kept having flashbacks to Event Horizon, last year's terrifying horror film. It makes you wonder if Lost In Space would have been better as a run-of-the-mill horror movie. My advice to the audience: please, don't support this movie. Go watch Dark City again, because it is much more entertaining, and it has great special effects (if not better than this film).