The Sword and Laser discussion
TV, Movies and Games
>
Lost in Space - Netflix
Mod
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm5347988/
and Dr. Smith is now female (Parker Posey)
Danger, Danger, Will Robinson
Full trailer: https://youtu.be/fzmM0AB60QQThis could go either way. I’m not crazy about the new
Finished bingeing it a short while ago.I thought Lost in Space was excellent. I like how they actually took their time to build the story and characters, setting up things that wouldn’t pay off until the final few episodes.
Unlike the Marvel shows where they have maybe 7 episodes of content stretched to 13, they made excellent use of the 10 episodes.
I also really, really, REALLY liked that the characters were all smart. They don’t do dumb things just to move the plot along. When they make bad choices, it’s either for the right reasons or because they don’t have enough information.
It’s a solid, entertaining sci-fi adventure.
Netflix better renew it for a second season, because they can’t leave me hanging off a space cliff like that.
“Danger!”
"They don’t do dumb things just to move the plot along"Uh... Judy in Ep 1? I just started watching and (view spoiler)
Also... do the flashbacks continue or are they just an early episode thing?
PS: (view spoiler)
Yes, lots of stuff is heightened for dramatic effect, but I mean, c’mon, it’s freakin’ Lost In Space.It’s based on a silly TV show that featured characters like a giant talking carrot, followed by a movie that wasn’t any better. The fact that they tried *at all* is huge step up.
And compared to other stuff that’s out there, it’s a lot of fun. It’s no Travelers but it’s a heckuva lot better than most things. Since it’s PG-13, there’s no dumb sex scenes to bring everything to a screeching halt, like in Altered Carbon. Have you seen Star Trek: Discovery? That thing is like getting hit in the face with a hammer.
Is this series perfect? No. But I enjoyed it a lot. I quite liked the character arcs, too.
I might watch more but the first ep pushed a lot of "No" buttons for me. It reminded me of when I first watched SG-U and the first THREE episodes were all about looking for food, water and air. It took 3 hours of time... and we knew they weren't going to all die because the series would end so there was no dramatic tension. Same here for the 'threat' to the two characters in peril - I spent an hour watching them act as if one might die when I knew she wouldn't and the other... well that was kind of good, actually. The very end raised some... interesting questions. I also tend to hate flashbacks.... they interrupt the story and are basically infodumps.
PS: Don't you talk to your carrots?
Mod
You must have hated Lost ;-)
I'm looking forward to watching this. The trailers look ok.
I loved the original LiS as a kid. I watched some of it in it's first run.
Makes me feel really old that it was set 32 years in the future. (1997) Which to us now is 21 years ago :-?
^ My bigger problem is that 1997 felt like a plausible time period for something like that to happen to people of the day, as did "2001" for that movie / book. Yet here we sit barely flinging probes at other planets. *sigh*
Rick wrote: "I might watch more but the first ep pushed a lot of "No" buttons for me. It reminded me of when I first watched SG-U and the first THREE episodes were all about looking for food, water and air. It ..."Without getting into spoilers, what I will say is that all that stuff is germane to plot points which develop later. Things that need to land with authority can’t do so unless you’ve done the work setting them up. Character interactions, whether they be arguments or agreements, need to be based on something, and that’s the case here.
It’s a lot like Ancillary Justice in that way, where it felt like a lot of the stuff in the early part of the book (early? Hell, the first 5/6ths of it) seem like you’re just spinning your wheels, but then you get to the climax and realize that all that stuff was necessary in order to really get what was happening.
In Lost in Space, all the animosity and ill will Maureen and John have for each other early on poisons everything that happens later, even to the point of endangering their survival. It’s one of the reasons the kids act out in small ways. But all of that unpleasantness — which I really hated at the beginning — eventually pays off as they come together as a cohesive unit. That was one area where the film mishandled it but the show employs those exact same themes to better effect.
It’s a tried-and-true formula that’s used over and over again storytelling. Star Wars, The Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy, every buddy cop movie, even the new iterations of Sherlock Holmes, all feature characters who start off as antagonists and end up working together, eventually liking one another. They do that here, as well, to very good effect.
John (Taloni) wrote: "^ My bigger problem is that 1997 felt like a plausible time period for something like that to happen to people of the day, as did "2001" for that movie / book. Yet here we sit barely flinging probe..."Well, America spent three decades systematically tearing down science in favor of short-term profits and then threw 3 trillion dollars into wars. Not much left over for space exploration.
Too bad no other country can get its shit together to carry the banner. China might, but they’re too interested in being the global manufacturing hub to do anything big when it comes to outer space.
Trike wrote: "Without getting into spoilers, what I will say is that all that stuff is germane to plot points which develop later. Things that need to land with authority can’t do so unless you’ve done the work setting them up. Character interactions, whether they be arguments or agreements, need to be based on something, and that’s the case here.
..."
I agree but trying to make me believe the characters will die in the first episode isn't a good way to do that since I know that won't happen. Manipulating the science so that it does one thing here and another there (the rate at which water freezes) makes me aware that they're interfering in how the world works to make points vs setting up the world in one consistent way and letting the drama and situations emerge from that. And (view spoiler)
I get that they needed to string out (view spoiler) but they went for melodrama... literally taking that down to the last minute and I'm just allergic to that kind of overt manipulation, esp when it's a cliché ("will they die? Will we get to them in the NICK of time?" - gee, I wonder...).
Flashbacks... are to me one of those things that I'm probably over-sensitive to. They're a form of showing the creator's hand which takes me out of the story and is a big pet peeve of mine. The problem for me is that, just as you get to a dramatic point , we get "yeah, let's leave at this point and show you a flashback for a bit". I'm not only aware that the flashback was done there deliberately, I usually feel that the information in it could have been presented more artfully.
And Tassie Dave - I skipped Lost once I heard it how it was done.
Don’t watch it then. You won’t like it.
Yeah, after reading some other reviews, I've come to that conclusion. Oh well, I had hope based on your comment that "... the characters were all smart. They don’t do dumb things just to move the plot along" but I can't agree with that at least from the first ep. Combined with the sloppy world building and... Next up! :)I mean, at least there's a new season of Into the Badlands that I've not watched.
I don’t know why you hold an 11-year-old kid to the same criteria as an adult, but whatever.And not liking flashbacks, that’s just weird. Why hate a basic tool in the storyteller toolbox?
But the science thing is something you’re going to have to make peace with, or you won’t be able to watch anything. No SF, no medical shows, no crime shows, no war movies, nothing is scientifically accurate.
In season 2 of The Expanse the Rocinante uses gravity assist from multiple moons to pull off a tricky maneuver to outfox their enemies. Which is actually a sound strategy that is based in real physics. Except they do it in a matter of hours when in reality it would take weeks, probably months, to execute that maneuver.
Heightened for dramatic effect.
In The Martian, the sandstorm that strands Watney on Mars is completely impossible. The Martian atmosphere isn’t dense enough to create a storm that severe.
Heightened for dramatic effect.
Star Trek, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, all have completely imaginary science that is Fantasy masquerading as SF,
As I said, it’s Lost in Space. The fact they based any of it on real science is a win.
I am about 5 episodes in. I just think its fun. There has been much worse sci-fi tv out there. The have spent money on this and it shows. The Robot is amazing. I like that its not a traditional happy family.
I enjoyed it. I really loved the relationships between the siblings, and between the kids and their parents, and even between the parents. I absolutely hated Dr. Smith (view spoiler). There were enough tension and challenges without adding her in. I've read other reviews in defense of her character, and can agree with some of the points made. But still No.
I also liked the new
I wasn't crazy about the robot's design.(view spoiler)
I was sad (view spoiler) But glad (view spoiler)
And I hope Debbie sticks around! : )
My wife and I watched it, and enjoyed it. There were a few kinks, but overall I thought it was well done.Thought I’d seen a confirmation on a season two, but after doing a quick Google search I couldn’t find one, though I did find several mentions that the show’s creators are already hard at work on scripts for a new season.
Mod
They have to have scripts ready to go if/when it is renewed.
I'd be very surprised if this doesn't get a 2nd season.
I never watched the original, so I have no particular attachment (good or bad) to the show. Should I try?Edit: I mean, is this targeted to me? I liked Star Trek Next Generation & DS9 & Voyager. I watch Stargate SG-1 with friends every Wednesday. But without the background of the original, will this mean anything for me? Are they trying to get "everybody" or mostly targeting people who remember it from back in the day?
For my money this is a nostalgia run. It would have about as much context for you as Thundercats would for me.
Terp, there will be those who enjoy the show for its nostalgia, but so far as I’m concerned the show is for everyone.
terpkristin wrote: "I never watched the original, so I have no particular attachment (good or bad) to the show. Should I try?"The original was a campy 1960s family show that bears little resemblance to the current incarnation. Granted, it has its charms, but unless you're into retro tv, you'd probably find it dull.
Kidding. I assume you meant the new one. One of the things that struck me was I couldn't think whom this actually was targeted at. It has the same conceit as the original, being about a family lost in space, but with a PG-13 rating, a creepy robot, and a full-blown psychopath as Dr. Smith, it is definitely not a family show for young children. It's well produced, although some of the science is terrible (if you care about that sort of thing) and the writing is not the best. Overall, I thought it was okay. But hey, it's Netflix, so it doesn't cost anything extra to try the first couple of episodes except your time.
terpkristin wrote: "I never watched the original, so I have no particular attachment (good or bad) to the show. Should I try?Edit: I mean, is this targeted to me? I liked Star Trek Next Generation & DS9 & Voyager. I..."
I think you might like it.
The original season of the 1960s Lost in Space was much more serious sci-fi. It only went for over-the-top camp once Batman became a huge hit.
Mod
Good popcorn sci-fi fun.
Even silly popcorn SF shows need to avoid blind stupid statements. I refer to Ep 3 where they are said to be "trillions and trillions of light years" from their expected destination of Alpha Centauri. The observable Universe has a diameter of under 100 billion light years. I had to look it up, but I knew it wasn't trillions.Had a similar reaction on my reread of Weapon Shops of Isher recently where the big bang was placed some trillions of years in the past. At least for that one they didn't really know the age of the Universe at the time the book was written. Or perhaps a few scientists had an inkling but it hadn't made its way out as general knowledge yet. That was then. Making a stupid error out of such an easily checked fact as the size of the observable universe is just pointless in the Internet age.
Mod
But the actual universe is estimated to be 7 trillion light years across and It could very well be significantly larger than this, or even infinite.
https://www.space.com/24073-how-big-i...
By using Bayesian model averaging, which focuses on how likely a model is to be correct given the data, rather than asking how well the model itself fits the data. They found that the universe is at least 250 times larger than the observable universe, or at least 7 trillion light-years across.
"That's big, but actually more tightly constrained that many other models," according to MIT Technology Review
Assuming the Resolute has gone through a worm-hole or warped space then they could be trillions of lightyears from earth and still be inside our universe..
Yeah, I getcha TD. My problem with that thought is that the observable universe isn't just "what we see," it's what we see for a reason. That is, that whatever may lay beyond isn't visible because the galaxies are receding so fast that light from them won't reach us. Actually, at the currently understood rate of expansion, eventually galaxies will essentially be island universes, unable to see other galaxies. Well, that's quite a long way off in the future, but I think you get the concept.Yes, by the middle of Ep4 (which is where I am now) they have strongly implied they went through a wormhole of some kind and came out in a place they really didn't expect. It's not yet clear if their FTL drive was warp, transition through hyperspace, wormhole, or one of the other SF tropes. Either way they are, well, lost in space.
But if they went to a place in the universe yet unobserved and unobservable, how would they have any idea where they are? Would they be using some FTL telescope previously unmentioned? Which would also have to be small enough to be put on every Jupiter craft. It's just too much for me to swallow.
John (Taloni) wrote: "Even silly popcorn SF shows need to avoid blind stupid statements. I refer to Ep 3 where they are said to be "trillions and trillions of light years" from their expected destination of Alpha Centau..."Maureen actually only says trillions once. So regardless of whether she’s indulging in hyperbole or being realistic, she’s technically correct.
Soooooo we've now got solar panels so powerful that a few of them on a jeep can power it with just a few hours to charge. And that's before (view spoiler)
Also, whyinthehell does everyone have to be going to Alpha Centauri? It's a trinary system fer chrissakes and not likely to have a stable planetary system. Tau Ceti is only another 5 light years further out! Oh, but the general public has heard of Alpha Centauri and not Tau Ceti.
Well, it *is* Lost in Space, not The Expanse. I probably *should* just apply MST3K standards. *grumble grumble*
Re: Hawking radiation - (view spoiler)Why are you watching this show? You really sound like you’re determined to hate it. Let it go and watch something else, fer cry.
It’s always weird to me how some shows get a pass on being scientific while others are condemned for their lapses when they’re both equally dumb. The classic comparison is Star Trek versus Star Wars, where Trek is praised while SW is damned, but it’s a ridiculous distinction. Trek’s so-called science is just as bad if not worse than Star Wars.
Same with The Expanse - the science in that show is utterly ludicrous. Every once in a while they get things right, but it still features completely preposterous and physics-ly impossible nonsense. It’s like they threw in a few scientific phrases and keywords in there and then completely ignored the science behind those terms. In one episode they said, “we’ll use gravity assist!” and then showed an impossible maneuver... yet they somehow get bonus points for scientific accuracy.
Meanwhile, Lost in Space uses actual science and scientific terms more accurately and people go, “Ah, this is bullshit!”
Baffling.
Well Trike, as partial answer, I did watch all of The Expanse first. Of course I'm coming at that from an enjoyment of the books, which largely get it right. Then several people in this thread seemed to like it so I gave it a try. And also, I'm ornery so once I start something I'll tend to finish.As for the show, I'm not hating it, and I reserve the right to complain about anything I want. We're SF fans after all, it's practically a requirement.
As for Star Trek and Star Wars, they've both heavy on the handwavium, to the point of ridiculousness. To be expected in both and I reserve the right to mock those as well.
And in closing, my favorite line so far, in Ep6. "Do you want me to break the laws of physics or lie to you?" I...think it's pretty clear which one this show's writers took!
Trike - for me at least, the problem isn't the handwavey stuff like the wormhole, it's flat out getting some things wrong that are basic known physics (thousands of gallons of water freezing in seconds) AND being internally inconsistent (it's so cold that all that water freezes in seconds but at that same temperature the cast is walking around without helmets and is just fine). Both of those CANNOT be true and it's that in-world inconsistency that annoyed me.The two properties you mention do a different thing - they ask you to assume certain things (FTL, teleportation) that are scientifically silly but once you do, they're generally OK as far as internal consistency (yes, I'm sure you can dig up something specific... note the word 'generally').
Finally - quit acting like people don't have a right to criticize or complain. We do and if it bothers you that's YOUR issue.
Rick wrote: "Trike - for me at least, the problem isn't the handwavey stuff like the wormhole, it's flat out getting some things wrong that are basic known physics (thousands of gallons of water freezing in seconds but at that same temperature the cast is walking around without helmets and is just fine). Both of those CANNOT be true and it's that in-world inconsistency that annoyed me."It’s not impossible, merely heightened for dramatic effect. On that specific thing I’m going to copy-and-paste my post from the SF&F Book Club thread:
Bill wrote: "I was wondering how the water could freeze so quickly around the ship and they are walking around with exposed skin."
The short answer is that the ship’s heat melted the glacier, resulting in a pool of fresh water surrounded by ice. Warm water freezes faster than cold water.
The reason they don’t freeze to death is because air is a poor conductor of cold, and because they’re all still wearing their spacesuits.
That’s one of the things I like about the show: the explanations for everything actually make sense, and the reactions of the characters show that they know this stuff.
For instance, in a later episode (view spoiler)
Rick wrote: "Finally - quit acting like people don't have a right to criticize or complain. We do and if it bothers you that's YOUR issue. ."WTF? I’m not saying anything of the sort, so kindly stop putting words in my mouth.
What I’m saying is that John *clearly* hates hates HATES this show, so I’m wondering why he’s torturing himself by watching it. I don’t understand that masochism, especially when there are a hundred other things to watch.
I watched the first two episodes of Dark Matter and didn’t like it at all. I figured, sci-fi spaceships, that’s for me! Turns out not so much. So I stopped watching it. Killjoys, otoh, I loved. I am eagerly anticipating the next two seasons.
Sure, *try* something that seems up your alley, but why on god’s Green earth would you continue to watch something you don’t like?
Yeah, the Hawking radiation thing was modestly cool. Although further to your explanation above (view spoiler)I then was peeved that both Maureen and the Japanese guy (view spoiler)
Also, as to the robot: (view spoiler)
And here I was liking the fact that the actors seem to be keeping the bump and bruises show to show!! Nice to see another Deadwood alumni. I am ready for Season 2, enough there to keep me interested.
^Hey, that's right! Maureen (the mom) gets injured in the first episode and (view spoiler)I finished it last night. Several silly "TV Moments" in the last few episodes but overall credibly done. I like that (view spoiler)
As for throwing scientific plausibility out of the window, now we've got(view spoiler)
Eh, what the heck. Good job with the plot and character development. For instance, I like how Penny(view spoiler)
I'll show up for the second season.
"The short answer is that the ship’s heat melted the glacier, resulting in a pool of fresh water surrounded by ice. Warm water freezes faster than cold water."You're talking about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mpemba_... which is fairly rare. And it's still unlikely that a huge mass of water will refreeze in seconds, even more unlikely that it will do so and still be warm enough for them to spend hours bare-headed (you can be bare headed in the 20F range perhaps. Not not, for hours, at 0F or below).
I think I'm coming across as making a science argument but I'm not, really. What I see is the writers' hands doing things that might not make sense or be internally consistent because they want something else to happen later and one of the things I'm allergic to in fiction is the overt presence of the creators manipulating things in their fictional world. They had the water refreeze in seconds because it trapped Judy and set up the drama for that hour, nothing else. 5 seconds more and she's fine. 3 seconds sooner and she's out of reach.
Another example is when(view spoiler) So many of the things they do like this could be made to work just fine with not much more effort that it's annoying (to me at least) that they didn't even bother.
My head canon says they got some light genetic engineering before leaving and can last longer in harsh environments. Either that or Redshirts has inured me to the concept of major cast having plot armor.
John (Taloni) wrote: "My head canon says they got some light genetic engineering before leaving and can last longer in harsh environments. Either that or Redshirts has inured me to the concept of major cast having plot ..."Oh, sure. I can make up reasoning for that too. But that's their job, not mine and there's so much good TV out there that I don't bother with stuff that repeatedly asks me to make excuses for it.
Yes, it was pretty much a foregone conclusion. But nice to have it verified:https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/14/17...
Big ups to John Taloni for bringing this to my attention. Season 2 trailer: https://youtu.be/pdwBMPKUV3E
As an unabashed fanboy of this series I am super stoked! Merry Xmas to me!
Mod
For something that isn't Disney, it's feeling very Disney so far on S2.
(view spoiler)
It’s so good.That part of the spoiler about the crash? There’s a reason for it.
Tassie Dave - that's the way I felt about the first ep of the first season. Never watched past that. Other people loved it... /shrug
So... I’m 54 years old and the only reason I mention that little fun fact is because I am very nostalgic about the original series, and it will show below...Season 2 is obviously out and i really enjoy it. Dr. Smith is a female character in this reboot if you didn’t know. Parker Posey IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000205/
does a awfully good job of rebooting the original slimy and conniving Dr. Smith (Cheers to you Parker!) and the series does a fairly good job of character development for the back stories of the Robinsons. The robot is nothing like the original series, but the connection between Will and Robot makes up a lot of the storyline it and is some cool alien tech! More surprises in store there I’m sure. Anyway, It’s something I enjoy more from a character driven perspective than any mind bending technical perspective. I enjoy it... you may too although it is more of a “Saturday Matinee” type series... Danger Will Robinson! ;)
Mod
Did you notice that [spoilers removed]"
and her mother is played by Angela Cartwright (The original Penny)
They have a black daughter, which should drive the racists crazy. I assume it’s Judy since she looks too young to be Major West.
https://youtu.be/I5X3vC-XsU0