Slashdot Mirror
Netflix Remaking Lost In Space (ew.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Classic sci-fi show Lost in Space is making a comeback. Netflix is developing a new version of the series, according to Kevin Burns, the executive producer in charge of the project. "The original series, which lasted three seasons and 83 episodes, is set in a futuristic 1997 and follows the Robinson family's space exploration. After the villainous Dr. Smith (Jonathan Harris) sabotages the navigation system, they become helpless and, yes, lost. (The robot tasked with protecting the youngest child, the precocious Will, utters "Danger, Will Robinson!" — a phrase that still tortures this reporter.)" Burns has been trying to bring the series back for more than 15 years, and it looks likely he'll finally get his chance.
I was a little kid when I saw that show, and even then, it was obvious it was a piece of crap.
The bottom of the barrel, we scrape it here.
What next, "My Mother, the Car"?
A quote from director John Huston: "There is a willful lemming-like persistence in remaking past successes time after time. They can't make them as good as they are in our memories, but they go on doing them and each time it's a disaster. Why don't we remake some of our bad pictures - I'd love another shot at 'Roots of Heaven' - and make them good?"
I also remember seeing "Lost in Space" when I was a kid. Yes, it sucked badly, so if any show ever needed to be remade, (and fixed), that was it.
There was an attempted remake in 2004 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt07... but the pilot was so terrible it was never picked up. You can find some clips on Youtube but it's painful to watch.
I often wondered why there is such a tendency for reboots in TV and movies. Why re-make something when you could make something new? Then I realized something. In today's society of perpetual copyrights it is nearly impossible to create something new that would not be considered derivative of some existing work. The path of least resistance is to license a known entity to shield the show creators from a nearly inevitable barrage of lawsuits from people with rights to any movie, show, novel, comic book, or whatever, seeking to get a piece of the profits.
The creators of the reboot can then derive freedom to re-invent the premise with even wildly variations on the theme so long as they retain enough of the character names, plot elements, and so forth that they can logically claim it is still a derivative of the original. The ability to bring in fans of the original work no doubt allows for some insurance of success for the series.
This is why, IMHO, we can't have anything new. We've built up such a history of copyrighted works that anything that is not completely foreign to a potential audience will no doubt be considered a derivative of some existing work. Anything that is so foreign to be considered truly novel is so unlikely to be successful that the chances of finding someone willing to fund the effort would be very small.
Lost in Space sounds like a basis upon which someone could build a very entertaining universe. It could also turn out as badly as the original and the movie.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Back in the 60's, Star Trek had to compete with Lost in Space as some viewers and a lot of TV execs considered them basically the same. Which is silly. Star Trek rarely had costumed monsters of the week. Lost in Space never missed them.
Both shows shared some writers, directors, guest stars, and even monster props by the same people. So the two shows DID have some things in common. But not premise or most content.
And now, Netflix is remaking Lost and CBS is launching a new Star Trek series. They shall compete again.
Nothing changes.
Sig for hire.