TheLittleSongbird Although very fond of the original TV series from the 60s, especially the first season, it is by no means a perfect show and is pretty uneven. It was great and more when at its best (the whole of the first season) but it was near-embarrassing at its worst (the second half of Season 3).Still it had memorable characters (Dr Smith a genre landmark character), a good cast (Jonathan Harris is unforgettable), an endearing campy charm, a dark seriousness in the first season without forgetting to be fun and inventive stories and monsters that made the most of an at the time unique concept. There are worse TV-to-film translations around than 1998's 'Lost in Space', such as 'My Favourite Martian', 'Dragonball: Evolution', 'The Last Airbender', 'The Dukes of Hazzard' and 'The Avengers' (1998).'Lost in Space' however is still one of those films that has its moments and a few good qualities, but one where it has great talent on board yet manages to make one question its existence. Before those defending the film arrogantly accuse people of being too stuck in the past and refusing change, actually there is far more to the problem than it being a disappointing adaptation of the show, in fact that's the least of its problems and while not a terrible film on its own terms it's a long way from good (personal opinion of course).That it has a darker tone than the show, although some critics may disagree, is not the problem necessarily, and actually people would have appreciated the bigger, opened up approach (with technology having advanced a lot since the 60s it was necessary). The first season had a serious, dark tone too (even if fans remembered the campy charm of Season 2 and the over-the-top silliness of Season 3 a little more, judging by the word campy is often thrown around describing the show). The difference was that it didn't take itself too seriously and still managed to be entertaining and inventive. The film version, to me and fans/critics (this is what is meant by this criticism, so contrary to it being a seemingly misleading criticism it's a valid one to me), strips away the fun, loses the charm, takes itself too seriously mostly and has very little imaginative or original about it. It just felt charmless and dreary.Not without its bright spots. It is stylishly and atmospherically photographed and the Jupiter II setting is very cool and the most imaginative the film gets. Some of the special effects are good if never spectacular. The music score has creepiness and gives 'Lost in Space' some energy. 'Lost in Space' gets off to a promising start and gives one the impression "hey this may not be so bad after all", and there are a few nice adrenaline jolts in the action.Casting has its high spots. The best of the lot is Gary Oldman, who actually looks like he's having fun and gives a different, darker and more menacing Dr Smith and it actually works (even though wildly different). Matt Le Blanc may have moments where he's a little smug, which is due to him having some of the worst of the dialogue, but he does have a likable charm too and has a few amusing moments. Jack Johnson is neither too cloying or grating and the characterisation of the Robot is spot on.However, the rest of the cast don't work. William Hurt couldn't have been a blander choice for Professor Robinson, he sleepwalks through his role which cried out actually for the involvement of Bill Mumy. On the other side of the spectrum, Lacey Chabert irritates to a mind-numbing degree and, although the film does try to develop her with particularly those video diaries, she is little more than a stereotypical teen at the end of the day. Mimi Rogers has nothing to do and Heather Graham also grates and has non-existent chemistry with Le Blanc.While 'Lost in Space' is not a bad-looking film on the whole, there are a lot of cheap-looking costumes and some noticeably poor special effects. Particularly for that interminable Space Monkey (Blarp? who is actually for me far more annoying than Jar Jar Binks) and for Smith's spider form (some of the worst spider effects on any visual media, almost as bad as spiders from low-budget SyFy/Asylum films and the infamously terrible ones in the 'IT' mini-series). Really hated the end credits too, they go well overboard with the nausea-inducing surrealism and the overbearing music and as an epileptic it made me feel uncomfortable.Despite some intriguing moments and sporadic amusing moments early on, most of the script (especially for the characters played by Le Blanc and Graham and in the third act) is in 'Batman and Robin'-like cornball and cringe territory. Target audience is an issue, being too silly and trying too hard and failing to be cute for adults and with heavy-handed sermonising and family values to appeal properly to younger children, who will also find some of the ideas (like the time travel elements and most of the final third) going over their heads (and no this is coming from somebody who finds children's taste and intelligence for film under-estimated).The film is far too long and drags to dreary degrees in most of its later stages. Most of the time things are taken too seriously and fun and charm can barely be seen anywhere. Then there is the final act which undoes 'Lost in Space' significantly, where things just get weird, tonally muddled, nonsensical and borderline incoherent, far more so than the second half of Season 3 of the show.Overall, not THAT bad but very lacking in most departments. 4/10 Bethany Cox

Eric Stevenson I do feel kind of bad for knowing very little about the TV show this was based on. When I first heard the title "Lost In Space" I thought it would be about the characters from "Lost" going into space. What? Everyone goes into space nowadays. Anyway, all I really knew was about Dr. Smith and a robot that kept saying, "Danger, Will Robinson!". This movie features a family going into space but uh, getting lost. There's this one weird creature they call Blarp who does virtually nothing throughout the entire movie. I honestly have no idea why this character exists. I actually do kind of like the reveal at the end.We see a future version of Dr. Smith who's actually pretty well designed. Of course, he looks ugly when he's entirely CGI. This movie was also just too long. I saw the longest version at 2 hours and 10 minutes. I guess the acting isn't that bad and some of the action scenes are kind of interesting, but it's mostly pointless. It's actually sad that there were intentions to make a lot more movies in this series as this one ends on an obvious cliffhanger. Honestly, they might have improved in sequels. **

RocketeerFlyer I saw this back in the cinema back in 1998 I liked it then and although parts are a bit wobbly (the special effects at times & Penny's video diaries) overall I still find it GREAT Fun today.Get the home projector out and Give it a Go...The special effects at times now look a bit dated but some still hold up well today, I loved the Jupiter tribute at the beginning (original TV design ship becomes a super duper modern one when it reaches high Earth orbit)Most of the characters are super Fun...Matt LeBlanc's best film playing the macho character Don West William Hurt as the father is terrific (he's always been a good actor)Heather Graham a spunky, sexy lady and more than a match for poor Don.Mimi Rogers as the mother with a bit of attitude. Gary Oldman as Dr Zachary Smith is entertaining viewing "GIVE MY REGARDS TO OBLIVION" (i'm sure Tom Cruise would approve) Even Will Robinson (Jack Johnson) has something about him here.The real weak links (sadly) are Penny Robinson & the stupid and badly done Blarb creature but if you can overlook them or at least live with them? there's a lot of fun to be had here...A super ship, good cast & some terrific scenes in which the crew encounter a huge ship occupied by a swarm of metal spiders, a crash landing on an ice planet, time travel and a GREAT ending with the Jupiter 2 making it's way through the Planet (that's breaking up) only to encounter a black hole! oh and the early pre-title sequence is good too with Major Don West helping his mate in a space battle :)Keep your eyes peeled for cameo's from three of the original TV series cast members (the mother shows up as Will is messing with his computer device turning her into Rambo etc) and the two daughters from this 1960's series show up as reporters at the launch.This is for me an under-rated and FUN sci-fi adventure movie far more deserving of a rating higher than the current 5.1.I give it a solid 7.

FloodClearwater This movie, a remake of the Golden Era of TV show about a Swiss Family Robinson type of group who become "lost" in "space" together with a robot is, there is no way around it, an utter and dismal mess. The film is Hollywood mid-management filmmaking at its most slapdash and least thoughtful. The great crime of the fact of the movie's awfulness is that it sullies the records of two very good actors, William Hurt (Robinson pere, leader of the family expedition to space) and Gary Oldman (sensibly cast in his typical psychological and elegant baddie role, but rather unsensibly turned into a junk-CGI arachnid toward the film's end). On a pure sci-fi interest level, this version of Lost in Space is passable, just. The ships and their lasers are pedestrian but cool enough, the graphics portraying time travel and folds in space are serviceable, the deep space spiders look, well, like deep space spiders. You would think that with colorable sci-fi dressing and Hurt and Oldman, any script and ensemble could soldier through and deliver a worthwhile two hours. This film proves that assumption very, very wrong. Doubtless Hurt, Oldman, and even Matt LeBlanc, who likely had other options during his post-Friends victory lap period, were assured of a can't miss hit when they signed up. They must want to hunt down and flay whomever made them such promises. Watch this version of Lost in Space at the risk of profound regret over the "lost" time spent viewing.