I'm a little surprised this wasn't more successful than it was. I think it was a timely reboot, which had a good cast and a generous budget and was clearly designed to be the start-up for a series of sequels, which just never eventuated, as the film would have barely made a profit, if any.
Lost in Space was aimed at the family market, but wisely didn't fall into the trap, the TV series eventually did, by focusing 90% of the stories on Will, a comical, rather than villainous, Dr Smith and the robot. Onscreen time is pretty much evenly distributed amongst the characters, with Lacey Chabert's Penny, probably copping the least time and the least interesting storyline. I do think we could have done without the stereotypical family dysfunctions sub-plot too. It really doesn't make sense that the United Global Space Force (UGSF) would send up a family who couldn't be relied upon to work together harmoniously. I also would have personally liked to have seen more of Maureen, but the Matt LeBlanc/Heather Graham pairing was terrific, with the romantic chemistry between Don and a very smart, feisty Judy being a highlight of the film.
I'm always one for a good time travel story and personally didn't mind the one presented here. At the same time however, I think this may have been a reason the film wasn't a huge success. It just does seem incredibly unlikely that after being thrown off course, in the vastness of space the Jupiter 2 would encounter a vessel from Earth from a later time and then afterwards a couple of older members of their crew. Convenient yes, readily believable? Probably not. Still the screen writer was the very experienced and highly regarded Akiva Goldman, so go figure.
However I liked the special effects, especially those relating to the Jupiter 2 and the robot. They paid homages to the originals, whilst significantly updating them. Australian director Stephen Hopkins whose work on this project was pretty thorough in my estimations, has never had a really big hit. I'd liked to have seen him enjoy bigger audiences for Lost in Space, because I would have loved seeing into what uncharted territories a follow-up tale might have taken us.
Lost in Space was aimed at the family market, but wisely didn't fall into the trap, the TV series eventually did, by focusing 90% of the stories on Will, a comical, rather than villainous, Dr Smith and the robot. Onscreen time is pretty much evenly distributed amongst the characters, with Lacey Chabert's Penny, probably copping the least time and the least interesting storyline. I do think we could have done without the stereotypical family dysfunctions sub-plot too. It really doesn't make sense that the United Global Space Force (UGSF) would send up a family who couldn't be relied upon to work together harmoniously. I also would have personally liked to have seen more of Maureen, but the Matt LeBlanc/Heather Graham pairing was terrific, with the romantic chemistry between Don and a very smart, feisty Judy being a highlight of the film.
I'm always one for a good time travel story and personally didn't mind the one presented here. At the same time however, I think this may have been a reason the film wasn't a huge success. It just does seem incredibly unlikely that after being thrown off course, in the vastness of space the Jupiter 2 would encounter a vessel from Earth from a later time and then afterwards a couple of older members of their crew. Convenient yes, readily believable? Probably not. Still the screen writer was the very experienced and highly regarded Akiva Goldman, so go figure.
However I liked the special effects, especially those relating to the Jupiter 2 and the robot. They paid homages to the originals, whilst significantly updating them. Australian director Stephen Hopkins whose work on this project was pretty thorough in my estimations, has never had a really big hit. I'd liked to have seen him enjoy bigger audiences for Lost in Space, because I would have loved seeing into what uncharted territories a follow-up tale might have taken us.