Space: 1999 revival

[Sindatur]

I don't care. I don't know why I even started caring.

It's not the same name, it's not being made by the same people, it's not even being made in the same country, it's not the same show. Nothing to worry about. Panic over.

Eh, it's Space Opera, something incredibly rare on TV at this point, doesn't matter to me what it borrows from, or how unfaithful it may be to it's original source material (Though I know very little about Space 1999 anyways) I'm willing to give it a shot

 

[Andrew_Kearley]

Well, that's fair enough. I don't watch a lot of television any more, so I have no real idea what's on or not.

 

[Sindatur]

Well, that's fair enough. I don't watch a lot of television any more, so I have no real idea what's on or not.

Yea, I typically don't watch more than 2 or 3 shows a week. Mostly I watch DVDs (Halfway through DS9 S4 right now, when I finish it, I'll most likely watch UFO and Space 1999 next. I recall Space 1999 being on when I was young, but, don't really remember anything about it, UFO I remember more about, since watched it on PBS in the 1980s).

 

[Chris_Johnston]

Now that there'll be a Space: 2099, can we hope for a UFO revival?

One's already in the works...

UFO - Official Movie Site

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Awesomeness!

I wonder if they could tie the two together somehow like both the original series had planned.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

NuBSG was this way. They dropped the Imperious Leader, the dropped Evil Villain Baltar and the sycophantic Lucifer, they (eventually) dropped Boxy and Muffett. In the end, NONE of the storylines from the original BSG got recycled into the new one, and even the whole Pegasus arc had a dramatically different execution from start to finish.

I think BSG stayed pretty close to the core concept of the original BSG though. I mean, you still had a ragtag fleet led by a lone Battlestar taking the last human survivors of a Cylon genocidal attack on a quest to find Earth.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Well, that's fair enough. I don't watch a lot of television any more, so I have no real idea what's on or not.

Yeah, I haven't regularly watched a network TV show since Firefly got cancelled. Probably won't watch this one either until it shows up on Netflix.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

NuBSG was this way. They dropped the Imperious Leader, the dropped Evil Villain Baltar and the sycophantic Lucifer, they (eventually) dropped Boxy and Muffett. In the end, NONE of the storylines from the original BSG got recycled into the new one, and even the whole Pegasus arc had a dramatically different execution from start to finish.

I think BSG stayed pretty close to the core concept of the original BSG though. I mean, you still had a ragtag fleet led by a lone Battlestar taking the last human survivors of a Cylon genocidal attack on a quest to find Earth.

And I'm sure Space 2099 will stay similarly true to the core: a human base on the moon, cut off from its home planet, forced to find some way to survive in the far reaches of space.

The only difference in this case is they wouldn't have to tumble through the galaxy stumbling across an endless series of adventure planets, they'd be searching for useable resources, new supplies of fuel, energy, water, materials to help them not only survive but thrive in space entirely on their own. You'd still have the whole Adventure Planet aspect, but they'd be visiting places like Mercury and Venus, Ceres and the asteroid belt, the moons of Jupiter (Io would make for an interesting episode in and of itself), the methane lakes of Titan and the icy rings of Saturn.

It would take them at least two seasons just to VISIT all the worlds of the solar system; imagine how long it would take to COLONIZE them.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

^ Oh yeah? Source?

 

[7thsealord]

NuBSG was this way. They dropped the Imperious Leader, the dropped Evil Villain Baltar and the sycophantic Lucifer, they (eventually) dropped Boxy and Muffett. In the end, NONE of the storylines from the original BSG got recycled into the new one, and even the whole Pegasus arc had a dramatically different execution from start to finish.

I think BSG stayed pretty close to the core concept of the original BSG though. I mean, you still had a ragtag fleet led by a lone Battlestar taking the last human survivors of a Cylon genocidal attack on a quest to find Earth.

If you think so.

IMO, the only things the original and the remake had in common were:

1. "A ragtag fleet led by a lone Battlestar taking the last human survivors of a Cylon genocidal attack on a quest to find Earth";
2. Some of the ship designs;
3. Some of the names.

That was it.

Cheezy as the original series was, the main characters were Heroic. In the remake, it was all about making the main characers all go bugfrak nuts and/or devolve into such total dicks that one ended up rooting for the Cylons. IMO.

Ghod, I hope that they don't do that sort of c##p with Space 1999. Good solid space opera, THAT I would like.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I don't care. I don't know why I even started caring.

It's not the same name, it's not being made by the same people, it's not even being made in the same country, it's not the same show. Nothing to worry about. Panic over.

Exactly, nothing to worry about. The thing is, even if this show turns out to be the worst show of all time, Space 1999 still is out there for you to enjoy. It's not like they have to destroy every copy of the original and ban people from liking it before this can be made.

And if this is good, then there's another (rare) good sci-fi show to enjoy. All is well.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I don't care. I don't know why I even started caring.

It's not the same name, it's not being made by the same people, it's not even being made in the same country, it's not the same show. Nothing to worry about. Panic over.

Exactly, nothing to worry about. The thing is, even if this show turns out to be the worst show of all time, Space 1999 still is out there for you to enjoy. It's not like they have to destroy every copy of the original and ban people from liking it before this can be made.

And if this is good, then there's another (rare) good sci-fi show to enjoy. All is well.

That kind of rational thinking is not allowed here!

Don't do it again.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

^ Oh yeah? Source?

A source for what?

My totally unsupported speculation that a space opera that habitually sets its stories on REAL planets, using real science and a hyper-realistic depiction of what humanity's first baby steps into space might actually look like would be both very time consuming and very entertaining?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

^ Oh yeah? Source?

A source for what?

My totally unsupported speculation that a space opera that habitually sets its stories on REAL planets, using real science and a hyper-realistic depiction of what humanity's first baby steps into space might actually look like would be both very time consuming and very entertaining?

Your post read like an assertion that that's what the premise of Space: 2099 was going to be. Upon rereading it a third time, I still think it reads that way:

And I'm sure Space 2099 will stay similarly true to the core: a human base on the moon, cut off from its home planet, forced to find some way to survive in the far reaches of space.

The only difference in this case is they wouldn't have to tumble through the galaxy stumbling across an endless series of adventure planets, they'd be searching for useable resources, new supplies of fuel, energy, water, materials to help them not only survive but thrive in space entirely on their own. You'd still have the whole Adventure Planet aspect, but they'd be visiting places like Mercury and Venus, Ceres and the asteroid belt, the moons of Jupiter (Io would make for an interesting episode in and of itself), the methane lakes of Titan and the icy rings of Saturn.

It would take them at least two seasons just to VISIT all the worlds of the solar system; imagine how long it would take to COLONIZE them.

Much as I agree that a hyper-realistic space opera confined to the solar system could, if properly written, be extremely entertaining, I doubt Space: 2099 will follow that path. On the other hand, I wouldn't mind if they did what you suggest, provided it was properly written. But being properly written is always the big qualifier, isn't it?

 

[EKeelerWasRight]

"If realistic science is a yardstick for what makes good TV sci-fi, then there’s never been a good TV sci-fi show." Bull. See links below. "The only difference in this case is they wouldn't have to tumble through the galaxy stumbling across an endless series of adventure planets, they'd be searching for useable resources, new supplies of fuel, energy, water, materials to help them not only survive but thrive in space entirely on their own. You'd still have the whole Adventure Planet aspect, but they'd be visiting places like Mercury and Venus, Ceres and the asteroid belt, the moons of Jupiter (Io would make for an interesting episode in and of itself), the methane lakes of Titan and the icy rings of Saturn. It would take them at least two seasons just to VISIT all the worlds of the solar system; imagine how long it would take to COLONIZE them. " Yes, I feel exactly the same way, mate. Even Trek would have been a very different beast if they had kept the focus on exploring planets in a realistic way. The nearest we have ever had is this, which may be of interest to you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Odyssey_(TV_series) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0395417/combined It is hard SF, filmed in a mockumentary style.

 

[EKeelerWasRight]

First post. Sorry, it didn't seem to recognise my para breaks. ^

 

[EKeelerWasRight]

Reposted for readability

If realistic science is a yardstick for what makes good TV sci-fi, then there’s never been a good TV sci-fi show."

Bull. See links below.

"The only difference in this case is they wouldn't have to tumble through the galaxy stumbling across an endless series of adventure planets, they'd be searching for useable resources, new supplies of fuel, energy, water, materials to help them not only survive but thrive in space entirely on their own. You'd still have the whole Adventure Planet aspect, but they'd be visiting places like Mercury and Venus, Ceres and the asteroid belt, the moons of Jupiter (Io would make for an interesting episode in and of itself), the methane lakes of Titan and the icy rings of Saturn.
It would take them at least two seasons just to VISIT all the worlds of the solar system; imagine how long it would take to COLONIZE them. "

Yes, I feel exactly the same way, mate. Even Trek would have been a very different beast if they had kept the focus on exploring planets in a realistic way. The nearest we have ever had is this, which may be of interest to you:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_O...28TV_series)


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0395417/combined


It is hard SF, filmed in a mockumentary style.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

"... Yes, I feel exactly the same way, mate. Even Trek would have been a very different beast if they had kept the focus on exploring planets in a realistic way. The nearest we have ever had is this, which may be of interest to you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Odyssey_(TV_series) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0395417/combined It is hard SF, filmed in a mockumentary style.

I believe Defying Gravity was somewhat derived from Space Odyssey. I prefer to refer to Defying Gravity as The Wrong Stuff. It was bad, and not in a good way.

 

[EKeelerWasRight]

Thanks, Asbo. I hadn't heard of that but I am just reading about it now. (To the mods, sorry for being a nuisance with reposting above.) I will go back to my habitual lurking now.

 

[Professor Zoom]

I believe Defying Gravity was somewhat derived from Space Odyssey. I prefer to refer to Defying Gravity as The Wrong Stuff. It was bad, and not in a good way.

OH GOD, DEFYING GRAVITY, just when I thought I had forgotten that TURD. OH, JEEEZ. Now, I have to start drinking all over again.

What an AWFUL show that was.