image stabilized TOS

[MGagen]

Interesting that in The Corbomite Maneuver when the extras in the corridor are moving from one wall to the other you can see the set walls moving, guess they weren't that sturdy.

Try any of that blocking with the TOS movie-era Krell-shaped corridors. As you lurch toward the wall, reeling from the impact, the first thing that happens is your foot is stopped cold by the narrowness of the bottom of the corridor. Next, you throw out your hands, hoping for a hand rail, or at least a solid wall to stop you pitching head over heels. This area of the bulkhead being the furthest away, you continue your fall, unstopped; until your head impacts the upper section of the bulkhead that angles out toward you, cracking your skull and knocking you cold.

Always hated the movie era halls. They are a perfect example of "just making it look cool" with no thought given for actual usability. Yes, I know there are built in storage bins. But the constitute a hazardous work environment.

M

 

[NTRPRZ]

I'd love to see some image stabilized scenes from Lost in Space. I think June Lockhart once said they had the Jupiter II set on rollers so that the shaking, etc., would look more natural.

 

[Maurice]

I'd love to see some image stabilized scenes from Lost in Space. I think June Lockhart once said they had the Jupiter II set on rollers so that the shaking, etc., would look more natural.

I don't think that was the case at least from everything I have seen of the Jupiter 2/Gemini 12 sets.

 

[Metryq]

I saw a documentary a long while back on all the Irwin Allen productions. One of the actors, I can't recall who, said that the director would bang a bucket, shouting directions, "Action! Action! Everybody tumble to the right! Left! More action! Excitement!" (Bang!Bang!Bang!)

I've seen lots of photos of the LOST IN SPACE sets, and there's no way they were mounted on gimbals or rollers. That kind of set building is terribly expensive—and dangerous. The rotating habitat in Discovery for 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY was much more predictable and sedate than a shaking set, yet the crew had problems with falling lights and other hazards.

Other gimbaled sets were used in 2001, as well as other movies, such as Astaire dancing across the ceiling in ROYAL WEDDING. But LOST IN SPACE was different. There were many shots where the planet exterior could be seen through the forward viewport. There's no way the crew gimbaled the Jupiter 2 and the entire planet set. I can imagine smaller vehicles being gimbaled, such as the chariot for the ocean-crossing scenes.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN77b9DqEbc[/yt]​