Then again, how many times do shuttle pilots need to open the doors while in a vacuum?
If they have to do that, though, they can always depressurize the cabin before they open the door.
Re-Watching Space: 1999
- Thread starter Mysterion
- Start date
Then again, how many times do shuttle pilots need to open the doors while in a vacuum?
If they have to do that, though, they can always depressurize the cabin before they open the door.
There's also the issue of some just being 2 -dimensional cardboard cutouts.
Shhh. You weren't supposed to notice that.There's also the issue of some just being 2 -dimensional cardboard cutouts.
I like the Andrew Kearley Suggested Order (especially since he put Earthbound after Breakaway - I think that the absence of Simmonds from other episodes is too much to ignore), but yes, the viewing order is just a matter of taste 
Kevin McCorry seems to have compiled several different suggested viewing orders and timelines for the show's events. He's proposed such things as a "Wilding Field", which causes the Moon to slow down when entering the gravitational influence of a star system, but accelerate to FTL speeds after departing. He also groups the episodes in such a way that certain planets from different episodes turn out to be within the same star system. As the Moon would realistically take at least a few months to pass through one system, there's enough time for those planets to be encountered in successive episodes ... before the Moon leaves the system and accelerates again. This is treated differently than the Moon going through space warps and the like, which are explicitly called out when they happen.
In at least one of his timelines, "Matter of Life and Death" takes place immediately after "Breakaway". At that point the Moon is moving at fantastic speeds on the outer fringes of our own system, but has not yet gone to FTL. More importantly, the planet encountered in that episode IS Meta (albeit with a new name).
He also provides rationalizations for how they can keep losing so many people and Eagles and still remain operational. And yes, "Earthbound" takes place fairly soon after "Breakaway" too.
None of this stuff is canon, of course, But he appears to go out of his way not to violate anything seen onscreen, and it does go a long way toward smoothing over the inconsistencies.
In at least one of his timelines, "Matter of Life and Death" takes place immediately after "Breakaway". At that point the Moon is moving at fantastic speeds on the outer fringes of our own system, but has not yet gone to FTL. More importantly, the planet encountered in that episode IS Meta (albeit with a new name).
He also provides rationalizations for how they can keep losing so many people and Eagles and still remain operational. And yes, "Earthbound" takes place fairly soon after "Breakaway" too.
None of this stuff is canon, of course, But he appears to go out of his way not to violate anything seen onscreen, and it does go a long way toward smoothing over the inconsistencies.
^ Remember when Mysterion asked for no spoilers?
^^^
Yes, please. If you're gonna post spoilers, please code them. It's appreciated.
So, after some thought will be just be going with the order they show up on the discs as there seems to be no real advantage to the different orders, really.
Also this is going to be a weekend project - after a day at work I'm okay to watch stuff just for me, but if I want to pay enough attention to write about it somewhat intelligently here, I need more concentration. So, will be watching tow or three (maybe four) episodes a weekend. Remember: patience is a virtue.
Som will be picking this back up on Saturday with Matter of Life and Death.
Yes, please. If you're gonna post spoilers, please code them. It's appreciated.
So, after some thought will be just be going with the order they show up on the discs as there seems to be no real advantage to the different orders, really.
Also this is going to be a weekend project - after a day at work I'm okay to watch stuff just for me, but if I want to pay enough attention to write about it somewhat intelligently here, I need more concentration. So, will be watching tow or three (maybe four) episodes a weekend. Remember: patience is a virtue.
Som will be picking this back up on Saturday with Matter of Life and Death.
Not just reaction shots; more political arguments between Koenig and Simmonds, and a whole plot line around Gorski -his dislike of Koenig and poor relationship with Helena.I read once that the initial cut for Breakaway was 2hours but much of that was reaction shots rather than adding anything to the story and eventually lead to the director being canned.
From my own experience if you watch a few eps in a row, the stock footage of Eagles taking off really starts to stick out. Well it's either stock footage or some-one was always leaving a moon buggy on the edge of the pads
Is there a YouTube video of this footage?
No video, but this guy has posted audio clips of deleted scenes from Breakaway. Here's the first one:
and one time an Alan was aboard and it exploded, another time it crashed but thanks to wibbly-wobbly-timey-wimey it was all reset
It was really due to no arcs or continuity as the show was made in another time, before arcs were proven viable. And was more a show comprised of encapsulated episodes as escapism. Unless you were quoting NuWHO's toddlerspeak as a means to parody the format of the time... then it more or less works.
wow gorski was a real prick.
It was really due to no arcs or continuity as the show was made in another time, before arcs were proven viable. And was more a show comprised of encapsulated episodes as escapism. Unless you were quoting NuWHO's toddlerspeak as a means to parody the format of the time... then it more or less works.
More a case of how time was reset by the end the end of the episodes.
For example Carter and Koenig were killed in Another Time Another Place when the Eagle crashed on take off and then Carter was killed when the Eagle explodes in War Games (time resets so Alpha never opens fire so it doesn't get devastated in the counter attack
For example Carter and Koenig were killed in Another Time Another Place when the Eagle crashed on take off and then Carter was killed when the Eagle explodes in War Games (time resets so Alpha never opens fire so it doesn't get devastated in the counter attack
Matter of Life and Death
Well. That happened. Gotta say this was a bit of a letdown plot-wise from Breakaway, but the production values continue to be at a good level. The planet surface looks pretty good for being an indoor set. Where the first episode was well paced and knew exactly where it wanted to go, this seems like kind of a muddle. And the writer here seems to have had the same grasp of antimatter as the writer of TOS's Alternative Factor. And while I get that there's not going to be any real sort of ongoing arc to the series, a bit disappointed that they didn't follow-up with the Meta thread from the first episode. At lest Bain seems to now be capable of actual emotion. Koenig comes across as lot less focused in his leadership here as in the first episode, and his decisions actually end of killing everyone including himself killed - shoulda listened to Prof. Bergman, there pal. Fortunately Dr. Russell gets to click her heels three times and bring everyone back to life. Hoping this is just second-episode slump.
Next up: Black Sun
Well. That happened. Gotta say this was a bit of a letdown plot-wise from Breakaway, but the production values continue to be at a good level. The planet surface looks pretty good for being an indoor set. Where the first episode was well paced and knew exactly where it wanted to go, this seems like kind of a muddle. And the writer here seems to have had the same grasp of antimatter as the writer of TOS's Alternative Factor. And while I get that there's not going to be any real sort of ongoing arc to the series, a bit disappointed that they didn't follow-up with the Meta thread from the first episode. At lest Bain seems to now be capable of actual emotion. Koenig comes across as lot less focused in his leadership here as in the first episode, and his decisions actually end of killing everyone including himself killed - shoulda listened to Prof. Bergman, there pal. Fortunately Dr. Russell gets to click her heels three times and bring everyone back to life. Hoping this is just second-episode slump.
Next up: Black Sun
Well, no -- lots of shows in British TV had story arcs before Space: 1999, like the three Quatermass serials, or Doctor Who, which consisted almost entirely of multi-episode story arcs. And just a couple of years after S'99 was Sapphire & Steel, which consisted of 6 distinct serial arcs of 4 to 8 episodes each. Serials were popular as a way of saving money by reusing the same sets, costumes, and props across multiple episodes. They're not some superior advance over episodic storytelling, just a different format that coexisted with it.
I repost this about the perceived lack of scientific accuracy of "Space: 1999". Interesting.
Regarding scientific accuracy and a critical review of Space: 1999 by Isaac Asimov, Gerry Anderson commented: ‘I think that a show that is absolutely scientifically correct can be as dull as ditch-water. But I think the point he was making was that, if you are going deep into the universe, then you can say whatever you like and that’s fine; but if you’re dealing with subjects that we have up-to-date knowledge on, like the Moon, then you ought to be correct. I think that was a reasonable criticism. But I think the problem with scientific advisors is that if you had a scientific advisor in 1820 he would have told you that it was impossible to fly and to travel beyond the speed of sound. And today they’re telling us that it’s impossible to travel beyond the speed of light. I think, therefore, they are inhibiting to a production, and since the heading is science fiction – underline the word fiction – I don’t really think there’s any place for them.’
(This is the original review by Isac Asimov: Is ‘Space 1999 More Fi Than Sci?)
By the way, I don't think that a scientific advisor in 1820 would have said that it is impossible to surpass the speed of sound.
I know that Jules Verne is considered in the U.S. a writer for kids because butchered translations and Disney movies, but he managed to write good and entertainment stories while trying to be consistent with the scientific knowledge of his time. So, I don't think that to be scientifically sound prevents one from writing good stories.
Regarding scientific accuracy and a critical review of Space: 1999 by Isaac Asimov, Gerry Anderson commented: ‘I think that a show that is absolutely scientifically correct can be as dull as ditch-water. But I think the point he was making was that, if you are going deep into the universe, then you can say whatever you like and that’s fine; but if you’re dealing with subjects that we have up-to-date knowledge on, like the Moon, then you ought to be correct. I think that was a reasonable criticism. But I think the problem with scientific advisors is that if you had a scientific advisor in 1820 he would have told you that it was impossible to fly and to travel beyond the speed of sound. And today they’re telling us that it’s impossible to travel beyond the speed of light. I think, therefore, they are inhibiting to a production, and since the heading is science fiction – underline the word fiction – I don’t really think there’s any place for them.’
(This is the original review by Isac Asimov: Is ‘Space 1999 More Fi Than Sci?)
By the way, I don't think that a scientific advisor in 1820 would have said that it is impossible to surpass the speed of sound.
I know that Jules Verne is considered in the U.S. a writer for kids because butchered translations and Disney movies, but he managed to write good and entertainment stories while trying to be consistent with the scientific knowledge of his time. So, I don't think that to be scientifically sound prevents one from writing good stories.
Last edited:
The implausibility of the whole thing was hilarious in that even if the Moon broke away and reached relativistic speeds, (and reach a new star system every week) - there's NO WAY the Eagles could/should be able to slow themselves enough to be able to land on any other planet, or reach the speeds need to catch up/land back on the Moon afterwads.
Not to mention the infinite supply of fuel that over the series never ran out or got critical. Also the speed yeah, just how fast could those things fly?
Why would they run out? They have the mineral resources of the entire Moon at their disposal. They could always make more rocket fuel. Or, for that matter, build more Eagles.
Could the fourth flaw be that they had an inexhaustable supply of the damn things ala: Voyager shuttles?
When I was doing a series watch earlier this year (late last year?), I thought about counting how many got blasted, but I was already halfway through season 1.
Did they really have smelting facilities?
If they had some spare parts I could see them building a few new Eagles.
Why would you imagine they wouldn't? They built that whole sprawling Moonbase complex. It would've been prohibitive to blast all that material out of Earth's intense gravity well and all the way out to Lunar orbit -- obviously, naturally, they built Alpha in place from local resources. That's the only way Lunar colonization could ever be practical. So of course they have the resources to refine metals, fabricate and assemble large components and technical systems, etc. I would've thought that was self-evident from the very existence of Moonbase Alpha.
According to Geoffrey Mandel's "official" technical notes, Eagles are "constructed by the Engineering and Technics section of Moonbase Alpha using materials and components either shipped from Earth or manufactured on the Moon." So they do have the capacity to do it themselves even without Earth being an option anymore.
