• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Revisiting Space: 1999...

Economy in all things. Less is more. When the story's over, just stop. That's actually something that's quite common to British drama tv and films. We don't need peple to explain what's happened, we don't need cosy wrap-up scenes and family moments.
Granted there are some series where episode endings drag on, but then there are those where a "tasteful" amount of time is given after the end of the main story line. Star Trek episodes seem to do this very well. It's not a need to explain anything, it's getting character perspective on what took place. An ease down of tempo. Even Dr. Who had plenty of episodes that didn't end so abruptly.

And... Ed Bishop is incredible. It's one of the best drama performances I've seen in anything.
Well, I think he had his moments, but frankly, if he gave such astoundingly high quality performances, then why did his career fizzle out after that? He was never in the same level of spotlight role ever again. I'm not saying he needed to be of Shakespearean heritage, but his characterization of Straker could have used more dimension. Don't get me wrong--I think he showed some great talent in a few episodes; maybe it was a side effect of the directing.

Well, I'm not so sure. As much as I love the programme, I did find it starting to tail off towards the end, as they moved away from affecting human drama and more into high concept "bizarre alien plot of the week stuff" and I really don't think it could have sustained doing that for another series. Thanks God we got Space: 1999.
It was just the first season. I saw a pretty logical progression to the alien invasion. There was plenty more material to explore, had more imaginative writers been brought on board. It's true that we could have only taken so many more of the same plots: UFO's attack moonbase; Aliens employ UFO decoys while main attack fleet gets through to Earth; Skydiver crew overwhelmed with UFO targets; Mobiles on the hunt for escaped UFO's; Aliens secretly start a base on Earth; SHADO enlists the help of NASA; Aliens possess human beings to do their dirty work for them; and so on. You could only pull off these kinds of plots so many times. There were a few terribly botched episodes that could have been revisited too, like the probe that follows a UFO back to the home planet (seriously stupid, as the UFO's have far faster speeds--better to have a homing device attached to a UFO that is allowed to escape).


Of course, what's rarely mentioned is that the proposed second series was not going to be a direct continuation of the first. For a start, Anderson and his team didn't even start to work on it until 2 years after the original show had wrapped. It was going to be very different, set entirely on the Moon in the year 1999, with a new Moonbase. Different writers were involved - notably Christopher Penfold who went on to be the chief writer on Space: 1999. That's why it was so easy for them to adapt the pre-production work into the concept of Space. It's not even certain if any of the original cast would have featured in UFO 1999 - so I really think the show would have been closer to what eventually became Space than it would have been to the original UFO series.
I take it you meant "second season" of UFO. I do know that it was intended to have a change as you've outlined. I think a lot of this all rested on Lew Grade, the main financier of Anderson's productions, which partly contributed to the gap in time. I do agree that the original UFO moonbase was seriously limited and frankly the "one shot" interceptors was a weak idea (giving UFO's a chance to get away). But an expanded moonbase would likely mean more episodes dealing with outer space encounters with UFO crafts, which doesn't have a good deal of potential. It's no wonder why it was eventually decided on the breakaway idea, to have the moon travel through space so that the possibilities for stories would be wide open.

Well, I'm not going to defend the physics of the breakaway. As a former astronomy student, I'm well aware that it's nonsensical. But does it matter? No, it does not. It's fiction, it's a fantasy. It's the nature of the show that strange and inexplicable things happen - what I love is that the show rolls with the idea and bloody well makes it work. It's big and it's spectacular. They don't shy away from questioning the very fact that they've survived something they couldn't possibly have done, which opens up the whole notion that higher alien powers (or God maybe) are guiding and protecting them on their journey. It's this thematic material, the existentialist drama that makes the show what it is, that maintains my interest in it. There's plenty in there to get one's teeth into, an emotional, spiritual, philosophical depth that I don't find in many other tv shows. And that's why it work. The lapses in science, well, that's just something I don't worry about, because that's not what I'm watching it for. (Though there are plenty of interesting uses of science in there too.)
Well, I think that if there was supposed to be some "other worldly" force influencing things, it should have been given much greater acknowledgement. It wasn't. Maybe one or two observations from Victor, but that was it. No, it wouldn't be necessary to iron out every detail. It is after all science fiction and some things must be left up to the imagination. But in the face of just outright impossibility, it's not given very much consideration. Even an ambiguous message or sign of some kind would have helped.

And there we differ, you see (apart obviously from the majority of the second series episodes). But Series 1 is the finest space opera type programme I've ever encountered - depth, complexity, and an examination of the mysteries of life and the universe; subtle and well-drawn characters.
Well, you're certainly welcome to your opinion. I don't see any need to debate further on the quality of the programme, although I will heartily agree with you that most of the second season was trash. Losing Victor was a big blow. He was the man of wisdom and insight. When he left, much of that left with the show as well.


Back when I first saw Space: 1999, I had an alternative in mind that might have worked. The idea is that when the nuclear waste piles reach a critical level of intense radiation, an explosion takes place that is unaccounted for. Certainly the nuclear material wouldn't explode of its own accord. What Moonbase Alpha discovers later on, after things settle down, is that the explosion was a start of massive engines inside the moon. The high radiation penetrated deep into the moon, affecting a submerged ancient alien construction. At some point way before human beings roamed the Earth, there was a civilization living on the moon. The aliens excavated strategic portions of it and installed massive engines. The idea they had was to use the moon as a large scale space vehicle. But somewhere down the line the aliens abandoned the moon, leaving behind all of their handiwork. The electrical system was put into a hibernation mode, never completely shut down. When the high degree of radiation was passively detected, the system awakened and the engines kicked in to try clearing the proximity of the radiation source. The nuclear waste dumps were built right in front of an exhaust cluster. So, when the engines ignited, it was all blown into space, sending the moon out of orbit. From there, a pre-programmed course appeared to activate.

Now, of course the Alphans would want to figure out more of what was going on, but initial exploration attempts would turn up nothing. The constructed engines were heavily shielded, with no apparent way to get at them. But, in time, the Alphans would find an access hatch to some of the underground chambers and see if they could figure out what was there and if a way to control the moon's course might be possible. This would be the underlying sub-plot, which would serve as a useful filler in between encounters with other life, planets, and cosmological phenomenon along their journey. So, not only do you have alien intelligence to deal with during the journey, you've also got a mystery to solve right beneath the lunar soil.

If Space: 1999 had done something like this, I'd have been far more interested. ;)
 
Last edited:
And... Ed Bishop is incredible. It's one of the best drama performances I've seen in anything.
Well, I think he had his moments, but frankly, if he gave such astoundingly high quality performances, then why did his career fizzle out after that? He was never in the same level of spotlight role ever again.

I wouldn't say he fizzled out. He's in hundreds of things after UFO. Not all actors want to be big stars. He was an excellent character actor, and was always working - a lot of stage work too. We're obvously going to disagree on the quality of his performance in UFO - that's fine. I can only tell you that I find him mesmerizing.

Well, I think that if there was supposed to be some "other worldly" force influencing things, it should have been given much greater acknowledgement. It wasn't. Maybe one or two observations from Victor, but that was it. No, it wouldn't be necessary to iron out every detail. It is after all science fiction and some things must be left up to the imagination. But in the face of just outright impossibility, it's not given very much consideration. Even an ambiguous message or sign of some kind would have helped.

Apart obviously from "Black Sun", where they encounter an alien entity that guides them safely through a black hole; "Collision Course" which hinges around the fact that they have a destiny to fulfill in the universe, and in which Arra prophesies their future as the progenitors of a new race in the heavens; or "The Testament of Arkadia" where the Moon is stopped by whatever mysterious force there is, so that life can be returned to Arkadia. You know, this isn't just a vague hint, it's showboated right out there in the open. And once you take that idea on board, then more connections can be made. Destroying the Guardian which brings the planet Piri back to life, that could have been part of the plan - even the death of the Space Brain might be part of it, which gives a darker twist to the whole thing - imagine if the alien powers are using the Moon as effectively a bullet to slay the Brain. Because maybe the Brain's influence is holding back the development of the races in that galaxy. Who knows? But it's fascinating to speculate.

You know, the more I think about it, it becomes obvious to me what the story is about - it's an epic journey straight out of classical myth, like the Odyssey or the Aeneid. But it's been recast into futuristic trappings. But there you get gods interfering and guiding the destiny of the epic Heroes, in just the same way. Perhaps that's another reason why the problems of the breakaway or the Moon's impossible interstellar trajectory don't bother me, in the same way that I don't worry about the physical interventions of Zeus in the ancient myths. It's the story, the myth itself that's important, the journey and the discovery that it leads to, not the mechanics of how it might work.

(I suppose most religions must work in much the same way.)

If Space: 1999 had done something like this, I'd have been far more interested. ;)

Well, fair does. All I can reiterate is how much it's affected me in the last 20 years, and how much it's continued to enthrall me.
 
I love UFO, but it needed to be fleshed out more. I think the overall execution was there, but it wasn't perfect. It had rough spots. In Space: 1999 I think it had some nice big ideas, which really interesting SF aspires to, but it suffered in terms of inconsistent execution. As I said before the second season is essentially a write-off. It had a few okay episodes, a lot of disappointments and very little competent execution. It seemed to reboot the show in a mostly bad way. The first season reminded me a lot of the first two seasons of TNG: interesting ideas with inconsistent execution.
 
I love UFO, but it needed to be fleshed out more. I think the overall execution was there, but it wasn't perfect. It had rough spots. In Space: 1999 I think it had some nice big ideas, which really interesting SF aspires to, but it suffered in terms of inconsistent execution. As I said before the second season is essentially a write-off. It had a few okay episodes, a lot of disappointments and very little competent execution. It seemed to reboot the show in a mostly bad way. The first season reminded me a lot of the first two seasons of TNG: interesting ideas with inconsistent execution.

S2 of Space:1999 can be summed up with two words :-
Fred Freiberger.

According to his wiki entry he claims credit to the show's second season going ahead by the ideas he pitched but given the way things were executed perhaps it would have been best if the show had had a single season.
 
A single season for Space: 1999 might have turned it into a better remembered cult show, something like the original Kolchak: The Night Stalker. I remember quite liking Kolchak although it had its ups and downs as well.

If I were to relaunch or reboot 1999 I'd forget almost everything about the second season. There's very little there worth remembering or salvaging.
 
S2 of Space:1999 can be summed up with two words :-
Fred Freiberger.

It's easy to blame Fred Freiberger, but I think it's a bit more complicated than that. Gerry Anderson was told that the US backers would only pony up for a second series if he hired an American writer as script consultant to help him tailor the show more towards the American market. That's a fairly vague brief really. To me, the most sensible thing to have done might have been to try and patch things up with George Bellak and brought him back to the production - but well, that's me and the benefit of hindsight. What Gerry did was shop around America for a writer with experience of sci-fi writing. He eventually ended up with Freiberger, and the fact that he had worked on Star Trek was what recommended him in Anderson's eyes - that and the fact that he was available. (An astute person might have asked "why is he available?" of course.) So Freddy was asked to look at Space, and recommend some ways to modify it to the satisfaction of the US backers. And here's where it all went wrong. Freiberger comes up with his proposals for completely redrafting the show. Now what should happen at this point is that Gerry and Johnny Byrne should take this as a working document for further discussion, sit down with Freiberger, and thrash out how to incorporate some of his suggestions into the series format. Instead he makes Freddy producer, and gives him a free hand to do whatever he wants. As executive producer, Gerry could have overruled any decision that Freiberger made, but he doesn't. So if anyone's ultimately to blame for the way series 2 turned out, it's got to be Anderson himself. Why? It's like Gerry just gives up on the show and doesn't have his own vision for it. Maybe he's still smarting from the collapse of his marriage to Sylvia. Maybe. Gerry Anderson doesn't seem on this evidence to be a very strong personality, and also rather lacking creatively. He's obviously an efficient, competent and technically accomplished tv producer - but i think his career and reputation have been largely founded on being able to hire the right creative people for his team: Barry Gray, Derek Meddings, Brian Johnson, Keith Wilson and so on. Having said that, one has to wonder why he dropped the ball so spectacularly when he hired Fred Freiberger! So, is it the absence of Sylvia that's the problem? It's not hard to believe that she was the creative side of their partnership, and also perhaps the strength...

A single season for Space: 1999 might have turned it into a better remembered cult show

Works for me. :)

Actually, that's not just flippancy. For years, I didn't even know that series 2 existed. They didn't show it here.

But like I said before, it's so different in look, style and tone, as well as the lack of character continuity, that it's very easy to think of it as a different show entirely - a reboot as distinct from the original as the two different versions of Battlestar Galactica, say. In fact, I don't know why it isn't viewed like that.
 
It's easy to blame Fred Freiberger, but I think it's a bit more complicated than that. Gerry Anderson was told that the US backers would only pony up for a second series if he hired an American writer as script consultant to help him tailor the show more towards the American market. That's a fairly vague brief really. To me, the most sensible thing to have done might have been to try and patch things up with George Bellak and brought him back to the production - but well, that's me and the benefit of hindsight. What Gerry did was shop around America for a writer with experience of sci-fi writing. He eventually ended up with Freiberger, and the fact that he had worked on Star Trek was what recommended him in Anderson's eyes - that and the fact that he was available. (An astute person might have asked "why is he available?" of course.) So Freddy was asked to look at Space, and recommend some ways to modify it to the satisfaction of the US backers. And here's where it all went wrong. Freiberger comes up with his proposals for completely redrafting the show. Now what should happen at this point is that Gerry and Johnny Byrne should take this as a working document for further discussion, sit down with Freiberger, and thrash out how to incorporate some of his suggestions into the series format. Instead he makes Freddy producer, and gives him a free hand to do whatever he wants. As executive producer, Gerry could have overruled any decision that Freiberger made, but he doesn't. So if anyone's ultimately to blame for the way series 2 turned out, it's got to be Anderson himself. Why? It's like Gerry just gives up on the show and doesn't have his own vision for it. Maybe he's still smarting from the collapse of his marriage to Sylvia. Maybe. Gerry Anderson doesn't seem on this evidence to be a very strong personality, and also rather lacking creatively. He's obviously an efficient, competent and technically accomplished tv producer - but i think his career and reputation have been largely founded on being able to hire the right creative people for his team: Barry Gray, Derek Meddings, Brian Johnson, Keith Wilson and so on. Having said that, one has to wonder why he dropped the ball so spectacularly when he hired Fred Freiberger! So, is it the absence of Sylvia that's the problem? It's not hard to believe that she was the creative side of their partnership, and also perhaps the strength...

That's all very interesting. Thanks for the insight. :)

Warped, I've enjoyed your troll through the seasons and the discussion it's started. It's also reminded me to go back and watch some episodes, so it's all good. :)
 
Warped, I've enjoyed your troll through the seasons and the discussion it's started. It's also reminded me to go back and watch some episodes, so it's all good. :)
It wasn't intended as a troll, or did you mean stroll? I really enjoyed some of those episodes. Also now I can make more informed remarks about the series and the episodes because I've actually seen them all.

I enjoyed some of them enough that I'll be going back at some point to rewatch some of them.
 
On further reflection I'm pretty sure I'm going to go with Kolchak: The Night Stalker and The Prisoner as the next shows I'm going to revisit. In case of The Prisoner it won't really be a revisit because I've never seen anything of it.
 
^ The Prisoner is a very peculiar yet engaging show. There are some rather weak elements in it, but one must watch it with an appreciation for the production period. Some of the stories are incredibly imaginative. The ending is another matter. It seriously takes an enormous leap of faith. At the time it aired, people were furious. They were expecting a more straight forward wrap-up. Instead, they got something quite esoteric and cerebral. Once you're done, visit the Prisoner Gigacorp website for theories explained.
 
The Prisoner is an excellent series, although a few episodes don't quite work. At times it's almost avant-garde, which might be off-putting if you're looking for a more conventional narrative, but I rather enjoy it.

I've never actually seen Kolchack: The Night Stalker. I've been meaning to get to it, but Netflix only has the series on instant, not the two TV movies that preceded it.
 
^^ That raises a good point. Will Warped review the movies as well? I vote "Yes." :D

The Prisoner was a very cerebral series overall, but the ending was not cerebral-- it was psychedelic. Now, I'm usually a big fan of psychedelic, but in this case it was so inconsistent with the overall tone of the series that I found it very disappointing.
 
The Prisoner was a very cerebral series overall, but the ending was not cerebral-- it was psychedelic. Now, I'm usually a big fan of psychedelic, but in this case it was so inconsistent with the overall tone of the series that I found it very disappointing.

Well, I'd argue to say that not only was the series generally cerebral as a whole (although there were some episodes that required little intellect to get), the final episode was very cerebral and yes--psychedelic. And yes, a really big departure from the rest of the series.

There were several problems. First, McGoohan was under a very tight deadline to get a script done, because the attempts made by others were rubbish. And, according to him, all along he had a kind of esoteric ending in mind anyway. If expecting the last episode to be of the same tone as the rest, then you've missed the point. Please take a moment to check out the Prisoner Gigacorp website and see what they have to say. I think it puts the series ending into an easier to digest perspective. I do find that some of the production values were terribly rushed. All the missles and helicopters suddenly appearing was silly and looked very shabbily done. Plus, the "drive home" didn't make any sense, because Number 6 had been in the air previously and seen that the village was located on a remote island. But then... it's all about the "suggestion" of what it meant to be Number 6 and that the village isn't very far from us indeed. ;)
 
Warped, I've enjoyed your troll through the seasons and the discussion it's started. It's also reminded me to go back and watch some episodes, so it's all good. :)
It wasn't intended as a troll, or did you mean stroll?

Gosh! In my neighbourhood we use "troll" as slang for "trawl" - going through something systematically. I didn't mean "troll" in the internet sense. So, sorry, for any confusion, there, Warped. No offense intended, I just wrote it as I thought it! :)
 
Warped, I've enjoyed your troll through the seasons and the discussion it's started. It's also reminded me to go back and watch some episodes, so it's all good. :)
It wasn't intended as a troll, or did you mean stroll?

Gosh! In my neighbourhood we use "troll" as slang for "trawl" - going through something systematically. I didn't mean "troll" in the internet sense. So, sorry, for any confusion, there, Warped. No offense intended, I just wrote it as I thought it! :)
No problem.
 
Please take a moment to check out the Prisoner Gigacorp website and see what they have to say. I think it puts the series ending into an easier to digest perspective.
This is a valid perspective, and I agree with it to a large extent. My problem is not with the finale in and of itself-- just that it's the finale to a different series. :rommie:

The Starlost was absolutely, irredeemably awful. But I liked it as a kid and have the DVD set. :rommie:
Agree and I have the DVD set too.:lol:
Now I want to watch it.... :D
 
^^ It really is bad, I should send you the DVDs. :lol: I was on a retro kick having enjoyed Quark and others and thought it sounded really interesting. Hoo boy....
 
^^ Oh, I have the DVD set (you must have missed that in my post). All I have to do is reach up on the shelf and I am immersed in the wonders of classic science fiction-- hey, it was created by Harlan Ellison, so it must be good, right? :D

Oddly enough, I have been tempted to buy Quark for the retro-ness, too, though I never saw that one during its first run.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top