darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
I would tend to agree...their "new releases" for this imprint however all seem to be obscure older films and such that I doubt seriously many people are interesed in. Many of those I suspect probably watch the website.
Roddenberry’s Genesis II and Planet Earth Coming to DVD
- Thread starter Surak
- Start date
I would tend to agree...their "new releases" for this imprint however all seem to be obscure older films and such that I doubt seriously many people are interesed in. Many of those I suspect probably watch the website.
Great! Now (he said ungratefully) can we have The Questor Tapes? Pretty please??
As was stated upthread, "The Questor Tapes" was from Universal, so that's a whole 'nother set of begging that has to be started.
Well, I guess I'd better get started..
upon further review at the following..this is a DVD on demand thing..so they will make your DVD at the time the order is processed..
http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/news/Andromeda-Genesis-II-Planet_Earth/12760
Bummer..
upon further review at the following..this is a DVD on demand thing..so they will make your DVD at the time the order is processed..
http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/news/Andromeda-Genesis-II-Planet_Earth/12760
Bummer..
Does this mean "Andromeda" fits into Trek too?
My copies arrived today. Genesis II is pretty dire; the writing, direction, and acting are uniformly bad. Alex Cord deserves special mention for his weird, spaced-out acting, and for looking exactly like Harry Reems in Deep Throat. I kept waiting for Linda Lovelace (with 2 belly buttons) to show up and teach Dylan Hunt about the 23rd century...
John Saxon and all the rest of Planet Earth are a considerable improvement. The script was energetic, some of the humor was at least worth a grin, and the vibe was generally fun. And Diana Muldaur was great!
I definitely would've watched Planet Earth, had it made it to series. Genesis II, not so much.
The masters are reasonable, considering their age (and the low quality of the originals -- they included quite a lot of grainy stock footage that reminded me of old Disney nature documentaries. Not a lot you can do to make that look HD!)
My biggest complaint is that the photo adorning the front of Genesis II is clearly the wrong pic -- it looks like a still from some '70's foreign film.
John Saxon and all the rest of Planet Earth are a considerable improvement. The script was energetic, some of the humor was at least worth a grin, and the vibe was generally fun. And Diana Muldaur was great!
I definitely would've watched Planet Earth, had it made it to series. Genesis II, not so much.
The masters are reasonable, considering their age (and the low quality of the originals -- they included quite a lot of grainy stock footage that reminded me of old Disney nature documentaries. Not a lot you can do to make that look HD!)
My biggest complaint is that the photo adorning the front of Genesis II is clearly the wrong pic -- it looks like a still from some '70's foreign film.
I agree with your assessment of both films. Genesis II was awful, awful stuff. I hated that whole 70's "everyone in the future wears robes and slippers" thing, the acting (aside from Mariette Hartley) was awful. I get what Gene was going for with the off-beat casting of Alex Cord, but I thought the same thing when I watched him: porn star.
Planet Earth, while still hideous, was lighter in tone and seems almost like a Trek parody. John Saxon, who should have been a big star, was really good as Dylan Hunt. Obviously, they "Kirked Up" the character for the sequel. Just check out the opening fight: he fires his gun - click. No more ammo. Tosses it aside. Then dodges a knife until he can flip the guy and then punch his lights out. Nice.
The "Women's Lib Gone Mad" crapulence was amazingly 70's and too ridiculous to be taken seriously. The film slows to a crawl while Hunt gets Marg drunk, but the final fight is well done. It still looks and feels like every other Earth-bound 70's SF show on network TV. A couple of years later the pilot for the TV version of Logan's Run would look a lot like this...
I do hate paying $20 for DVD-R copies that won't even play on every machine. $10 - $15 would be more appropriate.
Planet Earth, while still hideous, was lighter in tone and seems almost like a Trek parody. John Saxon, who should have been a big star, was really good as Dylan Hunt. Obviously, they "Kirked Up" the character for the sequel. Just check out the opening fight: he fires his gun - click. No more ammo. Tosses it aside. Then dodges a knife until he can flip the guy and then punch his lights out. Nice.
The "Women's Lib Gone Mad" crapulence was amazingly 70's and too ridiculous to be taken seriously. The film slows to a crawl while Hunt gets Marg drunk, but the final fight is well done. It still looks and feels like every other Earth-bound 70's SF show on network TV. A couple of years later the pilot for the TV version of Logan's Run would look a lot like this...
I do hate paying $20 for DVD-R copies that won't even play on every machine. $10 - $15 would be more appropriate.
I kinda of liked it. The potential for a series was there, IMO. Especially after ST:TNG and Encounter at Farpoint and "Oh, captain, I feel pain, terrible pain!" and the many seasons of episodes that followed that weak initial offering.
I liked the ideas in GII so much that when the RPG Gamma World came out back in 1978, one of the first things I did was mark out the subterrainian train lines on the map of North America.
Actually three timelines because the ENT timeline isn't part of TOS'.
I know it's an unpopular view but I couldn't care less. On the other hand the Abrams-verse could easily be part of the ENT timeline, not that I really care because I have zero respect for either.
Yet you had to share.
Of course. Why should I be different from everyone else around here?Yet you had to share.
Becaue it might actually raise the level of discusion from the level of "my opinion is right and yours is totally wrong because I say so"?Of course. Why should I be different from everyone else around here?Yet you had to share.
You can disike Enterprise and ST09, nothing wrong with that. But it's hardly the basis for claiming "Actually three timelines because the ENT timeline isn't part of TOS'."
^^ My basis of opinion is that there are far too many things that don't add up to for the timelines to be one and the same.
And you can't stand it whenever I decide to remark on something as opposed to how often I read things I disagree with and just let them pass. And I get real tired of you ragging on me just for stating my opinion.
I thought we'd reached a sort of truce where we wouldn't rag on each other. But it seems you can't let that continue.
If you don't like my opinion that's fine, but it's your problem and keep it to yourself. No one appointed you the guardian of accepted views around here.
And you can't stand it whenever I decide to remark on something as opposed to how often I read things I disagree with and just let them pass. And I get real tired of you ragging on me just for stating my opinion.
I thought we'd reached a sort of truce where we wouldn't rag on each other. But it seems you can't let that continue.
If you don't like my opinion that's fine, but it's your problem and keep it to yourself. No one appointed you the guardian of accepted views around here.
Last edited:
number6
Vice Admiral
Of course it is, without fail..as predictable as a falling stone.
....Actually with a load of FAIL.
I'm ragging on you for misrepresenting opinion as fact. Like I said, you're free to dislike Enterprise and ST09. You're free to express that opinion.( I won't demand you keep it to yourself) I simply draw the line at passing it off as "fact". And I won't hesitate to point that out.
Truce? Hey. when we agree we agree, When we don't we don't. Thats pretty much how I continue to play it.
I won't go into why I think your "opinion" is wrong. This really isn't the place for it.
^^ My opinion isn't fact, it's an opinion. Just as yours is yours and someone else's is theirs. If I'm convinced my opinion is correct and fits how I've interpreted what's presented to me then so what? What does it take away from you or anyone else who disagrees?
If you don't like it just ignore it and shut the hell up about it. Christ knows how often I've read posts of yours or someone else's and felt you were off track yet I just let it pass because I feel it's not worth my time. I did do that sort of thing before when I first signed on to this site, but now far more often than not I just don't bother.
Geez, how many times have I read one of CRA's posts stating he simply can't accept a bridge not facing directly forward? But I won't bother constantly telling him he's wrong because it's only his opinion and it doesn't matter anyway.
Pity you can't seem to grasp that.
If you don't like it just ignore it and shut the hell up about it. Christ knows how often I've read posts of yours or someone else's and felt you were off track yet I just let it pass because I feel it's not worth my time. I did do that sort of thing before when I first signed on to this site, but now far more often than not I just don't bother.
Geez, how many times have I read one of CRA's posts stating he simply can't accept a bridge not facing directly forward? But I won't bother constantly telling him he's wrong because it's only his opinion and it doesn't matter anyway.
Pity you can't seem to grasp that.
Actually......
