Space 1999 Movie

A good Sp99 film could only be done by a rebellious sort of producer who wants to maintain the show's integrity against all the Hollywood weasels who put out all the awful Hollywood product we see today. He/she would have to know how to use diplomacy and placate the executives, satisfying them that the film will push the right buttons with the public, while going ahead and doing what he wants. If you trust it to mainstream Hollywood, you'll get garbage.

Magnus Greel wrote:A good Sp99 film could only be done by a rebellious sort of producer who wants to maintain the show's integrity

Just curious, what aspects in particular would be needed in order to maintain integrity ?

SPACE 1899 wrote:

Magnus Greel wrote:A good Sp99 film could only be done by a rebellious sort of producer who wants to maintain the show's integrity

Just curious, what aspects in particular would be needed in order to maintain integrity ?

Well, we can start with keeping the characters essentially 'normal' without adding any of the pathetic pseudo-drama the creators of the new BSG felt compelled to add to make their characters 'more real'.

Keep the Eagles functional with that rough edge of 'this could really be done', as opposed to the sleek, modernistic look of Vipers and Starfuries, or even ST shuttles.

Would changing the designs of the uniform and the look / layout of the MoonBase Command Centre itself affect integrity or do we see that as not mattering either way ?
(bearing in mind that they did just that for Year 2, compared to Year 1)

SPACE 1899 wrote:Would changing the designs of the uniform and the look / layout of the MoonBase Command Centre itself affect integrity or do we see that as not mattering either way ?
(bearing in mind that they did just that for Year 2, compared to Year 1)

Keep the iconoclastic one-coloured sleeve and uncluttered uniform as a base, but modifications to the bell bottoms would not be amiss.

Also keep the grand MM look. While perhaps not the most ' realistic' appearance given what we know know of the true space design (e.g. the cramped ISS), it gives a majestic and distinctive look to the series. The woe-begotten CC looks like just another cheap science fiction show.

s99fan wrote:modifications to the bell bottoms would not be amiss.

Well, Health & Safety Inspectors would probably agree with that - it would certainly enable them to run down the corridors with less danger of tripping over their flared trousers

s99fan wrote:Keep the iconoclastic one-coloured sleeve

Agreed - that was indeed one truly great design aspect of the Show.

s99fan wrote:Also keep the grand MM look.

Interesting thing about the Main Mission white plastic garden chairs is that, unlike the bell bottom trousers, they do not appear dated when watching the Show now - ie still widely available from ones local Garden / DIY superstore.

I loathe reboots. I don't want it unless it's continuous with the series, emphasizing year one, but not overtly negating tear two. Even if original cast members can't be in it, I'd still want it to take place many years later to explain their absence. They may have redesigned the uniform by then, or given up on uniforms. They wouldn't just happen to adopt flashy Hollywoodesque sci-fi-action-movie outfits though. Overwhelm the viewers with wonders or terrors of the universe and gripping, gut-level human issues and dialogue, and no one's going to be thinking about how unflashy the costumes are. The base should show age, but be the same base with the same Main Mission, which would be great on the big screen.

As for what a committed maverick producer would maintain in Sp99 for the sake of its integrity-- It's nothing so simple or tangible that you could make it into a list. It's an attitude. There are science fiction oriented people whose sensibilities come from literary SF, there are people who just enjoy sci-fi action entertainment, and people who don't get any kind of science fiction. He/she would have to be in category #1, while having as a (somewhat lower) priority satisfying people in category #2 to some extent too. The money people are mostly category #3, though a few may be #2's.

Like most here I'd love to see a reboot of S1999 either as a movie or TV series. The thing that strikes me is that the design and special effects of the old series are still class leading today, better indeed than more recent fare such as STTNG. I'd leave it pretty much unchanged. I'm amazed that Gerry Anderson himself hasn'tgone back to it, raised the money and done it again. Personally my gripe with most modern reincarnations is that the cast pull off unrealistic and superhuman feats which make the story unbelievable - and this applies to the new Star Trek, the new Die Hard and the new Bond. There is just so much going on on the screen that you can no longer suspend disbelief and so tension is lost. I'd be keen for the reboot to maintain the slow pacing of its series counterpart and I'd love to see at least some of the original cast in it as elders.

Saxon

saxon wrote:Like most here I'd love to see a reboot of S1999 either as a movie or TV series. The thing that strikes me is that the design and special effects of the old series are still class leading today, better indeed than more recent fare such as STTNG. I'd leave it pretty much unchanged.
Saxon

I absolutely agree with you.

saxon wrote:Personally my gripe with most modern reincarnations is that the cast pull off unrealistic and superhuman feats which make the story unbelievable - and this applies to the new Star Trek, the new Die Hard and the new Bond. There is just so much going on on the screen that you can no longer suspend disbelief and so tension is lost. I'd be keen for the reboot to maintain the slow pacing of its series counterpart and I'd love to see at least some of the original cast in it as elders. Saxon

Totally agree with these sentiments. It seems that film producers today try to fit too much action into their productions, and although action is good, sometimes it's just too overwhelming. To me special effects lose their 'specialness' if they are over-used. The fashion seems to be to bombard your senses to the point where subtleties of storyline and character are lost.

I think a remake using flashback by original cast members could work. A prequel along the same lines as the new Star Trek movie and yes, Magnus I agree, it should use the original Main Mission which was a superb set. Maybe a petition to Gerry Anderson asking him to consider a remake would be a good idea

Commander Koenig wrote:I think a remake using flashback by original cast members could work. A prequel along the same lines as the new Star Trek movie and yes, Magnus I agree, it should use the original Main Mission which was a superb set. Maybe a petition to Gerry Anderson asking him to consider a remake would be a good idea

Gerry Anderson doesn't own the rights to Space: 1999 - Granada does. So petitioning Gerry won't do any good. However, bringing to Granada's attention all that is going on in Space: 1999 fandom might be of value. Eric Bernard has made Granada aware of his Space: 2099 project, and the new UFO movie is well into its pre-production, so I'm sure that Space: 1999 is showing up on their radar.

CalgaryAlphan wrote: Gerry Anderson doesn't own the rights to Space: 1999 - Granada does. So petitioning Gerry won't do any good. However, bringing to Granada's attention all that is going on in Space: 1999 fandom might be of value. Eric Bernard has made Granada aware of his Space: 2099 project, and the new UFO movie is well into its pre-production, so I'm sure that Space: 1999 is showing up on their radar.

I agree with your analysis CalgaryAlphan. Let us hope that this UFO 2011 movie will be the catalyst to finally launch a SPACE:1999 sequel/remake/reboot motion picture or TV series.

saxon wrote:Like most here I'd love to see a reboot of S1999 either as a movie or TV series. Personally my gripe with most modern reincarnations is that the cast pull off unrealistic and superhuman feats which make the story unbelievable - and this applies to the new Star Trek, the new Die Hard and the new Bond. There is just so much going on on the screen that you can no longer suspend disbelief and so tension is lost. I'd be keen for the reboot to maintain the slow pacing of its series counterpart
Saxon

Fair comment Saxon, but sadly audiences of today tend to expect FAST ACTION. The recent wonderful sci-fi show 'Defying Gravity' had a slow pace and look what happened - the Show got cancelled after the first Season.

Hi folks,

I've been away due to computer problems for the past few months.

I'd love to see a well done (there is, of course no guarantee of that)Space:1999 reboot. I personally, don't see a continuation of the original series being successful...The general audience would get too caught up on the date (as would those who ignorantly despise/judge the series)...And it just open the series to more unfair criticism.

I think a clean reboot is the best way to go, if the series were to be "re-introduced" to the world.

Dana

As a movie reboot I always thought that it would be easier to suspend disbelief if the moon were removed from earth orbit as in E.C. Tubb's "Earthfall" or the current attempt at reinvention, Space: 2099. No longer having the moon shot like a rocket out of orbit, rather an explosion mixed with anti matter causes the moon to "jump" into either another dimension or to be propelled into a wormhole or some other similar plot device.

I would cast someone like Wes Studi as Commander Koenig, an actor who can portray the brooding essence of the character, yet give Koenig an even more cold-blooded edge. Someone totally against type.
How about Edie Falco as Dr. Russell?
Battlestar Galactica's Tahmoh Penikett (Helo) as Paul Morrow.
Jason Statham as Alan Carter.
Patrick Stewart or Ben Kingsly as Victor Bergman?

What do you think?

Coach34 wrote:As a movie reboot I always thought that it would be easier to suspend disbelief if the moon were removed from earth orbit as in E.C. Tubb's "Earthfall" or the current attempt at reinvention, Space: 2099. No longer having the moon shot like a rocket out of orbit, rather an explosion mixed with anti matter causes the moon to "jump" into either another dimension or to be propelled into a wormhole or some other similar plot device.

I think you're right about this, and EC Tubb did some fascinating things with his "Earthfall" novel. I'm quite certain that a reboot would be the way that today's producers would proceed with reviving Space: 1999, rather than a continuation (rightly or wrongly, which is a debatable point). Given that a reboot would be the likely direction, they could do worse than look back to what Tubb wrote in "Earthfall", with the goal in mind of assisting viewers in their suspension of disbelief about the moon being removed from Earth orbit and sent on its odyssey with the inclusion of a plot device along the lines of a warp/wormhole/alternate dimension/etc...

Agree that E.C.Tubb's trans-reality blast is a solid sci-fi mechanism to start the series, but please, do not allow him to write the episodes. He is lodged firmly in the 1960's when it comes to multi-faceted, complex characters. Concisely, he cannot do it. What I have seen of John Kenneth Muir's stories with Powys would make him a much better candidate.

Patrick Stewart as Bergman. Now that has interesting possibilities.

Simple question. Any hypothetical movie remake, what do you think they should call it? Would it still be Space: 1999?

It's a tricky one this. Obviously the year 1999 has been and gone so it may be a bit non-sensical to call it that, but then it has to be something which is instantly recognisable by fans as pertaining to Space 1999. Ummm...

The Void Ahead?
Zero G?
Breakaway?
Moonbase Alpha?

You see, what I'm thinking is: when Hollywood does these movie remakes, they're trying to trade on the good name of the series - to pick up the existing fanbase, as well as to attract those more casual viewers who have fond memories of the original. If they call it something else, then instantly they've lost that built-in box office potential. You'd also have reviewers and film-goers pointing out that it was a rip off of that old tv show "Space: 1999"! To combat all that, they'd have to have publicity material pointing out that the movie is based on "Space: 1999" - which would then attract the criticism of why didn't they call it "Space: 1999" then? See, they can't win. So I think there's no option: any potential movie remake has got to be called "Space: 1999" regardless of the problems inherent in that.

Andrew Kearley wrote:You see, what I'm thinking is: when Hollywood does these movie remakes, they're trying to trade on the good name of the series - to pick up the existing fanbase, as well as to attract those more casual viewers who have fond memories of the original. If they call it something else, then instantly they've lost that built-in box office potential. You'd also have reviewers and film-goers pointing out that it was a rip off of that old tv show "Space: 1999"! To combat all that, they'd have to have publicity material pointing out that the movie is based on "Space: 1999" - which would then attract the criticism of why didn't they call it "Space: 1999" then? See, they can't win. So I think there's no option: any potential movie remake has got to be called "Space: 1999" regardless of the problems inherent in that.

I agree Andrew. The title has to be recognisable by the fans otherwise an awful lot of time and effort would need to go into promotion and pointing out the fact that it's a remake of Space: 1999. People have to be able to link the two otherwise much of it's pulling power is lost.

I think Moonbase Alpha would be the most recognizable (even to many non-fans) and the best title to have for any remake.

Dana

cmdrkoenig67 wrote:I think Moonbase Alpha would be the most recognizable (even to many non-fans) and the best title to have for any remake.

Dana

That's a pretty good suggestion Dana. You're right, it would be recognisable to fans and many non-fans, and an intriguing enough title to get people to want to watch the film.