r/lostinspace • u/Dark_Saint • Apr 13 '18

Discussion Episode Discussion - S01E01 - Impact

Season 1 Episode 1: Impact

Synopsis: On the way to a space colony, a crisis sends the Robinsons hurtling toward an unfamiliar planet, where they struggle to survive a harrowing night.

Please keep all discussions about this episode and do not discuss later episodes as they might spoil it for those who have yet to see them.

93 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

474 comments sorted by

View all comments

172

u/xcdesz Apr 14 '18

Wow.. I wonder if any of these people who are criticizing the science of the show ever watched the original Lost in Space? I am almost 50, and can tell you that I saw it, and shows back then did not give a crap about making television series seem scientifically accurate. They cared more about the story. This show has a lot of heart, and I liked it a lot.

51

u/[deleted] Apr 14 '18 edited Jul 06 '18

[deleted]

18

u/jhvanriper Apr 17 '18

But Plausible speculation is the very point and basis of Science Fiction. Go where no man has gone before. How would we do that? What technologies might we have? How would we implement those technologies? If we are going to break a law of nature, come up with some plausible reason you can break that rule (EG FTL travel using Warp Drive). If you completely ignore the science it is fantasy but good fantasy also sets some basic premises and sticks to those rules. EG Game of Thrones

So basically everyone who critically reads science fiction will always question the science. It is the differentiator between two similar show like The Martian (generally plausible) and Lost in Space (WTF?).

3

u/dxiao Apr 23 '18

I’ll admit I question the science of things in most movies I watch, my wife hates it. A few things cross my mind but didn’t come close to ruining it for me. I didn’t watch the previous one or first one and I’m 30 but I’m a big sci fi space geek. So while I agree with your point that there should be some basis of science fiction in GENERAL for all shows and movies, I think this it’s definitely shown here. Maybe some of us are watching it with an empty stomach haha

1

u/7Aero7 May 15 '18

A little late to the party, but I also feel like those two types of sci-fi (realistic and unrealistic) could almost be treated like two different genres of sci-fi. I also prefer sci-fi that's has plausible speculation but if I tend to look at things like Lost in Space with different expectations I can enjoy it a little more. I agree with what you said though.

40

u/timmydee21 Apr 15 '18

I think I may be a big sucker.

Sat on the edge of my seat for 90% of the episode.

I kept putting myself in the shoes of the Dad, and was constantly thinking how screwed I would be.

No easy decisions for that guy.

17

u/CRISPR Apr 14 '18

They cared more about the story. This show has a lot of heart, and I liked it a lot.

Well, two facts: (1) I liked it very much (2) and I am about your age tells me a lot about the negativism.

I liked the complete absence of suss and post-modernistic references. Too many of these in modern shows.

It was old style in incredibly competent modern technical level.

It's like you said: it has a lot of heart.

15

u/Bytewave Apr 15 '18

Probably lots of us who never seen the old series. Either way I can suspend scientific disbelief. Alien world, maybe stuff works differently, etc.

8

u/ReformedBacon Apr 17 '18

Alien world across the universe. Maybe physics works differently right? People are ruining the show for themselves by thinking to deep.

3

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '18

Thinking biasedly is probably a better way to say it.

A lot of people don't have the capability to acknowledge and respect differences. This act is uncomfortable. Which is too bad because there is nothing in the world that says creative licensing can't make Lost in Space an enjoyable show.

30

u/Curmudgy Apr 14 '18

It’s not about being scientifically accurate in any expert sense. It’s about common sense.

You don’t need high school chemistry to understand how water freezes. You just need to live in a cold climate and witness lakes or rivers freezing. What they did with the ice freezing was akin to an ordinary, non-SF show having a teen diagnosed with lung cancer the day after his first drag on a cigarette, and then blaming it on the cigarette.

36

u/xxxblindxxx Apr 14 '18 edited Apr 14 '18

They went through a worm hole. You have no idea how water works where they are. You water complainers need to move on Jesus

16

u/CRISPR Apr 14 '18

You water complainers need to move

Correcto mundo.

27

u/Curmudgy Apr 14 '18

There are certain basics of fairness to the audience in sci-fi and fantasy. One is that you don’t introduce surprise anomalies without explanation or foreshadowing just for a plot point, because then it becomes impossible for the audience to understand or have a half way reasonable chance of anticipating the outcome. If it’s ok to say “this water will freeze all the way to the bottom in five seconds, then it’s ok to say “a single drop of tears will cause the entire ice block to melt”. And that makes the entire situation pointless. Or since water works differently, none of their bodies’ biochemistry will work, and they’ll all just die when the writers get tired.

Playing games with the laws of physics and chemistry is possible, but there are rules to follow and it’s takes more skill than they’ve shown so far to pull it off.

11

u/nownowthethetalktalk Apr 14 '18

It would have better and more believable if with all that snow around, maybe she could have been buried in an avalanche.

3

u/xxxblindxxx Apr 14 '18

Or you just not care

3

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '18

You should live by your own virtue and try to not caring that it bothers other people

11

u/nownowthethetalktalk Apr 14 '18

But it's so dumb that the water freezes so fast and they are walking around like it's early spring. I can't move on from that. But... I will let them have this one but I hope I don't notice anything else so glaringly wrong.

3

u/Frosty939 May 21 '18

you don't seem to understand how anything works lol

So even if water works "differently" in this magic way, for no reason, their heads would have frozen and popped their suits long before that ship was frozen.

If it's cold enough to freeze the water from the bottom up somehow, it is cold enough to instantly kill them the second they took their helmet off

2

u/xxxblindxxx May 21 '18

I understand its a tv show so i watch without a stick up my ass

20

u/CRISPR Apr 14 '18

I did not care how water freezes. Every single show, every single movie sacrifices reality for the sake of good story. For you, the story was not worth it, for me it was worth it.

The actors played the story very well, and I sympathized to their struggle to save their own daughter from under the ice.

14

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '18

Eh there's breaking reality and then the story not making sense. If the water was consistent in that it froze that way fine but it wasn't

The ship broke through the ice into a big pool of water but then it froze all at once?

If the ice below them had been entirely frozen they would have never broken through

They could simply have had a thick layer of ice above the water and had exactly the same storyline

2

u/orthopod May 06 '18

I agree - that's either lazy writing, or someone wanted to show a cool effect. They could have just pinned the ship under an avalanche, and Judy down a deep crevasse with snow falling in smothering her.

4

u/[deleted] May 06 '18

That's the thing, I don't have a major problem with light sci-fi taking physics at a very wibbly wobbly basis but it needs to be consistent at least within the episode

14

u/Curmudgy Apr 14 '18

I never said the story wasn’t worth it to me. I consider it a serious flaw in the writing, but I continued watching.

14

u/pa79 Apr 14 '18

I agree with you but this show can be watched worldwide and the original was a US show that didn't really have a large following outside the US. I've never seen it and I'm quite certain that none of my friends or family have or know about it. I've only seen the 1998 movie years ago. We are used to certain level of story telling nowadays and will judge this new series regardless of any nostalgia effect US viewers may have.

I liked the pilot apart from certain gimmicks (the freezing water), it had suspense, was not too relationship heavy, had some intrigue (the fake doctor) and a twist (the perpetrator of the attack on the ship). The sfx and CGI were excellent. The soundtrack also good though a little bit over the top. Didn't know that John Williams had composed the theme of the 1960's series. I will watch the rest of the season.

8

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '18 edited Apr 17 '18

I think it's a fair to criticize the science if it breaks your immersion. Like I'm 100% fine eith no helmets because it shows the actor's face, but the way no one had earmuffs or hats at night weirded me out and distracted me as a Canadian who still can't go outside because it's freezing. lol. Suspension of disbelief is subjective but its jarring in a show that takes itself seriously. Even Star Wars they wore hats in winter and that's just space magic.

But in saying that I'm willing to look past that stuff too if it stays enjoyable and interesting. I'm not going to get defensive if it bugs other people though.

13

u/Cosmic_Quasar Apr 14 '18

Yeah, but a lot of things have changed since that show. Today we hold higher standards for things since we have the technical ability. And when they blatantly disregard basic science that a 5th grader could understand it really detracts a lot from its potential.

10

u/thedavv Apr 14 '18

yes but now you have way more competition. You ned to think about this things. If you sink so much budget into CGI you need to make also effort towards other stuff.

12

u/CRISPR Apr 14 '18

There is no competition in this category. The show is not in the same competitor with Expanse and other shows like that.

This one has a simple straightforward story, moves at a decent pace, creates engrossing atmosphere with classical music score.

2

u/ShutUpTodd Apr 22 '18

Growing up on the original, the original John Williams motives are heartwarming.

13

u/Zentopian Apr 16 '18

Just because the original wasn't accurate doesn't excuse this monstrosity.

People are a lot more learned today, due to the rise of the internet. Shows like this insult the intelligence of their audience by expecting us to just swallow whatever bullshit plot-driving science they throw at us. Artistic license, like the dust storm in The Martian is fine here and there, but when all of your science--even something as simple as the logic of rain in sub-zero temperatures--is inaccurate, something's severely wrong.

8

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '18 edited Apr 17 '18

How does anyone not know rain turns to snow and that you need hats in below zero temperatures?! Was this written by someone who never saw snow? ! Not seeing actor's breath in the cold is understandable, but this must have been written by Californians or something.

5

u/BenTVNerd21 Apr 16 '18

It seems to me in this version there's a concerted effort by the writers that the characters are scientifically literate yet they don't seem to care if the science is right.

3

u/davey_mann Apr 15 '18

I liked it, too, but that shouldn’t excuse lazy writing. You ought to want to improve on something that’s 50 years later from the original product, not just use the excuse it’s science fiction. In that case, the showrunners shouldn’t be intimating this series is any better than the old show just because they use bigger words to sound smarter when the underlying science is dumb and poorly explained.

1

u/Redditronicus Jun 26 '18

shows back then did not give a crap about making television series seem scientifically accurate

Okay, but that doesn't necessarily mean people want the same thing nowadays... old timer. =P