Lost in Space

Updated
 
7.8 (17)
2434 0 1 0 0

User reviews

11 reviews with 7-9 stars
17 reviews
 
24%
 
65%
 
12%
3-5 stars
 
0%
1-3 stars
 
0%
Overall rating
 
7.8
Audio/Video Quality
 
8.5(2)
Visual Editing
 
9.0(2)
Audio Editing
 
8.0(1)
Narrative
 
6.0(1)
Enjoyment
 
8.0(17)
Back to Listing
11 results - showing 6 - 10
1 2 3
Ordering
(Updated: September 17, 2012)
Enjoyment
 
8.0
Review by Istvan6 — May 24, 2009 @ 3:03 pm

*This rating was given before reviews were required*
Report this review Comments (0) | Was this review helpful? 0 0
(Updated: September 17, 2012)
Enjoyment
 
8.0
Review by Kolpitz — May 27, 2009 @ 12:32 am

Man, oh man, does this movie suck. I was 16 when “Lost in Space” first crashed into cinemas, taking the #1 spot away from “Titanic” nonetheless, and I remember actually liking (or, at the very least, not hating) this movie. Boy, was I wrong! Things start out horribly right off the bat, with some of the worst CGI to ever grace the screen. I understand that this movie was made over a decade ago but you shouldn’t try something so “ambitious” if technology hasn’t caught up with you yet. The acting is uniformly awful, except for maybe William Hurt. Matt LeBlanc is especially terrible and this is coming from a guy that LOVES “Friends” and his character of Joey. Anyway, the movie sucks … hard … so on to the edit itself. If there is a Martin Scorsese or Steven Spielberg of FanEditing, Uncanny Antman’s the guy. He proved, with “Terminator 3: The Coming Storm” that you could, in fact, polish a turd. He took a mediocre Arnie movie with “Jericho Cane” and made it highly entertaining. With “Echo,” he took a film I really, really liked and made it even better. “Lost in Space” is probably his most ambitious edit to date, since even with stinkers like “Alien vs. Predator” under his belt, “Lost in Space” still takes the cake for “Worst Movie” he’s ever attempted to edit. For about the first 20 to 30 minutes, I was starting to believe that not even UA could salvage this wreck. At about the half hour mark, though (when the crew boards the Prometheus), things start to pick up and the film becomes pretty watchable (not good, but no longer painful). I found myself being able to watch the final hour without problem and that’s saying a lot, considering the source material. The removal of Blarp helps the most, but the shedding of almost 40 minutes of painful material helps immensely as well. This edit isn’t going to convert anyone into a “Lost in Space” (the movie) fan but that doesn’t diminish it’s achievements on UA’s part. Just making this film easy to sit through is a miracle unto itself.
Report this review Comments (0) | Was this review helpful? 0 0
(Updated: September 17, 2012)
Enjoyment
 
7.0
Review by joebshmoe — February 24, 2009 @ 1:00 am

I actually agree completely with elbarto1, but the actual entertainment value doesn’t skyrocket for me. Obviously removing that damn cgi tangent is a great feat, so for that this movie is now not as irritating – it just wasn’t good to begin with.

Only one cut was, I felt, unnecessary – the kiss between judy and don and the end…

7/10
Report this review Comments (0) | Was this review helpful? 0 0
(Updated: September 17, 2012)
Enjoyment
 
7.0
Review by Link — February 22, 2009 @ 2:58 am

*This rating was given before reviews were required*
Report this review Comments (0) | Was this review helpful? 0 0
(Updated: September 17, 2012)
Enjoyment
 
8.0
Review by dop — December 3, 2008 @ 6:44 pm

*This rating was given before reviews were required*
Report this review Comments (0) | Was this review helpful? 0 0
11 results - showing 6 - 10
1 2 3

Leave a Reply