Lost in Space 1998

Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times: By largely jettisoning the elements that made the TV series popular, the creative crew of Lost in Space embarked on a road not fated to meet with any kind of meaningful success. Read more

Jay Boyar, Orlando Sentinel: If all you want is special effects, you may have come to the right galaxy. But if you're looking for old-fashioned goofiness, you'll be shouting, "Beam me up, Scotty!'' Or whatever the Lost in Space equivalent of that is. Read more

Steven Rea, Philadelphia Inquirer: I don't know about you, but my eyes glaze like doughnuts when people start time-traveling, showing up in two places at once, or one place twice -- which is what happens here. Read more

Ted Fry, Seattle Times: Much of the movie plays like a live-action video game, and the sequel-ready ending feels akin to falling off a cliff. But with its appealing mix of heart and adventure, Lost in Space is great fun for children of the '60s or the '90s. Read more

Susan Stark, Detroit News: Read more

Janet Maslin, New York Times: The film is so overly busy that its background touches become welcome distractions. Read more

Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal: After seeing Lost in Space, my first impulse was to say that it had been made by a bunch of sorcerers' apprentices who didn't know how to tell a story with their high-tech tools. But why give apprenticeship a bad name? Read more

John Krewson, AV Club: [Lost In Space features] a horrible, horrible computer-generated space-pet creature that's a cross between a leech and a boiled howler monkey. Read more

Lisa Alspector, Chicago Reader: Time-travel cliches... dialogue that's neither self-mocking nor serious, and an ostentatious though not particularly exciting production design keep the movie from taking off. Read more

Paul Clinton (CNN.com), CNN.com: Once again an idea for a big budgeted feature film has been pulled from old issues of TV Guide. Read more

Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: Is any of this, you know, fun? Just barely. But I'm sure I would have loved it at 6. Read more

Jami Bernard, New York Daily News: The new robot is a disappointment. Instead of the endearingly low-tech fireplug of yore that warned Will Robinson of encroaching danger, the new machine is all bells and whistles and no fun at all. Kinda like the movie itself. Read more

James Berardinelli, ReelViews: Unfortunately, there's not much to supplement all the eye-popping visuals. The story is unfocused and the character development is virtually nonexistent. Read more

Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: It's got cheesy special effects, a muddy visual look, and characters who say obvious things in obvious ways. Read more

Peter Stack, San Francisco Chronicle: Packed with Star Wars-style dazzle and some of the clunkiest dialogue this year, Lost in Space is a wild ride through nonstop visual effects yet a warm wallow in the cinema of the dumbed-down. Read more

Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune: The film is set 60 years from now, yet its vision of the future is badly dated. Read more

Wally Hammond, Time Out: Most effort has gone into the impressive Star Wars-style opening dogfight and the edge-of-your-seat closing sequences, leaving a drawn out mid-section on the ship, with only a standard mutant insect invasion to pass the time. Read more

Dennis Harvey, Variety: It was smart, in theory, to cast some very good actors not usually seen in this sort of fare. Ultimately, though, their casting can't do much to salvage script's dim human dimensions. Read more

Desson Thomson, Washington Post: A galactic slump of a movie that stuffs its travel bag with special effects but forgets to pack the charm. Read more

Rita Kempley, Washington Post: Boasting state-of-the-art gimcracks and a solid cast, the motion picture lifts off easily enough. Only it's not long before you realize that mission control forgot to load the Tang. Read more