We're coming up on 30 years since the first broadcasts...Despite the flaws, the show does have some credibility for it's place in history. It was the first major space adventure series (as opposed to scifi shows such as The Planet of the Apes or The Six Million Dollar Man) after Star Trek, so they went with a different approach (which later Trek series tried to do...Next Gen cloning the original's deep space mission, Deep Space Nine imitating Babylon 5, Voyager doing it's own 1999/Lost in Space thingy, and Enterprise re-inventing history with it's cloak-and-dagger time war being kinda similar to the X-Files' conspiracy...) SF changed at all level after Star Wars; the next two major sf/space adventure series, Battlestar Galactica and Buck Rogers, went to fx-centered concepts (whereas both Classic Trek and 1999 had story/character concepts, even when things fizzled...)
This show did a good turn at being a multinational series, with American leads, an Australian co-star, Italian and German co-stars for Year Two, and various Caribbean actors/characters, reflecting Trek's multiethnic crew and going it one better (as all Trek regulars were Americans or Canadians) and providing a springboard for the British actors Alec Guinness in Star Wars and Patrick Stewart, Marina Sirtis, and Colm Meaney (Chief O'Brien) in Next Gen.
One of the first season's strong points (in retrospect) was its unique style as compared to many later programs. Even the show's pre-digital, pre-motion control effects were memorably different. The stark lighting and detailed miniature work of the space effects are still more impressive than a lot of today's digital effects (many of which tend to be somewhat fuzzy and of a lower resolution). The multiple exposure technique resulted in a unique style - nebulas. constellations,twinkling stars in the compositions of the shots.
Having bought the first six episodes of Space:1999 last week, I've had the pleasure of watching several of them this weekend. I'm more of a Star Trek fan, but I enjoyed this show as a youngster. In my Star Trek fan club, a couple of members detested this show. They felt it represented everything bad about a science fiction show ( bad science and scripts...and Maya was a ripoff of Spock), but I still liked the show regardless.
The one thing that struck me about the pilot was the lack of depth to the characters. This might be because of the hour length. All the post Next:Generation Trek shows allow two hours to properly introduce the characters.
One thing most impressive is the 2001:A Space Oddessy feel of the show.
Reading the critical comments on websites (NitCentral and others) helps me to appreciate some points I might not have noticed otherwise.
Back in 1999, "Wise Guy" asked if the ending (with the camera rising up to the stars with a narration) reminded any one of the Twilight Zone. It reminded me more of Star Trek (in City on the Edge of Forever, Kirk is stranded on the planet and the camera pans from him up to the stars).
Welcome to the Space:1999 boards Christopher.
I, too, wish the first ep had been two hours, or at least 1h40m if you allow for commercial breaks.
I also wish more Star Trek fans were as open-minded as they claim to be, and stopped outright slamming S99 whenever it's mentioned. (Yes, I know not all ST fans are like that, but a lot of very vocal ones are. BTW, I'm also a ST fan, but my personal fondness leans toward S99.)
Believe me Craig, I've had much the same experience with some vocal Star Trek fans when I say my preferences lie towards B5 and Space:1999. I think Space:1999 is one of my favourites partially because it is the Sci Fi show I grew up with, whereas a lot of people had Trek as their first exposure.
ST was my first ("The Doomsday Machine," specifically... it's one of my earliest memories, too!), but S99 was the first high-quality new sf I'd watched as a child a few years later.
Bringing up your other point though, it is unusual that the pilot episode wasn't longer, most Sci Fi that I know of has a longer pilot episode. All Trek incarnations, Galactica, Dark Skies, Space:Above and Beyond etc.
Though saying that, its maybe not so normal in British tv as Blake's 7 just started with a normal length episode.
TOS didn't have a longer pilot. That didn't start till TNG.
A few days ago, on the Sink 1999 2 board, Curious asked what effects we'd like to see enhanced to improve the S99 episodes. I started responding there on an episode by episode basis, but decided I should post each of my Episode Improvement lists on their respective episodes' boards. Here's what I came up with for "Breakaway":
As Koenig flies toward NDA1, the flashing sky effect needs a little tweaking.
I'd fix the "blinky-eyed" death scene of the Meta Probe astronaut (see the "Breakaway" board).
During the Breakaway, the Spacedock spin changes directions, which could easily be fixed by flopping (reversing) the image of the long-distance shot. Adding the moon to that shot would be a nice touch, too, as well as showing the Meta probe getting destroyed by Spacedock debris.
The Earth changes phase several times during the Breakaway, which could all be corrected to show better continuity.
Speaking of Earth phases, the Earth should have appeared full in the opening shot on 9 September 1999, as the moon was actually in its new phase as viewed from Earth. By 13 September, the Earth should have appeared slightly waning gibbous, as the moon was entering its waxing crescent phase as viewed from Earth.
That's it for now...
Trying to sell a show for first run syndication was hard enough in those days, so a 90 minute or two hour opening episode just wasn't on. Even if British tv had accepted such a thing its likely a chopped to one hour version would have sold to the US and elsewhere to keep it consistent with the rest of the episodes, especially given ITC's "it has to be viewable in any order" edict, which likely would have precluded a two parter.
It does seem more common in the UK for British shows to have regular length first episodes. Of the sci fi/cult shows I can think of, Space:1999, Blake's 7, Red Dwarf, Dr Who, they all had regular length first episodes, even UFO and Space Precinct if memory serves me correctly.
As to what I would change. This is an overall season change, I would try and have the Wall Panel lights a consistent colour throughout the season unless an episode plot specifically demands otherwise (low power), I understand the various strikes throughout the 70's plus the difficulties of lighting such a then, big set had problems all of their own, but a bit of CGI work should sort that.
I would have liked several more hours of watching the dumps blow up. No CGI please, proper model effects.
CR, how could you suggest changing the exploding Space Dock ? I love that shot exactly the way it is (especially the field of debris it leaves). Adding a moon to that shot would be distracting.
I don't like Eric Bernards version; a flaming (as if in an atmosphere) explosion over a standard moon view.
One thing I loved in the first season (and entirely missing in the second season), those shots showing people through the cockpit windows of the Eagles. I wish there were even more of those type shots.
Eric added a few computer style graphics on the Main Mission big screen. Every episode would benefit from such additions.
Regarding a lengthier opening episode; It was fairly common practice for a television pilot to be produced as a made-for-TV movie. Breakaway certainly cost as much as one, and if the 1975 novelisation is based on a shooting script or late draft of one there's enough extra dialouge for a 90 minute show.
Christopher, the pan up to the stars in "City on the Edge of Forever" also evokes the closing shots of the Twilight Zone. Terrific old show, if you can find it late some night.
Actually, I agree with you, Mark regarding the Spacedock explosion... Bernard's flame-y one isn't as nice as the original. (The original explosion was one of my more prominent memories of the ep for many years in pre-vcr days, and it was the debris flying toward the viewer that did it.) Now that you mention it, the moon being in the shot would make things a bit too crowded, and the first shot showing the Spacedock spinning away from the moon establishes nicely why the moon's no longer in view. I'd still fix the Spacedock's spin direction in the second shot, though, and think it would be neat to add an extra shot of the Meta Probe getting clipped by the debris.
Douglas, the changing wall panel lights wasn't totally bothersome to me; I always figured it was a way for the Alphans to vary things a bit, what with not having a change of scenery for looong stretches of time and all. I do wish, however, that emergency lighting (red wall panels) would have come up right after the Breakaway, instead of the normal white lighting.
One more thing I would add to the entire season is small viewscreens on each desk, like the ones Kano & Koenig had on theirs. (Not the big ones Season 2 had, but hey, at least Season 2 had monitors!) Of course, as Curious mentioned elsewhere (and I seconded), it would be nice to see all the monitors colorized.
I missed another obvious fix: change the prologue caption from "THE DARK SIDE OF THE MOON" to "THE FAR SIDE OF THE MOON."
Wouldn't want to overlook that one.
It really dates the show.
The same with calling a "Black Hole" a "Black Sun".
Peter, the end of this episode is indeed more evocative of the Twilight Zone. It is a great old show (most of which I haven't seen in ages).
My two favorite zone eps were "Time at Last" (with Burgess Merideth) and "To Serve Man" (with Richard Kiel).
Kinggodzillak (Godzilla fan?), I agree 100% about models over CGI. Star Trek: Voyager switched from models to CGI during its run. The early eps' modelwork looks better than the later CGI work (of course, the CGI allowed for more fanciful shots).
The fan ideas on digitally enhancing the efx are interesting. Star Trek fans were able to see one of the films, Star Trek: The Motion Picture, enhanced with some CGI efx with the release in 2001 of the special director's cut. In my opinion, the scenes on Vulcan were greatly improved, but I hated the alteration of some later scenes inside the V'Ger cloud. As with many fans, I felt Paramount was trying to wring out a few more dollars from fans with a only minimally improved film.
Most of the efx. shots in Breakaway look fine to me. Adding more dense starfields might give it a more "Star Wars" feel.
The sets and costumes of Space:1999 (especially for year one) are considered by many to have influenced those in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Some critics derisively called ST:TMP "Space:1999 The Movie" for its supposed emphasis on special effects and not characters.
This board is up to 148K.
Scotty from original Trek wouldn't know what you're talking about!
Don't use the word "download" either. You might confuse him.
Another added effect to this ep: add lights to the exterior shots of Moonbase Alpha.
One thing most impressive (as a kid); the Commlocks featured real television pictures and obviously weren't a special effect. They gave the illusion of being a real working gadget.
Too bad in Y2, they stopped using the Commlocks to open and close doors (in "Beta Cloud", Tony merely uses "voice command" to open up doors securely locked by the computer). For that matter, only one ep in Y2 ("Immunity Syndrome") featured a working Commlock. The "picture" in Rules of Luton was merely a color slide.
I just realized another thing I would fix in this ep, but it's a continuity edit... During the Breakaway explosions, we see closeups of NDA2 blowing up, followed by the now-iconic long distance shots of explosions approaching the viewer (seen during every Season 1 opening credits sequence). We then see another 2 shots of what's left of NDA2 exploding, followed by the orbital shot of the immense explosion on the moon seen from Carter's POV. Then the next now-iconic shot occurs, showing the unnatural dawn over Alpha.
Shouldn't the shots of the approaching explosions go between the last two shots of NDA2 and the shot from the orbital POV? That way, each shot would show the explosions getting progresively more massive and spreading out to an area far larger than NDA2.
Another effects shot that's missing, and there's a brief glimpse of it in the Fanderson-produced Space: 1999 Documentary, is a moving image of the moon getting under way with a prominent glowing hotspot on its trailing surface, illustrating the "giant rocket motor" Bergman later describes. Is it evident in any alternate cut of "Breakaway", such as the "Alien Attack" compilation movie?
Also, the falling & exploding Eagle seen at the start of every "this episode" montage must be an outtake from the NDA2 ignition sequence, as well as the well-recognized image of an Eagle with animated "lightning" striking its underside, absent from the final cut of the episode (but what great shots; smart not to waste them!)
A nice wallpaper including the moon with a glowing spot is included in Ken Scott's episode guide for "Breakaway" in the Catacombs.
Isn't it at "Moonbase Alpha's Space: 1999 Page"? (Of course, The Catacombs has a link to Ken Scott's stuff, as well as a ton of other places, including NitCentral... that's how I first discovered this place!)
The pic of the moon with a glowing 'exhaust' port really does emphasize what a ridiculous notion the series is based on.
How so? (Other than the fact that the whole idea is not plausible, of course!)
Plausibility vs. a willing suspension of disbelief… The notion is fairly preposterous that the moon could be moved in this fashion and it's to their credit that it's presented as plausibly as they could make it. It would have made for even greater drama if it was emphasized that nobody believes it can happen, followed by the tremendous shock when it does. Like Asimov conceded, the moon has to be gotten out of orbit somehow for reasons of dramatic necessity. Also, it sets the level of disbelief required to accept what follows in the series. I'll accept bad science fiction if it's in the service of a good dramatic presentation. Almost none of the dramatic presentations we nitpick have demonstrated accurate science; they're more space opera than science fiction. That doesn't stop us from enjoying them on the level that they were intended.
I agree. If I actually let plausibilty be a factor in how I judge S99, I'd never have watched the show, nor comment on it as extensively as I have on these boards. Setting the level of disbelief... that's a good point. I think some of the situations presented were easier to accept once the basic premise was accepted. To it's credit, the show's first season was fairly internally consistent with its levels of drama & fantasy.)
The whole notion of the traveling moon was very similar to an idea in a Jules Verne story. I can't think of the title, but a saw an animated film version of it, a long time ago.
Was that Off on a Comet?
What was acceptable 'science' in the nineteenth century novel was inexcusable in the 1970s. Can't avoid that fact, as virtually every DVD review for Space:1999 slams the show for the bad science. The unfortunate fact is that virtually all scifi shows are impossible, but critics usually single out S99 for scientific inaccuracy (ever read a review of Star Trek that starts out "faster than light" travel is impossible...).
I'd mentioned on another board how I've grown tired of the fact that S99 gets slammed so much. (As Mark pointed out, I wasn't in the best mood at the time.) And while it's easy to nitpick the show in a negative way, I tire of the hypocrisy exhibited by such critics: Mark's example of selective nitpicking regarding FTL travel is a prime example. Another is that S99 has been slammed for its sound effects in space; other than 2001: A Space Odyssey, I know of no sci-fi film or series that realistically portrays sound (or lack of it) in space... even the sequel to 2001 got it wrong!
So, Mark, was I right about that cartoon you mentioned? I remember that a comet slams into Earth, and survivors of the explosion wonder why the world is getting darker and colder, finally realizing that they (and large tracts of land, water & atmosphere) have become attached to the comet itself, which had only made a glancing blow against Earth and was headed out of the solar system. Eventually, before they all freeze to death, the sun's gravity pulls the comet back toward Earth's orbit and the survivors use a balloon or something to get back home (as the comet re-enters the atmosphere).
Obviously an implausable tale, but rather imaginative for its day and entertaining as a cartoon in the mid-to-late 1970's when I saw it.
The Battlestar Galactica miniseries has a lack of sound in space, but not totally.
One thing made me wonder, is that Carter is on a couple of occasions referred to as 'Captain' by Koenig, and while the original premise was that Carter was to be the Meta Probe Commander, I wonder if that while one of Koenigs jobs was to make sure that the Probe got launched without a hitch, whether Carter's job was similiar to what Koenig did in the Ultra Probe mission, receiving telemetry data and other such important work.
There's conflicting info on that, Douglas... I'd read a biography of Alan Carter in an early Starlog issue that said he was to pilot the mission, and the novelisation of this episode also implies that he was to do so. (Thus, when I built a model of the Meta Probe ship many years ago, I included a three-man crew: Carter, Sparkman & Warren.) But the episode itself makes it look like he was going to be the mission controller on Alpha (as Koenig was during the Ultra Probe mission), rather than the mission pilot.
As for Carter's rank, the first two eps specifically refer to him as "Captain," while in Season Two, his rank changed to lieutenant. I chalk the "demotion" up to continuity problems between the two seasons.
Sound in space: Even the historic dramatization of Apollo 13, no science fiction there, had sound effects for attitude-control thrusters in exterior POV shots, a bit of dramatic license that no filmmaker dares do without anymore. A shame that kind of accuracy is disregarded.
Dead silence becomes deadly dull after a while. I think we can all forgive 'sounds' in space. The second season of S99 made the outer space "sounds" even more dramatic than the first year (a good example being "Brian the Brain").
Happy 5th anniversary, everybody!
Found a new nit, after all these years... hopefully, it hasn't already been mentioned. (I didn't see it previously, but it's late, I'm tired and I may have missed it.) Moving right along...
In "Breakaway," as Koenig & Bergman fly over NDA1 on the way to NDA2, Koenig asks Bergman if Area 1 has been used "...since I left...". Bergman replies "No, they've moved on to Area 2 now. This one hasn't been been used in five years."
Doing the math, that means NDA1 closed in 1994, and Koenig & Bergman's dialogue imply that Koenig left the moon a short time before that (though quite possibly within the same year). The nit is that in "Dragon's Domain," we learn that Koenig was overseeing the Ultra Probe mission while stationed on Moonbase Alpha... in 1996!
I recently bought some Meta Probe blueprints off eBay (from a store there called kennedyshipyards). They're not the greatest print quality I've ever seen, but they're not bad, either, and contain 16 large sheets of diagrams & perspective drawings. I have some nits about their accuracy which I'll discuss on the Sink 1999 board. Just thought I'd mention it here, since it's "Breakaway" related.
Over the past couple of years, I've shown various S99 episodes to various younger children (mostly pre-teen to early teen) in an effort to "pass the torch," so to speak. Most kids tend to like this series. (They've been unanimous in thinking "Dragon's Domain" was both "neat" and "gross.")
Regarding "Breakaway," just the other day, a seven-year-old boy pointed out a special effects "fix" that could be added to the list I started a while back: on the long shot of the Lunar Spacedock (the one I'd flop to correct the spin direction), perhaps there could be a few small random explosions at various points on the dock (to show that the gravitational stress was tearing the dock apart at the seams), followed by the big explosion & debris cloud.
Kind of a neat idea, I think!
CR,
Koenig's question and Bergman's answer can still make sense. Even if disposal site 1 was closed in 1994, it could still have been reopened and taken some waste between 1996 and 1999. Koenig's question could have been to establish if there was even a brief revival of its use.
Geoff Capp
Today is September thirteenth, two thousand and five. Does anybody still care??
Happy sixth anniversary.
Well, today I noted at work (where some people know of my S99 obsession--er, I mean appreciation) that today was the anniversary of the moon leaving orbit. I then remembered it's also my mom's birthday! (Sorry, Mom, and happy b-day!)
Was spacedock actually destroyed or not?
I recently saw the remastered first episode and I got the impression it was blasted out to space too just like the moon had.
I think it was blasted out of the orbit of the moon, then exploded.
BTW, are the remastered Network DVD's worth getting?
Happy 7th anniversary!
Have we exhausted the topics for discussion?
Hey, I looked up in the sky- its still there.
(Another time another place or any episode)
Keonig: ten planets.
Dr. Bergman: Xena!
Kano: And Gaberiella!
Dr. Russell: yechh.
Re:Last comment
Unfortunately for Xena fans, said object has been named Eris, according to a news item....
Eris was the Goddess of Discord, in Greek Mythology....
Ares- someone wanted to name the new planet Kirk or something like that.
Re:last comment
There is a Asteroid named Mr.Spock as I recall....
(I think it's Asteroid 4092, but I'm not sure of the exact number...).
As I mentioned elsewhere, I recently purchased the 30th Anniversary DVD package of Space: 1999. So, I was able to finally see Breakaway in its original form. I too wondered what had happened to the scenes with those guys in the office on Earth. It was not until I read this thread that I found out that those scenes were not part of the original pilot.
So, when they stuck this episode and War Games together to make that movie, Alien Attack, they actually filmed new scenes with the guys in the office. What it God's name possessed them to do that?
I always felt that it was weak that they wouldn't leave the moon when it was blasted out of orbit, it wasn't that far away and Eagle Transporters have been shown to have a decent range. Even if they used up all their fuel before making it back to earth they would at least have been near enough for Earth to mount a rescue attempt.
It would have been better for the moon to accelerate for far longer thus keeping them pinned to the floor for too long to make it back to earth or they could have said the Eagles had suffered minor damage and couldn't take off.
The problem with that is Alan Carter's Eagle couldn't have made it back to the moon if that had happened but that could easily be solved by putting someone else on it. We could have seen them watch the moon go before they reluctantly turned back to Earth
say I know -way off topic but-, Danny21 mind me asking what was your first Trek how old and where you at?
and while your at it what was your first 1999 episode
Lord Lew Grade poured a fortune into Space:1999 & boy does it ever show! The production values are phenomenal & lavish with the model work,sets,costumes & props.They have withstood the test of time magnificently.I watched the original broadcast of this show for both of its seasons.And while they did some good episodes from a writing standpoint,I never felt that this show became as outstanding with its scripts as it did with its visuals.Much of the science was atrocious & they desperately required a scientific advisor on the show.I'm also curious as to why no top sf writers ever ever wrote for this series? No Harlan Ellison,David Gerrold,Theodore Sturgeon,Norman Spinrad,DC Fontana,Richard Matheson,or Rod Serling to name a few of the finest sf TV writers available at that time.Barbara Bain was a multiple Emmy winner for her work on Mission:Impossible.Yet I found her acting on this show very stiff,mechanical,remote.I truly wish that Space:1999 would have become the classic show it could have been with superb scripts matching its stunning look.
Rod Serling died in 1975, just as this series was starting, so sadly, his talents could not be used.
Actually, this show had some good British writers. Johnny Byrne wrote a lot of good 1999 episodes in S1. He went on to write some Doctor Who stories and was the creator of the character, Nyssa of Traken. Terrence Dicks, another prominent Who writer, also wrote a 1999 episode.
Didn't Space:1999 start filming in 1973? It was syndicated in the US in 1975.
According to this, Mike is correct. I don't know if any of the above named writers were available. Ellison may have been involved with The Starlost (which he disdained so much he used his alias "Cordwainer Bird") at the time. Serling was just coming off Night Gallery, which was cancelled as pre-production of Space: 1999 was gearing up.
Well, I'm not sure Serling would have done it. His experience on Night Gallery kind of poisoned writing for television for him. Bascially, NBC wouldn't give him creative control, the kind that he enjoyed on Twilight Zone, and they heavily rewrote a lot of his scripts. When Night Gallery was cancelled, Serling quit writing for television for good. Of course, he died only a couple of years later. Had he lived, he might have eventually changed his mind, but we'll never know.
As for Ellison, I don't know how long he would have lasted. The man has a way of pissing off TV producers.
Anyway, nice to see some activity in the 1999 forums again.
Sure i'm in England, I first saw part of the rules of luton as my first 1999 episode about 15 years ago then my dad bought them on DVD quite recently then I watched them in order. No idea how old I was when I first saw a Star Trek episode I saw the bits before the music just before I went to bed when I was very little I think I saw a complete original series ep when I was 6 or 7.
I saw 1999 back in the 70's too. I was too young to appreciate it though.
I have the 30th Anniversary DVD set, all 48 episodes 
Re:last post
Personally, I'm waiting to see if Network ever releases their remastered Series 2 boxset, or will they just jump straight to Blu-ray...?
(Network Video in the U.K promised a Series 2 boxset in 2008. Since then, nothing...)
"The Agony Booth" has posted a recap of "Breakaway". I think the writer was quite hard on it, and I intensely dislike his crack about Barry Morse's age (he was 55 when he shot this episode, the same age I am now). But, judge for yourself here.
Yeah, that was harsh.
The writer got one of his facts wrong - he claims, "The first science fiction series that didn’t completely •••• debuted in 1967 and it was friggin’ cool, if kind of nuts", a reference to STAR TREK. Er, TREK debuted in '66.
I found this on Youtube. It's a 2:35 compressed version of this episode with new special effects added when the Moon breaks orbit that really improves the sequence. Hope you like it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7cr-HXwRas
I like it, pretty good new effects. I wonder if they'll (whomever owns the rights) eventually do to Space: 1999 what they did with Classic Trek, replaced the old effects with 21st Century ones.
I can see it happening to a degree. The starscapes of 1999 always seemed to possess a mere 5 to 10 stars at the most. I'd like to see a hundred added, with some whispy galactic clouds in the background. Not to the point of space turning red or green in the background, like Babylon 5 used to have, but definite galactic phenomena in the back.
Stun gun hits could also be improved by encompassing the target in a better flash, since if you freezeframe it, you see a second of rapid zig-zags across the characters, which was strange, but unique to 1999.
Those frog-headed-aliens-with-gorilla-bodies that maya changes into or attacks the base could have blinking eyes, and slithering tongues for starters.
But I'd insist they keep the Eagle's lighting as is, because I like the dark patches across the hulls when they're in space.
But what special effects could make Barbara Bain speak above a whisper???
Bit of a ressurection here, but I read a bit of that Agony Booth writeup, and I take exception about the crack about Victor Bergman, hinting that everyone on TV should be 'good looking'. Why?
I remember reading season summaries before release of Stargate Atlantis and Universe and the first parts in the descriptions
Character X is handsome/beautiful and smart. What happened to joe or jane average
Goodbye, Moon!
We hardly knew ya!
See you on the other side of the galaxy!
Don't forget to write!
Oh, wait. She's still here.
Good.
Never mind.
Eh. Maybe next year.
Nope.
Still there.
Whew! That was close!
Oh, good, the Moon is still there, 20 years after that nasty prediction I once saw on TV!
Hope all those Eagles still function!
Watched "Breakaway" for the first time in 45 years last night (and for the first time ever in color; all I had for the whole series was a 19 inch black and white set). What got me right away was how stiff Barbara Bain's acting was. I'll be revisiting the series now that I can stream it; I'll see if she loosens up.
But, what did you think of the pilot?
For me, it's one of my all-time favorites, right up there with Land of the Giants, The Time Tunnel, and The Pirsoner. I can watch all of them over and over and over.
Come to think of it... I have!
Pretty good, Steve. In fact, I think I liked it more now than when I first saw it as a kid of 20. The dumping of nuclear waste on the moon in the series has an eerie parallel to the recent explosion in Beirut. Which may have been caused by a build up of waste. Moonbase Alpha also had its own self-involved politician in the person of Simmonds. And, Barbara Bain is less stiff as each episode passes. And, I'm very impressed with Barry Gray's music. I just hope the series doesn't get pulled from the streaming app I'm watching it on.
OT a bit - I assume you own The Prisoner on DVD. If not, it's available on the same app (Tubi) I've been watching 1999 on. As is Secret Agent and more Gerry Anderson stuff (Supercar, Thunderbirds to name two.)
Most 1999 fans, me among them, agree that Season One is the better of the two seasons.
Yes, but of my two favorite episodes, one (Black Sun) is in the first season and the other (The Beta Cloud) in the second one.
The Black Sun is excellent.
But The Beta Cloud? Are you joking!?
I love The Beta Cloud because it's so over the top stupid, just turn off your brain and enjoy. 
Truer words have never been spoken.
Hard to believe that the same show that produced the excellent Black Sun produced the rubbish Beta Cloud.
Don't forget - the same crew (or a lot of it) that produced "The Naked Time", "The City On The Edge Of Forever", "The Doomsday Machine" and "Journey To Babel" also produced "Plato's Stepchildren" and "And The Children Shall Lead".
Don't get me wrong, Season Two isn't all bad. However, it will never stack up to Season One in my books.
The Beta Cloud is a debut for David Prowse - less than a year later, he put on the famous heavy-breathing black helmet and wielded The Force.
You could see the influence of 2001: A Space Odyssey here.
On his way to Alpha, John Koenig is offered a coffee by a Flight Attendant.
A similar scene played out with Heywood Floyd on his way to the Clavius Moon Base in 2001.
'Breakaway' is still in my personal Top 5 first episode/pilot episode in all of science fiction.
Three others would be The Time Tunnel's 'Rendesvous With Yesterday', and Land of the Giants' 'The Crash', and Star Trek's 'The Cage'.
I never get tired of any of them.
22 years ago today, the Moon was blown out of Earth orbit and...
What do you mean it's still there!
I can't see it! Where is it?! Where is it?!
Oh, it's cloudy outside.
Never mind!
In his 1975 review, Isaac Asimov said that there was no way a base like Alpha could have been constructed so fast (in just 24 years).
Of course, he was right. We're now 23 years beyond 1999, and there is no base on the Moon.
Perhaps they should have set this show in 2099, because a base like Alpha would take decades to build.
I believe Arthur C. Clarke once said that had the U.S. committed itself more to it's space program, and Viet Nam had never happened, lunar bases would have been a reality by now (or even 1999).
Maybe the Viet Nam War never happened in the Space:1999 universe.
Yeah, but a base like Alpha, complete with artificial gravity?
No, I don't think so.
Ah, yes, that mysterious, never-turned-off-or-damaged power of science fictions moon bases and starships. No matter how much damage Alpha sustained (or the Enterprise, or Voyager, or any ship, period), the artificial gravity still worked, and nobody was left floating about, bouncing off walls and bulkheads.
I don't remember which Star Trek novel it was, but there was ONE story that had the crew dealing temporarily without internal gravity after the Enterprise is damaged.
I don't remember which Star Trek novel it was, but there was ONE story that had the crew dealing temporarily without internal gravity after the Enterprise is damaged.
Crisis On Centaurus
Holey Moley!
Of course, the out of universe reason is that having the actors move around, like they were on the real Moon, would look silly.
Also difficult for the time period.
I seem to recall an '80s or '90s production about the moon missions & I think they duplicated the lunar gravity with large helium balloons attached to the actors.
Trying to pull off a weightless effect on the Space: 1999 sets (even if the studio had a high enough roof) with three or more actors would probably be a logistical nightmare, trying to avoid landing on desks or chairs, or actors getting their balloon lines tangled.
Good point.
Balloons? Probably easier just to film them in slow motion.
Of course, to be fair to the Anderson's, they were not the only ones to overestimate us.
Irwin Allen has us sending the Robinson family to Alpha Centauri in 1997. Well, we're now 25 years past 1997, and we still haven't left our own Solar System.
[[In his 1975 review, Isaac Asimov said that there was no way a base like Alpha could have been constructed so fast (in just 24 years).]]
Could be worse...look at what SHADO built in only a decade!
Perhaps they should have set both shows a few decades further into the future.
I guess the year '1999' sounded so futuristic to him, compared to say '2025'.
The thing is, even during the first couple of years of the early 2000's I still felt that 1999 sounded futuristic, despite it being in the past!
I'm just glad he didn't make it 'Space 2999', because what we saw couldn't past for 1000 years in the future.
Same thing could be said about setting the Eugenics Wars in the 1990's. In 1967, the 90's were still a long ways off.
I think perhaps much of this is forgivable in that when these shows were made, mankind had experienced incredibly fast technological progress. In the space of only a few decades, we had gone from primitive automobiles to landing on the moon. Particularly in the late 50s through the 60s, the pace of progress was breathtaking...some real-world aspects rivalled or exceeded the SF dreams of the day.
Thus, there was reason to speculate that this pace of progress would continue through the 70s and beyond. If that pace had been maintained for the next 30 years, we might well have seen some of the space-program features shown in these shows. It is not the various shows' fault that the pace slowed so dramatically (or went in different directions - unmanned versus manned, for example) after Apollo.
Just a thought.
And when it comes to something as cool as an Eagle, which I've always wished I had in real life, as much as an Enterprise, or Galileo shuttlecraft to fly around in, there's more to consider than just the technology of its engines.
Eagles have engines capable of crossing distances farther than our Earth-to-Moon route in alot less than 2 days; they have internal gravity, because people aren't floating about it when they're travelling through space; they have enough room for environmental needs (air, water) for long trips; they have (compared to us) advanced laser weaponry for defense.
NONE of that stuff is still possible, even 50 years after the first episode! Ugh!
EK - we had gone from primitive automobiles to landing on the moon.
Just me, but I think a better rewrite of that sentence would be "we had gone from primitive automobiles on Earth to driving on the moon." ;-)
Building a base as large and sophisticated like Alpha would take a lot longer than just 24 years.
Conservative estimate, at least a century.
And I can't even imagine how much it would cost!
Agreed. We will just have to think of S:1999 as an alternative timeline or some such.
Yeah, I guess so.