Talk:Lost in Space/Archive 1

Archive 1

Theme music

Correction: John Williams created the theme songs for the first season (which was used also in the second season as well) AND the third season. The third season's theme and opening credits were much more serious than the previous two. In year three, the opening credits had the action freeze frame, and a 7 to 1 countdown sequence would begin over the still image with an exciting theme song with french horns and trumpets blazing. The original two season used cartoons of the Robinson's "floating" across the screen. The third season had actual scenes of the cast imbedded in some pretty high tech graphics for the '60s! As for the rest of the score getting "less serious", most of the music in the series was repeated over and over again, much of it used from John Williams compositions from the first five episodes. Incidently, Alexander Courage, most famous for composing the theme from the original Star Trek, also wrote some of the background score for Lost In Space. Most of the original musical soundtrack to the series is available CD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.233.184 (talk) 14:27, 23 February 2004 (UTC)

Opening sentence

In keeping with the format of most TV articles, I would suggest the opening sentence say "which ran on the CBS Television Network from (year) to (year)."66.143.97.25 17:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Conceptual dilemmas

The Jupiter II spacecraft and its technology represented a considerable engineering achievement given the short amount of time since space flight began on Earth... the first manned landing on the moon is identified as being in 1970. Other industrial nations must also have been making parallel achievements because at least one of them was willing to sabotage the American effort to allow their own efforts to succeed. However, somehow John and Don were able to surpass even those efforts and produce faster-than-light flight which was used in episode #31 ("Wild Adventure") and afterward, the only way to explain reaching Earth in a matter of days.

Some sort of replication technology is repeatedly implied, although not shown until the episode "The Space Vikings". Dr. Smith, in particular, seems to come up with numerous devices, costumes and other "needs" for his assorted enterprises; for example, the many barrels for his home-made brew in "The Prisoners of Space". The Robinsons also seem to be able to come up with milk and eggs, and presumably some meat products. The most logical deduction is that the Jupiter II has some sort of a protein sequencer to produce limited amounts of foods (until additional colonists arrived at Alpha Centauri, presumably), and a matter replicator to produce limited amounts of non-organic materials. Smith would be a disproportionately-high user of these devices, threatening the Robinsons' ability to meet their real needs when Smith indulges in one of his impulsive hobbies.

For goodness sakes, it is a TV show, made for entertainment!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtalledo (talk • contribs) 23:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

CORRECTING THE ISSUES FLAGGED

Over the past weeks I did a lot or reworking of this article. I removed a lot of redundent information, junked the "Analysis" section, and moved pieces of information to more appropriate sections. In regards to the issue of the origins of the show, I streamlined the that section and linked to the actual court documents in question.

I hope that these edits not only make the entry more encyclopediac in nature, but address the disputed neutrality of the article.MrNeutronSF 05:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Timeline

I'd love to see a timeline comparing the "family" version of a lengthy space journey with the "military" version (Star Trek). --Uncle Ed 12:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Added Internal Links

I have added Internal Links to this article. Kathleen.wright5 01:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

• No kidding, you've effectively blitzed the page with your "helpfulness". You should step back and consider what would be appropriate to add and what would be superfluous, as indeed a good 90% of the internal links you've added are. Doceo 10:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

And as I've said elsewhere - many of your wikilinks are unnecessary! Please don't create redlinks (look here) or link every other common word in articles..... Zir 18:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Above Links

I have deleted many of the above Links. Kathleen.wright5 10:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

The Robot in ANZ Bank advertising

In 2005 The Robot was in an ANZ Bank advertisement,the reference for which is on the ANZ Bank article under advertising and I have also removed more of the Links mentioned above. Kathleen.wright5 11:08, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Lost in "ST"?

Is it me, or is the writer trying to say "LiS" was as good as "ST"? Y, "ST" had space hippies & space cowboys; they were a plague, sure sign of what happens if you let TV writers, not SF writers, write SF. (IIRC, both were in Season 3, after Gene'd more or less lost control of the show.) Also, note "LiS" went nowhere in syndication & didn't spawn 10 mopics & 4 revival/spinoff series... (Y, Y, I'm a Trekker; so? Tell me I'm wrong.) Trekphiler 07:20, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• There were no space pirates in Star Trek. But there were cowboys and hippies for sure. The line has been edited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.203.14 (talk • contribs)

Regarding Gene Roddenberry pitching a science fiction idea to CBS: the first Star Trek pilot was filmed in late 1964, even though the series debuted a full year after Lost In Space.THD3 02:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment

Thanks-I Always suspected it was nothing more than a space age version of Swiss Family Robinson.

I answered this question with a quote from June Lockhart...that's exactly what it had been intended to be named. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard 10:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Film

I think someone should do a seperate article for the film. Would anyone else agree? 86.133.200.236 (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

There already is a seperate article page under: Lost in Space (film). I Is Larry (talk) 14:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I just made a link to the movie article page, from this article page. I Is Larry (talk) 14:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Copy edit and other changes

I did a copy edit with the goal of removing the copy edit tag that had been added. A number of other changes were also made:

1) Removing dupe information (sometimes stated three times).

2) Removing overlinking on common words, following WP:CONTEXT.

3) Regularizing names according to Wiki policy. So for example Irwin Allen is called Allen, except in first reference.

4) Removes several sentences describing Allen's other work. Those belong in his article, not here.

5) Removes some original research -- for example about "tone" of seasons -- particularly because different things were being said in different places (and not being given citation).

6) Removes commentary about fan divisions between seasons, and relation to larger genre. This is original research (and uncited).

7) Removes actor's later, previous roles. Unless earlier roles affected "Lost in Space", or later roles were influenced by "Lost in Space", they don't belong here. For Guy Williams and June Lockhart, a case probably can be made that they were brought in because of their typecasting in "Zorro" and "Lassie" -- but citations would be invaluable to say exactly who felt that influence was important, and why (Irwin Allen, would that be right?)

In a separate edit, I removed reference to LIS simulator. Despite good intentions, despite access being free, Wikipedia is not a platform for self-advertising. WP:SOAP At most, LIS might merit an external link. If the project is notable, it should have its own Wiki article. If not it may not belong in external links, either. WP:EL#ADV.

What's left to be done (I didn't really do a thorough edit):

1) From the "Title in other languages" section, it seems that "Lost in Space" belongs in other Wiki's besides those that are listed. Could people with non-English skills help complete the list and links to other Wikipedia languages?

2) Could someone representing the AlphaControl and Irwin Allen Wiki add a few words explaining what those external links offer?

3) The Trivia section is getting large. Anyone feel like creating a new, section that ties some of this information together? (Hopefully with references?)

4) Rewrite introductory para, so Irwin Allen mention is balanced with other show aspects. (Compare with Star Trek: The Original Series or Battlestar Galactica (reimagining))

5) Provide more detail on what "Lost in Space" sets were used in "Galactica"?

6) Create a section for "Lost in Space Forever" DVD.

7) Remove "Feature film" section, and replace with a link to Wiki article that has most of that information?

Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 10:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Bashing?

The article seems to bash Star Trek at the beginning.

AlexanderTG 21:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Changed, quite some time ago. Now it has other problems. Lol. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 11:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Tags

The tagged the article with several tags. The "Analysis" and "Conceptual dilemmas" sections may violate the no original research policy. The "Chronology" section is an in-universe description of the show's events. Also, the article does not cite its sources. --Jtalledo (talk) 23:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Moved the sections here - it doesn't look like any amount of citations or rewrites will make them comply with Wikipedia policy/guidelines. --Jtalledo (talk) 23:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

("Analysis" was a wandering, unreferenced essay-like section that was deleted. [1] Several sentences of it are in current version. "Conceptual dilemmas" was deleted, and appears below.) Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 11:22, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

POV revision

26-March-2007: In March 2007, the article "Lost in Space" was extensively re-written (to avoid POV issues) by a new user ID with less than 100 contributions edits; however, extra omissions might have occurred. To compare changes, see the prior POV-tagged revision from 20Feb07 (prior revision: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lost_in_Space&direction=next&oldid=109476698). The article had also been tagged as "unreferenced" (with no footnotes), but the extensive rewrite by the new user ID did not add ref-tag footnotes. -Wikid77 07:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

That anonymous IP (90.184.23.95) started in Wiki editing Ib Melchior and the Lost in Space article. They added a large number of itemized comparative points between Melchior's treatment and Allen's later one. That Wiki material was soon removed by another editor as not being neutral. Apparently it was taken from a book "Lost in Space: The True Story". I was going to suggest someone hunt this book down and extract any interesting information, but after reading the customer reviews in amazon, maybe not. [2] Melchior, following the Wiki article link, also attempted to sue New Line Productions, and failed [3]. This all reminds me of a line from "Noises Off". Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 11:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

First Paragraph and misleading facts

First of all, this first paragraph doesn't seem to read right:

"The show initially experienced some legal challenges. Ib Melchior, a notable science fiction writer, had conceived what was essentially the same idea (but with different characters) years before either the television series or the comic book. He had called his version "Space Family Robinson", which was also the original production name for Lost in Space. Although legal action went nowhere, Ib Melchior was hired as a consultant on the "Lost in Space" movie as a way of recognizing his original idea."

Not sure what the writer is trying to say "the television series or the comic book". Secondly, didn't Melchior win the court battles over Lost In Space. This article seems to make it seem like he didn't. Anyone doing a page on Ib?

He has an article as of this time. Also, see below "POV revision". Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 12:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Transistors vs. Vacuum tubes

I respectfully point out the statement that Jupiter 2's control room looked more realistic than the Enterprise's because the former used transistors whilst the latter used vacuum tubes is nonsense. It was a TV set, for goodness sake. Both of those components would be under the dash and I don't recall any discussion about either (at least on Star Trek).

While we may never know, I would not be surprised to learn that neither tubes nor transistors had any connection to the actual sets. Movie / TV consoles of that sort look like they are operated by "idiot light" circuits (R-C controlled flashers) or some kind of mechanical shifting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.20.186.83 (talk) 05:34, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The 1960s comic book

Is there a source for the statement that Allen based the TV show on the Space Family Robinson comic? Although there are obvious similarities, I was always under the impression that Allen was unaware of the comic when he created the show. 23skidoo 21:26, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

my understanding is he was unaware of the comic at first, then learned about it and worked out a deal with Gold Key. This is why the title got renamed 'Lost in Space' to kind of tie in with the tv series. Emb021

The second paragraph of "History" also seems backward. It says Allen and Gold Key settled because Allen expected to make TV shows of other Gold Key comics. I think this is wrong -- Gold Key expected to make comics of other Allen TV series (and did). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.167.7 (talk) 07:14, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

External Link - Jupiter-2 and related equipment for use in Microsoft Flight Simulator

I tried going to the link (name listed above) with the url; http://pendercrafts.com/

Kaspersky Internet Security stopped me, stating that there was a trojan trying to install on my PC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.170.11.73 (talk) 08:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

How was the spaceships lift off and landing sounds created?

How were the lift off sound and the crash landing sounds created, this sound is used in several movies , like The Fantastic Voyage etc. It would be cool to get these sound tracks somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.14.118.117 (talk) 02:56, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

The Jupiter Two's engine sound may come from an air conditioning unit.Eligius (talk) 02:45, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

going inside the robot

where was the one when the kid got shrunk and went inside the robot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.194.181 (talk) 04:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

The name of the episode is "Trip Through the Robot." Eligius (talk) 02:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Gold Key

Here's the original text as currently in the article:

""The Lost in Space TV series was originally named Space Family Robinson. Allen was apparently unaware of the Gold Key comic of the same name and similar theme. His series was, as was the comic, a space version of "Swiss Family Robinson" hence the title similarity. Gold Key Comics had the opportunity to sue Allen's production company and the 20th Century Fox studio for copyright infringement but as Allen was expected to win the rights to other Gold Key licenses and had already produced their Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea series, a deal was arranged. Not only was the name changed to Lost in Space but two extra characters, Doctor Zachary Smith, and the Robot, were added to ensure a greater difference between the comic and series. Narration in several Lost in Space episodes also mentioned the comic. Allen later went on to produce Gold Key's The Time Tunnel in 1966, and Land of the Giants in 1968.""

There are some errors here that need to be corrected:

1) Allen was aware of Gold Key's comic, having picked up a copy on a New York to LA flight, and decided to make his own "Swiss Family Robinson".

2) Gold Key did not initially try to sue, as they had existing deals with 20th Century Fox for some of their film properties, as well as Allen's previous ""Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea"" film and TV series.

3) A deal was worked out where Gold Key would produce a tie-in comic of sorts, in that the comic itself wouldn't change, but the title would be altered to reflect a "link" to the TV series. "Space Family Robinson" became "Lost In Space" and then "Lost in Space" with "on Space Station One" listed in smaller font size.

4) The same deal worked out allowed Gold Key to do comics directly based on ""The Time Tunnel"" and ""Land of the Giants"", neither of which were Gold Key properties, but were Irwin Allen ones. This is a major mistake that needs to be corrected in the section above.

I'd do it myself, but after issues with rogue admins vandalizing the "Lost" and "Jericho" pages, I'm somewhat deterred from making any corrections on articles, knowing full well they'll be purged out of spite. However, if someone wants to make the necessary corrections, feel free to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.90.148.162 (talk) 23:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

"Rogue admins"? Editor 66.90.148.162, the things you said about Allen and the comics ring vaguely true. So what's the problem? Lack of reliable sources? Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 01:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

USS Enterprise?

Here's the following statement:

The ship set was expensive for its time, about $600,000. (More than the U.S.S. Enterprise a couple years later.)[citation needed][dubious – discuss]

Can we get this cited and which Enterprise? Star Trek? US Navy Enterprise? Space Shuttle Enterprise? Get it confirmed... Dinkytown 19:52, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Yep. I largely wrote the section on cancellation, drawing mostly on the book "Lost in Space Forever" which includes considerable interview material. I returned some months later to find an extended section of original research inserted:

"Also, the cost of the set itself was extremely high for its time, about $600,000. The producers had, in fact, spent far more money on the Jupiter 2 than Gene Roddenberry had spent on the U.S.S. Enterprise. Then there was the Robot suit, which by itself cost $30,000. A full-scale wooden mock-up of the Jupiter 2 (used on those rare occasions when the ship actually landed properly) cost $70,000, and occupied a considerable amount of studio storage space. Between the model shots and setting up the full-sized Jupiter 2, the landings on "Lost in Space" were very costly, which is why Gene Roddenberry came up with a "transporter." Furthermore, the "control room" set was technically superior, using transistors, as opposed to the Enterprise bridge, which used vacuum tubes. Although more realistic-looking and more energy-efficient, these sets were very costly. As a result, Allen had to struggle to play catch-up during the entire run of the series."

Rather than delete it entirely, I thought it might be conservative to leave a placeholder, in case other editors felt it was worth expanding upon. It wouldn't take me too long to find the cost of the original Enterprise in "The Making of Star Trek", but I somewhat question whether the information belongs in this article at all. These "it cost a lot of money" (or a little money) relating to TV shows and movies often seem a little unencyclopedic. Everything costs money. What encyclopedic difference does it make that something cost more than something else? Cheers, Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 22:49, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Exported for many countries

Here in Brazil this American TV serie was a success. In fact, Lost in space was exported for many countries.Agre22 (talk) 21:13, 12 December 2009 (UTC)agre22 I know for a fact that the Jupiter 2 engine sound was created using a Pipe Organ at the Fox Studios.Sure it was manipulated, slowed down, reversed etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.79.43 (talk) 17:03, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

?

• In the pilot episode the nearest Dr Smith comes to sabotaging the Space mission is after killing a guard and throwing the body down a disposal shute outside the spacecraft-he then instead of sabotaging the aircraft controls and getting off the ship-he keeps trying to contact this "Superiors" about what to do-until he's trapped aboard. Was this clumsy scene of SMith being trapped aboard-the result of a last minute rewrite of the story Plot to make it more interesting than a uppdated version of Swiss Family Robinson? If it was-ironically it worked-because he turned from the series villian to the series comic relief!!
• At the end of each episode of the 1st season Dr Robinson would always write the Days events in his logbook-was this dropped in the next seasons?
• In the first season episodes the Robinson family would talk about how the evil Dr Smith would control the robot with withholding the robots power pack-instead of having our heroes taking the power pack away from the Doctor. Would this be a running gag?
• Is it just conicidence that TUFF Puppy villian Dr Birdbrain always talks in Dr Smith's pompous voice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.75.141 (talk) 13:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

New Lost in Space books available.

There are two new great books for Lost in Space fans available at fabgearusa.com.

http://fabgearusa.com/jupiter_2_technical_guide.html

http://fabgearusa.com/lost_in_space_design.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.17.28.226 (talk) 21:43, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bloop

The text (as of 2011-11-01) reads:

She [Penny] acquires a chimpanzee-like alien pet that made one sound, "Bloop". While it is sometimes remembered by that name,[2] Penny had named the creature Debbie.

In fairness, the crew usually referred to it as "the Bloop", i.e., by species, whereas Penny usually referred to it as "Debbie", i.e., by name. So we have the "Bloop" named "Debbie" (as we would have a pet "Dog" named "Spot"). — Loadmaster (talk) 23:36, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

General Revision and Cleanup Needed

This article is overlong and repetitive. I've rewritten the PLOT section to be SERIES FORMAT, but much of the information there is also in the PRODUCTION section, which actually doesn't seem to discuss the show's production at all, whereas the SERIES HISTORY section does talk about the production. I plan to consolidate and re-arrange the material under correct headings and eliminate redundancy ove the next few days. MrNeutronSF (talk) 11:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Reason for cancelation

LiS was cancelled not due to a "clerical error," but due to lack of adequate funding/budget restraints. I believe this is mentioned on the DVD set and was reported in major publications, such as TV Guide.

From www.tv.com: "The series was still very popular in the spring of 1968, and cast members were confident that a 1968/1969 fall season would be in the works. Unfortunately, due to the excessive cost of 20th Century Fox's disastrous movie foray Cleopatra, all television and film divisions of the massive studio were asked to collectively absorb the losses. Lost in Space was no exception and series creator, Irwin Allen, felt his portion of the cuts were unacceptable and refused to produce Lost in Space for the following season. And with that, the show was cancelled - not because of bad ratings, but because of lack of proper funding."

I suggest the errors about the cancellation of the show be corrected.

131.156.217.21 21:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)gregg fieffer

If the above statement is true, it needs further explanation. Cleopatra was shown in theaters in 1963. Lost in Space was cancelled in 1968. If shockwaves from the movie's failure rippled through the tv and film divisions, wouldn't its effects have been felt several seasons earlier, not 5 years after the movie aired? --Thirdmoon 22:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I've addressed the cancellation issue at length, since it's interesting, and considerably more open than often Hollywood is about these touchy events. I've added citations, least there be any question, ok? Also the cost figures which were quoted were wildly off, and the source I have is extremely specific about wht they actually were.

Unfortunately I don't have access to the DVD that Mumy and Harris did about Lost in Space from a few years back, that might add yet additional insight.

Also, at editorial request -- for copy editing in the box at the top, I've reworded a couple sections so they have a more consistent style, and use less oblique language. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard 10:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Seems unlikely that William Paley would have said he was a "fan of the robot" in 1997, considering he died in 1990. Calliaume (talk) 17:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I deleted the following under Budget too high as a reason for cancellation because the cost of the sets was incurred years earlier at the show's onset, and those costs are amortized over the life of the series. "The interior of the Jupiter II was the most expensive TV set for its time, about $350,000."MrNeutronSF (talk) 07:51, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

References

Lost In Space: The Journey Home?

I know it was a rather minor blip on the LIS radar, but it probably should at least be mentioned somewhere. Thoughts? Evil-yuusha (talk) 20:18, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Myth of Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek rejection is true.

User Macduff is wrong about rejecting the myth of: Gene Roddenberry's gripe with CBS network. In the book "The Making Of Star Trek", reguarding his 2-hour "Star Trek" presentation meeting with CBS programming executives, and their rejection of it... Gene Rodenberry states: "MY ATTITUDE WAS, "YOU S.O.B.'S, WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL ME THAT AFTER THE FIRST TEN MINUTES? IF YOU WANT TECHNICAL ADVICE AND HELP, HIRE ME AND PAY ME FOR IT!" IT'S LIKE CALLING A DOCTOR AND HAVING HIM ANALYZE YOU FOR TWO HOURS AND THEN TELLING HIM, "THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PINPOINTING WHAT'S WRONG, AND I'VE DECIDED TO GO TO ANOTHER DOCTOR FOR THE TREATMENT." I Is Larry (talk) 16:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

...Herb Solow and Bob Justman, in the section of Inside Star Trek: The Real Story that deals with this, makes note of Gene's story regarding the events of the ill-fated CBS meeting. While neither were present, and don't deny the events occurred as Gene stated, they do offer that the issue of CBS rejecting Star Trek lay more with the fact that Desilu as a studio had no reputation for being able to produce the kind of state-of-the-art special effects that a show like Star Trek would require, much less being able to churn out effects at the level and amount required for a weekly series. As Solow put it, the only special effect Desilu knew how to do on a weekly basis was color Lucille Ball's hair red. Ergo, while the "company line" at CBS was that they turned down Star Trek because they already had Lost In Space, the real factor most likely was extreme doubt that Desilu Studios could produce a weekly show with the quality a sci-fi show like Star Trek would require in order to be successful.

...On a side note, some have noted that CBS president James Aubrey was present at the meeting, and had Gene taken that sort of verbiage towards those in attendance as he claimed in The Making of Star Trek, it would be surprising to those who knew Aubrey and/or of his own hair-trigger temperament if Aubrey hadn't had Gene physically tossed off the property after verbally chewing him out from stem to stern. Therefore, it's likely that while Gene may have expressed his displeasure for having been suckered into giving a "free consultation", it's less likely that he used such verbiage, at least in the presence of those in the meeting with CBS. 66.90.148.162 (talk) 23:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Just a minor correction to the above; Gene never claimed he "used such verbiage" at the meeting with CBS. As noted by "I is Larry" above, Roddenberry said, "My ATTITUDE was...." I doubt he actually EXPRESSED that attitude directly in the meeting. I've also read "The Making Of Star Trek," although it's been awhile, and I would stand by that interpretation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.248.185.22 (talk) 18:29, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Guest Stars

Wasn't that Robin Williams who played the Planetary Junkman? If so, he wasn't on the list of guest stars. Good Read — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.60.204.18 (talk) 02:26, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

No, that was Marcel Hillaire. πr² (t • c) 02:21, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, Robin would have been about 7 yrs old at the time or thereabouts.HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:22, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not allow advertising

If these books are to be used as Reliable Sources for the improvement of the article, feel free to bring the subject up and discuss what information they contain to shed extra info on LIS - but for now, this post is removed. Sorry. HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Archiving

If there is no objections, this talk page needs archiving. Mlpearc powwow 15:21, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Disagree at this point, size is fine. HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Chronology

Based on "facts" presented in the episodes, a timeline of events can be compiled.

The Lost in Space Chronology
The Adventures of the Space Family Robinson
1997-2000

Prior to 4.6 billion years ago- The first creature in the universe to leave his home and explore space was Formale from the fifth planet of Orion. In the 6000th year of his planet’s history, Formale (which means explorer in the language of his people) designed, constructed and piloted a spacecraft. Unfortunately, his explorations had a tragic end. (Verda instructs Will and Penny in early galactic history in “The Android Machine.”)

Over 4.6 billion years ago - The Invaders from the 5th Dimension begin their travels. (One of the Invaders states that they have been traveling since before the earliest moments of Earth’s history.)

4.6 billion years ago – the Earth was formed.

Millions of years ago –The pure cosmic force that will become Mr. Nobody gains consciousness on Planet Preplanus. (Mr. Nobody’s earliest memories are the formation of rocks on the planet.)

Many thousands of years ago- People from the planet Quasti overthrow a despot named Kanto. They entomb his remains on Preplanus. (Kanto hints at this in "Follow the Leader.")

Thousands of years ago- A humanoid alien civilization exists on Planet Preplanus. The Robinsons will later discover the ruins of this civilization in “There Were Giants in the Earth.” (It can be speculated that they existed 3000 years prior to the Robinson’s discovery. It is reasonable to assume this due to the condition of the mummified remains of one of the aliens.)

October 12, 1492 - Christopher Columbus discovers the Americas. (The Robot was teaching Will and Penny this fact in “The Android Machine.”)

1780- Benedict Arnold betrays George Washington. (The Robot recounts this in The Ghost Planet.)

1793 - Alien recluse Tiabo moves to a desolate planet to escape from people. (Tiabo relates this to Dr. Smith in “Forbidden World.”)

1797 – An alien spacecraft containing the wishing machine crashes on planet Preplanus. (Will theorizes that the spaceship ruins are centuries old in "Wish Upon a Star".)

1798 - An evil Vizier captures a Caliph’s daughter and takes her to a place called Utopia. The Thief of Outer Space steals the Vizier’s slave and begins his quest to find the Princess. (The Thief has been looking for the princess for “200 years.“ This is revealed in “The Thief of Outer Space.”)

1858 - Alonzo P. Tucker is born in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania.

1876 - General Armstrong Custer is killed at The Little Bighorn. A.P. Tucker, age 18, is abducted by Tellurians for biological studies. Tucker is kept in a time-freezer to retard his aging processes.

1895- The Andromedan civilization melts down all the robots similar to the B-9 series robot as they are obsolete. (Mr. Zumdish notes that his people did this “over a century ago“ in “The Android Machine.”)

1946 – Zachary Smith is born. His maternal grandmother is Irish.

1947 - The Jupiter II time-travels back to Earth in "Visit to a Hostile Planet"

1956 – Professor John Robinson is born.

1957 – Maureen Robinson is born.

1958 – The United States begins intensive research on space travel technology. (The reporter states that the Jupiter II is the culmination of nearly 40 years of intensive research.) The Keeper monitors radio communications between astronauts and earth to learn English.

1958- Sagramonte of Altair begins his quest to slay the “beast”. (It is stated in the episode “The Questing Beast“ that they have been chasing each other for forty years.)

1964 – Zachary Smith enters Oxford University to study medicine. He minors in robotic engineering. While at school, Smith becomes the Grand Master of the Oxford University Chess Society for three years running. While at Oxford, Smith had the lead in his college musical.

1966- Maureen Robinson, age 9, has an imaginary friend named Mr. Noodles that lives in her teddy bear.

John Robinson, age 10, goes to school with a boy whose father owned a carnival. The boy taught John how to work a shell game.

1968– Don West is born.

July 20, 1969- Apollo 11 the first manned lunar landing mission. (Historical fact, although John Robinson said it happened in 1970 in the episode "Visit to a Hostile Planet".)

1970– Zachary Smith graduates from Oxford University with a medical degree.

December 7-19, 1972- Apollo 17 the final lunar mission in the Apollo Series (historical fact.)

Soon after the final Apollo mission, the United States embarks on creating permanent lunar bases. The bases will have tracking stations that will help monitor future manned missions. To facilitate this massive project the United States Space Corps is proposed. NASA is renamed Alpha Control.

1973– The United States Space Corps is formed.

1974– John Robinson, age 18, enters college. He joins the Football team and becomes a three letter man.

1976– John and Maureen Robinson are married.

1977– Judy Robinson is born.

1978- John Robinson completes his undergraduate studies. On graduation, he receives an offer to play professional football. He declines in order to pursue his doctorate degree.

Don West, age 10, becomes adept at using a slingshot. (The Keeper part 1)

1980– Professor John Robinson earns his doctorate in Geology.

June 18, 1982– at 0600, Jimmy Hapgood on board the Traveling Man, a spacecraft with a rudimentary FTL engine, is launched on a mission to Saturn. He becomes lost in space due to a navigational error. (Welcome Stranger. It can be theorized that the ship has FTL capability because Hapgood has been to many different planets in his travels.)

1983- Alpha Control launches a test vehicle equipped with a suspended animation tube. The vessel, containing a small dog as a test subject, becomes lost in space. (Professor Robinson theorizes that the dog must have been part of the space programs early experiments in suspended animation. It is proposed that this occurred after Hapgood’s flight because he did not have suspended animation equipment in Traveling Man.)

1984– Penny Robinson is born.

1986– Will Robinson is born.

Don West, age 18, enters the United States Space Corps Academy.

1988– Intensive research and preparation begins on the Jupiter II mission. Because the Earth is overcrowded and polluted, it is determined that a new home must be found to insure the future of humanity. A series of deep space telescopic probes conclusively establish a planet orbiting the binary star pair Alpha Centauri as the only one within range of American technology able to furnish ideal conditions for Human existence. Other countries race the United States in reaching this goal and the danger of sabotage is a constant danger. (The Reluctant Stowaway points out that the flight has been preceded by nearly a decade of research and preparation.)

Smith’s great Aunt Maude dies. Smith is at her bedside.

1990– Don West graduates from the United States Space Corps academy.

1995- Will Robinson eats fudge that Penny made for the Space Scouts. He keeps it secret and has bad dreams. (Will tells Smith of this in Wild Adventure. The date is conjecture.)

Prior to the Jupiter II mission - The Robinson Family is selected from more than two million volunteers for its unique balance of scientific achievement, emotional stability and pioneer resourcefulness.

1996- Alpha Control launches a series of unmanned fuel barges to the edge of the Siribidus Galaxy. These will act as refueling stations for the Intergalactic Probe 22 mission. (It is mentioned that this occurred a year prior to launch of the Jupiter 2 mission. “Wild Adventure“.)

October 16, 1997– The Jupiter II is launched. (The Reluctant Stowaway)

October 21, 1997– At 1800 hours, all attempts to contact the Jupiter II are determined to be futile. Alpha Control declares the ship and its crew Lost in Space. (The Derelict) The Robinson family and Major West are assumed to be dead. (Return to Earth)

By October 30, 1997– The Jupiter II crash lands on an alien planet. ("Island in the Sky". The date is inferred in that, despite hypervelocity, no severe time dilation occurred and a year later, Alpha Control notifies the Jupiter II that they were lost in space a year earlier.)

There were Giants in the Earth

November 4th, 1997- (A few weeks pass during the course of this adventure) The Robinsons learn to plant crops safely in the alien soil and domesticate ostrich-like animals.

The Hungry Sea

November 8th, 1997

Welcome Stranger

November 15, 1997

The Robinsons meet Jimmy Hapgood.

The Robinsons dub the planet Priplanus.

My Friend, Mr. Nobody

November 22, 1997

Penny befriends a being of pure cosmic force.

The Robinsons start drilling in Priplanus’s surface for raw materials to synthesize rocket fuel for the Jupiter II.

Invaders from the 5th dimension

November 29, 1997

Ancient aliens from the 5th dimension try to steal Will’s brain.

The Oasis

December 6, 1997

Drought conditions occur on Priplanus. Dr. Smith grows to three times his normal height after eating alien fruit.

The Sky Is Falling

December 13, 1997 An alien family lands on Priplanus. The aliens, known as Taurons, leave behind a matter transfer device. Soon after they leave, Professor Robinson gives Dr. Smith the responsibility for the hydroponic garden.

Wish Upon a Star

Will and Dr. Smith discover the wishing machine in the wreck of an alien spaceship. At least four days pass during the course of this adventure. Smith has been away for four days.

The Raft

The Jupiter II runs out of fuel. Professor Robinson and Major West design and construct a prototype plasma engine. Dr. Smith begins writing his book.

One of Our Dogs Is Missing

Professor Robinson, Major West and Will go on a scouting expedition. Maureen, Judy, Penny and Dr. Smith find the recent wreckage of a small spacecraft. The spacecraft contained a small dog in suspended animation. Lost in space in 1983, the ship crashed on Priplanus and released the dog.

Attack of the Monster Plants

The Robinsons begin to extract dutronium fuel from Priplanus. During the course of this adventure, the Robinsons lose all of the fuel.

Return from Outer Space

Early January 1998. It is after Christmas and the Launch of the Jupiter II is referred to as have happened “last year.”

The Robinsons begin to search for new veins of radioactive ore to refine into Dutronium. Will is sent back to Earth via the Tauron matter Transfer device.

A local reporter notifies Alpha Control of Will’s visit.

The Robinsons begin to construct their irrigation system.

The Keeper (1)

The Keeper (2)

March 1998 (The Robot mentions the month in this episode.)

The Sky Pirate

John mentions it is 1998.

Ghost in Space

The Robinsons again attempt to extract Dutronium from deep within Preplanus.

War of the Robots

The Magic Mirror

The Challenge

The Space Trader

The Robinson's food and Water supply is damaged.

His Majesty Smith

The Space Croppers

The water pipeline is completed.

All That Glitters

The Lost Civilization

A Change of Space

Follow the Leader

Under the influence of the ancient spirit of Kanto, Professor Robinson creates a Fuel synthesizer unit and repairs the Jupiter 2

Blast Off into Space

The blasting for Cosmonium by Mr. Nerim causes the core of Preplanus to become unstable. The Jupiter 2 launches from the surface of the planet with mere moments to spare as the planet explodes to cosmic dust. The Robinsons head for Alpha Centauri.

Wild Adventure

The Jupiter 2 is near the Siribidus Galaxy. They head inadvertently towards Sol and make brief contact with Alpha Control. Smith meets the Green Girl for the first time.

The Ghost Planet

The Jupiter 2 lands on the automated planet. They escape and the Android ruler launches a homing missile to destroy the ship.

Forbidden World

Attempting to avoid the missile, the Jupiter 2 crash lands on a neighboring world. The Jupiter 2 is once again stranded o an alien world. The missile detonates harmlessly on the planet’s surface. Tiabo, a hermit, at first tries to scare the Robinsons away. Seeing that they are harmless, he moves to the other side of the planet to be alone once again.

Space Circus

The Prisoners of Space

The Robinsons are held accountable for Smith’s attack on the bubble creatures from “The Derelict.”

The Android Machine

The Robinsons encounter Verda and Mr. Zumdish.

The Deadly Games of Gamma 6

The Robinsons discover that the planet they are on is named Gamma 6.

The Thief from Outer Space

The Curse of Cousin Smith

This episode takes place on June 28, 1998. (Smith mentions it is 180 days until Christmas.)

West of Mars

A Visit to Hades

The Wreck of the Robot

The Dream Monster

The Golden Man

The Girl From the Green Dimension

The Questing Beast

The Toymaker

Mutiny in Space

The Space Vikings

Rocket to Earth

The Cave of the Wizards

Treasures of the Lost Planet

Revolt of the Androids

The Colonists

Trip Through the Robot

The Phantom Family

The Mechanical Men

The Astral Traveler

The Galaxy Gift

Condemned of Space

Visit to a Hostile Planet

Kidnapped in Space

Hunter's Moon

The Space Primevals

The Space Destructors

The Haunted Lighthouse

Flight into the Future

Collision of the Planets

The Space Creature

Deadliest of the Species

A Day at the Zoo

Two Weeks in Space

Castles in Space

The Anti-Matter Man

Target: Earth

Princess of Space

The Time Merchant

The Promised Planet

Fugitives in Space

Space Beauty

The Flaming Planet

The Great Vegetable Rebellion

Junkyard of Space

2198

Dr. Smith becomes the property of the Space Trader. (The contract comes into effect after 200 years.)

• • • Nice attempt to start the chronology -- three comments 1) re: "Invaders from the 5th Dimension"... I am not convinced that their statement that they were traveling before the "earliest moments of Earth's history" refers to the PLANET. If we say it refers to the SENTIENT BEINGS who actually make "recorded history"... one can reasonably conclude that the invaders have been traveling for a much shorter time. After all -- they sure didn't change much in 5 billion years! 2) If the Robinsons ever make it back to Earth, the Space Trader is out of luck -- as trafficking in human body parts or live human beings is prohibited by most Earth nations... and you cannot enforce illegal provisions of a contract. 3) You may -- or may not -- have to account for any minor changes in the Robinsons' timeline that occur in "The Time Merchant"... they get the main events back on track, but one can reasonably conclude that minor changes occurred...giving the opportunity to smooth out any inconsistencies in the prior timeline. Thus, actions and events depicted between the time of the narrative shown in "The Time Merchant"... and the actual time of "The Time Merchant" ... might be up for revision. Chesspride 172.164.30.32 (talk) 04:42, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Equipment

I imply that gravity is used in the Jupiter II's propulsion because it is not likely that even nuclear electric propulsion could produce a velocity of .8 c, since the mass of an object increases with its percentage of light speed, to the point that infinite mass is reached. Jupiter II was to reach Alpha Centauri in just 5.5 years, a distance of (as believed in the 1960s) 4.2 light years, hence my estimate of point 8 c.

During the second and third seasons, the ship repeatedly crossed incredible distances in just days. Notably in one episode, the Jupiter II reached and landed on Earth, then returned to the alien planet where the majority of the Robinsons were in suspended animation. In the second episode of the second season, the Jupiter II was able to reach Earth in just a few days, in spite of the fact that it started out so far from Sol and Alpha Centauri that the constellations could not be recognized.

Although Don and John did some experiments with plasma fuel during the first season, the final episode of that season features an alien taking over John's body and directing the others to perform a number of repairs, while "John" designed a fuel synthesizer. It is highly likely that the alien, intent on returning to his people, incorporated FTL upgrades to accomplish his goal in weeks rather than many years in suspended animation.

The reel-to-reel tape recorders used by the children for their music, by the data recorders on the upper deck, and by other characters such as Dr. Smith in the narration of his books, are a glaring anachronism of a ship that reflects several stunning breakthroughs that miniaturize technology. CDs are but a hint of what could have been imagined by Irwin Allen's designers.

The "transistorized" lights of the ship speak to me of the LED lighting that is poised to hit the marketplace. GBC 02:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC

• • • • Not to quibble, but the "season 2, episode 2" that you reference is "Wild Adventure" and season 2, episode 3 is "The Ghost Planet" ... and I think perhaps the reason you think they are on Earth (they are not)... is that in S2ep2 the Jupiter 2 is headed "toward the Sun" (but here "Sun" does not mean our sun, it is a generic reference to stellar body)...and in S2ep3 they approach the "ghost" planet and the evil-minded machines lead them to believe they are encountering (Earth-based) beings...but they are not. Yes -- they did go through various time loops and make it to Earth, but either at the wrong point in the timeline or similar situation. But having spent all of season 1 on Preplanis...they were incredibly far away in season 2 and any references to "Sun" or "Earth" were either generic or because they were tricked. Chesspride 172.164.30.32 (talk) 04:57, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Inappropriate Fanon

Why is that enormous piece of fanon here on the discussion page? It has no relevance to the actual content or reliability of the Wiki article. This isn't a fan site. It belongs on some fan-forum, and should be deleted. Jack Brooks 02:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

It does seem like fans of LIS have been trying to put their "fanon" into this article. I deleted a few sentences that were fan speculation, and therefore "independent research". If we say that the Jupiter 2 goes 80% of light speed, that is independent research because we have done the math ourselves, it isn't explicitly said anywhere in the series.

Moreover, in the first episode as broadcast, the Robot's sabotage causes the ship to go into something called "hyperdrive". Control back on Earth thinks that this causes the Jupiter 2 to go "outside the galaxy". And the Robinsons seem to think this is a possibility--that they are in another galaxy. There were on route from Earth to a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri (the closest star to the sun), but end up somewhere else entirely, almost instantaneously. All that is specifically said in the episode.

To do "independent research", I would conclude that this "hyperdrive" did indeed cause them to go faster than the speed of light. More "independent research"--they didn't seem to be planning to use the hyperdrive on their travel to Alpha Centauri, because this was supposed to take five years with them in suspended animation. So why is the hyperdrive ability (there is even a control labeled "hyperdrive" in the control room) even a part of the spaceship? I think that the writers were just displaying the usual ignorance of TV writers on scientific subjects. In another episode (the second or third) the writer doesn't seem to know what the word "velocity" means. KEVP 9/08/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.8.4.137 (talk) 17:16, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

• • • A minor quibble -- yes, the ship traveled huge distances in some episodes, but in season 2 episode 2 "Wild Adventure" it is heading toward A SUN -- a stellar body (not THE SUN or Sol). In season 2 episode 3 "The Ghost Planet" they are nowhere near Earth (but they are led to believe they might be there by the evil machines on the ghost planet). Also, a suggestion re: hyperdrive... they had it, the technology was new and unexplored, it was meant to be used in short bursts (thus speeding up a long voyage to Alpha Centauri but still requiring five years). The sabotage in the pilot/first episode caused it to be used in a prolonged burst, something that led to unknown consequences. (A Star Trek analogy would be having warp drive, knowing that you can use it in short bursts at warp 2, but then -- by accident -- applying it for an extended period of time with unknown consequences). Of course, once you use it and nothing bad happens, you feel more confident experimenting with it again and again as the series progresses. Chesspride 172.164.30.32 (talk) 05:12, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Ownership of CBS.

In "Budget was cut" in Cancellation section, it is stated that 20th Century-Fox owned CBS at the time of cancellation.I've added a citation needed tag for this statement.I have never heard of this before and doubt the truthfulness of the statement since CBS was a seperate independent corporation under the controll of Willam S. Paley at that time. A quick read of the Wikipedia main articles for both CBS and 20th Century-Fox made no mention of any such ownership.Jonel469 (talk • contribs) 02:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes your right. CBS was controlled by stock holders until Lawrence Tisch became majority holder in 1986. The Davison Library (talk) 16:33, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Wow

You can sure tell this is a hot subject for the lonely, diehard, sci-fi nerds the way so much of the article is so poorly written. You can almost smell the Funyuns on the fingers of the geeks who typed in that horrible "Trivia" section. User:Ted —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.93.146 (talk) 06:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Dittio. It appears to be the work of Springfield's Comic Book Guy. Anyone who uses the word 'plethora' to mean 'many' is of the geek variety, especially the geek who isn't truly educated, just reads a plethora of tosh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.182.165 (talk) 11:17, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

8 years ago, an anonymous editor griped about the state of this (and one other) article, did nothing it improve it, and disappeared.

2024 will be here before you know it. - SummerPhD^v2.0 14:32, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

(De)Capitalisation of "Space Western"

I recently edited the capitalisation of the currently-debated-over genre of space Western. The edit was subsequently reverted. The genre should be written as "space Western" rather than "space western"; this is because Western is capitalised due to its name's connection to the American Old West, while "space" is just "the void that exists between celestial bodies", and is therefore not capitalised. For further evidence:

• The article "Western (genre)" refers to "Western" with capitalisation.
• The article "Outer space" refers to "space" without capitalisation.
• The article "Space Western", excluding the caption for an image file, refers to "space Western" as such.

Therefore, in this article, only the "Western" in "space Western" should be capitalised. Wikipedia arguments sure are petty. –Matthew - (talk) 23:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Edit: Nevermind, by the time I wrote out this section, the genre had been changed to "science fiction". Carry on. –Matthew - (talk) 23:14, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

I corrected the capitalization thanks.--Taeyebar 16:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Space Western/Science Fiction

Gothicfilm and Taeyebar, it looks like there is a lot more heat here than light. It would be helpful if each of you could, without discussing other editors, explain why you feel this show should be listed as one, the other, both or neither. - SummerPhD^v2.0 01:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

My ping for Taeyebar was ineffective. This remedies that. - SummerPhD^v2.0 02:01, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

@SummerPhDv: I just got logged in and got this message.--Taeyebar 17:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Multiple sources list Lost in Space as science fiction. Taeyebar cannot use one source to overcome that. Creator-producer Irwin Allen intended the series to be a sci-fi Swiss Family Robinson, as the article shows. Lost in Space only vaguely fits the Western genre. It is not like Firefly (TV series) with consistent use of Western iconography. It is primarily science fiction. It's been listed that way for years and should not be changed on the whim of a genre warrior. You need to be aware of Taeyebar's years-long history of edit warring. As I posted on his Talk page:

Stop taking away longstanding links to primary genres. There is no consensus for your relentless changing of genres to subgenres in film article leads. Your history as a genre warrior goes back years, as can be seen by the multiple previous warnings posted on your Talk page. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Repeating the same edit is WP:edit warring. Try following WP:BRD and getting WP:Consensus instead. - Gothicfilm (talk) 01:43, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

I am not here to discuss other editors. Whittling that down a bit (and removing all of the discussion of another editor), here's what I hear you saying: "Science fiction" is listed in multiple sources and has been listed here for some time, "space western" is in one source and has not been here for any length of time. You do not feel this show is a "space western". Is that a fair summary? - SummerPhD^v2.0 02:01, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

It is not primarily a space Western, and the lead should not make it sound like it is. Multiple sources list Lost in Space as science fiction. Creator-producer Irwin Allen intended the series to be a sci-fi Swiss Family Robinson, as the article shows. Lost in Space only vaguely resembles the Western genre. It is primarily science fiction. - Gothicfilm (talk) 02:21, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Here's what I hear you saying: "Science fiction" is listed in multiple sources and has been listed here for some time, "space western" is in one source and has not been here for any length of time. In your opinion this show is primarily "science fiction" and only vaguely a "space western". Is that a fair summary? - SummerPhD^v2.0 02:39, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

I suppose, but I would prefer to let my words stand for themselves. Since there should be more than one person expressing an opinion here, I've posted a notice at WT:WikiProject Film. - Gothicfilm (talk) 05:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

My goal is not to replace your words, but to ensure I understand what you are saying. - SummerPhD^v2.0 12:00, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

I came via the note at the Film project but this article technically comes under the jurisdiction of Wikiproject television, so you may get more responses by posting a note at WT:TV. Betty Logan (talk) 13:06, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

• Support science-fiction Lost in Space is clearly science-fiction. It has Western motifs because it is about a "frontier" family and some sources allude to this by describing it as a "space western", but that is not a designation of its genre. It has spaceships and robots, and is set in the future on another planet. Abbott (2006) goes into detail about the impact of Western mythology on the show, but still principally describes it as "science fiction" in the opening sentence. Allmovie gives the primary genres as Adventure and Science-fiction and the sub-genre as "Space Adventure" which seems to be fairly on the money IMO. Betty Logan (talk) 13:00, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Space Western is the subgenre and science fiction is the collective genre, so there is no conflict between the two. And as people explained to Gothicfilm on WIkiProject film months ago, WP:SPECIFICLINK determines that we put it on the subgenre. Gothicfilm has a history of edit warring with multiple editors including violating the 3RR on multiple pages.--Taeyebar 17:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

[4] over there in the link Gothicfilm was told by a WikiProject film member why subgenre is more specific than "primary genre"--Taeyebar 17:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

"People" did not say that. It was only one user who was mistaken. No one else agreed with it in regard to genres. In fact others at that discussion disputed what Taeyebar was doing. WP:SPECIFICLINK is referring to hard facts, like the flag of Tokelau over the flag of Tokelau, or geographical locations, etc. No one disputers Paris is in France. SPECIFICLINK does not apply to debatable subjects like subgenres. It was not intended to link readers to substandard subgenre article-lists over the far better maintained primary genre articles. It is Taeyebar who has a years-long history of edit warring, as my links above show. SPECIFICLINK does not give Taeyebar license to put in his desired subgenres, and he needs to stop using it as an excuse to edit war and claim he doesn't need consensus and is not in conflict with the majority of sources and other editors. - Gothicfilm (talk) 15:42, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

People should no believe the lies and misleading claims made by Gothicfilm, claiming that I said I don't need consensus. Gothicfilm has edit warred a number of editors on different pages including violating the 3RR. Gothiciflm typically ignores reliable sources- a strict Wikipedia policy- until she/he approves of the edit, calling it "consensus". And as that link pointed out, that editor explained to Gothicfilm a number of policies insist that the specific subgenre be placed.--Taeyebar 17:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

And the reason why LIS is called science fiction, is because Space Western is science fiction. We call Lord of the Rings fantasy, because high-fantasy is fantasy.--Taeyebar 17:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

No, that is not why most sources call Lost in Space science fiction. You're just assuming that, with no source. This, along with Space Western is the subgenre and science fiction is the collective genre, so there is no conflict between the two is Taeyebar giving himself permission to put in what he wants without consensus, as I said. He denies there's any conflict, even as I and others say there's a conflict. And he has a long history of accusing others of nonsense, often behavior he engages in himself. It's incredible how he keeps throwing around accusations of 3RR, never mentioning that the only reason that comes up is because he put in the same edit repeatedly, over and over. - Gothicfilm (talk) 04:51, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

• Comment: "Space western" is the (loose) SUBgenre and should not be in the lead's opening sentence. Period. Leaving the genre in the infobox as "science fiction" but calling it a "space western" is counter-productive, sourced or not. I'm not saying change the infobox either. The most-telling to me is that LIS is a cult classic and, should it actually be a space western, it's mentioned nowhere at the link. Lastly, edit warring to suIt singular needs does not reflect consensus. — Wyliepedia 15:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

So long as there are enough reliable sources to back up the "space Western" claim, then there shouldn't be anything wrong with it. According to WP:FILMLEAD, subgenres are perfectly acceptable for inclusion. The issue is whether or not there are multiple reliable sources. –Matthew - (talk) 22:59, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

• Support science fiction. Calling the idea of Space Family Robinson a "space western" would be like calling Little House on the Prairie a revisionist or modern western. — Wyliepedia 15:57, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

• Comment I have looked at the source installed by Taeyebar and I cannnot find any evidence of the show being referred to as a "space western". Will he please quote the relevant sentence/passage so we are better able to understand the context in which the phrase is used. Betty Logan (talk) 16:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I am still adding more sources. They call it a western . And science fiction western redirects to space western, (a redirect i had no involvement in). And I'm adding more sources.--Taeyebar 16:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

• Support science-fiction - per above supports. Jusdafax 17:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

@Betty Logan: The second source has no preview available it seems, but it says space western there. I have to find it again.--Taeyebar 01:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Renamed Robot B-9 to Robot (Lost in Space)

I've renamed the article concerning the Robot to Robot (Lost in Space). As per the script, common name for Robot B-9 is "Robot", and as per the opening credits for season 4, the actors portraying him are presented with the caption "as The Robot". AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:10, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lost in Space. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140727232436/http://www.carlustblog.com/2010/01/the-chariot-from-lost-in-space.html to http://www.carlustblog.com/2010/01/the-chariot-from-lost-in-space.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:07, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

DuckDuckGo search and http://www.lostinspace.com.br/

When you search for "Wikipedia Lost in Space" why does it appear in a small box with http://www.lostinspace.com.br/ directly under its name? Is http://www.lostinspace.com.br/ somehow embedded in the Wiki page? If so, is there a way to remove it? Or is this all caused by the search engine somehow? Phantom in ca (talk) 19:19, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

When is "Citation needed" vandalism?

On 29 October 2017 Special:Contributions/2602:306:C445:2689:BC04:4452:3B9A:AF45 added {fact} to the end of over 30 paragraphs of this article. This is the only contribution by this anonymous WP writer (by this i.d.) although based on the notation, the contributor may be an experienced editor who has adopted a disguised i.d. (irksome!) While this article may be imperfect, I wonder if this use of {citation needed} isn't a subtle form of vandalism that is harder to challenge than the more blatant pranking that crops up regularly. Thoughts?

(To discuss this I used {single brackets}.)

Just browsing, this is not my specialty, but ...

Thanks GeeBee60 (talk) 02:56, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Split article

There's a Wiki entry devoted to the technology of Star Trek (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_in_Star_Trek). I think it is time to spin off the Technology section for LiS into its own Wiki entry (and link to it with this entry).

If someone knows how to start a new Wiki page (or can direct me to info how to do it), make it so. ;)

Phantom in ca (talk) 17:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

What you are asking is to split the article. See WP:SPLIT. The article is almost 80kB and so would normally be a candidate for splitting. However the article is in sorry state and the part you wish to split off is lacking in standard citations. Efforts to improve this article would be better spent on fixing it up then splitting. That said, while I am not willing to create a new unsourced article, if you care to be WP:BOLD and create your own article, go to Help:Userspace draft and start creating. You can click on this link to cut and paste the Technology and equipment section into your new article and the same link to make changes to that section of the article once your draft is approved and added to the main article space. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 18:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Needed: section/subsection telling where various iconic scenes were shot

I was watching the latest trailer for the LiS Netflix reboot (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzmM0AB60QQ) and at 1 min 08 sec in is an image that, IMO, alludes to Vasquez Rocks, a location used for many TV shows in the 1960s, like Star Trek and The Wild Wild West. (List_of_productions_using_the_Vasquez_Rocks_as_a_filming_location). But I could not remember if the original LiS ever used that location.

I think it would be worthwhile for someone knowledgeable to add a section/subsection devoted to where iconic LiS scenes were filmed (the original crash landing of the Jupiter 2; where John used the Jet Pack; where they drove the Chariot out in the desert; etc) with suitable Wiki or external links. Phantom in ca (talk) 02:32, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

@ Phantom : I think the Trona Pinnacles were used in some location-establishing shots, but, unfortunately, I can't cite any web sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:EE0:20D0:51A5:4CF0:55D3:A6B (talk) 14:37, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Dr. Smith

Is it just me or doesn't the movie Doctor Smith seem more evil then the television Doctor Smith

He was more evil. Jon Harris played Smith as a complainer, a free spirit, a coward; a more evil and dangerous Smith would not have been tolerated and would have been eliminated by desertion if Smith didn't cause his own demise. Gary Oldman played a much darker Smith in what was expected to be limited to two movies at most. GBC 04:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

The 1965-68 Smith had a purpose. These corny TV shows that become popular (eg Gilligan's Is) utilize a lot of mass psychology. Smith represents the US government, at the time, which was at war in Vietnam. Smith became the focus of the stories later in 67/68 as, the US govt became unpopular. He is a liar and a schemer, and hides behind a young boy. The young boy represents the 18yo draftees.220.244.75.213 (talk) 00:13, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Interesting theory, but you'll need citations to support it. (This is the first I've ever heard this.) As far as Dr. Smith's demeanor, in the first shows (perhaps the first 2/3 of the first season), Smith was an unwilling guest after having been trapped on board while reprogramming the Robot to sabotage the voyage (the reasons for this are never adequately explained). He had a high IQ and was cunning and evasive. The Smith character, in fact, was added after the original pilot was shot, in order to add a more dramatic element to the show. It was this original Smith character that Oldman's film version was based on.

As the show progressed, however, Jonathon Harris began playing the part as camp, and Irwin Allen went along with this, as the showed was getting higher ratings in large part because of this. Harris rewrote most of his scripted dialogue in the days before shooting, rehearsing his new lines with Billy Mumy before each day's shooting. (All of this, by the way, comes from interviews with Mumy and Harris.) Unless you have statements from Allen or others to the contrary, it is more likely that he was simply trying to produce a popular (although corny) show with high ratings, competing directly against Star Trek, and only one of three successful shows he was producing simultaneously. — Loadmaster (talk) 17:00, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

@ 220 and Loadmaster : I can confirm that a lot of people in the early 1970s thought of Dr Smith as a stand-in for that war-criminal Johnson, but I don't know if Harris' portrayal was deliberately imitative of him or was just coincidentally similar. Only Harris could have answered that question, and I don't know if he was ever asked about that in any interview. I can't find anything on the internet and I obviously can't quote my own memory as a Wikipedia source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:EE0:20D0:51A5:4CF0:55D3:A6B (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

The name of the robot

The external link to the discussion of the name of the robot is excellent. However, I have a fairly distinct memory (and I'm well aware that fairly distinct memories can be completely wrong) that in the pilot movie of the series, there was a brief pre-launch scene where the robot was being loaded into his niche. I remember "General Utility Non Theorizing..." being stenciled on the back of that niche. To me, this means that the attempt to name the robot GUNTR or GUNTER dates from the very beginning and not from the second season or later. I have searched in vain for screen grabs from the pilot or for a sufficiently good quality copy of the pilot that I could examine to determine if I'm right or wrong about this. Can anybody confirm the presence or absence of said stenciling in the pilot movie? If it exists, I think a change to the article stating that the actual name of the robot truly was GUNTER is appropriate, even if the name never really caught on. If I'm wrong, of course, then things should be left as they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benenglish (talk • contribs)

Let's assume for the sake of argument that your memory is correct. It would still not be true to state the "actual name" of the robot as GUNTER, when in fact nobody ever used that name in the series. The robot was always called simply "Robot", or "the Robot". Characters names are the ones actually used; they have no other "reality", IMHO. Slowmover 19:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Slowmover - On this point, I must respectfully disagree. For a fictional world to allow us to suspend disbelief and be entertained, basic rules of human interaction need to seem natural to the viewer (unless, of course, the deliberate lack of such mechanisms is being used by the writers to a greater purpose). Names are a good example of this. People call me Ben. The name on my birth certificate is Bernard. No one ever uses "Bernard" to refer to me. Does that mean that my "real" name is "Ben" and NOT "Bernard"? I don't think so. I would argue that, in an attempt to make the fictional world of Lost in Space comfortable for viewers, it is reasonable that the writers would attempt to preserve such niceties (or, if you will, foibles) of human interaction. Here's a hypothetical illustration: If the writer's guidebook for Lost in Space specified that the robot was officially named General...etc., but that such name was considered by the characters as too unwieldy, then the guidebook might well specify that in all dialogue the robot simply be called "Robot." That would not, however, convince me that the proper, formal name for the robot would, indeed, be "Robot" instead of "G.U.N.T.E.R." All of this may be moot, however, considering the input of Rizzleboffin, below.Benenglish 13:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I think I see your point. On a personal level, for me, it just doesn't matter, possibly because I'm usually more interested in the thematic content than in realism. (After all, there isn't a lot of realism in LiS!) But I agree that details which supply realism are important to involving the viewer. With details of this nature however (ie, details that are essentially "off-screen", or back story details) sometimes I think people get too carried away. Your name may really be "Bernard" but if you were a fictional character, the name on your fictional birth certificate wouldn't normally be important. The author could arbitrarily make it anything he wanted without material effect on the story he is telling. And if the author doesn't supply that information, we don't need to go looking for it or try to invent it. But these are general comments, and may not be relevant in this case. Slowmover 14:56, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Benenglish, just now I watched my DVD of the first episode and saw nothing like what you describe. I suppose I could have missed it, but I watched specifically for this whenever the robot was on-screen. The Robot was referred to only as "The Robot," verbally and in labels on the control panel. Sorry to burst any fond memories... Rizzleboffin 04:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Rizzleboffin - You certainly aren't bursting any fond memories of mine; you're helping me understand fact. For that I'm very appreciative. However, I would like to point out that my original posting referred to the pilot movie, not the first episode. It's my understanding (and, again, this may be one of those things I have completely misremembered) that the pilot movie and the first episode were different cuts. They shared much footage, but weren't the same. A number of years ago, there was a minor bit of hoopla over the broadcast of the pilot on TV, with ad hype to the effect of "never before seen!" etc. It was that pilot to which I referred. My memory of the first episode, frankly, doesn't include the very brief shot of the robot being loaded onto the ship. Further, the article contains a flat statement that "...the Robot did not appear in the first, unaired pilot episode", something I believe to be incorrect on two counts: The pilot was eventually aired (Sometime in the 1990s?) and the robot did appear in the pilot (though briefly and it wasn't prominently featured). Now I'm going to have to go off and research some more about the differences, if any, between the pilot movie and the first episode. Am I a strange person for enjoying the process of re-discovering meaningless trivia?  :-)Benenglish 13:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

The memory of the Robot being readied for entry onto the ship is from the 3rd season episode "The Time Merchant". Hope that helps. I think it's fair to assume that the robot's name is simply "Robot" same as on Dark Matter the android's name is "Android". As this is the only way these characters are addressed and no other documentation of 'actual' name is supplied, then the spoken names can be considered actual names in respect of the characters concerned. :-)RokkoRokkoRokkanno

It took only a few minutes of Googling to find multiple articles on the "unaired" pilot that contradict my memory. Until and unless I come across something more verifiable than my own (apparently faulty) memory, I'll offer my apologies to all who have suffered through the errors I've introduced to this page. I can only offer the weak excuse that I prefer such errors be confined to the discussion page instead of entered into the article; at least I didn't screw up that bad.  :-)Benenglish 13:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Benenglish. I appreciate your search for accurate info on the subject, no problem there. This Robot name thing is probably similar to the "Skipper/Jonas Grumby" situation on Gilligan's Island. Certainly, he's called "Jonas Grumby" in the first episode over the radio (I just saw it this weekend, so I can verify that), but also, certainly, he was called only "The Skipper" throughout the series. Sorry I missed your point that this Robot name was in the unaired pilot (though I did enjoy re-watching the first episode with my son the other day). Unless my memory is inaccurate, the first-season DVD box includes that unaired pilot, so, if time allows, I'll watch it tonight and report back. Rizzleboffin 17:31, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Rizzleboffin - My research shows that the unaired pilot is in the box set, so I'll be interested in what you see. However, just to throw another spanner into the works, I'm not sure that the 45-minute pilot is the same as the "never before seen" pilot movie that was aired on cable a few years ago. What showed on TV was movie-length, at least 90 minutes. Now, that could have been padded with commercials, padded with commentary, or a figment of my terrible memory, so take it for what it's worth. The scene is early on, as the ship is being provisioned. For about 3 seconds, a couple of ground crew are seen pushing the robot into its niche; the stenciling on the back of the niche isn't fully visible. Personally, I'm going to start searching the file trading networks to see if anyone has an off-air recording of this since all of my memories (or overactive imagination, if that's the way it turns out) come from the TV broadcast of a few years ago and not the box set or any of the bootlegs that people trade at conventions.Benenglish 21:08, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Benenglish-- I was no more than a couple minutes into the unaired pilot when it hit me-- There is no Dr. Smith in the unaired pilot, and there is no robot in the unaired pilot! Oh well, I enjoyed re-watching it anyway, it has scenes that were used in at least 3 of the early aired episodes.

However, to get to the bottom of "GUNTER" controversy, I looked around and found this: a Model B-9 environmental-control robot. In at least two episodes it was shown in its packing case as a General Utility Non THeorizing Environmental Robot (Gunther), and on various occasions the Robot referred to itself as such. [5] as well as copies of the Wiki article portion on the Robot's name, from packing crate in the third season "Time Merchant" episode. I do seem to remember the Robot referring to himself as a "General Utility, etc..." however I don't remember ever hearing the "GUNTER" acronym explicitly stated. So it sounds pretty iffy. But I think the article is fine as it stands ("some have suggested that this was supposed to convey the acronym GUNTER") Rizzleboffin 07:02, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi guys, I'm one of the members of the B9 Robot Builder's Club [6]. I've never heard the term "Model Luke H". From everything I've heard over the years in the club it's a Class M-3, Model B9, General Utility Non Theorizing Environmental Robot. I've seen the sticker on the crate in the Time Merchant episode and there was a guy in the club selling these large stickers a couple years ago. Here is a link to a picture of the GUNTER sticker on the crate. Generally people assume this robot's name is Robby (from Forbidden Planet) and 9 times out of 10, we'll correct them and say he didn't have a name, but was referred to as "robot". We've speculated that perhaps he was supposed to be called GUNTER, but this was never spoken on any episode. Rdarlington (talk) 00:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

• • • My two cents -- "The Time Merchant" evidence would actually be MORE conclusive than the pilot (aired or un-aired) because one can reasonably conclude there may have been small changes to the timeline in "The Time Merchant" episode. Even though they got most of the timeline back on track, there are enough changes that one can conclude the Robinsons had that "fresh start" that saved them from the lingering effects of the pilot(s), gave Smith a different personality, etc. And if that is the case -- then G.U.N.T.H.E.R. is indeed the Robot's acronym. Whether it is a NAME is another question entirely -- because acronym and name are very different things. Suggestion (though it is OR, it may help to frame the issue for the article)....the robot had no name, but if it ever would have one in the time AFTER "The Time Merchant", it would likely be GUNTHER (after the acronym...blah blah blah). I say that because initially the robot had no real personality -- indeed, it actually becomes a sentient being as the three seasons progress. The human characters would have no reason to give the robot a name in the first half of season 1, as it had no personality. By the time it had a personality in seasons 2 and 3, they were used to calling it "Robot" and so that was its name (rather like a pet owner who calls his pet cat "Kitty"). "The Time Merchant" reboot gave them an opportunity to give the robot a name ... in late season 3 (or the never-filmed season 4)... but the option was never utilized. 'Nuff said. Chespride 172.164.30.32 (talk) 04:16, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

• • • • Additional info: I just watched the last episode of season 3 (i.e. last episode of the entire series)..."Junkyard in Space"...and I can confirm that in the last two minutes (literally) of the episode...the Robot refers to himself by the extended form of G.U.N.T.H.E.R. (i.e. the full name spelled out rather than as an acronym). This does not make GUNTHER his name -- I think it is correct that his name is ROBOT...but it also gives mild support to the timeline change from "The Time Merchant" and shows that rather than B9...he is a GUNTHER style robot. Chesspride172.164.31.122 (talk) 04:43, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Promo and COI

Recently, editor Edshifres has made several edits that appear, to me, to be overly promotional and conflicted: [7]. I have warned him on his talk page, but he continues. Do other editors care to weigh in, here? Attic Salt (talk) 21:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

You are correct. I have removed the material. [8] has information about Ib Melchior's claims, but we need another source about the court case. To use the the referenced court findings we need to establish its significance. Neither the Hollywood Reporter nor the court findings mention the book. To include it in the article we would need a book review type article crediting the book with these claims that it was somehow significant. I have not found any book reviews for this. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 08:04, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Mistakes

1) The pilot version of the spaceship had two decks, not one, as the article states. Both decks are described and shown. 2) The ship had atomic motors, not nuclear. 98.221.93.94 (talk) 02:16, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The pilot, which was never broadcast by CBS, was titled "No Place To Hide" and there was no lower deck or no robot or no Dr. Smith. The pilot is not to be confused with the first series episode (broadcast September 15th of 1965) entitled "The Reluctant Stowaway". 208.82.40.154 (talk) 21:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Most people use "atomic" interchangeably with "nuclear". For example, when they speak of "atomic" bombs or reactors, they mean the same thing as "nuclear" bombs and reactors. Chemists and physicists are often more restrictive in their usages of these words; most other folks aren't, because they don't know the difference. This includes writers and producers of serial television in the 1960s. If in this context one insists upon interpreting "atomic" and "nuclear" separately, then one would, I think, necessarily infer that the Jupiter 2's atomic motors use chemical energy, not nuclear. I suppose that wouldn't be more literally absurd than all sorts of other things on the show. But, in the '60s it was still impressive to speak of "atomic (nuclear)" energy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.223.130.60 (talk) 18:12, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm concerned about the line in the overview which reads: "This, plus the robot's rampage, causes the ship to prematurely engage its hyperdrive, and the expedition becomes hopelessly lost in the infinite depths of outer space." I'm not aware that the ship has a hyperdrive, which most SF fans would consider to be the equivalent of warp drive or FTL, etc. That's the whole reason why occupants go into suspended animation when they travel long distances (at least at the start of the first season). What I've always considered the storyline is that the destruction of various engine components and controls result in the ship experiencing runaway acceleration, as if someone had bumped the throttle all the way forward and left it there. There was nothing "premature" about it. It was never an intended action. Drgitlow (talk) 02:32, 27 March 2020 (UTC)