This was the third attempt to get a series from Gene Roddenberry's Genesis II concept, this time without any involvement from Roddenberry. The basic plot is similar to many SF series with returning astronauts traveling across a new Earth after some sort of cataclysm, searching for remnants of their civilization. As an example of what the regular series might look like, the pilot is broken into two separate stories. The first involving a culture who may have discovered the secret of immortality. But, at what cost? The second, more elaborate episode follows the astronauts into a battle for survival against a tribe of primitive forest dwellers. Well made and cast with well known actors, the pilot is action packed and interesting, but tired at the same time.
9 Reviews
The third time was NOT the charm.
planktonrules10 August 2021
In 1973, Gene Roddenberry created a TV pilot movie that the networks rejected. "Genesis II" was a neat sci-fi film which starred Alex Cord. He played a man who was the subject of a suspended animation experiment but the experiment went awry when there was an earthquake. Two centuries later, he is unearthed and finds the planet very strange in this post-apocalyptic world....and he's taken prisoner by some sadistic jerks. He also learns of a team called 'PAX' whose goal it is to preserve the best of the planet and insure the peace.
A year later, Roddenbury brought out another pilot movie, PLANET EARTH....with the same plot and same character, though he was played now by John Saxon. Saxon's character, to me, seemed more like Captain Kirk in style than Cord....and it involved him and a team infiltrating a society of amazons in order to rescue a doctor.
Now, in 1975 the idea was once again retooled as a potential series...and was rejected once again. However, in this version (still starring Saxon), Roddenbury had nothing to do with it...and the style was a bit different as well as the backstory....which now includes three folks from the past.
The story begins on a space station where several people are in suspended animation. But instead of being suspended for a short time, a cataclysm occurs on Earth and the station's computers keep them asleep for 180 years! Taking a shuttle back to the planet, they find life as they knew it is gone and the planet is fragmented into various factions. Some are quite primitive and warlike, some very gentle and some amazingly weird...and sterile!
In many ways, this plays like two television episodes strung together. The first involves meeting some nasty poachers and some animal loving peacenicks. The second a very advanced society where there is no real death...but there are also no children as everyone is sterile.
Compared to the two previous pilot movies, "Strange New World" seems more cerebral and less like popular sci-fi, such as "Buck Rogers". Which of the three you prefer will probably depend on our taste. I prefer the earlier campier movies...mostly because they were more action-oriented and more fun. "Strange New World", in contrast, is a bit dull. I really think the first film is probably the best of the three (being slightly better than the second) and the third is a bit of a step back because they forgot the energy and fun of the previous films.
Regardless of which of the three you prefer, it's all immaterial as the TV series never resulted. It does make you wonder what might have been...or what could be if someone were to resurrect the basic storyline.
A year later, Roddenbury brought out another pilot movie, PLANET EARTH....with the same plot and same character, though he was played now by John Saxon. Saxon's character, to me, seemed more like Captain Kirk in style than Cord....and it involved him and a team infiltrating a society of amazons in order to rescue a doctor.
Now, in 1975 the idea was once again retooled as a potential series...and was rejected once again. However, in this version (still starring Saxon), Roddenbury had nothing to do with it...and the style was a bit different as well as the backstory....which now includes three folks from the past.
The story begins on a space station where several people are in suspended animation. But instead of being suspended for a short time, a cataclysm occurs on Earth and the station's computers keep them asleep for 180 years! Taking a shuttle back to the planet, they find life as they knew it is gone and the planet is fragmented into various factions. Some are quite primitive and warlike, some very gentle and some amazingly weird...and sterile!
In many ways, this plays like two television episodes strung together. The first involves meeting some nasty poachers and some animal loving peacenicks. The second a very advanced society where there is no real death...but there are also no children as everyone is sterile.
Compared to the two previous pilot movies, "Strange New World" seems more cerebral and less like popular sci-fi, such as "Buck Rogers". Which of the three you prefer will probably depend on our taste. I prefer the earlier campier movies...mostly because they were more action-oriented and more fun. "Strange New World", in contrast, is a bit dull. I really think the first film is probably the best of the three (being slightly better than the second) and the third is a bit of a step back because they forgot the energy and fun of the previous films.
Regardless of which of the three you prefer, it's all immaterial as the TV series never resulted. It does make you wonder what might have been...or what could be if someone were to resurrect the basic storyline.
Not entirely terrible, not notably good, but competent time-killer
skinnybert7 February 2021
Strange New World opens with an EARTH II-type spacelab ... and immediately abandons it to explore post-apocalyptic Earth, where the first casualties were the special effects budget and doing laundry. Well, not so immediately: first we have to endure a lengthy voice-over/exposition/cheap-video-effects intro, which goes on and on. I wouldn't be surprised if the broadcast lost a lot of viewers by the first commercial break.
The two episodes here (posing as one movie) bring them first to a society of gauzy-clad women and toga-wearing men, and then to a grimy ragtag bunch living in a zoo. Both have guest stars of some interest, though none of the roles are particularly outstanding. Neither are the episodes outstanding, but they are competently structured and written -- par for mid-70s TV.
Story-wise, this is sort of like Star Trek (without Spock) crossed with Space 1999 (Moonbase Alpha) in a cheaper format: a traveling vehicle takes our regular crew to meet people in problematic situations, which are then resolved or commented on; the crew then continue, in search of their own people. The first story is akin to any of the flawed-but-beautiful ST:TOS episodes (say, "The Cloud Minders"); the second feels akin to "The Omega Glory" (note that neither are considered outstanding Trek episodes).
John Saxon is good as the man-of-thought-and-action (with his own kind of energy and style), with Keene Curtis an effective foil/counter-balance. Kathleen Miller, though, seemed destined for a Peggy Liptonesque captive-to-be-rescued role despite her supposed "doctor" status.
Ultimately, Strange New World illustrates the fine, almost intangible difference between a TV series that works, and one that almost works. Star Trek (TOS) worked -- but could we have seen that just from the pilot episode? Could this have grown and developed the way Star Trek did? It seems a relevant question, seeing how Robert Butler directed both this and the Star Trek pilot.
The two episodes here (posing as one movie) bring them first to a society of gauzy-clad women and toga-wearing men, and then to a grimy ragtag bunch living in a zoo. Both have guest stars of some interest, though none of the roles are particularly outstanding. Neither are the episodes outstanding, but they are competently structured and written -- par for mid-70s TV.
Story-wise, this is sort of like Star Trek (without Spock) crossed with Space 1999 (Moonbase Alpha) in a cheaper format: a traveling vehicle takes our regular crew to meet people in problematic situations, which are then resolved or commented on; the crew then continue, in search of their own people. The first story is akin to any of the flawed-but-beautiful ST:TOS episodes (say, "The Cloud Minders"); the second feels akin to "The Omega Glory" (note that neither are considered outstanding Trek episodes).
John Saxon is good as the man-of-thought-and-action (with his own kind of energy and style), with Keene Curtis an effective foil/counter-balance. Kathleen Miller, though, seemed destined for a Peggy Liptonesque captive-to-be-rescued role despite her supposed "doctor" status.
Ultimately, Strange New World illustrates the fine, almost intangible difference between a TV series that works, and one that almost works. Star Trek (TOS) worked -- but could we have seen that just from the pilot episode? Could this have grown and developed the way Star Trek did? It seems a relevant question, seeing how Robert Butler directed both this and the Star Trek pilot.
Bad knockoff of Roddenberry's Genesis II
couchman12 September 1999
Warning: Spoilers
Possible spoilers (but unlikely).
I saw this movie on TV in 1975. I don't remember much. All I actually remember is a shot of star John Saxon using a crossbow he made from an old automobile leaf spring. The premise of the film is similar to two previous TV movies written by Gene Roddenberry:
Genesis II, starring Alex Cord as Dylan Hunt (1973)
Planet Earth, starring John Saxon as Dylan Hunt (1974)
I don't know whether Roddenberry had anything to do with this 1975 John Saxon film, or whether Saxon's character was Dylan Hunt. The IMDB database does not say. I suspect there was no official connection between this bad 1975 film and the film Saxon made in 1974 for Gene Roddenberry.
I saw this movie on TV in 1975. I don't remember much. All I actually remember is a shot of star John Saxon using a crossbow he made from an old automobile leaf spring. The premise of the film is similar to two previous TV movies written by Gene Roddenberry:
Genesis II, starring Alex Cord as Dylan Hunt (1973)
Planet Earth, starring John Saxon as Dylan Hunt (1974)
I don't know whether Roddenberry had anything to do with this 1975 John Saxon film, or whether Saxon's character was Dylan Hunt. The IMDB database does not say. I suspect there was no official connection between this bad 1975 film and the film Saxon made in 1974 for Gene Roddenberry.
Violent themes killed the series
midge5616 November 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Even though Roddenberry chose not to be involved with this third revival of his Genesis II series project... the core problem was prevalent in all three attempts. Roddenberry should have known better on Genesis II and the sequel Planet Earth... because the reason Star Trek was so popular was because it was a Utopian futuristic society which had risen above wars, violence, disease, poverty, racism and discrimination. It depicted mankind learning from its mistakes and building a peaceful society of exploration, cooperation, invention and forward progress.
This Trilogy did exactly the opposite. It showed the degradation of society. Each film, while claiming Pax peace... was filled with violence, segregation, themes of hatred and slavery. Themes of technological regression. These were the very things that this generation of viewers hated. No one wanted to see shows depicting societal disintegration and backward momentum into archaic, violent existences. These were offensive themes which no one wanted to view even once, let alone on a weekly episode.
Even worse, the writers interpretations of ideal societies as depicted on these shows such as an ancient Rome type of society... were the perceptions and desires of people born in the 20's instead of the views of the generations who were the target audience... the baby boomers.
Our generation hated wars and poverty, discrimination, big brother, environmental damage and establishmentarianism most of all. They wanted to see peace, progress, no poverty, no disease, clean air, no fossil fuels, technological advancement... just like Star Trek.
This trilogy was just the opposite of the themes preferred by both the peace generation or the yuppie generation that followed. Both were antiwar. This PAX series was one violent conflict after another despite the fact that they called their society by a name for peace. It was just the opposite. Even worse, the core character from the past was a violent man who managed to judge and then destroy one society after another. In this final story, he managed to kill an entire city with no more conscience than. "Oh well." Sure, they tried to kill him... but he spilled the first and last blood with death. Who would want to watch this every week. I had to fast forward through the violent scenes which went on and on. Same mentality as a fist fighting western. I didn't need to see people punching each other in the face for 10 minutes straight. Even the good citizens were killed along with the bad ones. It was still the death of an entire city and society by the lead characters... and they wonder why this series attempt kept failing.
It had the same core problem whether it was the first 2 written by Roddenberry or this last version which he was not affiliated with. They simply did not get it... which is surprising considering that Roddenberry was the one who originally understood the concept of the Utopian society during the strong anti-war, pro-peace sentiment of the 60's and 70's.
Perhaps if they had created a truly peaceful, technologically advanced, futuristic society for this series... it might have worked. But all three of these movies were simply unpleasant to watch. Most of us watched them out of respect for Roddenberry in the hope that he had come up with a new series. We continued to hope that they would learn their lesson in the 2nd and third movie but no such luck. It just went downhill from the onset.
At the time these pilot movies were made, we had no conception that society would truly degrade as it has over the past 10 years. Who could imagine that it would go backward and not learn from its mistakes. Fortunately, Roddenberry never saw what society finally became in the 21st century. But when these shows were made, our generations still believed it would improve. How could we have guessed otherwise. While there may be some truth in how a post apocalyptic society might degrade in some distant future... our target generations were not interested in seeing it. We wanted to see forward momentum and progress... not the opposite. Thankfully, they brought back Star Trek until Berman finally managed to destroy that as well... with the same narrow minded thinking as was depicted in this violent trilogy.
This Trilogy did exactly the opposite. It showed the degradation of society. Each film, while claiming Pax peace... was filled with violence, segregation, themes of hatred and slavery. Themes of technological regression. These were the very things that this generation of viewers hated. No one wanted to see shows depicting societal disintegration and backward momentum into archaic, violent existences. These were offensive themes which no one wanted to view even once, let alone on a weekly episode.
Even worse, the writers interpretations of ideal societies as depicted on these shows such as an ancient Rome type of society... were the perceptions and desires of people born in the 20's instead of the views of the generations who were the target audience... the baby boomers.
Our generation hated wars and poverty, discrimination, big brother, environmental damage and establishmentarianism most of all. They wanted to see peace, progress, no poverty, no disease, clean air, no fossil fuels, technological advancement... just like Star Trek.
This trilogy was just the opposite of the themes preferred by both the peace generation or the yuppie generation that followed. Both were antiwar. This PAX series was one violent conflict after another despite the fact that they called their society by a name for peace. It was just the opposite. Even worse, the core character from the past was a violent man who managed to judge and then destroy one society after another. In this final story, he managed to kill an entire city with no more conscience than. "Oh well." Sure, they tried to kill him... but he spilled the first and last blood with death. Who would want to watch this every week. I had to fast forward through the violent scenes which went on and on. Same mentality as a fist fighting western. I didn't need to see people punching each other in the face for 10 minutes straight. Even the good citizens were killed along with the bad ones. It was still the death of an entire city and society by the lead characters... and they wonder why this series attempt kept failing.
It had the same core problem whether it was the first 2 written by Roddenberry or this last version which he was not affiliated with. They simply did not get it... which is surprising considering that Roddenberry was the one who originally understood the concept of the Utopian society during the strong anti-war, pro-peace sentiment of the 60's and 70's.
Perhaps if they had created a truly peaceful, technologically advanced, futuristic society for this series... it might have worked. But all three of these movies were simply unpleasant to watch. Most of us watched them out of respect for Roddenberry in the hope that he had come up with a new series. We continued to hope that they would learn their lesson in the 2nd and third movie but no such luck. It just went downhill from the onset.
At the time these pilot movies were made, we had no conception that society would truly degrade as it has over the past 10 years. Who could imagine that it would go backward and not learn from its mistakes. Fortunately, Roddenberry never saw what society finally became in the 21st century. But when these shows were made, our generations still believed it would improve. How could we have guessed otherwise. While there may be some truth in how a post apocalyptic society might degrade in some distant future... our target generations were not interested in seeing it. We wanted to see forward momentum and progress... not the opposite. Thankfully, they brought back Star Trek until Berman finally managed to destroy that as well... with the same narrow minded thinking as was depicted in this violent trilogy.
Smacks of plagiarism
redbeard_nv3 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This weak attempt at a apocalyptic Earth premise was, IMHO, a thinly veiled rip-off of Gene Roddenberry's "Genesis II" / "Planet Earth" pilots, down to the name of the organization that ran the space station/hibernarium being the same, "Pax". They went so far as to cast John Saxon (perhaps not the greatest actor of his time, but would do very well in many other roles) in the lead, drawing cries of plagiarism from the sci-fi fan community. Gone, perhaps lost forever, if we're lucky!
Many ask why Roddenb2erry didn't seek some legal recourse through the Writer's Guild against this painfully leeched premise? He probably didn't want to grant it any more attention than it already didn't deserve.
Many ask why Roddenb2erry didn't seek some legal recourse through the Writer's Guild against this painfully leeched premise? He probably didn't want to grant it any more attention than it already didn't deserve.
Strange New World? Nah
davercrb6 August 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This was the third and weakest attempt to make something out of Roddenberry's Genesis II concept- this time with Gene not involved. Suffice to say it didn't work.
The fundamental premise is that a team in an Earth Orbiting Laboratory belonging to an organization called Pax is conducting hibernation research. While monitoring the experiment the MOCR discovers the eternal sci-fi cliche of the meteor swarm headed for Earth. The trajectory of the orbiting lab is changed from Earth orbit to Sun orbit due to return in 180 years and the hibernation period extended for the same amount of time. Just before the meteors hit Earth -devastating it and destroying civilization-volunteers enter hibernation chambers at Pax HQ. The astronauts mission on return is to seek out and revive them. The pilot has two main stories. In the first one they find and are imprisoned by a Physician from their time who has developed a form of immortality along with clones. The second story involves them coming across an old wildlife preserve where the descendants of the Wardens are in conflict with the locals who poach the animals. Strangely enough in the version I have the order of the two is reversed. Good thing too as if I had seen them in the proper order I would have stopped watching within a few minutes.
I'll start with the premise. Why are they doing the experiment at all? Hundreds of volunteers put themselves in hibernation on Earth. That scale of existing hibernation vaults suggests it is a well established procedure deemed safe enough for people to sleep for decades. Take that part away and I can accept the premise. Second- the Earth Lab is moved from Earth to solar orbit for 180 years. That takes a pretty good amount of rocket power especially as those rockets will have to be used again after 180 years to re-establish Earth Orbit. The 180 years is explained simply by orbital geometry. OK- I can accept that. Desperate situations call for desperate actions. The Space Lab itself is pretty cool and clearly shows the influence of shows like Earth II or 2001:A Space Odyssey spinning wheel artificial gravity. The Earth return vehicle however is a space shuttle. How do they expect to land it on runways that no longer exist without bad things happening? Hint- while not shown bad things happened while trying to land on runways that no longer exist. I liked it up to this point. Poor acting -but what the heck. This is 70's TV Sci-fi - not exactly noted for academy award performances. Incidentally- the concept of the Earth Impact that destroys civilization came just a few years before the scientific community accepted that just such a disaster offed the dinosaurs.
Then we get to the immortal colony. My interest instantly started to wane. The physician leader (played by James Olsen) is from their time and he has developed cloning and a way to keep himself alive using the clones' blood. Guess whose blood he intends to use now ? Even worse- the team physician (played by Keene Curtis) throws in with the doc to kill his friends. WTF? Good way to make one of your lead characters thoroughly un-likeble right off the bat. If I had not seen the Animaland scenes before this I would probably have turned it off and never watched the rest. One interesting concept was that there was no cure for senility- which James Olsen shows a lot of (he didn't have much acting to do here- the entire script reeks of senility) Keene Curtis has a last minute conversion back to reality and the bad doc is defeated. For some bizarre reason there is a force field surrounding the colony and everyone dies from the resulting infection instantly when the shield fails and normal air enters the compound. Pretty fast acting bugs. This was not in the least bit believable. When the actors read the script I have always wondered what they thought- probably something like "Not much we can do with this drivel. I'm just going to read my lines and get my paycheck"
Then we come to the second episode- which I saw first. This one almost made up for the first one. We see the crew in their All-Terrain RV. They have been back on the surface for some months and are running out of water. They are also lost. Not surprising given they have no way to determine their location. All they know is they are in the desert SW. They come across an old zoo preserve and find the pools and fountains are made with concrete. The navigator (the obligatory helpless female our virile heroes need to rescue) finds a trap and frees the animal., gets captured by the wardens and as a convicted poacher is going to be branded on her chest with a big letter "P" then is going to be thrown into a pit of vipers which our male heroes stop in the nick of time. How did they get there? They ran into the real poachers made a deal with their leader to raid the Warden's compound in exchange for the flare gun. Suffice to say the leader is a bad guy, manages to steal the flare gun , and sets up an attack to kill the wardens and take over the forest. Our heroes have made tranquilizer darts out of a 200 year old chemical vial and save the day by shooting the poacher leader with a handmade crossbow and a one of their darts. The Wardens take their advice and decide to re-write the CFR book . They all live happily ever after while our heroes ride off into the Sunset (a road through the mountains to the west).
In spite of my sarcasm and the poor acting I rather liked this segment. The plot- while somewhat contrived- is I feel realistic. The wardens are denying others the use of the forest and water in the classic bureaucrat tactic of enforcing regulations written for long ago conditions that no longer exist. The net result is that the poachers have no way to get food or water without raiding the forest. When the springs dry up in summer the old and young die. A least initially the sympathy is on the side of the poachers. They are desperate men driven to committing desperate acts. This is negated when we find the leader is a thorough scoundrel who wants to be king of the forest more than obtaining food and water for his tribe. Then we see the wardens confused as they discover the situation is not what they think. But the only thing they can think of is to look through the CFR. Finally the deputy warden realizes the necessity of change. He realizes a lot of the poaching activity is pure desperation. He realizes that if the poachers can be taught basic agriculture and foraging they may not be so dependent on killing and eating game. I think he recognize the basic injustice of the situation. Although I think he is naive to think the head poacher is going to be anything but a recurring enemy.
If the series had followed the second story it could well have been worth developing although the formula was too limited to last more than a season .Think of the contemporary series "Planet Of The Apes" and " Logan's Run" adventure of the week series. Neither lasted more than a season. This one would have met the same fate.
The fundamental premise is that a team in an Earth Orbiting Laboratory belonging to an organization called Pax is conducting hibernation research. While monitoring the experiment the MOCR discovers the eternal sci-fi cliche of the meteor swarm headed for Earth. The trajectory of the orbiting lab is changed from Earth orbit to Sun orbit due to return in 180 years and the hibernation period extended for the same amount of time. Just before the meteors hit Earth -devastating it and destroying civilization-volunteers enter hibernation chambers at Pax HQ. The astronauts mission on return is to seek out and revive them. The pilot has two main stories. In the first one they find and are imprisoned by a Physician from their time who has developed a form of immortality along with clones. The second story involves them coming across an old wildlife preserve where the descendants of the Wardens are in conflict with the locals who poach the animals. Strangely enough in the version I have the order of the two is reversed. Good thing too as if I had seen them in the proper order I would have stopped watching within a few minutes.
I'll start with the premise. Why are they doing the experiment at all? Hundreds of volunteers put themselves in hibernation on Earth. That scale of existing hibernation vaults suggests it is a well established procedure deemed safe enough for people to sleep for decades. Take that part away and I can accept the premise. Second- the Earth Lab is moved from Earth to solar orbit for 180 years. That takes a pretty good amount of rocket power especially as those rockets will have to be used again after 180 years to re-establish Earth Orbit. The 180 years is explained simply by orbital geometry. OK- I can accept that. Desperate situations call for desperate actions. The Space Lab itself is pretty cool and clearly shows the influence of shows like Earth II or 2001:A Space Odyssey spinning wheel artificial gravity. The Earth return vehicle however is a space shuttle. How do they expect to land it on runways that no longer exist without bad things happening? Hint- while not shown bad things happened while trying to land on runways that no longer exist. I liked it up to this point. Poor acting -but what the heck. This is 70's TV Sci-fi - not exactly noted for academy award performances. Incidentally- the concept of the Earth Impact that destroys civilization came just a few years before the scientific community accepted that just such a disaster offed the dinosaurs.
Then we get to the immortal colony. My interest instantly started to wane. The physician leader (played by James Olsen) is from their time and he has developed cloning and a way to keep himself alive using the clones' blood. Guess whose blood he intends to use now ? Even worse- the team physician (played by Keene Curtis) throws in with the doc to kill his friends. WTF? Good way to make one of your lead characters thoroughly un-likeble right off the bat. If I had not seen the Animaland scenes before this I would probably have turned it off and never watched the rest. One interesting concept was that there was no cure for senility- which James Olsen shows a lot of (he didn't have much acting to do here- the entire script reeks of senility) Keene Curtis has a last minute conversion back to reality and the bad doc is defeated. For some bizarre reason there is a force field surrounding the colony and everyone dies from the resulting infection instantly when the shield fails and normal air enters the compound. Pretty fast acting bugs. This was not in the least bit believable. When the actors read the script I have always wondered what they thought- probably something like "Not much we can do with this drivel. I'm just going to read my lines and get my paycheck"
Then we come to the second episode- which I saw first. This one almost made up for the first one. We see the crew in their All-Terrain RV. They have been back on the surface for some months and are running out of water. They are also lost. Not surprising given they have no way to determine their location. All they know is they are in the desert SW. They come across an old zoo preserve and find the pools and fountains are made with concrete. The navigator (the obligatory helpless female our virile heroes need to rescue) finds a trap and frees the animal., gets captured by the wardens and as a convicted poacher is going to be branded on her chest with a big letter "P" then is going to be thrown into a pit of vipers which our male heroes stop in the nick of time. How did they get there? They ran into the real poachers made a deal with their leader to raid the Warden's compound in exchange for the flare gun. Suffice to say the leader is a bad guy, manages to steal the flare gun , and sets up an attack to kill the wardens and take over the forest. Our heroes have made tranquilizer darts out of a 200 year old chemical vial and save the day by shooting the poacher leader with a handmade crossbow and a one of their darts. The Wardens take their advice and decide to re-write the CFR book . They all live happily ever after while our heroes ride off into the Sunset (a road through the mountains to the west).
In spite of my sarcasm and the poor acting I rather liked this segment. The plot- while somewhat contrived- is I feel realistic. The wardens are denying others the use of the forest and water in the classic bureaucrat tactic of enforcing regulations written for long ago conditions that no longer exist. The net result is that the poachers have no way to get food or water without raiding the forest. When the springs dry up in summer the old and young die. A least initially the sympathy is on the side of the poachers. They are desperate men driven to committing desperate acts. This is negated when we find the leader is a thorough scoundrel who wants to be king of the forest more than obtaining food and water for his tribe. Then we see the wardens confused as they discover the situation is not what they think. But the only thing they can think of is to look through the CFR. Finally the deputy warden realizes the necessity of change. He realizes a lot of the poaching activity is pure desperation. He realizes that if the poachers can be taught basic agriculture and foraging they may not be so dependent on killing and eating game. I think he recognize the basic injustice of the situation. Although I think he is naive to think the head poacher is going to be anything but a recurring enemy.
If the series had followed the second story it could well have been worth developing although the formula was too limited to last more than a season .Think of the contemporary series "Planet Of The Apes" and " Logan's Run" adventure of the week series. Neither lasted more than a season. This one would have met the same fate.
When Earth recovers from an asteroid strike, the togas will return.
mark.waltz18 May 2022
Warning: Spoilers
This amusing but odd science fiction film opens in outer space and ends up back on Earth 200 years after it's been decimated by a bunch of meteors, and the earthlings who either survived or went into suspended animation or were cloned live as if they are either Roman citizens or cavemen or something out of a Central American jungle community. With a cast led by John saxon, Kathleen Miller, Keene Curtis and James Olsen, this film has multiple genres attached to it outside of basic science fiction, and seems to have been influenced by other films both on the big and small screen around the same time in putting together its very strange story. You'll want to break into a retitle version of "Sendi in the Clowns" when Olsen reveals how Earth's population keeps replenishing itself, and Curtis has a very interesting description of the coffee they drink. The good guys often become the bad guys and vice-versa, and clearly it's about survival for some while morality for others has them judging those who want to just keep Earth moving and return to some sort of order.
But a lot of the elements of the film are unintentionally comic, and there are parts where the film drags as it goes from one structural flow to another. Miller is accused by some cavemen like humans of breaking their laws that concern their treatment of the wild animals they coexist with, and for those afraid of snakes, there are several sequences that utilize various breeds of varying sizes. It's not a hideous film but just one that never settles to one direction to head in, but I guess if you're living on a planet that's been recovering from Destruction for several centuries, I guess you'd be living in a misdirected world as well. Strange and perplexing, often wonderful and thought-provoking, but at the end, all I could think of was that this ended in a way that ripped off "Planet of the Apes".
But a lot of the elements of the film are unintentionally comic, and there are parts where the film drags as it goes from one structural flow to another. Miller is accused by some cavemen like humans of breaking their laws that concern their treatment of the wild animals they coexist with, and for those afraid of snakes, there are several sequences that utilize various breeds of varying sizes. It's not a hideous film but just one that never settles to one direction to head in, but I guess if you're living on a planet that's been recovering from Destruction for several centuries, I guess you'd be living in a misdirected world as well. Strange and perplexing, often wonderful and thought-provoking, but at the end, all I could think of was that this ended in a way that ripped off "Planet of the Apes".
Better without Gene Roddenberry
Simulcron24 November 2017
This film is often grouped with Gene Roddenberry's "Genesis II" and "Planet Earth." The big difference is that Roddenberry didn't participate in this film. For those who are not fond of Roddenberry rather campy style of writing, you'll find this film a more sober depiction of his imagination. This film completely lacks the campiness and bulges at the seems with seriousness. There's nearly zero humor in this film. The astronauts (except Saxon), and many of the characters they meet, maintain a stoic demeanor. The director's choice to hold shots during dialogue adds an additional layer of subtextual realism. The entire film maintains a sense of dis-ease. However, the first episode/story suffers from poor set and costume design. The second episode fares much better.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
