MovieChat Forums > The Starlost (1973) Discussion > Cheesy, low budget, yes, but somehow int...

Cheesy, low budget, yes, but somehow intriguing to watch

posted 10 years ago by jeffyoung1
9 replies | jump to latest

Today in 2014 you can sit and watch THE STARLOST with a curious eye in how this Canadian production made a go with its limited budget and resources. It is tempting to dismiss the cheesiness and laughable props, low budget background and props, but it's more rewarding to be intrigued at how this television show ran as it did with what it had.

Personally speaking only for myself, I found THE STARLOST with its contemporary sci-fi stylishness reflected in the clothing and hairstyles of its actors to be interesting and curious to watch. My point is not to sit there and judge THE STARLOST with the sensibilities of a 2014 person but mindful of what filming technology was like back in 1973. Filmmakers work with what they have at the time. For today's filmmakers and the curious, here's an example of how you make do with a limited budget and limited resources yet try to pull off a sci-fi television series that people will watch.

[–] lookyloot 10 years ago

It had little (or no) budget yet the idea behind it was cool. I remember watching this a a 10 year old in canada and thinking it was pretty neat. So much so that the memories of the show stayed with me for all these years. I look at it as something similar to a local theater troops play... not the best production values nor acting but with an intrigueing idea you can still get into the story. I think ill have to order the dvd and kill off a rainy weekend this fall.

[–] lookyloot 10 years ago

okay, so ive been watching them online. the acting is off and on, the sets are cheesey and the production values suck BUT its still a cool idea and you can see they tried with what they had. Im not one for remakes/reboots but this show would actually be good redone like BSG.

[–] kerryedavis 10 years ago

redone like BSG.

Please God, no. Not like BG! (And it is BG, unless you can show me where it was ever called Battle Star Galactica - 3 words rather than 2 - or where International Business Machines was ever called INBM. I'm sorry if that makes it sound like a group of high-voiced mostly-disco singers, but them's the facts.)

If they did that, the Ark would become filthy and Devon perhaps, and Garth and Rachel for sure, would become psychotic. THAT is what they did with BG. It really was not an improvement in my book, no matter what you might think of the special effects.

[–] TVholic 9 years ago

I judge The Starlost with the sensibilities of someone who watched in back in 1973 and found it cheesy even then. But we watched it because we were desperate kids. We were in the middle of a drought of SF that began with the cancellation of Star Trek and didn't end until Star Wars burst onto the scene. Face it. Even by the standards of those days, it wasn't good.

[–] kerryedavis 9 years ago

Somehow in my own mind, I was able to see what it COULD be and not so much what it actually WAS. And also somehow, time seemed to pass more slowly when it was on. I guess I was able to get that much into it, and maybe I imagined so much more than had actually happened on screen.

[–] bloody-3 8 years ago

The chintzy special effects reminded me of episodes of DOCTOR WHO made at the same time.

[–] kerryedavis 8 years ago

And lots of people LOVE those, so why not love The Starlost too?

[–] bloody-3 8 years ago

I wouldn't say I love THE STARLOST but I enjoyed it. I own the series on dvd.

[–] creatorof2002 8 years ago

its kind of like Twilight Zone and Star Trek in that the story and the staggering implications of the plot are so fascinating that you can forgive bad effects and corniness.