Review of Year Two Omnibus

[Mateo Latosa]

To be quite honest, after all this time, I don’t know who wrote that line (maybe me). I asked John at the time what I should write into the omnibus to link back (ahead?) to The Whispering Sea, so I don’t know.

I was born in the sixties. If Helena was born around 1970, she grew up with LPs! And before VCRs!

I can only say that when we talk about The House Between, we often say it was “filmed using digital cameras”. There was no “film” involved. My dad records shows on DVR and says, “we’ve got it on tape”.

I think it may have been simply my anachronistic speech patterns showing up in the book, or Helena’s?

[Patricia Sokol]

It’s really no big deal. Maybe I should have smiled rather than cringed – it’s my fault, because I tend to be “tight” about being literal. My husband routinely asks if something I am watching is “on tape” or “live”, and I usually reply neither – it’s a DVD, and he says whatever. That’s just how we talk – you’re right. So, yes, her statement is a reference to her formative years. After all, in Outlook Express, there is an option for “Cc”- carbon copy. When was the last time you even saw carbon paper? :laugh:

Helena’s typewriter, on the other hand…

I think I’ll just shut up for a while now.

Edit – (just can’t help myself) – That one phrase about “The events…” DID manage to whet our appetites and get us thinking about what it might mean, so in that respect, it was very effective. 🙂

[meredith]

[b]mateo wrote:[/b]
[quote]I was born in the sixties. If Helena was born around 1970, she grew up with LPs! And before VCRs!

I can only say that when we talk about The House Between, we often say it was “filmed using digital cameras”. There was no “film” involved. My dad records shows on DVR and says, “we’ve got it on tape”.

I think it may have been simply my anachronistic speech patterns showing up in the book, or Helena’s?[/quote]

For what it is worth, I rather doubt Helena would be the CMO of a major off-planet medical installation at age 29. It would make more sense to have her in her mid-thirties at the least, and even more likely a few years older than that. I’ve always thought the age of BB was probably not too far off what was appropriate for the position, Hollywood’s desire to have the ‘Doogie Howser’ mentality not withstanding. A rather long-winded way of saying I bet Helena at least knew how to use a VCR along with that record player. 🙂

And I agree about the anachronistic speech patterns, for all the reasons cited. In the hospital, we still ask for the x-ray ‘films’ when just about everything has now gone digital. :laugh:

[David Bobzien]

I was born in the sixties. If Helena was born around 1970, she grew up with LPs! And before VCRs!.

I actually knew people who had VCRs during the 1970’s. This is a little off topic here. My apologies.

Coincidentally, a friend of mine in San Jose recorded the original telecast of “Breakaway” and “Dragon’s Domain” from KRON TV San Francisco in September 1975. “Breakaway” had the Year One Intro and Outro that Landau and Bain recorded for each of the stations in the U.S.

So…to make a long story shorter, I inherited that tape from him in the 1980’s. Several years ago word got back to Granada/Network (and BBC Technicolor) in the UK (I live in San Francisco) that I had the tape with the promo footage. Arrangements where made with Network express since there was deadline just a few weeks away that had to be met.

Ros Connors received my tape in London in July 2005 and took the Underground to get the tape to BBC Technicolor in time. BBC Technicolor was responsible for “restoring” the video image which, for the most part, had not aged well. Ros ending up taking several hours to get to BBC which should have only taken her 20 minutes. Right as she was entering the Underground, terrorists exploded bombs in the London subway system. She did everything in her power to ensure that BBC would receive that tape in time, dodging mayhem, traffic jams and closed off streets and subway routes.

For those of you who have, or know about the Network Year One restored release, know that Ros made it there in the nick of time. The Intros and Outros are on the DVD set.

It just goes to show you what we are willing to do for SPACE: 1999.

David

[David W]

[b]PatS wrote:[/b]
[quote]As you read on to The Forsaken (assuming one hasn’t read it yet) and Shepherd Moon, you’ll see that Helena is portrayed much the same way, and that her stoicism is also interpreted as coldness,[/quote]
I really liked the portrayal of her character in [i]The Forsaken[/i]. As I stated in a review at my site (not yet summarized here), I’ve long struggled with the Y1 portrayal of her character. The character is used well in plots, thematic statements, and most other dialog, but just strikes me as so unreactive in some cases, in my perception anyway, or that the reactions that were so subtle I often had trouble picking them out without multiple viewings or others’ viewpoints.

She is a doctor, a chief one at that, so one expects a lot of detachment. There are portrayals of doctors with over the top reactions that are often not very sensible, from what I understand. Yet despite the underplayed aspect, Helena’s Y1 portrayal never really fully clicked with me for a long time. After a number of years and reading others’ reactions, seeing some of the subtle signs, and making some other assumptions myself, I sort of understand the character earlier in S19 better now.

No difficulties at all with her character in [i]The Forsaken[/i], as far as I recall. There, the various sides of her character are strongly played (well written), both in a “Y1 sense” but in transition to Y2 type of portrayal. There is no trouble for me seeing both the surface and depths, and adjustments of the character in that novel (both within that story in regard to what is happening, but also long term) — and it all works well as a different aspects of the same character.

As from that, Pat, your continuing the point about stoicism into Helena’s character is actually rather fitting and helpful.

(Not that I always had problems with her Y1 characterization. As one example, I don’t recall struggling with her portrayal in “Breakaway” or the awkward meeting there of her and John, which makes it interesting that he started seeing through her shell to who she was, as the season went on and into the next.)

If nothing else, I suppose it can be taken as a positive that someone who often struggled with Helena’s Y1 characterization, that I thought she really shined in [i]The Forsaken[/i] and I’m seeing her character well in the Y2 Omnibus so far in my detailed reviews.

[quote]although her patina was probably developed over a period of years/events rather than one huge traumatic event.[/quote]
I’ve sometimes wondered and speculated, and tend to agree there was something in her past, recent or long term, that did make her seem outwardly stoic/cold/unemotional (different viewers may have different takes). In some senses, any sort of event or events seem to be “needed” as part of me refused to believe that went all the way to the center of the character, and Y2 shows that she seems to trust others and herself enough to show more feelings, while still remaining ever the doctor, both in terms of the portrayal and the reactions of some of the other characters (including Sally Martin’s, however myopic her view may be).

Mateo, your indication regarding her past is striking, and curiously, I never really thought that far back before regarding this, that it may indeed be something more distant but powerful.

“Let’s her ‘inner Barbara Bain’ shine through.” Interesting way of putting it. Unfortunately, I’ve never really seen her act in TV outside of S19, though she does show range there. I do have the first season of MI on DVD, though I haven’t had the chance to watch it.

PatS concluded….
[quote]Therefore, their friendship/camaraderie is much more natural and understandable – after all, who can you let your hair down with other than someone who understands you?[/quote]
That seems to make sense. It always struck me that Helena in Y1 may feel an isolated character due to her outward personality and her role, and Maya knows Helena as someone who reached out to her right away. Such factors could have helped make a friendship pretty easy to form. Your point makes it clearer they may have a little more in common than I already thought.

The subsequent discussion in this group about psychology and space medicine is interesting. I’ve had some prior off-line conversations with Cricket on this before. Even before that, I can still recall seeing “Dragon’s Domain” and assuming that Helena’s psychological discussions seemed some sort of extension of her medical skills, and not so much a whole other career within Medicine, though until I talked with Cricket, I really wasn’t sure exactly how. I was actually rather confused when seeing DD again in 1992. Perhaps another unfortunate thing in my perception of her character that I wasn’t sure how she could be more psychologist there and doctor later, and just figured it was some extension of her main practice. Took until these last few years to start hearing some good explanations.

–DW

P.S. “Powysverse” — clever term, Pat!

[David W]

[b]cricket wrote:[/b]
[quote]For what it is worth, I rather doubt Helena would be the CMO of a major off-planet medical installation at age 29. It would make more sense to have her in her mid-thirties at the least, and even more likely a few years older than that. I’ve always thought the age of BB was probably not too far off what was appropriate for the position,[/quote]
I always took the character to be the age that I assumed the actress to be, which I thought was late-thirties (which turns out to be a little younger than BB’s actual age at the time, if the date in the IMDB is correct). Usually, unless there is some hint otherwise, or mistaken assumption on my part, I tend to assume the character is around the same age as my estimation of the actor’s.

[quote][….] I bet Helena at least knew how to use a VCR along with that record player. 🙂
And I agree about the anachronistic speech patterns, for all the reasons cited. In the hospital, we still ask for the x-ray ‘films’ when just about everything has now gone digital. :laugh:[/quote]
Yeah, I still use the term “tape” for recording a program too. My parents, sister, and I, when we’re at my parents’ place, still all call the TV-listings section of the Sunday paper the “TV Screen” even though it has been retitled away from that decades ago, and a few more times since! (We all still use those listings sometimes, as it is so much quicker to scan listings for almost 100 channels and 6 hours on each page, as opposed to the miniscule 5(?)-channel x 1.5 hour shavings that the cable provider’s unit gives in each “page” on screen. But I digress.)

–DW

[David W]

It took me awhile, unfortunately, but I finally posted [url=http://www.space1999.net/~metaforms/oth-revu/y2omni03.htm]a detailed review[/url] of “One Moment of Humanity” — lightly revised this afternoon — as well as this summary review here in this forum. It’s not that it was a long review, just slow getting it wrapped up.

The broadcast episode is one of my least-favorite episodes of Y2. It is not the worst of the season in my opinion, and it has many scenes and elements I like; but is still among the lower five for me. I’ll get into why as I go along here. This is a shorter review than the prior two, in part because I did not notice a lot of changes between the 1970’s novelization and the 2000’s revision thereof. Thus, this is more of a review of the Omnibus version vs. the episode, unless noted otherwise.

Resource and social issues get some notice early on, with tiranium getting noted, as well as a noticeable uptick in social events. The former is a typical pressing point for the mostly-moonbound Alphans, but then again, the latter is important too. People cooped up for a long time have to find some outlets in activities, have to climb out of the potential depression that could suck everyone in. Not that it is going to be an even and orderly climb or anything. Despite the OMOH novelization being moved up from the last story of the second of six books to the third episode novelized in the Omnibus, this social reassertion works well in either spot. A related one, maybe not, of everyone having gone through all the movies a “dozen times already” — though since the dates are not explicitly mentioned in the Omnibus, maybe it still works or the reviewer is taking it too literally.

Helena has previously acted subtly as a go between a little for Tony and Maya, and she’s already “half expecting” an engagement announcement soon. She may be seeing more than there is, and even she thinks in terms of “half” anyway; but as I said for the prior chapter, there is some better characterization set up here than in the original novelization.

When the crisis soon hits, it is Sandra who has been written into Command Center in place of Yasko in the earlier novel. I wonder, is this simply because in the episodes, Yasko doesn’t appear (get promoted perhaps) until later? Maybe we see Yasko “introduced” later in the Omnibus.

The Alphans are immobilized, and I find it interesting the author posits they are aware — something I had wondered about from the episode. Yet the novelizations lack Zamara studying the still figures, and does not see Tony and Helena in contact (in support as they started getting hit with dizzyness or such). This seemingly eliminates Zamara perhaps choosing them as a perceived couple, and makes her choice in the novelization a little more murky. Yet curiously, this still works, but more as a minor mystery. When the novelization reaches her finding [i]Othello[/i] and asking some questions about it, now she thinks she has more leverage. Backing up, though….

Something added to the Omnibus is a minor continuity bit, of Tony thinking, [i]Here we go again,[/i] when he and Helena are chosen by Zamara. This bit is good because given the Omnibus using the DAB ordering (even if not the numbers themselves), these same two characters were just kidnapped by the Exiles. There are some other subtle additions and changes which are good, such as replacing “radio” with “communication system” and “girl” with “woman” instead. Kept unchanged is a great bit of foreshadowing: that Zamara’s smile is “coldly artificial” — how little the characters know at that point.

While Butterworth does not have Zamara observing Tony and Helena before choosing them, he instead adds observations by Helena of how, after she has been clued into what the Vegans really are, she thinks Zarl seems to show a bit more than mere mimicry of emotions. While this observation is not “necessary” for understanding the events at the end in the episode, it is a nice addition in writing.

Soon, we all reach one of the longer scenes, of the Moonbase copy. A clever idea by the script writer, I think — but one I thought came off disjointed on screen. Perhaps it lacks a sense of duration, and that absence makes the character motivations a little more muddy. There is a line in the novel that seems to add some clarity; and it all comes out better in writing than on screen. The new novelization also tones down a line about Tony’s perception of Maya, by eliminating “his beloved Psychon” phrase present in the older version, as this would have been premature here given the reorder and the more subtle approach taken.

I always liked the next scene, of John, Alan, and Maya confronting Zamara, the last gaining new knowledge, John’s ploy to get Maya on planet, regardless of her feelings or the accuracy (or lack there)of his statement about her and Tony. Once there, it seems Zamara is thinking too much of the likely success meddling with John and Helena’s relationship (leaving Maya and Tony as Zamara’s backup plan, I gather), and does not notice Maya slipping away. It is good that this is pointed out. Of course, Maya can’t help in the end, other than providing information that the alien computer (which “looks” different in the novels than in the episode) cannot be attacked without killing everyone.

Before that point, John is forced to watch Zarl dancing with Helena. However, on screen, this falls flat. It succeeds in feeling awkward for the reason Zarl is trying to coerce Helena, which is also an act trying to coerce John into a violent response. That is supposed to feel wrong to the viewer, and it succeeds; but it feels like the scene itself is just completely awkward. Maybe it is the length of the scene, or the music (my least favorite, and the most screechy, track in Y2), or the choreography maybe (though I’m no judge of such), or something. It is just a difficult scene to watch, not just for the intended reasons, but unintended ones, I think. However, the scene works far better in writing, feeling more to the point and putting more focus on reaching the thematic point of the eponymous metaphorical change in Zarl, that ends up dooming his fellow androids and himself. The last was clear in the episode, but comes across more strongly in the novelization, as does the subsequent challenge in front of the real humans of Vega.

Finally, what I thought a distractingly flawed point added to the original novelization was removed in this one: what felt like the very rapid arrival of an Eagle.

In the end, the novelization is actually a distinct improvement on the episode. The changes between versions of the novelization are mostly subtle, but still welcome; and only one bit of seeming hyperbole remains (perhaps with more metaphorical than literal intent), that I noticed.

–DW

[Mateo Latosa]

You didn’t mention the entirely rewritten explanation as to why the Alphans are advised NOT to show violent emotions, and the revision of the idea that the androids CANNOT kill because they don’t understand violent emotions. It always bothered me–no violent emotions are needed to kill.

Human minus head = death.
Human minus air = death
Human minus water = death

The new version of the novelized episode makes this issue much more logical and was one of the first major revisions made.

[David W]

[b]mateo wrote:[/b]
[quote]You didn’t mention the entirely rewritten explanation as to why the Alphans are advised NOT to show violent emotions, and the revision of the idea that the androids CANNOT kill because they don’t understand violent emotions. It always bothered me–no violent emotions are needed to kill.[/quote]
Mateo,

Huh, you are quite right that I apparently entirely missed a more major revision point. Well, before I go looking, I will say that you reminded me this aspect of the episode did bother me too in the past. In fact, it is probably one gap that is to at least a small degree responsible for my lower estimation of this episode.

However, as a partial fill-in, I long figured the androids still not knowing the emotions of love and hate, they were seeking not just actions that can be related to hatred, but to understand enough of the feeling itself. In this, I had probably picked up some thematic cross from other series’ stories regarding androids’ mental abilities, which are sometimes posited in their “universes” (e.g. Mr. Data in TNG) as being so advanced as to blur the lines between “computation” and “thinking” — or at least arguably so.

One thing that had bothered me too (and it resembles one of your points too) was how the Vegans were causing the slow loss of Alphan life support, and again led me to assume it wasn’t “merely” the actions they were seeking to assimilate but a “stronger” and wider [i]range[/i] of such actions, under the heading of hate. Same for the stated history of the androids ripping off the masks of the “Numbers.” Grasping at enough of the [i]backing[/i] of the emotion of hatred could be seen by the Vegan androids as a fuller grasp on the emotive ability and thus giving them a larger range of actions they could use in more varying situations where they felt they might need this perceived “strength.”

These quick fill-in assumptions of mine have apparently become so ingrained in my thinking, perhaps starting with my 1992 viewings, that I apparently entirely missed these Omnibus revisions somehow, even though I usually am aware of these assumptions and am curious to seek out alternate “explanations” — as I am now curious to backtrack and see what I missed in this case. Sometimes I miss the obvious. 🙁

However, one more thing before going back to both versions to review more carefully, namely:

[quote]Human minus head = death.
Human minus air = death
Human minus water = death[/quote]
Okay, I’ll grant the last two as having a relatively “low” — almost “passive” — level of violent action. Arguably, the word “violence” could be extended to include anything intending to do such harm, however much or little action; but in this context that is splitting hairs, and I agree with the intent of your point. I’m dubious of the first example, however, because more action (and rather bloody at that) is still needed in that case. Even if taken on in a machine-like manner, it isn’t that much different than other violent deaths. Still, minus that, your other examples correspond to more of my initial misgivings too, and are part of why I made an assumption about the motivation being deeper than the literal words.

This was not the first time, in either season, I had to do something like this, unfortunately.

[quote]The new version of the novelized episode makes this issue much more logical and was one of the first major revisions made.[/quote]
Alright, let’s see…. Long pause as I take both novel versions outside to re-read relevant chapter sections in in the waning sunlight of a nice day and in light of your points….

Yes, I can see the changes. The original dialog was crippled by focussing on just the actions more than the emotional backing, even though Love and Hate were mentioned and the latter pointed to as something the androids saw as “strength.” The Omnibus has switched this to keep focus on the emotions, the feelings, even while keeping it clear that the actions would contribute to gaining the understanding. The changes are clearly visible to me now in at least two places especially: when “Number 8” is explaining the androids to Tony and Helena, and then when Tony is explaining them to John and Maya. One extra facet this makes me notice also is that it more neatly bridges to Helena pressing Zarl to feel what love is. She’s focussing him on that emotion even as Zamara vainly tries keeping him focussed on hatred.

Okay, a case where my post-viewing assumptions were so ingrained I glided right past the Powys changes without noticing them. Alright, you got me there, that I missed the fixes to a rather major flaw that had bothered me more, years back. The more assumptions I have to make under the heading of “suspension of disbelief” the more my opinion of the particular episode (or situation, or whatever) is lowered — and some things I just can’t cover with speculative assumptions. Regardless, I see it is a lot less necessary to make such assumptions reading this, because the core situation has been improved greatly!

Alright, I admit this is an oversight on my part, and I will likely go back to my webpage and add an Important Addendum or similar post-revision.

Along the way of more closely analyzing the above, I caught a couple other changes….

A minor but for some reason good change was the door swinging open after Tony shoots it is changed to sliding open.

Also, I don’t know how I missed mentioning this, since I brought up a semi-related topic in reviewing “The Exiles” and there was alll the related and tangential discussion which followed. Some rather anachronistic references in the original OMOH novelization were fixed in the Omnibus. It is actually a rather curious case….

I admired (and still do) the OMOH episode in its presenting something which nowadays resembles in form and presumed function a miniature compact disk. What OMOH showed presented something that as far as I know was still about a decade away at the time of production.

It is rather curious that the 1970’s novelization instead used “cassettes” and “microtape” made of “celluoid” instead of the disks shown. I first read these novelizations around 1994 or 1995, and was baffled by the nature of this change, and eventually settled on assuming that the novelist was either working off scripts that described them differently than what Keith Wilson or someone assembled just before filming, or that the scripts were not specific enough and Michael Butterworth had to improvise (perhaps under time pressure). I don’t know what the case actually is. (Mateo? Anyone?)

What could perhaps be added to the puzzle is “The Exiles” — then near the end of the third of the six 1970’s Y2 releases — actually [i]did[/i] refer to disks being used. Of course, there is nothing too terribly unusual about having multiple media at all, at any point in time, with some being treated as old and new, and some perhaps being seen as similar complexity levels. In fact, I rather like that at different points, square mini-disks were being used (e.g. BOW) “alongside” round mini-disks (e.g. Exiles, OMOH), both of which still look more advanced than cassettes and celluoid microtape. So the OMOH and Exiles cases are arguably a false case of inconsistency; but it is still an observation. Anyway, getting back on point to wrap it up….

The Powys OMOH revision thankfully just sweeps the cassettes, microtape, and celluoid references (which are really dated now) away, “restoring” the original then-forward-thinking design element that just so happens to look rather familiar to us now. 🙂

[Mateo Latosa]

It’s a simple change of “can’t” to “won’t”. From “The androids can’t kill us all until they learn violent emotions.” to “The androids can kill us at any time, but they won’t until they learn violent emotions.” The first is illogical. The second leaves the Alphans in a more dangerous position of 1. being expendable and 2. potentially being more trouble than they’re worth. Knowing the androids can kill them at any time (and know how to do it) makes it more suspenseful, I feel.

Michael Butterworth was working from early draft scripts. I doubt the writer went into detail to dictate the shape of props. And may have used the same anachronistic technology.

[Author]

Posts