Genesis II

The architecture referred to by another reviewer is actually the campus of the University of California at Riverside. It was filmed while I was a student there, during spring break so no students were around. While I loved the film, it was hard to suspend my disbelief looking at buildings I saw every day. We hoped it would take off as a series, since the campus got a paint job, some landscaping, and a few thousand dollars for our scholarship funds in exchange for letting them film. That "futuristic" architecture was mostly built in the early to mid 1960's. But it still has that "future" look. One of my fond memories of my undergraduate alma mater.

As you would expect from Roddenberry there are many themes about the good and bad sides of human nature explored, and his optimism about the fate of the Human race shows through as it often does in Star Trek.

The plot follows a scientist who is researching suspended animation in deep underground caverns. He is supposed to be asleep for a week, but due to an Earth quake he is buried for 150 years.

When he awakes, he finds his world has been destroyed by war. PACS - a group of Unisex humans live underground, while the mutants (the only outwardly sign being 2 navels!)live outside.

Little is know about the ancient technology of the Nuclear Power plants and both sides fight to have the "man from the past" help them.

The moral dilema for out hero is which side he chooses to help.

Despite its age, this film ain't too bad. There's no flashy special effects , but an entertaining moral tale against slavery and oppressive regimes.

Look out for Gene Roddenberry's wife making an appearance (better known as Counsellor Troi's Mother in Star Trek The Next Generation).

Call me a geek, but I was 13 years old when I first saw this pilot, at a pre-release screening at a Star Trek convention.

It exhibits numerous elements characteristic of Roddenberry's finest, including a compelling premise, focus on recognizable human interactions, and some light, thoughtful humor: e.g. a reference to the teachings of "Saint Freud".

Sadly, it didn't have quite the kick of some of his better work, but rather plays like one of the weaker episodes of one of them. That is to say the story is pretty good, some of the characters display a potential for significant depth, but it drags a bit. I see it as kind of a "Star Trek - The Motion Picture", without the million dollar light show, or the established relationship with the characters that would have brought us back for Star Trek II no matter how excruciating it was.

It ain't easy maintaining the emotional pacing necessary for a "human adventure" while interspersing enough action (and scifi eye candy/gadgetry) to keep the plot moving. I thought it was not just watchable, but endearing in it's way... which is more than I could say for "Planet Earth"; which I thought came across as a rather superficial remake, dumbed down a bit for the masses.

Genesis II was made for CBS, who turned it down in favor of the Planet of the Apes series, with the thinking that a network could have only one science fiction show on its schedule at a time.

Planet Earth was made for ABC, and it wasn't a sequel, rather, the next episode of the same premise, with a new male lead and a lighter tone.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture's script was written to be an episode of Genesis II. (and was in turn, stolen from an older episode of Star Trek! (Earth satellite comes back looking for its maker))

Andromeda uses two of the characters' names (Dylan Hunt and Harper Smythe)though it has little to do with the original concept. By using the names I suppose the producers could call it "Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda") I really wish they would have made a Genesis II series instead,

IMHO: I liked that Mariette Hartley was set up to be a recurring, love-interest/villain for Dylan. It could have been a good show, though I have to agree with the poster who said it probably would have only lasted one season. Still, 26 episodes would have been great to have.

Unlike a lot of reviewers on here, I can't claim to have any sort of expectation for something that "Roddenberry" was involved in and all I have to say is that, if his other stuff is as full of massive plot holes and huge leaps of basic logic as this thing, then I think I'll pass. So, these guys thought it would be a good idea to build an underground network across massive fault lines (in California no less!) and not expect an earthquake? And how does this suspended animation contraption work again? You stick the guy in a massive Tupperware jar and what did he do for air for 150 years? And no one owns a gun in the future? This is never explained, nor is it explained how the "mutants" were able to subdue the humans to the degree they did in such a relatively short period of time (without guns!). So, they are twice as strong and have these stinger thing-ma-doohickeys? Big deal--they are drastically outnumbered and obviously not twice as smart, or they would have figured out their energy problem. And so on.

But don't get me wrong--this movie is entertaining as hell. Stupid, yes, but fun. Ending leaves a lot to be desired and they decided to skip a huge chunk of action where the hero rigs a nuclear warhead to explode and then escapes (not like anyone would want to watch that or anything), presumably to fit it into time constraints and save a buck or two. Pretty dumb stuff and bad overall, but I got some good laughs out of it and would watch again. Recommended.