A very original set-up: two scientists create a miniature artificial replica of a distant planet, an isolated "model" planet on which time is programmed to move at a rate many times quicker than our own - in order to get quicker results with the evolution of the planet's life-forms. Now, while this may be a unique idea, it brings with it a few far-fetched absurdities: these guys being actually able to tweak gravity - and especially their ability to control the flow of time by speeding it up - essentially means they possess god-like powers. With these powers they could rule the world (and beyond), nevermind waste time on a comparatively unimportant scientific project.
Nevertheless, this could be construed as science-based nitpickery because this is after all pulp sci-fi; a rather balanced, good mix of real science and pulpy, fun, mumbo-jumbo pseudo-science. As good sci-fi should be.
There is some shaky logic also about why they'd picked this particular planet to replicate, and how they can even call it a replica when it is too distant for them to be acquainted with its exact conditions. The scientist himself admits that the planet is too far to be observed directly hence "the information we have is second-hand". This implies that the miniature replica and its conditions are based on a rough estimate, nothing more. Which further begs the question: if they have such tremendous powers such as control of gravity and the ability to speed up time, WHY bother with a specific planet? Why not just pick any desired conditions to create a model of a non-existent planet, just to be able to learn about evolution? Or accelerated evolution, in this case. Predicting whether a planet is suitable for colonization - using such a vague experiment that may veer off totally from the evolution of the real planet Dundee - is nonsensical.
A more blatant disregard for science i.e. A more blatant pulp-like shtick is the fact that the model planet is evolving pretty much exactly like Earth, even including "the 19th century" which implies that this miniature world has their own Jesus too! That is an extremely far-fetched scenario, to put it very mildly. The likelihood of getting the same outcome in a lab in replicating history - which involves millions of years of evolution and just as many uncontrollable factors - is practically zero. This is 100% pulp fiction, very cheesy. As I often said before, this kind of ultra-far-fetched, corny premise/twist works very well in a comic-book anthology such as "Weird Tales" but not on the screen, where more realism and logic are expected - simply because movies are a much more realistic i.e. Less stylized/idealized medium than comic-books.
The plot slows down a bit around the middle, when the scientist's wife witnesses the same bizarre creature (well, a low-budget ghost-bat thingy) as the two scientists had. We'd already had their reactions to the discovery, so witnessing her reactions and hearing her comments too is just unnecessary repetition of what we already knew.
O'Neal's decision-making, upon realizing that "the creature is dangerous and is gaining in power and strength", is illogical. Instead of hiring MORE people to act as security in case the ghost-bat starts flexing its bat-muscles, he first sends his wife away and then even his only assistant. His motives are noble, i.e. He does this to protect them, but it makes a lot more sense to start hiring additional staff instead of turning into a hermit. After all, the ghost-bat could be potentially dangerous to the outside world, not just the people in and around the desert lab.
When the investor and the assistant come over unannounced to check on him, he reacts aggressively, as if he'd started morphing into yet another cliche mad scientist. This is a pity, because done solely so there can be more danger i.e. Tension. In other words, this is the kind of writing decision that places tension and drama above logic. Since O'Neal is extremely dedicated to this project i.e. Finding out "what Earth's future will be like" through this experiment, it makes no sense for him to endanger the entire project by opting to go one-on-one against the mysterious ghost-bat thingy, instead of just doing the smart and practical thing - which means hiring extra help.
The creature's behaviour isn't entirely logical either. Clearly, this is a powerful, intelligent being, and yet it gradually kills ants, birds, and hamsters (i.e. All of the lab's test critters) which shows a lack of caution. If the ghost-bat knew it was being observed then WHY would it warn the humans of its malevolence BEFORE it got powerful enough to kill them too? Logically, the creature would want to fake civility instead, if anything, to deceive its "captors". If it had done that, it would have avoided defeat and destruction.
Hence it must be stupid.
In the end, O'Neal is predictably attacked by the evil force, so he instructs his wife to shatter the glass thereby killing the creature - but also every single inhabitant of the mini-planet! I can get past the fact that O'Neal somehow knew how to kill the ghost-bat. What I can't accept is that he had no qualms about DESTROYING an entire civilization!
Then, to make things truly ironic and almost comical, he concludes the episode by uttering these silly "poignant" words:
"Dundee isn't a planet where we can land our spacemen. But the project is feasible. A planet can be recreated in a laboratory. (Now comes the punchline...) The odds are that the next time it will be a place of warmth and love, LIKE OUR PLANET EARTH."
This is amusing on so many levels. Not only is this a rather Disney-like description of Earth, but O'Neal had just DESTROYED an entire planet of humanoids, animals and plants! That's hardly "warmth and love", is it... Even worse than that, neither O'Neal nor the narrator even mention this sudden genocide, as if the laboratory planet were inhabited by toys instead of actual living creatures.
In that sense, O'Neal is the greatest murderer in TOL's history - and yet he isn't even considered to be a bad guy!
The narrator mentions the idea of the multi-verse, that our own universe may be a speck of dust in some vast collection of worlds. It's rather interesting to hear this theory being mentioned in a 1965 sci-fi TV show.
5 out of 8 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink