J.J. Abrams Promises 'Fringe' Will Die Fighting 392
An anonymous reader writes "Fringe creator J.J. Abrams has said of the show's much-maligned move to Friday nights, 'Fringe deserves to live beyond season 3. If we're going to fail, let's go down doing the most bad ***, weirdest, interesting, sophisticated version of a series that we could possibly do.' Previous announcements about the move were more defensive, claiming that Fringe's shift to Fridays was an attempt to draw younger viewers back to the 'dead zone' of Friday nights. But season three has been confused enough in tone and approach that it's no surprise to hear yet another contradictory statement about its future..." Good episodes of Fringe have been great TV. I've really enjoyed the first half of the season and am looking forward to seeing what they do with it. A lot of mediocre SciFi has been shut down recently (Caprica? SGU?) and a lot of bad SciFi continues (V?) but Fringe flirts with greatness with regularity. I hope it makes it... even though on Friday it's not likely.
As a geek, I don't get it (Score:4, Interesting)
This is one of those series that I keep hearing fellow geeks talk about (like Eureka) that I just don't get. I tried watching a couple of episodes of this show early on, and all I saw was a pretty boring, predictable, and pedestrian "incident of the week" show with some pretty silly supernatural or pseudo-scientific themes. It reminded me of the X-files in that regard (with the notable exceptions of the frickin' *brilliant* X-files episodes that Darin Morgan [wikipedia.org] wrote).
So what is supposed to be so great about this series, again?
Re:As a geek, I don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:As a geek, I don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)
First Season -> lots of one-off stories, not much plot development.
Second Season -> switch to development of an actual, ongoing, underlying plot. Not so many one-off stories.
The first season annoyed me, as people were billing Fringe as a replacement for the X-Files (which has a major legacy to live up to), and IMHO, it has yet to prove itself in that arena. However, starting with the second season, there are some actual developments of a plot, which makes the show more watchable. The jury is out on whether this plot will each lead to something exciting/interesting/entertaining, or if the writers will write themselves into a hole, and pull a Lost.
Re:As a geek, I don't get it (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
There are a few episodes in the middle of season 2, centering around Walter, that are some of the best TV drama, and best TV science fiction, I have ever seen. The show deserves to live for that kind of bravery alone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, instead of watching Big Brother or re-runs of Friends, you watch Fringe.
"I find television very educational. Every time someone switches it on I go into another room and read a good book."
There are a couple of series I like, but unfortunately they are so amazingly rare, especially in drama (for comedy there are a few nice ones from the UK).
Re: (Score:2)
Huh, looks like your guy Darin Morgan (yes, excellent X-Files episodes) is a consulting producer for Fringe. Go figure.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they should consult him more often.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it's really aimed at pseudogeeks....
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I liked Caprica very much. I thought it was underrated. I think people expected it to be a copy of Galactica, and were disappointed when it carved out its own style and pace. Too many people were tuning in expecting cool cylon battles, only to get complex explorations of family and religion instead. It was less space opera and more about asking questions like "Can a disembodied human still have a soul?" It never really caught on, but I will miss it.
Never watched Lost.
I watched a few episodes of Ba
Re: (Score:2)
You gotta give B5 some credit though for admitting that we still need bathrooms in space and for having a human invade Earth. But then I liked the series.
Caprica was an odd one for me. I kept wanting to like it but had trouble getting into the flow of it until the very end when they burned off the remaining episodes. Perhaps they should have done it in 2 hour segments from the start or develop just one of the story lines per episode.
SGU bad? (Score:5, Interesting)
Compared to the original two series, it was much better than the "go through a Stargate and everyone speaks English" tripe. Not that SG and SGA weren't fun, but they weren't "great scifi".
Re:SGU bad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:SGU bad? (Score:4, Insightful)
Too much interpersonal relationship drama - the same thing that killed BSG.
I don't mind character subplots but they should be 'sub', not the main course for week after week after week. If I want to watch a soap opera I'll go watch a soap opera, thanks.
Re:SGU bad? (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps, but I would argue that SG1 and SGA were more entertaining. You kind of get the feeling, as how some people remark about the original Star Wars trilogy, that the actors were doing Scifi, yes, but they were also having fun on the set, and were not below using a campy style when it suited them.
SGU is, for me, like the Star Wars prequels. It's like Stargate Continuum: it never happened.
SGU is exactly what the writers were making fun of in SG1's 200: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200_%28Stargate_SG-1%29
It's the younger, edgier version of SG1, with several plot lines lifted directly from the spoof (200) (pregnancy anyone?). From what I can surmise, having watched SGU, despite the intense pain, is that SGU is SGA rebooted, with a different cast. "We are far away from home, can communicate with home, and are surrounded by Ancient technology." It's SG1 with the military angle, it's SGA with the far from home angle, it's a disaster without any good humor.
Re: (Score:2)
My biggest problem with SGU is none of the characters are even remotely likable. I know stress turns people into jerks but the whole ship is full of them. I wish they'd spend more time exploring more of the ship (kind of like in SGA how they kept finding interesting bits of the city) and have a little fun doing it.
And the whole business with Chloe bores me to tears. Kill her off already.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree, the younger airman who died in the shuttle crash was likable, the redhead from the alliance, and the large breasted lieutenant. The rest of the people seem like bad stereotypes. Agreed on the Chloe thing dragged out for far too long.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I found Greer to be a fascinating character.
Re:SGU bad? (Score:4, Interesting)
Has anyone tried to rewatch BSG lately, anyway? While I enjoyed its first broadcasts, more recently I found it to be melodramatic, slow, and boring. The plots are too tied in to current events and political issues from several years ago, and it has not aged gracefully. So, even if Brad Wright & co had done better copying BSG, I'm not sure it was really something worth emulating at this point. Before someone flames me and says how awesome it was back in the day -- yes, I agree, it was -- but try watching it again today. It's not very enjoyable or interesting.
SGU was not much of a Stargate, at all. Does anyone recall the episode with Stargate Command / Sam Carter and the F-302 raid on a Lucian Alliance base? It felt nothing like a Stargate, and was simply bizarre to watch.
That said, I took no pleasure from SGU's cancellation. While not on par with SG1 or SGA, its writing was improving, and was somewhat watchable. Most of the characters were uninteresting, the BSG-wannabe camerawork was terrible, and Season 1 was mostly unwatchable. But, it was improving. Just not enough.
Still, I would have preferred SGA remain on the air. A proper Stargate series should be tongue-in-cheek, use cameras with image stabilization functions, be recorded by people who understand how to properly expose a shot, and be filmed in the forests of British Columbia, which coincidentally look like every alien world the SG teams visit.
Also, regarding the grandparent's claims that "everyone spoke English" through the Stargate... no, they didn't, not initially in SG1. But having dialog that Daniel had to translate, then have O'Neill say something, and have that get translated again, was just cumbersome. Further, some of the humans transplanted by the Gao'uld were in fact, white dudes from Earth who natively spoke English. So yes, they should probably be speaking English.
Stargate gets dubbed for foreign language markets anyway. Do you think they speak French, German or Italian full-time at the Cheyenne Mountain Complex? Survey says: no.
Re: (Score:2)
SGU was Emo-BSG,Big Brother in space. (Score:2, Troll)
SGU was a clear attempt to clone BSG. Dark set on a ship in the middle of nowhere, excess shaky cam.
But in an amateur attempt to clone the dramatic elements of BSG, they created a ship of fools, the characters were written as unlikable, incompetent, shrieking morons. That regularly engaged in reality show histrionics.
It was like the cast of big brother sent into space, where they ham up interpersonal conflict for TV, heck they even had confession cameras. They had a bunch of lame cookie cutter stereotypes,
SGU good! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then explain the last few episodes. The time filler of the stupid music needs to go away. And the episode where a brand new shuttle appears with everyone on it was simply a way to give them a shuttle back.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a personal preference thing. I found many of Asimov's stories really dull. Have you read the early Foundation books, for example? They're just pedestrian chronologies. This-happened, and-then-this-happened, and-then-100-years-later-this-happened.
(He wrote some gems too. "Pebble in the Sky" is my favourite. And the Foundation books he wrote when he was older are much better, especially Prelude.)
Contrast with a good sci-fi TV series? There's a lot of plotting, and indeed philosophy, going on in
Re: (Score:2)
Outer Limits had a ton of nice episodes, so did all of Star Trek, Stargate SG1 wasn't bad either and when you go outside of American television http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetes [slashdot.org] is absolutely fantastic.
Re: (Score:3)
Lexx
One of the Best on TV (Score:4, Insightful)
This is easily my favorite show. It's smart, fun, and Olivia Dunham is one of the best leading characters ever.
D
Re: (Score:3)
This is easily my favorite show. It's smart, fun, and Walter Bishop is one of the best leading characters ever.
FTFY
Re: (Score:3)
When i think of evil, i think of Walter with his brain intact. *shudders* It might be a good thing that Dr Bell cut up Walter.
Whatcha gonna do... (Score:5, Funny)
...when Hulkamania runs wild on your program schedule?
I don't see how Fringe could possibly compete with wrasslin' on Friday night. I mean, that's what hardcore sci-fi geeks are really after, right?
Re: (Score:2)
HAHAHA.....if I had mod points...I'd use them on someone else, you're already at +5 Funny.
Seriously though, WTF is up with "wrasslin" on Sci-Fi (I refuse to use their new name).
If for no other reason, I hope Fringe gets canceled and picked up by Sci-Fi to replace wrestling.
Abrams should go work on a Star Trek sequel (Score:2)
or even new TV series. Srsly.
Re:Abrams should go work on a Star Trek sequel (Score:5, Informative)
Want to see it profitable? Don't delay the DVDs! (Score:5, Interesting)
Season 2 finished in May last year. It wasn't available for me to rent on DVD until September. I watched Season 1 over the summer and, because season 2 wasn't available I couldn't add it to my rental queue. I forgot about it until just now.
When I rent a DVD, the studio gets some money. There's no need to persuade advertisers that I might buy something they advertise, it's a direct transaction - I exchange money for something they've created. Very often, however, they don't even bother releasing the DVD until after they've already cancelled the show.
There's no reason for DVDs to take this long. They can produce the menus concurrently with the show and just drop in the episodes once they're done. Some shows have come out with half-season DVD releases at the mid-season break, which is great. ITV managed to release DVDs of the last two dramatisations of Sharpe the day after they were first broadcast.
In short, if you want to sell a TV show to a relatively small market, sell it to them, don't sell it to a network, who will sell it to advertisers, who will sell things to the viewers, and hope that after the two layers of indirection taking their cut that you have enough money to continue.
Not watching J. J. Abrams (Score:3)
After the betrayal that was "Lost", I'm no longer watching anything by J. J. Abrams. Apparently the latest model of attracting viewers is to keep throwing mysteries and questions on them, without any plan to ever answer them. This is not something I am interested in.
Compare "Lost" to "Babylon 5".
Re: (Score:2)
"Lost" described the audience as much as named the show.
Even if you caught it at the beginning and watched it from the start, you almost needed a scorecard. I'm sure it's interesting- but it's entirely too complex and required absolute devotion to watching to show to really enjoy it. Much like Heroes was. At some threshold, I ended up having better things to do with my time.
Re: (Score:2)
I watched the last season of Lost with a laptop with Wikipedia open sitting on my lap. Characters that we hadn't seen for 3-4 years reappeared, and we were all supposed to remember who they were, what their connection to the story was, and why we should care. If I have to consult notes to work out what's going on, it's a massive failure.
Contrast this with Babylon 5, as another poster just did. There, if you watch the entire arc over a few weeks, you notice stuff at the start foreshadowing stuff much lat
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently the latest model of attracting viewers is to keep throwing mysteries and questions on them, without any plan to ever answer them.
Pretty much, its not even a secret, he talks about it in great length in his TED talk [ted.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Each to their own. I found B5 a bit more interesting in at least the first season and part of the second before I wandered off like I did with Lost.
Re:Not watching J. J. Abrams (Score:4, Interesting)
Seasons 2 through 4 of B5 are really great. There's a proper arc there, and because they thought they were getting cancelled after S4 they pretty much threw every good idea they had at the show and wrapped up everything.
Then they did a season 5, which we will not talk of again.
Re: (Score:2)
Then they did a season 5, which we will not talk of again.
Season 5 is great! It's just a shame that it only had about half a dozen episodes.
Good show (Score:2)
Great SciFi need not be hard Science (Score:2)
Too many SciFi that needs thinking, and SciFi must absolutely require its audience to think, gets cancelled and we only end up with "Cowboy in Space" shows :-( I think, to some extent, the writers/producers are also the blame, they star
Re: (Score:2)
Who watches live TV? (Score:5, Insightful)
I rarely watch live TV anymore, as a matter of fact I cannot tell you what night anything is on since my affair with my DVR began...
Re: (Score:3)
Unsurprising use of the phrase "Die Fighting" (Score:2)
Friday night helped kill Star Trek (Score:2)
Gotta make room for American Idol, don'tcha know? (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the biggest reason for the move. American Idol airs in Bones' time slot now and Bones is in Fringe's typical time slot on Thursdays. Bones gets better ratings because of the perpetual parade of buxom wenches in tight clothing being flashed across the screen. Apparently the womenfolk find that David Boreanaz fellow quite fetching as well.
I don't imagine John Noble (Walter Bishop) has the same draw with the ladies.
Besides, Fringe requires you to pay attention. You don't necessarily have to think about it because if you're patient enough, they explain it all in the course of the show. But that patience thing is a deal killer for most of the slack-jawed, mouth-breathers out there who dismiss anything even remotely based in higher subjects like math and science as boring. It's pathetic that people would rather watch garbage like "American Idol", "Real Housewives of..." or "Jersey Shore" than anything that requires you to flex some gray matter. It is, however, some high level subject matter and most superficial people I know have dismissed it without giving it any inkling of a chance as "nerd entertainment" and they can't follow it because it's all "sciency and stuff". Is that even a word?
It's a shame too because it honestly is good TV. It stands up as a drama as well as a Sci-Fi show. My girlfriend didn't give it a chance until Season 2 when I was not wanting to do anything on Thursdays so I could watch Fringe and the re-broadcast of another spectacular show, "Breaking Bad". Now she's hooked on both and is usually occupying the seat next to me on the couch, riveted to the TV for the hour or two for each show.
Thank God for the DVR though! It already records every new episode for me so even if I have to miss it, I'm still gonna get to see it! I've been eagerly awaiting the rest of the current season. If FOX cancels it like the morons they are, I think there should be another letter writing campaign on the level of the "Family Guy" debacle several years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
based in higher subjects like math and science
This is Fringe we're talking about right? Cause there's very little math and science involved in the episodes I saw. Just lots of handwaving and "Quick, hire Leonard Nimoy, we're a bit thin on plot!"
I think there should be another letter writing campaign
A postcard with the words "Thank you!" will do just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
If they were moving it to Tuesdays or Wednesdays, then it's possible they were moving it to make room for something else. The fact that they moved it to Friday means that they pretty much intend to kill it. Friday night is where TV shows go to die.
Re: (Score:3)
FOX has Glee on Tuesdays, American Idol on Wednesdays and House on Mondays. All are hit shows that bring big ratings. They aren't moving anything out of the way for Fringe on those days.
If there wasn't anything special on those days, I'd be more inclined to agree with you but Friday is the only weekday that has nothing else on the docket that would detract from the Fringe viewership or lead viewers of those other garbage shows to turn away from FOX when something with that "sciency stuff" came on. They want
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be willing to give you the concession in this matter if I actually cared about the science value of it all.
I like Fringe because even though most of the "science community" feels that it's bogus, it's written with a story and plot deeper than the normal schlock on TV.
I'm not a fan of Bones because I think it relies more on shock factor and sex appeal than anything science based. Yeah, maybe they follow the typical TV conventions of what the majority of the population thinks are typical crime scene inves
Friday nights are lonely (Score:2)
For instance, I remember when I was in high school there was this SF show on Friday nights (thus in conflict with high school Date Night as well as football). Talk about doomed! If I recall it had some goofy name -- I think it was "Star Trek" or something like that.
Does timeslot really matter that much any more? (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, fewer and fewer people watch TV live any more, except for actual live events.
Obviously, it is hard to collect metrics on DVR viewership (and it is still something they're trying to figure out), but really what matters is:
1) Are you in a conflict-heavy slot? Then you might lose if you exceed the typical number of tuners on people's DVRs (dual-tuner is getting pretty common...)
2) Are you in a slot that often gets its schedule broken? I disagree that Friday night is a "death slot" for this reason. Think "sci-fi Fridays" back before Sci-Fi became SyFy and started sucking. Sunday, however, is a "death slot" because half the time someone's DVR catches the previous show because football shifted the damn schedule back. (CSI: Miami went from "Record and watch at my convenience" to "Don't even bother recording" because of this. CSI: Miami recordings became a simple waste of hard drive space because 3/4 of them were of Undercover Boss instead.)
Re: (Score:2)
"Obviously, it is hard to collect metrics on DVR viewership"
Huh? they have acute metrics on DVR viewership TiVO sells a nice package of full details and even will let you know how much of a show is typically watched. The comcast DVR's collect the same information.
can comcast save scifi channel? (Score:2)
can comcast save scifi channel?
If i where ruining it then the WWE will moved to a other channel.
wcg ultimate gamer moved to g4
ghost hunters may there is other network then can move to.
Friday night needs to be back like the old scifi Friday.
also take some shows from the space channel.
Re: (Score:3)
Who's idea do you think it was to DO ALL OF THAT? NBC Universal is trying to devalue the network enough for Comcast to want it, hence the TechTV chop-shop treatment. It's not long for this world, as well as other properties... like USA. Comcast takes over, does away with all the innovative programming to air more soft core porn, explosions, and crap that sorta *kinda* passes for science and fiction. Goodbye Burn Notice, In Plain Sight, White Collar, Eureka, Warehouse 13, Sanctuary. Blood and Chrome wi
Who's Gonna Sing "You Can't Take Alt U From Me" (Score:2)
Good. Sortof. (Score:2)
I like Fringe. I don't love it however.
I think it has a good general premise. Parallel universes in a war, brought together by a genius scientist and his love for his son, fought by secret governmental organizations. Whats not to like.
I think they have good acting, They are generally believable, have decent depth, and are engaging/intriguing.
I don't think however the writing has been the best. There is a difference between believable, amazing, fantastical, and just stupid. They seem to like to flirt somewhe
'dead zone' Friday nights (Score:2)
claiming that Fringe's shift to Fridays was an attempt to draw younger viewers back to the 'dead zone' of Friday nights
Simply asked, are time slots and schedule still a major concern in the realm of DVR's, on-demand, and Internet streaming?
Shows like Fringe, where I haven't seen an episode, heard a lot about it and have interest in seeing it, are programs I wait for to be released mostly on DVD/streaming so I can sit and watch back-to-back episodes in order, from the start.
Wow! Rather taken aback by the Fringe haters (Score:2)
Yes, like most sci-fi & related genre shows, it's first season stunk as they tried to find their footing, but once the second season kicked in and they started actually developing the plot it's been a fairly fun and enjoyable show. I'll be sad to see it go, but Fox, like Uwe Boll, seems to thrive on the failure of its shows rather than their success.
does it really flirt with greatness? (Score:2)
I watched the first half season worth of season one (7 episodes), and not a single one was good, or even not bad. Just terrible, really terrible. Painful to watch even. Did it take a radical turn for the better later on?
Tried to like it but too many flaws in Fringe (Score:2)
The only good part of the show is the John Noble. Everyone else could be replaced by a featureless robot and I probably wouldn't notice. Anna Torv seems to think that emotion is confined to imagining a bad smell directly under one's nose. Joshua Jackson is a complete waste as the tough-guy genius who only purpose seems to be acting as a translator from crazy scientist English to, well, English.
It would have made a half-decent mini-series but it's been going on too damn long. Let it die or kill it quick.
"Confused enough in tone and approach"? (Score:2)
While such an accusation could be levelled at season 1 and much of season 2, season 3 has been quite rigorously, carefully structured IMO.
Re: (Score:2)
Lost (Score:2)
Younger viewers don't watch live (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess I could see older folks still staring mindlessly at live TV while they cut up their Swanson salsbury steak on the tv tray. But these are the people who wouldn't go out on Fridays anyway.
For anyone born after 1980, there's DVR and network tv.
I only watch 3 or 4 shows a week (life is too short for mediocre tv) but if you put a gun to my head, I couldn't tell you what day they air or even what channel. Any effect this "time slot" thing still has is diminishing rapidly.
But... let's assume for the sake of argument that everything they said is true, and moving Fringe to Fridays was an attempt to increase viewership in the young demographic on a day that's traditionally dead in that age group.
Then what? Just for a moment, let's try to think less like geeks. Do the network flunkies really think that Joe Teenager will blow off his chance to get to second base with Jill Cheerleader because Fringe is on? Seriously?
Re: (Score:3)
I think the demographic that might watch Fringe has little chance of getting to any base with Jill Cheerleader
Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (Score:5, Funny)
yeah, fuck all that fictional science-based science fiction!
I want more drama fiction!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (Score:5, Insightful)
At least it's acknowledged as fiction and (hopefully) won't be viewed as informative in the least.
Fuck you Discovery Channel and Auction Kings, Sons of Guns, Flying Wild, American Choppers, Duel Survival, American Loggers, Gold Rush, Swamp Loggers, Deadliest Catch, Man, Woman, Wild, Brew Masters, Storm Chasers, Pitchmen, Surviving the Cut, Swords, Howe & Howe Tech, The Colony, and FUCK YOU ESPECIALLY GHOST LAB.
Re: (Score:2)
Fringe is as science based as the extra lame fake ghost hunter crap on the SciFi channel.
That crap stays on tv, yet shows that make you think get canceled...
I see why they now show Wrestling.. That's the general populaces IQ. Idicroacy is coming true.
Re: (Score:2)
I love watching those ghost shows. It's hysterical to see how they overreact to every sound and then interpret random static into "Get out". You know if they didn't actually put the words on the screen they wanted you to hear in the noise that nobody would ever guess it.
Re:Cringe (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh man. There are a lot of specific episodes I could point to, but, really, the biggest problem was with their "the truth is out there" conspiracy mindset, combined with the fact that the rational/scientific Scully was made out to be a humourless bitch with zero curiosity who also happened to always be wrong.
I always had an aptitude for physics, and now that I'm older I'm wishing I'd gotten into it when I was still a kid, but back then I was under the impression that scientists were a bunch of stuffy drone
Re: (Score:3)
What was said: Fringe is thousands of magnitudes better than American Idol, et. al.
Your response: Raw corn is way better than shit, but you never hear somebody calling their friends to "come over for raw corn."
My response to you: "And yet, corn is actually a popular edible. Shit, not so much."
You seem to be suggesting that somebody was saying "WOW FRINGE R TEH BEST SHOWZ EVAR, NOT HORRIBLE LIKE DAT STOOPID MERICAN EYEDULL." In fact, nobody said that. Mister Whirly essentially said "for all the 'cringe
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The big sales pitch was that this show would expose fringe science to the average person. I watched probably six or seven episodes of the first season and had precisely zero basis in reality. Fictional shows have a right to be fictional, except this was mismarketed.
The X-Files took a fairly simple plot idea (that the government would conspire with aliens for their benefit while possibly selling out the rest of humanity) and used that to tie together a good character drama. What really made the show work was
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think I ever saw it pitched as being an accurate assessment of "fringe science". Certainly they were going on about how it was off-the-mainstream science but I didn't for one second believe that meant anything plausible.
Regarding the characters and plot, give Season 2 a shot. There was a well-publicised and conscious bit of gear-changing at that point to address exactly the Lost-like issues you mention, so it starts cranking out explainations for the existing mysteries (and new drama as a consequenc
There is no good Sci Fi. Is this Alias Again? (Score:2, Interesting)
I know what you mean, but their is no good, hard Sci Fi.
Fringe has good characters (chemistry), acting, directing, production values and writing.
But yes the "science" is eye-rolling pseudo-science nonsense that sort makes it just plain silly after getting so much right.
My other gripe is that JJ Abrams keeps repeating himself, this feels a lot like Alias. With all the body double nonsense and now it looks like they are gather Rimbaldi artifacts...
I still watch it for characters and acting, but I wish we coul
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
(misc characters in a room)
(some overwrought or cheesily-wrought tension)
(House makes demeaning and/or dismissive comment)
(Patient suddenly coughs up something)
(Dalekian medical devices go nuts, shooting paper and light and sound)
(everyone panics)
Commercial break!
only go see that guy at 4:45 PM on a Friday (Score:3)
Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank god we have people like you. If we didn't have so many people who were eager to cancel anything that doesn't meet their personal expectations, people might actually be exposed to a wider range of choices. Top 40 radio might die!
My hat is off to you, sir, for keeping the world safe for mediocrity and sheep-like behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
So just how does it affect you so terribly that you need to see it die? You're pathetic.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
sci-fi where the fictional part is the science is not my cup of tea.
You just disregarded 99% of all science fiction, including stuff from the old greats like Asimov, Heinlein, etc. Any story that has interstellar travel, levitation, teleportation, sentient robots, "the force", are stories where the science part is the fiction.
Jules Verne's From the Earth to the Moon's science was fiction; they shot the people to the moon in a cannon. About the only science fiction movie I ever saw that was true to science w
Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a big difference between speculative science that is based on the information at the time and pseudo-science that goes against the information of its time.
Re: (Score:2)
And Star Wars is arguably more Fantasy than Science Fiction. The force is just another way of saying magic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I think you are confusing Science Fiction with Fantasy. Two similar but ultimately different genres. Fringe is Fantasy - pure and simple. There is nothing "science" about it.
It had me at "will die"... (Score:3)
For a moment there I thought "Why, that is very nice of Jar-Jar...".
Then the text post-processing kicked in.
Ah well... at least it WILL die.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't read Slashdot much, do you?
That's the prevailing attitude here.
For a visual representation of it, think "Comic Book Guy" from "The Simpsons". Statements may be accurate but the superiority complex is a deal killer when trying to take those accurate statements seriously.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What are you talking about? Fringe is a situation comedy about fringe science. I love it, it's hilarious.
Especially that wacky professor and his psycho alter ego.
The only better geek comedy is Eureka.
Wait; are you saying they're trying to be SERIOUS?
Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a difference between the science being fictional and the technology being fictional. I'm rereading some Alastair Reynolds novels at the moment and, like Arthur C Clarke, he very rarely introduces anything that can't be understood with current (nonfictional) science. Many of the things he describes are not currently feasible, but most of them are not thought to be impossible.
In contrast, Fringe provides us with technology that is based on science which is so different from current scientific tho
Re: (Score:2)
There are some that think the original's much better. Quite honestly, I've not seen much in the way of TV SciFi that was worth my time. But then, that's MY personal take on things- your mileage will most definitely vary.
Re:It's Fox (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep, the failure of "Arrested Development" was directly attributed to the fan base never knowing when it would be on.
"Family Guy" was, however, just flat out canceled because FOX had no idea that's massive fan base was not represented by Nielsen ratings. Hence the letter writing campaign that got it put back on the air and prompted the syndication of the show on 4 separate networks.
I wonder when FOX will figure out that you can't put everything in a nice little box and have it accurately explain the population overall.
Re:It's Fox (Score:4, Interesting)
Nielsen has been irrelevant for nearly a decade. Cable TV companies get better data from their cable boxes, I could tell you from reading the database that at 11:15 pm last night the number of subscribers and boxes that were turned to a channel at that time, cross reference with the billing database and we can get age demographics as well as race demographics (Yes that data is in the customer database, Comcast mines you) to the point that I was able to give sales people targeted data to report to customers buying advertising.
My project only covered a single state and was a technology demonstration but was simple to do and was only SQL queries. Getting numbers from real viewers instead of a select few is far more accurate. In fact I used to correct the Nielsen data we paid heavily for with my numbers to better reflect the state.
Re: (Score:3)
They have to kill off good shows by moving them around as opposed to trying to build an audience. Remember "Arrested Development?"
The canonical example of this would have to be "Firefly". Cancelled and then became the #1 best selling DVD set on Amazon.