Fringe on Fox

[Menotti80]

Did anyone catch this premere last night?

 

I have been looking forward to it for a while now. It defiantely kept my interest, and I will keep watching, but there were a good number of flaws in the pilot episode...

 

What did you think>?

[pitchleague]

keep spoilers to a minimum, please. It's sitting on my tivo until I get a chance to watch it. But, yes, I've heard great things and am looking forward to seeing it.

 

In general, with television shows, I think all users need to keep spoilers to themselves for the most part. Put it in the title, use different colored fonts, whatever, so others who may peruse it for discussion do not get word of spoilers if they don't want to see it.

 

There are times that I like to read about a television show in a thread but somebody blows it without posting any warning. It's very troublesome for some people--like me--to see that. Is it the end of the world? Well, no, it's a tv show. But it would be appreciated.

[bjkrautk]

It's sitting on my tivo until I get a chance to watch it.

I think that last night's marathon-length game had that effect on most of the Brewers fans (or just me too).

[MarquesJohnson2000]

I liked it.. I'll keep watching. I usually get hooked on the shows that get cancelled long before resolution, however... be warned!

[bthurley19]

10 million dollar budget, big name director, I think the show will get every chance to succeed. Very cool concept for a show, kind of a big jumble of everything from Heroes to House to X-Files to CSI. Seems like it is going to be a great show, I for one will be watching.

[bjkrautk]

As someone who got into Alias during the first season, and started watching Lost from the Pilot....I feel like I've been here before.

 

The biggest difference between this trip through the story and the past few times, is that there's no role for Greg Grunberg this time. I mean that only slightly facetiously; while the actor is busy (he plays Matt Parkman on Heroes, but has otherwise found his way into the vast majority of Abrams' work - not unlike Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi), the likeable, relatable character he typically plays isn't anywhere to be found. Instead, we have a fractured House, Pacey Witter with a science degree, and the protagonist.

 

Plus, I just couldn't buy the parkour-esque chase sequence...and I saw the swerve coming.

 

 

I'll try to give it a few more episodes, but the characters seemed too cookie cutter, and the plot a bit too scattershot to draw me in.

[JoeHova]

I've heard bad things about it, but I'll give it a shot after I save up a couple episodes on the tivo. It seems interesting and I really like Lance Reddick (the guy from Oz and The Wire), but I don't know how much he'll be in it.

 

As for spoilers, why click on a thread about some show/movie if you don't want to know anything about it? I can see being disappointed if there is a thread filled with spoilers before the show/movie comes out, but after it's out, why not wait until you've seen it to click on the thread if you care about spoilers? I've never understood that. Plus, it's not like spoilers are a big deal if the movie/show is well done. Everybody knows that Rosebud was Charles Foster Kane's sled but that doesn't ruin the movie for anybody. If a show/film depends so heavily on a plot twist or gimmick that it's ruined if you know the twist, it's probably not anything special to begin with (with the possible exception of The Crying Game).

[YostInfection]

As someone who got into Alias during the first season, and started watching Lost from the Pilot....I feel like I've been here before.

 

The biggest difference between this trip through the story and the past few times, is that there's no role for Greg Grunberg this time. I mean that only slightly facetiously; while the actor is busy (he plays Matt Parkman on Heroes, but has otherwise found his way into the vast majority of Abrams' work - not unlike Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi), the likeable, relatable character he typically plays isn't anywhere to be found. Instead, we have a fractured House, Pacey Witter with a science degree, and the protagonist.

 

Plus, I just couldn't buy the parkour-esque chase sequence...and I saw the swerve coming.

 

 

I'll try to give it a few more episodes, but the characters seemed too cookie cutter, and the plot a bit too scattershot to draw me in.

Boy, this is about as dead-on as you can get, IMO. I too have been an Alias and Lost watcher and feel like this show has no chance for character development, but Abrams has proved me wrong before. I hope this is one of those instances as well.

 

Really, I'm just looking for a show to supplement my daily intake of Go Diego Go, Word Girl and Super Why... http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[And That]

I just watched Fringe and enjoyed it a lot, even though I had a few quibbles. Joshua Jackson's character seems a bit too forced in a look at me I'm funny sort of way, I got the X-Files vibe straight away (I disliked that show) and this seems like it will be more episodic-oriented than shows I generally like (shows that have few, if any, standalone plot episodes). The show also had some carbon-copy elements of Lost, down to some of the fonts, the credits and the musical queues (which makes sense, as the music was done by the same guy). If it bears any similarities to Alias, I'm in the dark as I haven't seen that show at all.

 

But all that said, I think the show has a lot of promise. If the budget of the pilot has any bearing on the rest of the series, we're at least going to be in for a visual treat. There are any number of ways the plot can go from here, and any guesses about character development or lack thereof at this point is purely conjecture - there's too much of a small sample. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[bjkrautk]

Watched ep. 2 after the Brewer's game. More of the same....except worse.

 

For a show that's trying to stick to the procedural framework, they're playing rather fast and loose with the procedure. The crackpot theory that pushes along the plot this week is entirely inconsistent with the plot as it's presented.

The theory was that the last thing a person sees would be captured on their retinas. Except we saw the victim strapped in for surgery with her eyes open. The bridge wasn't what she would have seen last. They completely gloss over that to advance the plot. And as long as I'm typing spoilers, maybe you should start researching Dr. Bishop's research assistants and colleagues....but that would be putting the cart before the procedural horse, so I don't expect it to happen. Of course, that would also throw off the shocking discovery that all of the cases our FBI friend and her 'partner' were investigating also tied in to this pattern, which is why she was picked for the job.

 

I think that the female lead is supposed to be written as non-emoting and introspective....or at least I hope so, because the actress (Anna Torv) is coming off as very non-descript. Of course, that could just be in contrast to sarcastic skeptic (Scully?) and the expert who keeps proving the skeptic wrong (Mulder?).

 

I still feel like I'm being too harsh with respect to the show, but "I Want To Believe" it's going to get better.

[Chio151]

I think some of the acting is great and the themes are sound, but the junk science throws me off. The whole aging thing was absurd. It totally ignored the fact that a being simply cannot grow in a traditional sense in a short amount of time like that. If anything, it would get massive tumors over a course of months, not seconds. It just was too much.

 

That said, the actor playing the scientist Bishop deserves an award or something. Just a great great character.

 

"What a wonderful feature, have you seen this, it warms your ass."

[RayKingsForemanGrill]

Yeah... Dr. Bishop is great... and i'll admit I chuckled at the constant references to the "manbaby"...

[jwill535]

***Spoiler alert for those who have seen episode 2***

 

 

A couple quick reality question/observation. Is there a person in here that believes that guy would be able to pull the women that he was shown with. He was awkward and shy and yet he was pulling strippers and bar skanks with little effort. Whats up with the gun that she gives to younger Bishop(sorry his name escapes me), he takes 2-3 shots and its out of bullets? When he puts the electrodes on her chest to bring her back, wouldnt that have burnt her really bad. All that electricity going through those washers(?) would make them awfully hot. In regards to the satellite photos, are they just randomly taking pictures of areas around Mass? How would they have pictures from different points in the day of that area. I realize that there probably are pics taking of the Boston area or any major city through out every day, but to be able to pull up a specific area in good detail like that seem highly unlikely. As for the image in her eye, even if you want to believe the idea that the muscle relaxer stopped the flow of images through her optic nerve, the bridge would have been long gone, replaced at worst by his face before he injects her or at best his face just before he cuts her.

 

At the end when Bishop was talking to Dunham about his son, I was half listening, were they trying to imply that Bishop genectically altered his son in order to produce the perfect child?

[Chio151]

" Is there a person in here that believes that guy would be able to pull the women that he was shown with. He was awkward and shy and yet he was pulling strippers and bar skanks with little effort."

 

I'm reasonably certain that they were paid escorts. The first one asked if he wanted to know her real name.

[And That]

"Her heart stopped."

"Do you have any cocaine?"

"Cocaine? No, I don't have any cocaine."

"That's too bad... you'll have to shock her heart."

 

Whats up with the gun that she gives to younger Bishop(sorry his name escapes me), he takes 2-3 shots and its out of bullets?

Peter didn't run out of bullets, Penrose ran around the corner. Peter had to stay with the girl to resuscitate her.

[jwill535]

Whats up with the gun that she gives to younger Bishop(sorry his name escapes me), he takes 2-3 shots and its out of bullets?

Peter didn't run out of bullets, Penrose ran around the corner. Peter had to stay with the girl to resuscitate her.

If you watch the scene you see the slide lock meaning that there are no more bullets in the magazine after only 2-3 shots. I know next to nothing about guns but I do know when the slide locks like that you are out of bullets.

[homer]

I was half watching last night and it didn't really impress me. Seemed like X files but without the suspense......or it could be that I can't stand Josh Jackson.

[sgtcluels]

I think it's got great potential. It needs to go a little bit, like homer said, more xfile suspense. But I love the concept.

 

Plus they appear to like to get what's her faces shirt off often. I'm pro-shirt off.

[fstorm1]

My nice lady friend and I have watched both episodes...and we still can't decide if we like it. I'm already disliking the whole "I can do this weird, unbelievable thing that will work and solve the case", "No, that's weird and unbelievable, won't work, we'll never solve the case"..."See, it worked". Both episodes followed that same formula.

 

We'll proally give it another go, however.

[And That]

I'm already disliking the whole "I can do this weird, unbelievable thing that will work and solve the case", "No, that's weird and unbelievable, won't work, we'll never solve the case"..."See, it worked". Both episodes followed that same formula.

Yah, that's why I dislike episodic TV shows. With a limited number of protagonists each week, usually one deus ex machina emerges, though that Dr. Bishop is one awesome deus!

[RobertR]

Don't like that we're already two episodes in and they're basically ripping off plot ideas from THE NIGHT STRANGLER. I'd buy their pseudo-science better too if they'd pay attention to basic science, like conservation of mass for instance. I'd probably like it a lot better if the mad scientist was the lead instead of the bland, uninteresting FBI agent. It's not necessarily bad, but it's far too bland at this point for me to go out of my way to watch.

 

Robert

[pitchleague]

Everybody knows that Rosebud was Charles Foster Kane's sled but that doesn't ruin the movie for anybody.

I will be completely honest here: I did not know about this when I finally watched Citizen Kane last summer. Totally made the movie much better having not known about it. When the movie was over, I said to my wife (something along the lines of), "oh, that was an interesting twist. Very good idea by the writers. I never saw that coming." She replied to me, "You've got to be kidding." I never knew about it.

 

As for the pilot of "Fringe," I finally watched it this afternoon. It was good. It felt like I was watching a suspense movie (since it was 90 minutes long). I'll probably check out the other episodes.

 

Oh, and for the record, I didn't read anything else in this thread until right now. So, I did do the "rules" of a thread about a tv show/movie (i.e. don't click on it). Heck, when a show's episode ends and they do "next week on (name of show), I usually plug my ears, close my eyes and start singing nonsense-word songs. Sometimes, I'll put my head under a blanket. I, personally, do not want to know what happens next--even if said preview doesn't really give much away. If that makes me weird, so be it. It's what make me "me."

 

Funny thing, movie trailers don't bother me. But that's pretty much because I hardly see movies in a theater, and by the time I actually see the movies that I see on trailers, it has been a lonnnnnnnng time since I saw the trailer and I've forgotten it by then. Except for the fact that I knew that I had wanted to see it.

 

I just hate spoilers.

 

EDIT: I just finished episode two, and I'll agree that there are holes in the story and the science. But, then again, I remind myself that it's a TV show that fantasy-based on "Fringe" science, which may or may not exist in the real world. Don't know if the show will last or not but I'll keep watching. And, yes, I, too, am enjoying Dr. Bishop--great character!

 

All the good shows end up canceled anyway (canceling "Journeyman" from last year still ticks me off!) so I am always very leery of watching a show from the beginning and end up wasting my time when it gets canceled.

[bjkrautk]

No posts from last week...anyone else still watching?

My general feeling still hasn't changed; I wish that I liked (or could feel anything for/against) the characters on the show.

 

Last night's was the least procedural, and started to introduce even more of an X-Files-y dynamic to the show.

[Godspeed]

I saw the pilot and was mildly intrigued. I then watched the 2nd episode and was turned off by the formulaic plot. I missed last weeks episode, but because I have nothing better to do on a Tuesday night I tuned in for episode #4. I actually liked the last one the best.

 

It is what it is. A semi-interesting show that occasionally piques my curiosity. If I'm in front of the TV, I'll probably watch it, but I'm not going to plan my night around it.

[Menotti80]

i enjoyed last night's episode. they are introducing way more questions than answers, and i dont know how i feel about that yet.

 

i still will be watching though...