Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

J.J. Abrams Promises 'Fringe' Will Die Fighting

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the walternate-for-president dept.

Sci-Fi 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.

cancel ×

392 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (1, Insightful)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 3 years ago | (#34953894)

I don't really care as long as it dies. Not to put to fine a point on it, but sci-fi where the fictional part is the science is not my cup of tea.

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954020)

I second that emotion.

Most science fiction requires some sort of suspension of disbelief. This one requires it for the entire freaking show.

I'm just not cut out to put up with that for very long.

Here's wishing Fringe a short, relatively noiseless death.

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (1)

zoomshorts (137587) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954022)

Agreed!

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (5, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954024)

yeah, fuck all that fictional science-based science fiction!

I want more drama fiction!

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (3, Insightful)

liquiddark (719647) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954220)

Fringe isn't science based. Fringe is pseudoscientific bullshit based, with a light sprinkling of scientific words to try to fool...someone.

Cringe (1, Insightful)

danlip (737336) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954258)

I nicknamed this show Cringe because of how I reacted every time I watched an episode. 'Nuff said.

Re:Cringe (4, Insightful)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955174)

Which still makes it thousands of magnitudes better than American Idol, America's Got Talent, Dancing with the Stars, etc.

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (4, Insightful)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954548)

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:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955138)

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:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (0)

bhcompy (1877290) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954044)

I don't care so much about the science, but I fail to understand why they needed to bring back X-Files in the first place

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954384)

They do need to bring back X-Files. And I mean real X-Files, Mulder and Scully, and pretend that the last 3 seasons never happened. What they don't need to do is make a cheap, shitty knock off of X-Files with shitty characters, terrible writing, nonsensical plots and the douchebag from Dawsons Creek.

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (3, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954062)

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 chemistry between the characters.

In Fringe, I never connected with the characters. I couldn't care one bit about them, or their interactions. And since Lost, shows try too hard to have this mega-supernatural mystery plot. Abrams already showed with Alias that he doesn't understand the basics of good storytelling. He twists for the sake of twisting without ever keeping sight of a consistent and meaningful story arch.

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (2)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955088)

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 consequence of those revelations) while spending a great deal of time trying to develop the characters.

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954206)

that's a pretty selfish attitude...you don't enjoy it so no one else should get to watch it?

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (1)

Ynsats (922697) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954364)

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.

There is no good Sci Fi. Is this Alias Again? (1, Interesting)

guidryp (702488) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954340)

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 could have had less pseudo science nonsense and less Alias rehash.

Re:There is no good Sci Fi. Is this Alias Again? (2)

mehemiah (971799) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954940)

I keep forgetting that he did alias. dam he's good. I just couldn't watch LOST past the fist episode, nor did I have any inclination to attempt to watch it ever.

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (4, Insightful)

GrumpySteen (1250194) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954412)

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:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954898)

How is a rehashed version of X-files a wider range of choices? Is the same old show with new special effects, terrible writing, and mediocre acting. And it's yet another procedural. The genius of Walter and Peter is so poorly written that they both come of looking below average. At least House (still strong) and Bones (for awhile -- not lately) were well written characters one could believe were extremely intelligent. Bones as a series is in a quality free fall, but fringe was born with one foot in the grave.

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954570)

Moar documentaries!

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (1)

m509272 (1286764) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954832)

So just how does it affect you so terribly that you need to see it die? You're pathetic.

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (3, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954924)

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 was 2001, and it even had a sentient computer (although HAL's sentience could have easily been pseudosentience).

Re:Die fighting, die trying, die hard... (1)

Mikey48 (1798918) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955048)

All sci-fi that I've read/seen is fiction in the science part too. What have you seen that isn't?

Perhaps you mean plausible? Was Star Trek plausible? Star Wars? At this point inter-stellar travel is science fiction, but it may be plausible to think we'll get there.

So what were you thinking?

As a geek, I don't get it (3, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34953898)

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 (5, Insightful)

Skythe (921438) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954042)

Watch Season 2 onward. I too took the same precedent as you, but the story developers late season 1, is strengthened season 2; and by the end of season 2/start of season 3 it's enthralling. Without spoiling too much, the "bad" guys/race are the fringe team in a specific alternate dimension, and they have a rich interlinked past which is explored in the show. Might sound a little cheezy from how I put it, but it's executed brilliantly.

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954536)

Developers, developers, developers...

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (1)

mehemiah (971799) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954990)

sounds like an anime plot arch. everything up to ep13 is setting, then the shit hits the fan ... and gets real. (that is, if its a good anime)

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (4, Insightful)

lightknight (213164) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954094)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954740)

Sorry, but if you can't make your show interesting by the middle of season 1, then fuck you. Fringe had a chance, and blew it. Besides, Abrams has never demonstrated any ability to actually resolve a series. Lost proven conclusively that the emperor has no clothes.

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (3, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954096)

It's a long way from hard science fiction, but it's entertaining, has a decent story arc (something missing from a lot of episodic TV), and entertaining - if somewhat stereotyped - characters.

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954978)

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:As a geek, I don't get it (1)

dpayton (588658) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954158)

You needed to watch the series to understand the series. Indeed, much of the beginning of the first season was in "incident of the week" format, but it set up the character development and introduced many of the concepts (the Observer, for instance) for use later. In fact, the first incident turned out to be a foreshadowing of something we see with regularity in the alternate universe.

Never judge a J. J. Abrams project by a couple shows of the first season. This guy knows how to build a story. If you do jump to conclusions this easily, you might have thought "Lost" was just going to be a 21st century Swiss Family Robinson. That "Babylon 5" was just Star Trek at the United Nations. That "Caprica" was going to be one jumbled mismash of disjointed story lines.

OK, that last one may have been right, actually.

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954386)

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 Babylon 5 and didn't care for them, but was impressed with one of the follow-up TV movies they did.

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (1)

dpayton (588658) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954828)

I had no illusions of Galactica 2.0, rest assured. I really wanted to like Caprica.

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (2)

guybrush3pwood (1579937) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954166)

I guess you didn't like the finale of Lost either, did you? Some shows are worth just because of their entertainment value. Fringe is the best one in that regard. It's not Lost. It's not The X-Files (which, let me remind you, for a lot of seasons was "incident of the week" only). But it's not Eureka of Warehouse 13, either; those are plain silly shows. Fringe tries to be a little more serious, even if the science is ridiculous. So, instead of watching Big Brother or re-runs of Friends, you watch Fringe. Now, if you have nothing better to do on Fridays' nights than to watch Fringe (or any other show, for that matter)... then you have a more important issue in your life.

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (1)

Damek (515688) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954388)

Huh, looks like your guy Darin Morgan (yes, excellent X-Files episodes) is a consulting producer for Fringe. Go figure.

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954462)

Maybe they should consult him more often.

Re:As a geek, I don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954726)

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?

It's not American So You Think You Can Live to Dance Like a Millionaire??!

It's Fox (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34953900)

They have to kill off good shows by moving them around as opposed to trying to build an audience. Remember "Arrested Development?"

Re:It's Fox (4, Insightful)

Ynsats (922697) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954454)

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.

lol (1)

jimmerz28 (1928616) | more than 3 years ago | (#34953914)

I think he meant SyFy on that first one*

SciFi ? seriously ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34953932)

fringe is just a rehash of xfiles. By the way it's fantastic, not SciFi.

SGU bad? (4, Interesting)

feepness (543479) | more than 3 years ago | (#34953958)

SGU, like any show, took some time to find its footing, but it had certainly started to pick up the pace.

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? (5, Insightful)

BlackErtai (788592) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954146)

I'm with you 100%. I don't understand why everybody hated SGU so much, as I found the show completely engrossing and interesting. It took longer to bond with the characters, but that's because McGuyver wasn't wisecracking on the firing line in this one. I, for one, already miss the show, and we're still supposed to get the 2nd half of season 2. All those people that enjoyed SG-1 Redux, aka Atlantis, just wanted another copy of the original. I was thrilled they did something totally different with the property.

Re:SGU bad? (1)

guybrush3pwood (1579937) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954214)

Great sci-fi does not exist in television. Ever. I challenge you all to name one great sci-fi TV series comparable to an Asimov story.

Re:SGU bad? (2)

Astatine (179864) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954344)

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 Babylon 5 at its best, for example...

Re:SGU bad? (1)

grumbel (592662) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954956)

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:SGU bad? (3, Insightful)

lightknight (213164) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954322)

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:SGU bad? (1)

Stele (9443) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954920)

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:SGU bad? (3, Interesting)

Frangible (881728) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954974)

Indeed. SGU was very much the "200" allusion, and it didn't please many fans when SGA, which had higher ratings than SGU and cost less to make, was canceled in favor of it. Brad Wright & co are simply not Ron Moore, and do best writing SG1/SGA style scripts.

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.

SGU was Emo-BSG,Big Brother in space. (1, Troll)

guidryp (702488) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954718)

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, the chubby nerd genius, the teen queen who cried through every episode ....

No show can survive unlikeable protagonists. And this show made every character unlikeable and had them in regular shouting matches/fist fights with each other.

I did a happy dance when the canceled this drek.

SGU good! (1)

Kuukai (865890) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955108)

Who's even saying it's bad, besides Syfy? I was amazed at how big an international following Stargate Universe already has, with the first season having aired across Europe. And it pulled in a lot of my friends who didn't like SGA. I think the main reason it died was just that it was a lot more expensive than the greenscreen and four actors it takes to make Sanctuary (I really tried to like that show, it has Nikola Tesla as an electric vampire, but I just couldn't get into it, which is a common theme in its reviews), even if the ratings were a lot better for SGU...

One of the Best on TV (3, Insightful)

derrickh (157646) | more than 3 years ago | (#34953984)

This is easily my favorite show. It's smart, fun, and Olivia Dunham is one of the best leading characters ever.

D

I miss stargate atlantis (0)

youn (1516637) | more than 3 years ago | (#34953994)

now that was a great show

Whatcha gonna do... (5, Funny)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954002)

...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:Whatcha gonna do... (1)

Crudely_Indecent (739699) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954590)

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 (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954006)

or even new TV series. Srsly.

Re:Abrams should go work on a Star Trek sequel (1)

guybrush3pwood (1579937) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954232)

So, you think Star Trek is good sci-fi?

Want to see it profitable? Don't delay the DVDs! (5, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954066)

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 (2)

SashaM (520334) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954068)

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:Not watching J. J. Abrams (0)

zegota (1105649) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954170)

Lost: interesting and entertaining

B5: Boring as fuck.

Anyway, JJ Abrams had very little to do with LOST. He helped create the basic premise, and then left.

Re:Not watching J. J. Abrams (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954256)

Lost: bunch of handwaving and endless promise of the critical reveal.
B5: actual substance, actual resolution.

Re:Not watching J. J. Abrams (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954302)

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 (3, Interesting)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955176)

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:Not watching J. J. Abrams (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954282)

"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:Not watching J. J. Abrams (1)

grumbel (592662) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954296)

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] .

Good show (2)

89cents (589228) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954090)

Fringe is one of my favorites, like a modern day X-files and the only show that my wife will watch on TV. I was really surprised to learn that it may be canceled, especially after it just got the 2011 People's Choice Award for best Sci-fi/Fantasy show. I guess it isn't dumb downed enough like all the other shows that people want to watch which good good ratings. I am ashamed.

Great SciFi need not be hard Science (2)

zrelativity (963547) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954124)

I would certainly be disappointed to see Fringe go... I think it still has some life left in it. I feel empathy towards the chacters, and if you don't then the show is not worth watching. I have the DVD collection from the previous seasons and its definitely worth watching.

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 start to challenge less and less of their audience, meander about, and soon loose their core audience. I would so much like to see shows which are just a single 22 episode season long show, where they have thought the whole story through, its closed. But that would never fly with the studios.

**Z

Spock? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954138)

After all, Leonard Nimoy had already announced retiring from acting. And without 'Spock', there's really not enough Fringe elements to continue. However, the same cannot be said about his photography career, which is still ongoing.

Who watches live TV? (5, Insightful)

JohnnyDoesLinux (19195) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954152)

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:Who watches live TV? (2)

krotkruton (967718) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954706)

I agree. So Fringe is moving to Friday? I don't know what day of the week it aired on anyway. I don't know the date and time of almost all of my series recordings, so time slot really isn't an issue to me.

V bad scifi? (1)

zzottt (629458) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954178)

WHA??? I think V is some of the best scifi to hit the streets in the last few years....

Re:V bad scifi? (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954328)

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.

TiVO/DVR Anyone ? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954194)

Does it really matter when shows air anymore....we all record them and watch them when we want to, and perhaps skip the odd commercial (stopping for good movie/show trailers).

Fringe Rocks ! I just see that they are beginning to close out the story looking at the trailers (next episode tonight !).

Unsurprising use of the phrase "Die Fighting" (1)

Linux_ho (205887) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954202)

Cheesy drama is pretty much what we've come to expect from you, JJ.

Re:Unsurprising use of the phrase "Die Fighting" (1)

Seng (697556) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955060)

Thanks for the opinion... You may now go back to viewing American Idol and Jersey Shore.

Friday night helped kill Star Trek (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954278)

No VCRs in those days too. It was easy to know where I was on Friday!

Gotta make room for American Idol, don'tcha know? (3, Insightful)

Ynsats (922697) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954288)

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:Gotta make room for American Idol, don'tcha kno (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954946)

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.

It's funny, Bones is built on its character interactions, and presents actual science in time-compressed, overly-convenient (CSI'd), but still somewhat plausible manner. Fringe, which you're championing so hard, is about as science-based as a Ouija board and is basically the bad part of X-Files.

Re:Gotta make room for American Idol, don'tcha kno (1)

discord5 (798235) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955124)

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.

Friday nights are lonely (1)

overshoot (39700) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954290)

Being scheduled on Friday night is the kiss of death to a science-fiction show.

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.

Re:Friday nights are lonely (1)

Satan Dumpling (656239) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955120)

Enterprise was really getting good when it was cancelled. I think what killed it wasn't just Friday, but putting it on at the exact same time as STARGATE. What were they thinking?

Does timeslot really matter that much any more? (4, Insightful)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954308)

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:Does timeslot really matter that much any more? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34954822)

For sci-fi shows in particular, I think you also have to consider the DVD demographic. There are a lot of geeks that love sci-fi but who don't even have cable TV service anymore. If you base the survival of a show only on the ratings and ignore DVD sales the next year, a lot more sci-fi shows are going to be cancelled than other genres.

can comcast save scifi channel? (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954312)

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.

Who's Gonna Sing "You Can't Take Alt U From Me" (1)

cybrpnk2 (579066) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954346)

Friday is where Fox sends top-notch SF like Firefly to die (sniff). Fringe is toast.

This is good TV (1)

mariox19 (632969) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954354)

The sci-fi aspect of Fringe is at times ludicrous, but it's always very entertaining. The cast and storyline, however, make for compelling television. The three main characters, Olivia, Peter, and Walter, played by John Noble, [wikipedia.org] make up a terrific cast. They have great rapport with one another.

As to the show's over-arching plot or mythology, it is far stronger than the X-Files'; moreover, the plot is advanced far more regularly than the X-File's ever was. About every other show is a "monster of the week." The alternating shows move the overall storyline forward.

The show got its footing halfway through the first season, and has been consistent ever since. (Any show has a mediocre episode now and then.)

How a show like Star Trek: Voyager or Sliders (for cryin' out loud!) could go on for years while a show like Fringe hangs by its fingernails is beyond me.

Good. Sortof. (1)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954446)

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 somewhere between fantastical and just stupid. Many episodes I would categorizes as just "silly". Now silly every now and again is OK, I think it is good not to take yourself too seriously, and to poke fun every now and again at what you do. Fans generally like this I think, I know I do. Stargate was good at this. However when you look silly but are trying to be serious, it doesn't come off very well. I have found that the writing also stretches the boundary of what I would call normal human behavior which make it difficult to believe and also to relate. When I am thinking about the actions of a character and the thoughts "that doesn't make any sense", or "why would they do that", or "that's not really all that consistant" or "no one would do that", it tells me that either they are not paying enough attention to the roles or the story, or they don't care.

Anyway as I said I do like the show, and I do watch it, however it isn't one of those shows that I MUST see each week, and I am waiting for the next episode. If its on and I am flicking around I'll watch it, and every now and again I will play catch up on the internet but that's about it.

'dead zone' Friday nights (1)

Fozzyuw (950608) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954484)

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.

Re:'dead zone' Friday nights (1)

Seng (697556) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954816)

It does, as long as you have asshat companies like "The Nielsen Company" that relies an antiquated methods of tracking viewership. Internet streaming, DVR/VCR viewers are completely omitted from the stats.

Wow! Rather taken aback by the Fringe haters (1)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954614)

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.

Changed dates? My DVR hardly notices... (1)

zarmanto (884704) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954628)

Who cares what day any particular show is on, anymore? I DVR all of the shows I watch, and I have three DVR tuners split between two computers... so it matters not in the least to me if it's on Friday at 8PM and conflicts with two other good shows or if it's on Saturday at 1AM and only conflicts with a late night LAN party.

I mean, who actually watches live TV anymore, anyway?

And look what they put in its Thursday slot. (1)

Seng (697556) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954780)

"The Cape"? What a piece of shit show...

does it really flirt with greatness? (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954850)

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 (1)

haruchai (17472) | more than 3 years ago | (#34954958)

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"? (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955002)

While such an accusation could be levelled at season 1 and much of season 2, season 3 has been quite rigorously, carefully structured IMO.

My DVR (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34955004)

Yes, my DVR will somehow magically care that the show moved to Friday and stop recording it.

The should could air at 2am and I'll still be able to watch it.

Mediocre.... really.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34955076)

Sorry but SGU and Caprica were 80X better than 90% of the crap on NBC,ABC, and CBS. Yes it's mediocre to to the purist snobs but a lot of people liked it. Granted SGU's last few episodes sucked big time. Stop the damned music video crap for the last 10 minutes of the show. WTF is that?

Skiffy is dying because everyone wants gay vampires that glitter and other stupid crap that is NOT scifi but horror/ fantasy.

Get rid of the homosexual vampires and I think Skiffy can rebound.

Please do not tweet about this (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 3 years ago | (#34955194)

It will threaten the show like Red Dwarf [slashdot.org]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?