posted
On last night's episode of Fringe, Agent Olivia Dunham finally came face-to-face with the ellusive William Bell, who turns out to be played by a grinning Leonard Nimoy. We were told beforehand that Bell was in an alternate world, and Dunham seems to have gone through some interface between worlds in the elevator to get to where Bell was. As the camera zoomed out, we see that where they met was in one of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, which in this alternate world have not fallen.
It is also fun to watch the character Walter, who is played by John Noble, previously known as Denethor, the Steward of Gondor.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, after reading this I was really glad that I don't watch the show and therefore don't care about the plot or episodes that I haven't seen. Otherwise I might have had to let loose with a few scathing comments about the missing spoiler warning.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Spoiler warning! For crying out loud - even the title is a spoiler. This show airs here on a channel I don't get, so I was waiting to pick up the DVD.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
how would knowing hes in the show would spoil something?
IP: Logged |
posted
I have a pretty funny review of the first season of Fringe up over at GeekaChicas if anyone is interested. It certainly doesn't gloss over the show's considerable flaws.
I'm hoping there will be more Nimoy next season.
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
How does the information I gave spoil anything? The fact that Leonard Nimoy is in the episode gives away nothing. The fact that Agent Dunham suddenly found herself in the alternate world is merely an interesting plot twist, not a resolution of anything. I said nothing about the bad guys or what happens to them. (SPOILER: The chief bad guy--at least in this episode--got cut in half. Lengthwise.) Remind me never to ask you cry babies to write fly leaf copy. You are supposed to tantalize the prospective reader, entice him or her into reading the book. Not keep from them anything interesting.
What is interesting is that the program is definitely turning out to be actual science fiction/fantasy.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Farmgirl: I sat through 55 stinkin' minutes of that stupid show in order to catch a 5 second glimpse of Nimoy at the very end.
Wasn't quite worth it.
But think about it... you're gonna get to see a lot more of him next season!
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: How does the information I gave spoil anything?
Why don't you look at your post after the words "As the camera zoomed out..." and get back to me?
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
That was the only episode of Fringe I ever watched -- simply because of the preview saying Nimoy was going to be on it.
I found the dialogue to be very lame (poor writing) and the characters to be.. lacking. So doubt I will watch it again next season even with Nimoy on it.
Maybe it's just one of those shows that has to grow on you. I was expecting the characters to be as good as X-Files, and they just weren't.
Posts: 9538 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Farmgirl: Maybe it's just one of those shows that has to grow on you.
Like fungus, maybe. I've never had a TV, so moving in with my boyfriend, who watches a ton of it, has been a learning experience. I've pretty much divided his shows into "worth watching with him," "okay background noise while I'm hanging around the room doing something else," and "should only be watched while I'm at the other end of the apartment, or, preferably, not home at all." Fringe is solidly in the third category.
The last episode I caught pieces of involved a young child who looked like a scrawny BTVS vampire. I kept rooting for him to start ripping people's throats out, but, sadly, he was more interested in saving lives. What's the fun in that?
Posts: 650 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: How does the information I gave spoil anything? The fact that Leonard Nimoy is in the episode gives away nothing. The fact that Agent Dunham suddenly found herself in the alternate world is merely an interesting plot twist, not a resolution of anything. I said nothing about the bad guys or what happens to them. (SPOILER: The chief bad guy--at least in this episode--got cut in half. Lengthwise.) Remind me never to ask you cry babies to write fly leaf copy. You are supposed to tantalize the prospective reader, entice him or her into reading the book. Not keep from them anything interesting.
What is interesting is that the program is definitely turning out to be actual science fiction/fantasy.
You basically told the end of the show. Maybe not the dialog but (at least in part) what happened. That is a spoiler. Particularly about the WTC. You'll notice that Bella Bee was upset b/c she doesn't get the station it airs on and has been patiently waiting for the DVD. Anyway, this isn't a book cover for a book that you're being paid to promote (although I've never seen one that tells what happened at the end of the book and I'd be pretty upset if I did and it was a book I'd been planning on reading). I also don't think that call people cry babies is a particularly good way of arguing your side of the case. It's not really a compelling argument.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fringe is definitely a show that grows on you. I was only half interested in it when it started and it has way to many "Shut up with the exposition, you're messing with my suspension of disbelief!" moments.
But it's sort of the reverse of other JJ Abrams shows... Usually his shows start interesting and then take a turn for the weird. A show about plane crash survivors on an island is interesting without adding The Others and the Dharma Initiative, for example...
But Fringe was just a run of the mill procedural with a bad-science twist until it took a turn for the weird and it's made the show much more interesting.
'sides, Peter is hot and Walter is funny. If they'd gotten an attractive female lead, it would have been worth watching just for that.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: How does the information I gave spoil anything
quote:On last night's episode of Fringe, Agent Olivia Dunham finally came face-to-face with the ellusive William Bell, who turns out to be played by a grinning Leonard Nimoy. We were told beforehand that Bell was in an alternate world, and Dunham seems to have gone through some interface between worlds in the elevator to get to where Bell was. As the camera zoomed out, we see that where they met was in one of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, which in this alternate world have not fallen.
posted
But that episode did not answer any questions, it only introduced more questions. Nothing was resolved except <SPOILER> the bad guy who got cut in half lengthwise.
I mean, talk about questions raised, <SPOILER> Nina Sharp was shown to have a Terminator-like hand and arm. <SPOILER> Her right hand and arm. And then Dunham's boss, Phillip Broyles, commented that <SPOILER> the Kevlar implants in her chest prevented the bullet she took in the chest from killing her. What world is she from?
And <SPOILER> who is the bald guy who kidnapped Walter <SPOILER> only not really, he went willingly?
Only with the last episode have I come to realize <SPOILER> how much I actually like this show.
Fringe started out seeming like a slightly bizarre mystery show, sort of like CSI, or NCIS. Then it added a few odd, almost horror show elements, that became stranger and stranger. Only toward the end of the season did you get more than just hints that an alternate world might be involved. The last episode established that Fringe is really science fiction. You might call it "stealth" science fiction.
Now that the scene has been set (and that is all that really happened in the last episode), it will be interesting to see where the next season goes with all of this.
Nighthawk: Thanks for providing that link. The SNL segment with Leonard Nimoy, Zachary Quinto, and Chris Pine was delightful.
Its just too bad that William Shatner has become such a parody of himself, or he could have had a venerated place with Nimoy in the new movie, and in such SNL segments. But as it is, if he showed up, the first thing everyone would think is that there is that dim-witted "lawyer" with Mad Cow Disease. Sigh.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
For the record, am I the only one who thinks this show has no redeeming value, and is angry that it gets renewed while Dollhouse (a much better show with a similar theoretical audience on the same channel is probably canceled)? Note: I only watched the first 3-5 episodes. I'd go off more, but don't want to completely derail the thread.
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheGrimace: For the record, am I the only one who thinks this show has no redeeming value, and is angry that it gets renewed while Dollhouse (a much better show with a similar theoretical audience on the same channel is probably canceled)? Note: I only watched the first 3-5 episodes. I'd go off more, but don't want to completely derail the thread.
You are not alone.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Me too. I watched the first couple of episodes, wanted to give it a fair shake because I love John Noble, but gave up.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, I'd cancel it in a heartbeat and burn every copy if it meant more Dollhouse... don't get me wrong.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I absolutely could not stand Dollhouse. It's whole premise is ludicrous, hardly capable of generating any really compelling or interesting stories. I couldn't bring myself to watch a single episode. Fringe, on the other hand, has turned out to be a bold, imaginative departure into genuine science fiction, of a higher dramatic quality than is usually seen on TV. And it has a wide variety of really interesting characters.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:If they'd gotten an attractive female lead, it would have been worth watching just for that.
While Olivia Dunham is no Dana Scully (who had the whole package), she's still smokin' hot. She's driven, über intelligent, and sensitive with the kids (her niece is one of the cutest kids on TV). For me, that makes her the most attractive female lead on television (followed by Dr. Gillian Foster on Lie To Me, which I've found quite enjoyable.)
Admittedly, one of the main reasons I kept watching Fringe was that it's set all around Boston, where I currently reside. Fringe may not be brilliant, but it's making science fiction more accessible, which means more chances for shows like Firefly to come forward.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Well, I absolutely could not stand Dollhouse. It's whole premise is ludicrous, hardly capable of generating any really compelling or interesting stories. I couldn't bring myself to watch a single episode.
Where I come from we usually watch something before we dismiss it.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the premise is bad enough, logically limiting enough, and can only go in a direction I do not find interesting, there is no point in watching it. This egg was rotten the instant Josh Whedon laid it.
Dollhouse sounds to me like chick flic science fiction. The only stories that can arise involve people being "sensitive". Real multiple personality disorder is more interesting.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Well, I absolutely could not stand Dollhouse. It's whole premise is ludicrous, hardly capable of generating any really compelling or interesting stories. I couldn't bring myself to watch a single episode.
Where I come from we usually watch something before we dismiss it.
I agree. It has always been my position that you cannot have an opinion on the quality of a tv show/movie/book etc unless you have actually watched/read it.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought the idea of a sci fi western wasn't something that could hold my attention either. I was very pleasantly surprised.... then they canceled it.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
What exactly is ridiculous about Dollhouse? It's one made up science premise, and one slightly bizarre social construct you have to swallow. After that, things follow pretty logically. Whereas Fringe makes up completely fake science every episode.
Saying it's a "chick flick" also betrays a complete lack of understanding. Yes, part of the point of the show is to be a feminist work (among other things), but it does so by creating a world about women who are essentially powerless and the romances turn out to be fake. It breaks most conventions that would attract women to standard chick flick fare.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
So it is a chick flick. Thanks, Raymond. As you said, it has one made-up scientific premise, one slightly bizarre social construct. But--as you said--"part of the point of the show is to be a feminist work...by creating a world about women who are essentially powerless and the romances turn out to be fake." That is chick flick fare, despite the fancy machine involved.
Pixiest, it sounds like you are talking about Wild, Wild West. I always thought it was too hard to maintain disbelief with that show. It was so incredible, it could only be a comedy all the time. It did have its moments. But it was never so good that I wanted to see the episodes that I had missed.
andi330, I disagree with your position. It sounds reasonable on the surface, and people often say that. But it is not really true. Sometimes you can tell before viewing any episodes of a show whether it is of the type that you would like. For example, I know that I would never like Desperate Housewives. Anyone who claims that I have to watch an episode can just go sup with Hulu. Or let the Hulu aliens sup on them (if they haven't already).
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where I come from, the term "chick flick" is used to describe a sappy romance that is emotionally appealing to women but not to men. It is not used to describe a sci-fi action story that uses metaphor to explore the role of women in our society and how those roles impact people, male and female alike, without a trace of genuine romance. You're free to define chick flick however you want, but be aware you're not speaking english as the rest of the world knows it.
If you're resistant to watch a perfectly exciting show, orchestrated like a conspiracy action drama, just because it suggests you might have to re-evaluate the role of women in your life or in the lives of people around you.... that's just sad.
It's also worth noting that you have to probe a bit to get the feminist metaphors. My roommate had no idea it was a feminist work until I told him so, and even then he didn't believe me (he has no background in feminist theory and the metaphors are on a level that require you to understand a lot beyond the basics to really get). He just thought it was a fun sci-fi show.
quote:Pixiest, it sounds like you are talking about Wild, Wild West.
Um, in case you're serious here, I'm pretty positive she's talking about Firefly.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: andi330, I disagree with your position. It sounds reasonable on the surface, and people often say that. But it is not really true. Sometimes you can tell before viewing any episodes of a show whether it is of the type that you would like. For example, I know that I would never like Desperate Housewives. Anyone who claims that I have to watch an episode can just go sup with Hulu. Or let the Hulu aliens sup on them (if they haven't already).
You can know that it is something that you do not wish to be exposed to, but you can't have an opinion on it if you do not expose yourself to it. Otherwise, your argument carries no weight. For example, Dollhouse did not look like a show I would like, so I do not watch it. But you will not hear (or see) me state that it is stupid, because I have not seen the show, and therefore I do not know one way or the other.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't tell me I can't have an opinion on it! That's pretty controlling, andi330. I say the idea of Dollhouse is stupid. And it is not stupid for me to say that.
If Pixiest was talking about Firefly, then I can see the point. But you will always find elements of the Old West Western in science fiction, just as you will always find elements of the old travel romance (like the Illiad and the Odyssey) in science fiction. They were the literary precedents of modern science fiction. I don't remember any fastest-on-the-draw gunfights at high noon on Firefly, though. Most of the action takes place in rural communities on sparsely settled planets, which is why it sometimes has a westernish feel. But the terminator-like character of Rivers took it way beyond any western. And in my opinion, space ships are way cooler than horses.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nowhere in my post did I state that your comment was stupid, please do not put words in my mouth. I did state that I do not consider an opinion made without exposure to something to be valid, this is not stating that it is stupid. You will find that there are many people who share this viewpoint.
You don't like your understanding of the premise, and therefore choose not to view the show. That's fine. I didn't like what I saw on commercials and don't watch the show either. But I will not state that the show is stupid until I have watched an episode or two, because without watching the show, I cannot know if the show is stupid or not.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
What I really want to know is WHY? I can understand why you'd feel it's uninteresting and not worth your time to investigate. I can understand why you'd feel the premise is a little outlandish and silly. It kinda is (but most sci-fi premises are). What about the premise makes the show so obviously terrible that you can declare so without having seen a single episode?
I'd like to note that, in general, the advertisements on TV for other TV shows or movies are pretty terrible. They pack together a bunch of random clips that don't give you any sense of what the show's actually about. (I've noticed they often include clips of characters saying things like "this is exciting!", as if that proves to us the show is, in fact, exciting).
If you (addressing both andi and Ron here) think action and/or conspiracy shows can be interesting I'd recommend checking out episode 6. It's where the show's story actually starts and introduces plenty of elements that I think any sci-fi fan would find interesting.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I get that, and think that's perfectly fine, but you've made statements that went far beyond "it doesn't suit my taste," and I'd like to know why you feel so strongly.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Raymond, what it boils down to is that the premise of Dollhouse does not suit my taste.
I could care less about that. There will be plenty of absurdly awesome stuff that will not suit your taste.
The issue is that you dismiss dollhouse as a ludicrous premise that is 'hardly capable' of generating any compelling or interesting stories, yet it has, so
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
