or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › New JJ Abrams TV show "Fringe"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New JJ Abrams TV show "Fringe"

post #1 of 175
Thread Starter 
I anyone else anticipating this? Or has anyone else even heard about it?
I just watched the 2 hour pilot. Apparently it was shot with a budget of $10 million, and is better than most movies out there, despite this being a tv show.

Apparantly it's JJ Abrams' new take on a Twilight Zone, X-Files type show. "Fringe" refers to fringe science. One of the main characters is a mad scientist (Dr. Frankenstein crossed with Einstein) who was locked up in a mental facility for 17 years. Before an assistant got killed and he got locked up for manslaughter, he was part of a government program in which he experimented in fringe science (ie. mind control, teleportation, invisibility, reanimation). Unexplained events begin to occur in the world and the FBI needs him to help.

I quite enjoyed it, but then I have to admit that I've always enjoyed JJ Abrams' tv shows. Guilty pleasures one might say. The lead woman is uber hot, and the mad scientist has some great lines.

"They, they have this horrible pudding in here. Butterscotch pudding on Mondays. It's, it's dreadful."
"It's Thursday."
"Oh! Well that's fantastic news."

"The only thing better than a cow is a human...Unless you need milk...Then you really need a cow."
post #2 of 175
Is it Lost-esque?
post #3 of 175
Thread Starter 
There seems to be an overarching mythology or large scale story behind the series (ie. who is causing these horrific events that they are now investigating) but each episode will be based around a new issue (kind of like X-Files with an overarching storyline, but discrete episodes). So, yes, somewhat Lost-esque.
post #4 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by denning View Post
I anyone else anticipating this? Or has anyone else even heard about it?
I just watched the 2 hour pilot. Apparently it was shot with a budget of $10 million, and is better than most movies out there, despite this being a tv show.

Apparantly it's JJ Abrams' new take on a Twilight Zone, X-Files type show. "Fringe" refers to fringe science. One of the main characters is a mad scientist (Dr. Frankenstein crossed with Einstein) who was locked up in a mental facility for 17 years. Before an assistant got killed and he got locked up for manslaughter, he was part of a government program in which he experimented in fringe science (ie. mind control, teleportation, invisibility, reanimation). Unexplained events begin to occur in the world and the FBI needs him to help.

I quite enjoyed it, but then I have to admit that I've always enjoyed JJ Abrams' tv shows. Guilty pleasures one might say. The lead woman is uber hot, and the mad scientist has some great lines.

"They, they have this horrible pudding in here. Butterscotch pudding on Mondays. It's, it's dreadful."
"It's Thursday."
"Oh! Well that's fantastic news."

"The only thing better than a cow is a human...Unless you need milk...Then you really need a cow."

Did you get a preview of it? I checked on fox's website and I couldn't find it. It is fox, isnt it?
post #5 of 175
Watched the pilot last week, thought it was really quite fabulous.
post #6 of 175
I've been anxiously awaiting this show for a couple months
post #7 of 175
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jschenkkan View Post
Did you get a preview of it? I checked on fox's website and I couldn't find it. It is fox, isnt it?

Shhh... Don't tell anyone, but I used bittorrent.
post #8 of 175
Watched the pilot and it wasn't too bad. Abrams production through and through but I hope it picks up after a few episodes. I mean that ending was just too effing cheesy.
post #9 of 175
Love the pilot, I am glad that as Lost is winding down Fringer emerges. It's funny how both pilots started with a midair disaster. The three main characters have great chemistry, I especially like the comic reliefs provided by the sarcastic Jackson's character. The CEO of the giant GE-Microsoftesque corporation is like a creepy version of Meg Whitman. I am hoping subsequent episodes will live up to its premise.
post #10 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by denning View Post
I just watched the 2 hour pilot. Apparently it was shot with a budget of $10 million, and is better than most movies out there, despite this being a tv show.

I quite enjoyed it, but then I have to admit that I've always enjoyed JJ Abrams' tv shows. Guilty pleasures one might say.

JJ Abrams' shows almost always start off strong, especially in the first few episodes, but then end up sucking when its clear that Abrams has no idea what to do beyond an intriguing start. After season 1, Lost was just a freakin' hot mess. I don't care what the producers said, I still think they had no idea where they were going with that story.

I suspect that Abrams would probably do better if he was limited to a miniseries or just one season than trying to create a multi-season TV series.
post #11 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire. View Post
JJ Abrams' shows almost always start off strong, especially in the first few episodes, but then end up sucking when its clear that Abrams has no idea what to do beyond an intriguing start. After season 1, Lost was just a freakin' hot mess. I don't care what the producers said, I still think they had no idea where they were going with that story.

I suspect that Abrams would probably do better if he was limited to a miniseries or just one season than trying to create a multi-season TV series.

I know where you're coming from. Lost Season 2 was seriously a departure from the near-perfect Season 1. However, I have to say they really got their shit together in the recent seasons.

As for Fringe, I stand by my opinion that it was a flawed but still an enjoyable pilot.
Oh and how cool are those 3-D letters?
post #12 of 175
I watched this last night and thought it was pretty good. A little over-the-top at points, with forced comic relief moments from the Dawson's Creek / Mighty Ducks dude, but it looks promising. I fear though that it'll be a continuous c*cktease ala Lost, where new ideas are perpetually introduced and none explained. So we'll see where it goes. The X-Files fan in me will keep me coming back for a while.
post #13 of 175
I thought it started off strong, lost momentum in the middle, and ended in a craptastic fashion. It's like they decided to throw a curveball for the sake of throwing a curveball. I'll probably still keep watching the rest of the season but with lowered expectations.

It's probably the research scientist in me, but I seriously thought that their "scientific" explanations with magnesium gluconante, blah blah blah was the worst example of tv science I've ever come across on screen. It's like they just looked at a lab shelf and picked out the longest sounding chemicals to lend pseduocredibility to the "chemical reaction" that caused Agent Scott to turn translucent.

Calcium? nah too short.
Sodium? nah too common.
Potassium? hmm... possible.
Magnesium? BINGO! That shit sounds like it can cure the translucentness!



anyone else think Joshua Jackson was essentially just playing Pacey Witter again?
post #14 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenaimarr View Post
I thought it started off strong, lost momentum in the middle, and ended in a craptastic fashion. It's like they decided to throw a curveball for the sake of throwing a curveball. I'll probably still keep watching the rest of the season but with lowered expectations.

It's probably the research scientist in me, but I seriously thought that their "scientific" explanations with magnesium gluconante, blah blah blah was the worst example of tv science I've ever come across on screen. It's like they just looked at a lab shelf and picked out the longest sounding chemicals to lend pseduocredibility to the "chemical reaction" that caused Agent Scott to turn translucent.

Calcium? nah too short.
Sodium? nah too common.
Potassium? hmm... possible.
Magnesium? BINGO! That shit sounds like it can cure the translucentness!



anyone else think Joshua Jackson was essentially just playing Pacey Witter again?

Agree.

Fairly weak pilot (even Abrams admits as much), tepid plotting and awkward dialogue.

Pass.

lefty
post #15 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenaimarr View Post

anyone else think Joshua Jackson was essentially just playing Pacey Witter again?

That's basically all he ever does.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment and Culture › New JJ Abrams TV show "Fringe"