I think the series will be more like X-Files meets Alias rather than X-Files meets Lost. Mainly because two of the executive producers of Fringe (Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci) were execs for Alias too and Alias had an overall mythology, even with its many stand alone episodes. But I loved Alias and I love Lost, so I'm really looking forward to it.
Originally posted by robert: My only hope is that Fringe will be more like X-Files than like Lost. I never liked SF movies or shows but i loved X-Files
Agreed. I hope JJ gives us answers faster than he does with LOST. I got confused with LOST and I watched from the beginning and dropped it this year because of no answers.
I liked the X-Files' paranormal aspect, so I hope Fringe resembles that too.
For me the problem with Lost is not the answers part but the fact that it gets more and more hard to follow the plot. Maybe i'm just stupid and i don't know it. They've tangled too much the plot. I don't have all the day to think about what's happening on Lost. The X-Files also had this kind of the problem. I hope this will be a more episodic show than Lost or X-Files
Originally posted by Marc Berman: Before I get into the rating results, let me focus on CBS’ Survivor: Micronesia for a moment. Erik…are you crazy? Nuts? Cuckoo? Meshugenah? Could you believe he fell for that scheme to give the immunity necklace to Natalie? As James appropriately noted, this is now the dumbest move in the history of the Survivor franchise. All I can say at this point is…go Cirie!
I agree with all of this.
NBC: Those numbers for The Office don't necessarily constitute a hit, but it's a smash hit by NBC's standards.
And whoa, B2Y canceled? Surprising, since it's the best live action comedy FOX has aired in awhile (not just quality-wise).
Posts: 406 | Location: Arkansas | Registered: 25 January 2008
Originally posted by robert: My only hope is that Fringe will be more like X-Files than like Lost. I never liked SF movies or shows but i loved X-Files
Agreed. I hope JJ gives us answers faster than he does with LOST. I got confused with LOST and I watched from the beginning and dropped it this year because of no answers.
I liked the X-Files' paranormal aspect, so I hope Fringe resembles that too.
For me the problem with Lost is not the answers part but the fact that it gets more and more hard to follow the plot. Maybe i'm just stupid and i don't know it. They've tangled too much the plot. I don't have all the day to think about what's happening on Lost. The X-Files also had this kind of the problem. I hope this will be a more episodic show than Lost or X-Files
I agree. They're all over the place and they can't figure out what to focus in on. The last episode I watched was about Desmond and how he went crazy in the airplane and could be in two places at once. What did that have to do with anything? I really just don't get it, either. Lol.
For me the problem with Lost is not the answers part but the fact that it gets more and more hard to follow the plot. Maybe i'm just stupid and i don't know it. They've tangled too much the plot. I don't have all the day to think about what's happening on Lost. The X-Files also had this kind of the problem. I hope this will be a more episodic show than Lost or X-Files
You are not stupid. They have brought up elements that immediately disappear, and the flash forwards/backwards have hindered for me any buildup of suspense. It is as if somebody changes the channel. Not good for a show that has a program content of 40 minutes.
This was its SEASON FINALE, and it fell half a percentage point in the demo. Which is to say, it lost about 20% of its demo audience.
NBC, are you really up for a whole 'nother year of this overhyped mediocrity-fest?
The show doesn't work. It never has worked, it never WILL work. It was a bad idea from the very start. Just not as bad as Studio 60.
The Alec Baldwin Show will stay on the air for as long as Lorne Michaels wants. I have a theory that he has photographs of some NBC VIPS playing with farm animals.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: ljpljpljp,
I have tried to like 30 Rock, but it just does not work for me. And don't even get me started on Lorne Michaels! I worked at NBC for five years...it was no laughing matter.
quote:
Originally posted by ljpljpljp:
quote:
Originally posted by pisher:
Just how lead-in dependent IS 30 Rock?
This was its SEASON FINALE, and it fell half a percentage point in the demo. Which is to say, it lost about 20% of its demo audience.
NBC, are you really up for a whole 'nother year of this overhyped mediocrity-fest?
The show doesn't work. It never has worked, it never WILL work. It was a bad idea from the very start. Just not as bad as Studio 60.
[i]The Alec Baldwin Show{/i] will stay on the air for as long as Lorne Michaels wants. I have a theory that he has photographs of some NBC VIPS playing with farm animals.
For me the problem with Lost is not the answers part but the fact that it gets more and more hard to follow the plot. Maybe i'm just stupid and i don't know it. They've tangled too much the plot. I don't have all the day to think about what's happening on Lost. The X-Files also had this kind of the problem. I hope this will be a more episodic show than Lost or X-Files
Well, I enjoy the labyrinthine plot of Lost--The X-Files, sad to say, never really HAD a plot--they completely made it up as they went along, and there was no consistency from one year to the next. Chris Carter is probably the worst writer to ever be acclaimed as a great writer. Though maybe not after this X-Files movie comes out.
The problem with Lost--and with Battlestar Galactica--is that they don't have enough story to fill the airtime they're supposed to fill. In both cases, there's a big mystery which they somehow have to keep mysterious for year after year, in an era when online fans dissect every little detail endlessly. So they both have to keep blowing smoke, and try to distract the audience with pointless romantic subplots and angsty character arcs. That has its place, of course--but they let it take too large a place.
When Lost and BSG conclude, a lot of people will say they're disappointed with what the answers turned out to be--and that would happen no matter what the answers were. It's a very long time to wait for a payoff, and it's nigh-impossible to fully satisfy people who have been waiting that long to find out what happens in the end.
Both shows would have been far better as very long miniseries--but far less profitable. Well, Lost would have been less profitable. Not sure BSG has made any profit for SciFi.
I have tried to like 30 Rock, but it just does not work for me.
30 Rock is a comedy that tries to be dramatic and fails. Like Studio 60 was a drama that tried to be comedic and failed. Both fail because the people writing the scripts are too close to the subject matter to be objective about what works and what doesn't.
Maybe someday the people who make and run television will wake up to the fact that the rest of the world doesn't find them all that interesting. Or at least we don't find THEIR OWN VISION of themselves that interesting. Paddy Chayefsky wrote Network from the perspective of somebody who had worked in television, but was still very much an outsider.
Yeah, maybe someday the people who make and run television will catch on.
But don't hold your breath.
quote:
And don't even get me started on Lorne Michaels! I worked at NBC for five years...it was no laughing matter.
Originally posted by pisher: Both shows would have been far better as very long miniseries--but far less profitable. Well, Lost would have been less profitable. Not sure BSG has made any profit for SciFi.
The networks should understand some shows are at best a "one season" shows. Lost, Prison Break, Heroes are the perfect examples. But the networks don't really care about quality, they just want money, money, money.
The networks should understand some shows are at best a "one season" shows. Lost, Prison Break, Heroes are the perfect examples. But the networks don't really care about quality, they just want money, money, money.
Well, yeah. Shows are MADE with money. Lots and lots of money. If we want the networks to stop being addicted to high profits, we have to stop being addicted to expensive production values. Not looking for that to happen anytime soon.
Why should networks spend huge money developing shows that won't run long enough, or have high enough viewership, to recoup the costs? This is the problem. They could make limited run shows that would be financially feasible--if people watched them. But if they didn't have state of the art megabudgeted production values, WOULD we? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. But the reason telenovelas haven't worked here is that we have gotten accustomed to TV shows that look like movies (well, not really, but close enough to pass muster on the first viewing).
I hear the word 'quality' a lot in connection to TV these days. If it means "Well written, produced and acted, with a genuine point to make" I'm all for it. If it means "Colossally expensive and pretentious, and not an original idea in its head", I can live just fine without it.
The networks have only themselves to blame for their decline--and in part, they are declining because they care too much about the latter definition of 'quality', and not nearly enough about the former.
