Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by MickeS, Sep 17, 2008.
I thought it was 3 more of his "sons."
Agreed, they all looked like the son.
I think it's OK. Not the best, not the worst. I get what Doug is saying about the camera suddenly being "invented" the instant it was needed -- that does distract a bit from the show. I'll SP it, though, as long as it keeps being entertaining.
My biggest annoyance, though, is that Pacey seems to bring nothing to the table other than (not funny) snarky comments.
On the plus side, I like Olivia. She's the only character we're really getting any depth with.
I thought the camera thing could be interesting. Not because of what they did with it though. Walter use to work with the guy that owns Massive Dynamics. Massive Dynamics now owns the patent to the camera that needs to be used. Maybe the camera was theoretical 17 years ago, with the idea of Walter and the other guy, now the other guy has built it.
Maybe it was Walter's idea all along and the guy stole it while Walter was in the asylum?
I think you're going to see more stuff pop up like this where Walter posits something but it's already been made by the company because of the history of Walter and the owner.
Then that makes more sense with Walters' comment.
I'm going to disagree with this analysis. I think the entire character is set up to be a cop out on any plot they ever want. I don't think the camera is any different than the deprivation psyche transfer chamber from last week. I thought it was implied that he had already thought of this in the past when he brought it up, just like in last week's episode.
Therein lies the potential problem with the series as a whole. They can make up some fringe science in an episode whenever they want to solve any problem. In a way, it's worse than CSI. But in a way, better, I guess, since people probably won't think it's real.
If this show is going to steer in the right direction, it needs to start serving advanced notice of all these things. They did with teleportation and a few others.
Why isn't anyone documenting every experiment he did and so forth? The show also strains credibility there. They are concerned about the pattern but no one seems to be pressing the doctor for information.
I don't see why everyone's complaining about the eye-camera thing. Yes, yes, nothing like that exists and the premise (that the last image seen is somehow still on the retina) is ridiculous, but I have no real problem with suspending my disbelief over technology, etc like that...
...what I do have a hard time with---and what no one's seemed to have mentioned---was the whole violation of conservation of mass.
Where did the ex-baby's mass come from? He looked like he weighed more than the mother, who still appears to weigh the same as when the episode started. Mass has to come from somewhere. There wasn't even any attempt at explaining that and no one even questioned it. Ignoring blatant violations of the laws of physics really takes me out of the show...
It's something to watch...I'm enjoying it. Keeping SP.
I try not to think TOO much when I watch TV. I'm enjoying the characters and the ongoing storyline I guess. Now I want to know what's up with Peter...I want to know what Walter was up to before he was put in an institution.
I don't care about the [un]scientific explainations for things. If they say that's how it works, that's how it works. It's just a tv show. I'm paying attention to the overall storyline, and so far I like it.
And I didn't predict a rapid growing baby at all. I was sure she was going to give birth to some kind of weird freakish monster.
ETA: And the eye camera thing...reminded me of Will Smith's Wild Wild West. So I DID kind of chuckle at that.
Maybe the mother ate 45,982,092 jelly donuts that day.
I'm either not smart or I'm simple minded, I don't know which really..... after reading this through I am wondering if I'm either. I really liked this show. I'm enjoying the characters. The old scientist guy cracks me up, the things he says out of the blue are awesome! I'm not thinking too much in to the science at all, it's a sci-fi type show in my opinion. I never go at them with the idea of what's suppose to be plausible or real.
Like, unicorngoddess, I assumed the woman was giving birth to some kind of weird freakish monster baby.
Count me as one of those that doesn't care that the science isn't based in reality. It's not supposed to be. If I wanted that, I'd watch Discovery Channel or something. This is supposed to be entertaining, and if you can't turn off your skeptical side for 42 minutes and just be entertained, you've got no business watching.
I'm not saying it's a great show yet. It's clearly got flaws and will take some work to make it more compelling, but at least it's entertaining so far.
It was commented on at least twice before you brought it up.
What I want to know is, why they had to extract the eyeball from the socket for the camera to work. My wife thought it was unnecessarily gory, and served no other purpose. I had to agree. It was also unnecessary for the women to be awake while their brain was being operated on. Unless they actually explain why this was essential for the extraction to work, there is fundamentally no difference between a pituitary from an awake person, and one who is asleep. The only purpose this served was to make the bad guys more revolting. Yeah, ther were tears streaming out of their victims while the "surgery" was going on, they are REALLY bad! We get it.
Yeah they really seemed to do the gore for the gore's sake. I don't mind it, but it's on at 8 PM here and I don't think it's appropriate for that time slot.
I don't think the problem is that the science is inaccurate. The problem for me is that they seem to have set up the show to involve a very cheap and dishonest formula. Every episode they can present a problem and then solve it through some completely made-up science that was never before mentioned. It's like some of the worst episodes of various Star Trek incarnations where they just invent some technobabble to solve a problem.
Wasn't this something that plagued Buffy, too? It seems like on that show (which was nevertheless very enjoyable and watchable) they were always finding the Ancient Dagger of Smiting right when the Ancient Evil Guy in Need of Smiting arrived in Sunnydale.
Stargate Atlantis too - the problem seems unsolvable, until either a) the Daedalus showed up or b) Rodney all of a sudden had an epiphany.
I guess it goes with the territory.
LOL. You said 42
Yeah but that was usually only an episode or two, not EVERY episode (as seems to be the case with Fringe thus far). Also it wasn't structured similar to a mystery as Fringe is.
I think the difference is how "realistic" a show's style is. Fringe is styled as a realistic drama, given that they are using realistic groups of people like DHS and FBI, having it set at a realistic place like Harvard University, and that sort of thing. So when you have very fantastical elements like the camera featured in this episode, the difference is very glaring.
On the other hand, a show like Buffy is very fantasy based - I mean, the series is all about a super-powered teen heroine fighting vampires. When they go and pull out a magical scythe to save the day, it fits in with the show's style.
On a show like Fringe, to make the fantastical technology seem a little less glaring, they should be inserting some slightly more accessible, yet still unrealistic, technology throughout. For instance, have a character state that they have a bionic eye thanks to Massive Dynamic, for example... or the cop cars are all electric thanks to a breakthrough electric engine from Massive Dynamic. Something like that. As a result, when the company breaks out this camera, you can go "oh, ok, well, this company is making all this other high-tech stuff, why not a camera that can take photographs of an electrical impulse?"
For me, the problem isn't making up science. That I can live with. The problem is when they use real, current science--and totally botch it. If you're going to fake it, fake it all the way.