19 November, 2011

FRINGE 4.07 - Wallflower


This review is going to be very easy to write and I thank the writers for that.

One of the smartest things the FRINGE writers did this season was bring Peter Bishop back. And then they wrote this episode and destroyed any good will they earned with the previous episode. What happens in this episode? Who gives a shit?! An awful case-of-the-week? Check. Dumbham being dumb? Check. This unnatural Olivia trying to get with her partner plot? Check. Peter barely in it? Check. A surprising ending that won't be explained for at least 2 months because the show is on hiatus? Check.

If I had to rate this one, I'd give it:

45 out of 100.

A total, unmitigated failure of epic proportions. I actually read a review by some hack that called this a "great" episode while giving it a B. Clearly, this person must be trying to kiss some major ass at FOX or WB. Though, how is a "great episode" a B? What is an A? Life saving episode?

Coming off such a well executed (overall) episode last week, this one was shockingly underwhelming. Had the writers really run out of filler good ideas at this point that they couldn't deliver something better? I think the previous episode answers that. They CAN do better and so there is no excuse for this crap. Granted, it isn't their fault FRINGE is going on hiatus after this episode. The next episode was supposed to be the mid-point hiatus but baseball screwed things up. But that fact is not my biggest gripe anyway.

What did you think about this piece of shit?


177 comments:

  1. Hated every agonizing second of it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So Olivia is trying her best to hook up with yet another partner. Who cares? She must be trying to set a record or something. I wish her good luck.

    This is what I find offensive: they forgot Peter Bishop is back and only used him to advance that trivial and completely flat relationship between Lincoln and Olivia. Are they kidding me? How can anyone think that's a good idea?

    Not only that, what happened to Walter? There was no acknowledgment on his part that he was struggling with Peter's appearance. Suddenly, everything was perfectly fine with him.

    What did I think about this piece of shit? That it was a huge steaming pile of shit, only worth watching by all those teenage girls who drool over Seth Gabel. That's the audience the show deserves right now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. In a lot of countries 50/100 is a C meaning average. For your international viewers maybe you should give it a 20/100 and that will universally be understood as a complete and fucking failure by everyone. This is horse shit, cunts like whyman and pinkner should be called out for trying to pull this crap. I thought fedak and scwartz were narcissists who only cared about their vision in chuck season 3, but these two beat them hands down. Fedak and Schwartz at least have some minor respect for fans whereas the other two assholes have none.

    ReplyDelete
  4. In America, failure is below 60. I go by that one. I can't worry about the relaxed standards of the rest of the world. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  5. WOW so this what a Peter season is supposed to be...7 episodes and 30 minutes of total fucking cunting shitty wanking time with him! WOW!!!!!!!!!!

    So next episode next year will be his? not alt linc and alt olivia along with our sorry some stranger shittier viersions as well? will we actually get more than one scene per episode with him? Come on you cunts Whyman and Pinkner are we gonna get some Peter arc or are you just full of shit all the time?

    Your show now averages less then 2.8 million viewers and is going down fast in the key demo...want to fuck with fans more? go ahead and watch this your shit you put on the screen be burned off in the summer.

    That felt good.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Let it out... show us on the doll where the show runners touched you.

    ReplyDelete
  7. They touched me where it hurts most....my trust.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Took me three times to actually get through the entire episode. It was that boring.

    The one thing hat kept going through my mind while I was watching it is how criminally under used the alternate universe has been this season. It started off promising and then pffft.

    I won't even mention the lack of Peter in this episode.

    Easily the weakest of the season.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Writing a season for Peter would be tantemount to the Chuck writers trying to write a seasonal arc for Casey or Sarah. Their characters are just not well defined enough for it to sustatin an entire season as much as we love them. Fringe has the ability to write for Walter and Olivia because they have gone to great pains to put effort into those characters...they have done no such thing for Peter and I doubt we will get much of him from now until the seasons/series end. You can tell that when a show would rather put out the shit it did last episode instead of spend time with Peter...they have no interest in Peter or his character or his story or anything to do with him. This is the first time I can tell that Fox has not even bothered to intervene and offer any input, this shows that they only renewed it on a sweet heart deal with the WB.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Fringe has the ability to write for Walter and Olivia because they have gone to great pains to put effort into those characters"

    But Olivia got her focus in season 3... that's why you can even say that. Otherwise, this was a show most people watched for Walter.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Right...The first 7/8 episodes of season 3 were all her, nothing but her in two universes. This season, season 4 is supposed to be about Peter. How much time have we spent in those same 7 episodes with him? 30 minutes?

    I do not know about the details, maybe after season 2 the only way Fringe could come back was to accept budget cuts in the form of lead actors. Maybe they could only afford to have 2 actors in every episode and decided to keep Olivia and Walter and they thought Fuck Peter.

    The funny thing is that this season is a metaphor for how the writers feel about Peter. If you think about it all the characters do not know what to do with Peter, so they shove him off to one side. The writers do not know how to do anything with Peter and shove him off to one side, lol. It is a shame that Fringe will most likely only be remembered for this crap storyline and the fan hatred for it and the fact that the ratings have nearly reached Chuck levels. At lease Chuck had 2 seasons to fix its reputation and go out on its own terms (sort of), Fringe will not have that.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Case in point, last episode if U Gene had that conversation with Peter instead of Olivia on not been able to be seen then that would have been a fantastic scene because the logic and emotional connection would have mader the scene that much more potent. The writers crafter a perfect scenario for Peter and yet they cannot see that they had it and would rather not use it...it is like they thought we have had him for 30 minutes that season...even though logic suggests that this is a perfect case for his characters current situation...we will not use him because he already has had too much screen time this season, lol. That seen could have had the impact that Walters had in White Tulip...how they are so blinfd and fucking up this badly is...wow.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Maybe the show is telling you something Mike, they are telling you that they know this is their last season and they are not going to waste time telling stories about a character they do not give a fuck about, ala Chuck season 3 (when pushed came to shove and the show only had 13 episodes left in the series, the writers showed their hand and demonstrated that they never really gave a shit about Sarah). Fringe is doing that now, they have only 22 episodes, why bother with a character they do not care about. Deal with it man, the rest of the fans I hope you can deal with that fact. Shows do it all the time, this is no different.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Writing a season for Peter would be tantemount to the Chuck writers trying to write a seasonal arc for Casey or Sarah. Their characters are just not well defined enough for it to sustatin an entire season as much as we love them."

    You would be right if it wasn't for a small distasteful heinous detail. They are writing for Lincoln. Let that sink in for a minute.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ok...then they love Lincoln more than Peter...same shit, they will do anything as cunts then write for Peter. I suspect that the only reason Josh Jackson puts up with it is because the WB is really big and well connected and you cannot fuck with people like that. But rest assured, I doubt he will make that mistake again.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I do find it funny that almost without fail, when show runners say they are doing a season "for the fans" what they really mean is "We are going to seemingly fuck this up every week until the final one or two episodes."

    ReplyDelete
  17. Doesn't it feel good to know, that when they said S4 was a "love letter" to the fans, what they meant was a "F*ck you letter" to the Peter fans?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Did they ever qualify it? Because they could have meant "a lover letter to the fans... of Seth Gabel."

    ReplyDelete
  19. The actors (in all the early interviews) told everyone that the show runners told them that this was Peters season. But something just came to me...they were under pressure to say that since fans did this small campaigne across the world where nut jobs held up signs saying whefre is Peter. So I guess they assumed that fans were not quite happy with Peter missing and the specualation that he left and so lied out of self preservation and told every actor to lie and say Peter will have a big massive part this season. All they have done is lose respect for themselves...from here on out they are the show runners who ran a JJ Abrahams show into the ground.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Jake, it IS Peter's season... but so far it doesn't seem that the show runners feel Peter actually being IN the episodes is important. Granted, will we feel as pissed off about it in 10 episodes? Maybe. Maybe not. Right now, they are making Peter fans very impatient. But then they don't know whether something is working or not, for the audience, until months after they have written and shot it.

    It's not like there is any way to change what they are doing this season. At least not what is coming in the next 5 or 6 episodes. That's already shot.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I have to admit Fringe has been losing my interest a lot this season, which is sad because I thought last season would be more torturous for me, but it actually turned out not to be. I really think it has been the fact that they have regressed Olivia back to S.1 Dumbham, except that S.1 Olivia had Peter and Walter to keep things interesting, and I guess it's just harder having seen how good the show CAN be and now feeling like it's just taking a mid-series siesta and not even trying to hold my attention.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I can understand show runners not being able to change the flow of a season otherwise they would.....forget it I just remembered chuck season 3.0 and I will not bother. I was going to say when critics and fans tell you what will make your show better or what they want to see before shooting starts then there is no excuse. Before season 3 chuck only a dumbasss would not know what fans and critics wanted and they still fucked up. My friend watched one episode live during season 2 and even he knew what was up, lol.

    Fienberg, sepinwall, mo Ryan, Ryan McGee, mules mcnutt... They all said last season wow they need to create a seasonal arc for Peter. How dumb as a show runner do you have to be to ignore such blatant messages from people who watch your show? I agree that show runners putting fan fic shit into a show is a no no and that is right but this goes beyond that. I guess all show runners are like matt wiener...he tells fan to literally go fuck themselves and get their own show...but he has the talent to back it up and a solid 3 seasons left to tell his story...fringe dud not have that luxury and is going to pay the price for not being smarter.

    ReplyDelete
  23. To be fair, Jake, what people want on the Internet doesn't necessarily mean it is what the general audience wants. So, it is definitely a balancing act for the writers to fit all the demands they have in delivering a show hardcore fans will continue to watch and a show the general audience will tune in for and stick with.

    Still, there are some things that should be obvious.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sounds like what they did with Buffy season seven. When they left Spike in the basement of the high school for several episodes.
    Now they've left Walter and Peter in the basement. I miss the Bishop boys. The interaction between Walter and Peter was what made this show so special. It's very rare to see a father and son show so much emotions for each other on a TV series.
    I don't understand why they are putting so much air time for Lincoln. If they thought it would bring in higher ratings, news flash...Didn't work!
    I know the producers have this grand plan for the series, but right now, I have no idea where the heck they are driving the bus. Someone needs to take the keys away and hit the brakes, 'cus this bus is aiming to ride off the cliff of Canceled shows.

    ReplyDelete
  25. At this point Peter (Joshua Jackson) fans should quit the show. Because we know what you want and your not going to get it. You want not one episode of a Peter arc but a whole season..not going to happen! You probably want all the times the show took a fucking shortcut with his character to be addressed as well as the current situation to be about him, not going to happen! There are so many things about Peter that you want that the show is not going to deliver so stop deluding yourself and either be content with seeing Peter once or twice or maybe 3 times as a lead for this whole season and then a background player or save yourself the heartache and quit. Do not worry, the show is gonna be cancelled and it will not be your fault if you quit. Trying to make a show into what you want is never going to happen.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Gina, I am pretty sure no one is deluding themselves. If they were, they'd be talking hopefully about what is coming for Peter in future episodes. What I see is the opposite of what you are suggesting. If anything, I would say stop deluding yourselves into believing we WON'T get the Peter focus fans are asking for, because they are eventually going to go there. No point in even setting this whole thing up if they don't intend on focusing a great deal on him.

    It's writing 101.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Unless they do all this setup like in seasons 2 and 3 and then make the finales about the other characters. Or they used this storyline to avoid paying off 3 seasons worth of material.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Peter is a lead, we want him to be treated likewise. This was Lincoln/Olivia Season! F**** I can't believe it!!!
    And to be honest, I think Peter's storylines are the most intriguing! S3 should have focused more about him. He was the man that sacrificed himself, that was determined to define the fate of the universe. But there was no single emotional scenes given to his character like the 100 ones they gave Olivia.
    And, YES!!! Peter's Fans have the right to protest this time! I've been a Peter's fan for very long, I sympathized so much with his storyline. But seing him being sidelined and dumped in S3 was bad enough.
    Funny thing is, when you tell people about Fringe. They get more interested in Peter's character. The writers could have really made a great TV character with which the audience would sympathize. And yet, they made him look like the most hated in the 3 leads, only if you try to understand it from his perspective when you really realize and love the character. Same thing I did and loved it so much.
    I know this isn't going to change. But I'll always remember Fringe by the character of Peter Bishop!!

    ReplyDelete
  29. I think head geek has said before that they had a chance at the beginning of this season and last to concentrate on him and they have refused. Call it a casualty of budget cuts.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Actors don't cost productions all that much. Unless they are big time movie actors.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Chuck lost Anna Wu...there is talk that if Community is renewed then Chang could be cut (wankers...please do not lose Chang...lose Shirley). Fringe has lost Peter pretty much for 2 seasons.

    If actors do not cost much how come they get cut when budget cuts hit? interesting, fucking suits.

    ReplyDelete
  32. You know for the fact that the only reason they don't want to write for Peter is because he doesn't have a double to play, notice how they write more for the damn doubles than they do about the ones who don't.

    ReplyDelete
  33. It's also sickening, too that they spent an entire episode on Olivia's migraines but refuse to give us an episode where Peter is coping with being back. People just do not understand that Josh is a very talented actor who can bring the angst but Josh can't do that if his screentime is cut in half.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I doubt Jackson not having a double is why they haven't written more for him. I bet they have some big story arc planned for Peter and that's why they are holding him back. They think it amplifies his importance to somehow give us less of him up front. And perhaps he slept with one of the writers' daughters.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Oh, the old, sleep with the writers daughter end up shopping for underwear. {{Shakes fist}} Curse you, writers revenge!!

    ReplyDelete
  36. no i rather think that anna torv is sleeping with the writer joel wyman;

    that's why she has so much screentime, even in the "season of peter".

    ReplyDelete
  37. You guys do know that Rupert Murdoch, the OWNER of FOX, is like Anna Torv's uncle or some shit, right?

    ReplyDelete
  38. That explains why the worst of the lead actors is the one with her first name in the credits and gets most of the screen time. I mean what was she in really before this? I checked her filmography and it is really bare, I mean really bare and most of it is on her uncles networks here and in Australia. I suppose it really is a world of who you know and what you know.

    ReplyDelete
  39. and not what you know.

    ReplyDelete
  40. It's nice to have a billionaire who owns the network your show is on as your uncle.

    ReplyDelete
  41. That explains the love affair they have with Anna's character.
    I just realized something. What they're doing in Fringe would be the same as if they gave Spock less screen time and filled it with a red shirt (Female of course) who slowly falls in love with Kirk while Bones is stuck in sickbay.
    "Damn it Jim, I'm a doctor, not a mushroom!!"

    ReplyDelete
  42. SO! We are all in agreement, this show can never reach greatness because the show has one hand tied behind its back and has to have Torv in every scene because if that does not happen then uncle Fox says bye bye Fringe.

    On Breaking Bad and Mad Men...one has an 3 time consecutive Emmy winning actor and the other is on a show that has won 4 consecutive drama Emmys...yet they are not afraid to let their be episodes that have 90% other characters stories. Sometimes Walter White and Don Draper are never really in the show...in season 4 of The Wire Jimmy Mcnulty was no where to be seen and yet that was probably its best season. Sometimes not having the lead in a show means that it is right for the story and right for the show. You never hear Bryan Cranston bitch about it...look at the pride on his face when Aaron Paul won an Emmy and even when he gave his speech he was so proud...he has no problem letting Aaron Paul own scenes they are in or leading an episode on his own and Bryan Cranston is a far superior actor to Anna Torv.

    Fringe and Anna Torv should have the modesty/humbleness to let other characters have a fucking story instead of hogging every scene, she and the show runners should know better and yet they do not and wonder why their show never gets emmys wins or nominations or any real critical aclaim. Wankers.

    ReplyDelete
  43. i never ever was impressed with anna torv acting ability.

    she makes those faces that drive me nuts.

    and that lionard nimoy voice, that was horrible.

    she is a average actress at best.

    did you guys see that "funny" clip can i give you a ticket?

    wtf was that?, she pulls some horrible facial expressions and that was so distracting.

    but of course , her fans find it so amazing and funny . give anna all the awards.

    i swear , if even anna blinks , her fans are impressed by her .

    when there are those kissing scenes between anna and joshua , you can see that anna never anticipats , she just stands/lays there and josh is the one who pulls here towards him and does the other stuff.

    i think that anna is a cold icequeen in reel life and that she is not into intimacy/sexs.

    that's why mark valley divorced her so quick.

    they always wonder why josh and anna dont get along.

    but it's simple josh is a extravert and wild and anna is introvert, boring/shy.

    josh needs someone who he can laugh with and have a good time with.

    and anna does not have those quality.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Torv was pretty impressive in parts of season 3... but there are definitely things she was given credit for, acting wise, that I felt were puzzling. It's as if critics don't really have a true appreciation for what is and isn't good acting. Or, perhaps they are just kissing ass.

    One of the reasons why I don't reach out to the studios/networks for the usual perks that they seem to give out to anyone with a blog is because I don't want to have to kiss ass. And believe me, if you aren't some big shot in the industry, the second you piss them off, you get cut off... so most smaller blogs go out of their way to kiss ass as a way to keep their perks.

    Sure, some of the more established journalists don't fear that since the studios/networks feel they NEED their coverage, even if negative, but even those guys can get too close to the shows they cover. Just look at Ain't It Cool News, a site I used to love (still read, mind you). Some of the writers (specifically one, who I pay homage to with my username here) gush all over shit even when it is shit, because they have developed personal relationships with some of those people.

    Mo Ryan once told me that she tries to distance herself from developing relationships with the people she covers because it makes it difficult for her to be honest in her criticism if she gets too close. And that is why I still respect her above all others. Not that I always agree with her, but at least when she says something, I don't wonder if her positivity is genuine.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Anna Torv did a good job in S3, not always and not consistently, but she had a few remarkable scenes. Not enough to deserve an Emmy nomination, that is absurd. I'm choosing to ignore Bell The Body Snatcher story arc, because Torv's job is not to imitate other people, it's to give life to fictional characters. She was terrible, the show suffered for it and her performance in future episodes suffered from it.

    However, let's face it, she was downright horrible in S1, no matter how much TPTB and Torv try to justify her acting. Olivia is not the first vulnerable, closed off, traumatized character on TV. She failed big time and that's why they fixed most of the characterization in S2. It's because all of that criticism, that everyone and their auntie is trying to overcompensate and now it's like she's the second coming of Meryl Streep. She is not. She's a capable of actress now, who has learned a lot in the last couple of years. I've watched a couple of her older shows and she was mediocre at best. Still, I don't think she's leading lady material, not for a big show. Her biggest problem is her anti-charisma, she doesn't have any on screen.

    Her performance in S4 has been more miss than hit for me. Most of her subtleties gained during S2 and part of S3 are gone and she relies too much on 2 expressions to define one Olivia or the other. The worst is the new speech pattern she has chosen for Olivia, it feels like Bell never left Olivia's body last season. It makes no sense.

    Favoritism for Torv might be the reason why they deny screentime and character development to the male lead here, but why is Seth Gabel getting lead character material over veteran actors like Lance Reddick and Jasika Nicole, and worse, over the real male lead of the show? What's the excuse for that? Did Torv have a say in that? She was the one pushing the idea of a Lincoln/Olivia pairing earlier this summer and she's always going on and on about Seth Gabel. I don't want to think the show has fallen this low, but seeing how the season is going, I have to wonder.

    ReplyDelete
  46. "It's because all of that criticism, that everyone and their auntie is trying to overcompensate and now it's like she's the second coming of Meryl Streep. She is not. She's a capable of actress now, who has learned a lot in the last couple of years."

    Well said. It is a bit like how Hayden Christensen was given far too much praise for his performance in SHATTERED GLASS... for basically being able to deliver his lines with some talent present.

    ReplyDelete
  47. wel said, newton

    very good view on anna torv acting ability

    ReplyDelete
  48. P.S. to the cunty bitch calguy2009 on tvwp forums, no. I wasn't talking about him. Nor was a whining. It's called shitting on stupidity.

    ReplyDelete
  49. i think that anna is a cold icequeen in reel life and that she is not into intimacy/sexs.
    ------------
    You should watch her on "The secret life of us" or "Mistresses". She´s very passionate.

    Yes, the lack of Peter is disappointing and I´m not Lincoln´s fan at all. But to assume Anna has something to do with it...
    Yes, Peter´s hardly there, in "Peter´s season". But: a really good actor can make work everything, even a cameo can be great if well done. What Josh´s doing with his scenes? Well, not much.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Actor's don't write their own scenes, so obviously... she has nothing to do with it. And not sure what your point is about Jackson. In the few scenes he has been in, he has been good.

    ReplyDelete
  51. And not sure what your point is about Jackson. In the few scenes he has been in, he has been good.
    ---------
    Peter´s fans complained that he didn´t show any strong emotions (didn´t cry etc.) and he´s "too cool". And that we don´t see what´s going on in Peter´s mind. A really great actor (like John Noble) would´ve done much more with the same material.

    ReplyDelete
  52. John Noble's character is written with many layers. He is given the best material. It comes down to the script. When they have given any of the actors meaty material, they have delivered meaty performances.

    The writers clearly love writing for Walter, like the COMMUNITY writers love writing for Abed. The quirky characters always win in that battle.

    ReplyDelete
  53. It´s not just about the character it´s about acting ability. If some untalented actor played Walter Fringe would´ve been dead years ago. If John was younger and played Peter he would´ve done it superb. Not everything is in the script. TV scripts aren´t classic books. Actor´s work does matter. Walter was just "a mad scientist" in the pilot script. But Walter we see on screen is John´s work that he put in this character and all the nuances that are not in the script (John and Josh talk about it in their interviews actually). Josh is good, but he´s not great. JMHO

    ReplyDelete
  54. I think you really want to believe that Josh isn't delivering and you are going to make it fit some fan-reality whether it is accurate or not. This is the typical fan site discussion bullshit... and this is not a fan site.

    No matter how great the actor, if the material is shit, it won't matter. John Noble wouldn't bring much more to Peter than Jackson does. In the end, a few eye fucks and a twitch of the ears doesn't make the character nuanced. It just makes him fuckin' twitchy. Sometimes John Noble over-acts or indicates all over the fuckin' place and fans think it is genius because they aren't sophisticated enough, or discriminating enough to notice the tell-tales.

    Come talk to me when they write a powerful scene for Peter and Jackson doesn't deliver. Until then, you are just trolling the actor's talent.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Sometimes John Noble over-acts or indicates all over the fuckin' place
    -------------
    I can say the same thing about Jackson. But maybe without the F-word. LOL
    I´d say the best Josh´s scenes are all with Walter/John. When he´s on his own or with other characters- not so much. JMHO

    ReplyDelete
  56. I won't disagree with you about his best scenes being opposite Noble.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Josh Jackson is an amazing actor and he is capable of showing emotional depth, crying and whatever you demand of him, as his previous work and occasionally Fringe show. He was great in Novation, the writers gave him good material and he delivered, the writers allowed him to show Peter was hurt by Walter's situation in the next episode and he delivered. It is a writing question in Fringe, not of acting.

    I was more affected by his expression in the last scene of Marionette than by one of the stupidly manipulative speeches in the whole series, during which Torv didn't manage to shed a single tear.

    Not even John Noble is perfect, as I've found a few of his acting choices out of place, the same goes for Josh, but Torv takes the cake in that regard by far.

    ReplyDelete
  58. And Noble's best scenes are with Jackson. His second best scenes are with the wonderful Jasika Nicole.

    I think Joshua Jackson is very charismatic and has great chemistry with everyone, except maybe Torv, but then I never thought she had that much screen presence. For instance, I always enjoyed Peter's scenes with Broyles and Astrid a lot. I wish the writers had spent more time developing those friendships. He even had better on screen chemistry with Charlie than Olivia/Charlie ever did, in spite of just having only one or two significant scenes with him.

    Surely liking or not one actor is a matter of personal taste, but my criticism on S4 is not about that, it's about what HGF stated in his review and the following comments, something I agree with.

    ReplyDelete
  59. At the end of the day, it comes down to writing. A great writer can make a bad actor look great. But a great actor can rarely make a bad writer look great. Audiences identify more with situations than delivery. And they will tell themselves an actor was good simply based on how much they liked or disliked the character and/or that character's story arc.

    It is rare, which is why we are called geeks and nerds, for people to recognize actual talent in the actor's craft. Even critics, especially online journalists, seem to have nearly abandoned the habit of judging bad acting talent from established actors. And do you know why you don't see it much? Because unless they need you (like with Ausiello or other TV journalists), you end up on the shit list and never get an interview with them again. And because there are far more writers now than ever before, you are easily replaced by the next writer who will say so-and-so is a good actor.

    And then ignorant, unsophisticated fans, especially those who gravitate toward Internet forums, eat that shit up like it is the life juice from God's own boiled baby fat. And then they repeat what they read over and over and over until they believe it whether it is fair or not. And sure, art is subjective, but subjectivity can be unreasonable. That is why actors created methods to their craft. So they could IMPROVE and so others with taste could judge whether or not they had.

    ReplyDelete
  60. WTF??? How can someone believe Joshua Jackson is average actor??????
    I don't understand why everybody think they can tell a good actor from a bad actor. Josh handled movies with perfection. I only saw him for the first time in Fringe, and then after I was amazed by his subtle acting I did a research about his movies and watched some, and needless to tell that we're lucky to have him on Fringe, if only people keep that in mind.
    Those emotional scenes everybody's talking about are the simplest thing actors can pull off. What? like a couple of tears and sad faces? you really believe it's what defines a good actor? I can't believe it. The real challenge for an actor is to define their characters with the script they're given. If you can't tell whether Josh could or couldn't bring many things to his character than you shouldn't post on internet, because the only people who will like your comments are ignorant like you. Why do people want Peter to become a crying baby for Josh to be defined as a good actor? this is real sh***. Characters are what they are! you can't change that.
    Furthermore, people who know nothing about acting ability get obsessed like crazy with actors who "overreact", and use too much twitching and facial expressions. They believe it's too hard to reach that level of acting. LOL! The great acting is defined when the actor is as close as he can get to showing that he isn't acting, not portraying, but living that moment. When I watch a scene I see how much that scene can be believable if it were real. people in real life don't show that much emotion and facial expressions on their faces like clowns. Sometimes you can only detect hurt, joy,.... By the look on one's eyes. When actors can reach that level o subtlty. They're real actors IMO. Fringe actors CAN do that and it's great, so there is no coplaining about their acting abilities. For me I do believe John noble deserves an EMMY, because he beautifully pulls off the material he's given, and he's given a lot of it. but the recent buzz about Anna having an EMMY wasn't that fair for me. I believe she's good. I actually like her subtle scenes better than the ones she uses too much faces. But to say she's perfect.... DUnno.
    Overall, Fringe casting is amazing... So I'm okay with everyone of them getting some recognition.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Lets be honest this season is a failure. It is supposed to be judged as a Peter season and he has barely been in it...therefore it has failed to do what it is supposed to do.....push the mythology and give answers. COTW is all good and fine if you want a procedural like NCIS, but as a mythology/serialised show...epic fail....They either get their shit together or I am gone.

    ReplyDelete
  62. If you are going to be "honest," then you can't say the season is a failure. The season isn't even 1/3 finished.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Mea Culpa,

    The season so far has failed on its initial promise. Therefore it is an epic fail thus far.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I'll give you that it has achieved an epic fail at least once in seven episodes. Maybe twice. But there is lots of time left for them to save it. Hell, to me, until about episode 15, season 2 is no better.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Well the telling part about this whole Peter situation is that most of his story this season has been played out in a comic book, lol. So that tells you the level of commitment they have to telling anything about Peter on screen, practically none.

    Best option is to just quit the show, the ratings cannot get any lower, less then 3 million overall and a 1.1. I would like to see it go below 2 million overall before the series is over, that will be good for them, a great learning curve for future shows. Erm, yeah that seems about right, if they do not want to play the game then fuck em, idiots.

    Let Torv bore people on another show.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Well, you should definitely quit the show if you are so bitter.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Quit! I will not watch the show but I will check out the ratings to see if the show learns anything and tries to arrest the rapid shameful spiral they are in. But I doubt it, it is a pity because there are a lot of fans, good fans, fans who make podcasts (fringe network, FBI, Spoilertv, you, etc) who really want more seasons and they will not get that. They just did not want to play the game....give fans what they want before they leave.

    ReplyDelete
  68. The biggest thing writers ever "learn" when their shows fail is to blame it on everything under the sun not related to their story telling.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Talking about podcasts, you noted that Josh Jackson (which I did not know) has the most experience of film and Tv than either John Noble or Anna Torv and he said it is confusing that they refuse to use him considering his experience and fan base.

    The Spoiler Tv Podcast guy went on a 10 minute rant about how in the comic books between season 3 and 4 there is a tonne of stuff that happened with Peter and that it makes no sense that Peter would not tell them any of his journey and that they would rather stall and give out these weak episodes than deal with the current situation, he said it makes no sense Peter would not speak up.

    I have to agree on all counts, it makes no narrative sense that the show would not off the bat answer these questions: where has Peter been, What does he feel that he does not belong in the blue universe because he was stolen and not from there, he does not belong in the red universe because he does not know that place and he does not belong in the amber universe. What does he feel that he he has no home and no belonging....does that not make him want to cry, shout, curse, curl up into a ball....die? Not only does he not know where he is, he is a prisoner that is trapped in a tiny house in a world that does not want him and views him as a scientific anonymally.

    Such frustration....instead of answering these questions we get episode 1, 3, 4, 5 and 7...very weak episodes that makes no sense at all and are just filler.

    There is no time for them to answer all the above questions and more that I have not thought of. They also have to fix the observer problem, over there problem, the potential war, the other big bads of this season...this has to be crammed into 15 episodes and then they have to come up with a fitting series finale....I just do not understand why they have wasted so much time and not been in answer mode from the get go. I just have a feeling that the show is going to great pains to sideline Peter. They put him in hospital, they have only one of him so they do not need him in two universes...they vanish him from the timeline so they do not have him and now they have him shop for Lincoln...why are they going to such great lengths to push him to the side?

    Then there are thousands of questions from previous seasons like was that kid they found in season 1 really important, was he an observer or someone else. What is the true history of the cortexaphan experiements...to get Peter back, to prepare for a war that only happened because Walter crossed over...why was the video of the experiment in season 1 of a kid olivia of 4 or 5 years old but the flashback she was like 12 or 13...did they experiement on them for like 10 years?

    And many, many, many more questions on Bell, Nina, Lincoln, Astrid, etc. Can they do that in 15 episodes as well as fix Peter?

    GULP....

    This is not going to end well.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Oh and the best part I forgot to mention, the showrunners Whyman and Pinkner say in interviews that they are frustrated that they cannot write more for Peter....well dudes if you are frustrated then why not just fucking write for him? you stupid cunts. What the fuck?

    That must be the most dumbest thing a show runner could say...we know fans are frustrated and so are we..? Hey my name is Chris Fedak the year is 2010 we are in season 3...we know fans are frustrated with this bullshit will they wont they and so am I...this is where I will give Fedak credit...at least he admitted flat out that he was just shit scarred that all the fans would leave his show before he got to tell the Chuck hero story if he put them together, lol.

    No such luck from the two dick heads above.

    ReplyDelete
  71. 15 episodes is more than enough time to fit it all in... problem is, I don't think that is their plan. Like I said when the season started, they seem to want to use up about 13 episodes telling a story they could have told in four episodes.

    Why? I really don't know.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Well we are getting the one episode 4.08 that has Peter in it for more than 15 minutes of an episode. So one episode for the season it is....about par for the course.

    ReplyDelete
  73. DK, are you kidding me? They really had the gall to say that they are frustrated they cannot write for Peter? Of all the stupid things they could ever say, this one takes the cake.

    Get this, they cannot write for Peter, although they do write for everyone else, because, surprise!, they are the producers and they decide which characters they want to develop and how well. This is why they decided that in the fourth season, the time was ripe to finally write for... Lincoln! Let's all rejoice, it was long overdue. Man, weren't we all frustrated that they didn't seem to care about Lincoln, but they finally listened to us. These guys are the worst.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Lincoln is a super interesting character, people! He has like glasses. So... yeah.

    ReplyDelete
  75. http://www.givememyremote.com/remote/2011/11/07/fringe-jeff-pinkner-and-j-h-wyman-talk-novation-and-whats-to-come/

    They said we made this relationship with Peter and we know fans are frustrated (with the lack of Peter) and we are frustrated.....basically they are a couple of wankers.

    ReplyDelete
  76. If you are going to paraphrase them, at least include this part:

    "So for all of those feelings to have the appropriate degree of satisfaction [for Peter's return], you need to go through some rough places first."

    ReplyDelete
  77. This situation reminds me of shows that just go off the rails when they cannot explain away their premise. How I Met Your Mother, Lost and Chuck are three fine examples...a target is set....finding the mother, solving the mysteries of the island and resolving WTWT and yet the shows just manage to devolve and lose quality in failing to address those issues in an appropriate amount of time. Out of the three I think Chuck just about got off the lightest, then Lost kind of blew it to shit and finally HIMYM has just fucked up in so many ways it is sad to see them go so low.

    Why bother setting these targets.....just tell a simplified story that may be predicatable..The Wire/Mad Men/Breaking Bad/etc....but at least does not set you up to look like idiots and hacks and does not frustrate your key audiences.

    I do not say this to be contrary, I just wonder if a show runner ever thinks that maybe it is not a good idea to set something up you know will never be able to answered well or could lose you points when fans know that you are stalling out of fear of showing your hand. Chuck screwed up big time with Shaw...Lost left basically all its mythology on the table and a lot of fans have written off the final season and HIMYM has devolved into a distasteful misogyny of a show. I once was invested in Teds search and now it just comes across as him bragging to his kids on how many women he banged.

    Fienberg and Sepinwall noted in their podcast that maybe the writers and show runners of HIMYM are probably oblivious to how distasteful they have become, the agree that they are just waiting for answers and it is no longer a critical piece to evaluate. I think the same goes for Fringe, I wonder if they have any idea just how much they have fucked up and how many answers they have just left on the table and how far their show has devolved. Sepinwall, Fienberg, McNutt, Ryan, McGee, etc have all just abandoned the show due to this fact...and yet the alarm bells are just not ringing at all. As a show runner if fans and proffessional critics (and some award winning at that...Mo Ryan (congratualations)) told me that my show sucks I might want to address that...I know I take heed if my boss tells me in a yearly review what my strengths and weaknessess are...maybe they should too.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Why set those targets? Simple. The general audiences likes them. As is often mentioned on this site, the hardcore fans make up the minority of viewers.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Yeah this has kind of devloved into a hateful debate between those who are about Peter and those who do not give a fuck.

    When a show has an actor write his characters own story in a comic book than that tells you the level of investment they have in telling a story for him: NONE. They could not even be bothered to write the comic book, they had him do it, lol.

    If they had any interest in writing for him they would, as the host of this site said, they could have done this arc in 4 episodes and not 13 and yet they have not. There are scripts being leaked and by the looks of it....this season is going to continue in the same vein...i.e. no Peter.

    I think fans who love Peter and Josh Jackson should just wait until the show is cancelled and watch him do something else. Relax and enjoy the last 15 episodes of the show, the end is nigh and lets see what the rest of the Walter and Olivia show has for them.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Peter is on the show because Joshua Jackson is "under contract"

    Simple, no more no less. He will barely be in the series and he will only be there because he has to be there...this came from the mouths of Whyman and Pinkner.

    So relax peeps, Peter may be a plot device, a contrivance generator, a non entity, etc...but he will be on the show in some form because he is "under contract"...not that they want him or have any use for him or want to explore him but because he is "under contract".

    So as the host of this site says...there is no point in getting frustrated....just accept what the show runners tell you and move on.

    ReplyDelete
  81. well, well, well.

    joshua jackson just signed on for yet another movie.

    that's his second by now in just a few months.

    finally , josh has opened his eyes and realized that they just use him (as a plot device) in fringe and he is wasting his time on that show.

    of course , anna and john get praised for their work in fringe, they get the best scenes!!!!

    when olivia was captured in the other universe, they gave anna the best script to work with.

    but for josh , they cant even bother to write one discent episode for him in this so called peter season????

    i hate those writers, i hate joel wyman even more.
    he has a thing for anna torv , i said it many times.
    in his tweets he talks the majority of the time about her and in his pictures he has like 3 photos of anna and maybe one of each other castmembers.

    and dont get me started about the way those two (anna and joel) were acting towards each other during comic con 2011.....

    but anyway, im so glad for josh.

    it his time to shine!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  82. "finally , josh has opened his eyes and realized that they just use him (as a plot device) in fringe and he is wasting his time on that show."

    You really don't understand TV contracts at all.

    ReplyDelete
  83. i do understand tv contract.

    i know very well that he's under contract.

    i just meant that josh has to do something else, WHILE he is on fringe.

    he has time, its not that they need him in every scene.

    anna and john on the other hand, i can understand that they dont make movies.

    it's because the show revolves around them , its "the olivia and walter show".

    so im happy that josh is not relaying on the show only , but is looking for other work.

    so he can at least use his acting ability in other projects.

    ReplyDelete
  84. But you said it as if Josh is like "Well, they aren't going to give me anything good to do so I better go do something else."

    Actors act. They are constantly looking for projects because you can be hot one second and cold the next. So, it is no wonder he is looking for as much work as possible. The issue here isn't that Jackson is fed up with what the writers are doing, because no one gives a crap what an actor thinks (at least not the producers and writers).

    What IS important is that he has TIME to do movies while shooting a TV show. Unless these shoots are happening in the summer... he should be much too busy.

    ReplyDelete
  85. How did Mandy Patikin leave criminal minds at the end of season 2? He said that he left for creative difference can Josh not do that? Surly CBS signed Patikin for 6 seasons and he left.

    If an actor wants to leave I think he or she can leave.

    ReplyDelete
  86. "How did Mandy Patikin leave criminal minds at the end of season 2?"

    Because he is Mandy fuckin' Patinkin. He wouldn't sign a six-year contract. He probably had an option to quit whenever he wanted.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Smart man! It help avoid him getting stuck in a shit procedural that does not respect his talents. Josh is stuck in the same situation. I hope he is set free soon.

    ReplyDelete
  88. I wouldn't be surprised if Adam Baldwin was on a season-by-season contract. After all, he was approached first. Though, I have no way of knowing that. I just get the sense Adam isn't the type to sign a 6-year contract.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Whatever contract it is...he is in every episode even if some of those episodes do not use him that much if at all. I mean suitcase comes to mind. After Chuck and Sarah got together Casey was hardly used, not that I am complaining, just observing. Poor guy got stuck with Morgan. Tvline released some spoilers BTW about what is happening in the next Chuck. Fedak smartly gave away an important spoiler. One that makes some sense....

    ReplyDelete
  90. Why are we talking about CHUCK in a FRINGE comment section?

    I get so lost sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
  91. i think that joshua will always be a tv actor.
    after fringe he is going to disappear from the spotlights.

    and after a couple years, he is going to show up in yet another tv-show.

    it's a shame, guess,
    man, the charisma that that guy has,OMG.
    no wonder, he always dating gorgeous women.

    anna torv on the other hand, i can see a future for her in movies.
    she already signed a two-picture deal with FOX.
    (FOX offered her this 2 movies , when she signed for fringe)
    this contract will give push her carrier in the right direction, i guess.
    LOL! poor FOX, little do they knew, that fringe would never actually take off.
    i wonder if they regret giving her 2movies to make......
    maybe they saw the futurejennifer garner,keri russell, or evangeline lilly in anna torv.

    anyway, i think that anna will become a big star. i just have that feeling.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Man, it really helps your career when your uncle OWNS THE COMPANY. :)

    ReplyDelete
  93. Anonymous, why don't you shut up? He has been in this business for over 20 + years, more than your precious Anna Torv has ever done. He has done over 20 films, has two movies like Lay the Favorite and Inescapable and that's DURING fringe. So shut up and leave Josh alone.

    ReplyDelete
  94. right?

    i think i never saw this.

    anna torv must be the first one EVER, to be offered a 2picture deal with a network AND a 6 year contract for a tv show at the same time.

    wow, lucky her.


    she was an unknown actress when they signed her for fringe for 6 seasons.

    why would they offer her than 2 movies right away?

    right, of course,there was no luck here involved, just nepotisme.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Oh and Fox gave Anna a 2 picture deal from Fox? Big effin deal, Josh has over 30 FILMS under his belt. So 2 damn films for Anna is nothing to be proud of.

    Oh AND Anna has done nothing but TV SHOWS, too so who the hell are you to judge Josh, huh and the fact that Anna is not filming ANY movies at all right now. So shut up.

    ReplyDelete
  96. josh has to look/audition for movies now, while shooting fringe.
    (he knows it's the last season).
    he has 2 movies coming up, but they are independant.

    anna torv is just chilling now, doing fringe whithout stressing out.

    and when fringe will finish, 2 movies are waiting for her. i assume, those 2 movies are commercial and not independant.
    and those 2 movies could be her break to stardom.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Anonymous, who cares if they are independent? Independent movies are not bad movies, jeez.

    Anna Torv is chilling doing fringe without stressing out? Shut up. You are annoying.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Don't you listen, you anna torv lover? Josh has 30 FILMS UNDER HIS BELT AND ANNA TORV ONLY HAS ONLY TWO MOVIES. shut up, just shut up.

    ReplyDelete
  99. I can't stand anna torv fans. They act like she is so superior over everyone else. it sickens me.

    ReplyDelete
  100. 30 films, who nobody ever saw.

    josh is still remembered as pacey, that is saying enough.

    anna torv just need 2 movies to become a star.

    ReplyDelete
  101. ANNA TORV IS A BITCH AND HER FANS ARE, TOO!December 25, 2011 at 2:15 PM

    And what the hell makes you think a person would watch a movie with a nobody like Anna Torv?

    SHUT UP YOU FUCKING JOSHUA JACKSON HATER! GO TO HELL ALL ANNA TORV FANS! I HATE YOU! I HATE YOU! I HATE YOU!

    ReplyDelete
  102. after fringe it's back to RIP joshua jackson.

    his next tv-show: playing the dad in a teenage soap opera. LOL!

    once a tv actor, always a tv actor.

    ReplyDelete
  103. anna torv is the next cate blanchett.

    mark my words!

    joshua jackson is the next.........., uhmmmmm,
    well i cant think of something.

    well at least he owns the name pacey.

    ReplyDelete
  104. ANNA TORV IS A BITCH AND HER FANS ARE, TOO!December 25, 2011 at 2:23 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  105. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  106. i'm sorry, i crossed the line.

    i just want people to know and acknowledge the fact that we have here an amazing , perfect woman who happens to be an actress; anna torv.

    anna torv is one of the greatest actresses of our generation.

    her emmy, golden globe and oscar are waiting for her.

    just give her a chance, and you will adore her.
    be a fan of somebody who at least, can act.

    ReplyDelete
  107. ANNA TORV IS A BITCH AND HER FANS ARE, TOO!December 25, 2011 at 5:25 PM

    oh so you think by bashing Joshua jackson, you honestly get people to like anna torv which i NEVER WILL you idiot? You are an asshole.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Calm down, assholes. Or I will delete more messages. I don't mind if you shit on each other but at least make it interesting. I want interesting flame wars!

    ReplyDelete
  109. P.S.

    As Australian chicks go, Yvonne Strahovski is the real deal!

    WAR!

    ReplyDelete
  110. You know, who cares if Josh is still being seen as Pacey, at least Pacey was a well-written, well loved character that has made a big impression on people unlike Peter Bishop who people see as nothing but a plot device.

    BTw, don't think for a single second that Anna Torv won't be still as Olivia when Fringe ends. it happens to EVERY star who was done TV, no matter how good they are.

    Considering Fringe's ratings, I doubt Anna will be a big star. Sorry to bust your bubble.

    BTW, you CAN have a successful TV career, thank you very much. Hello, The Mentalist? Hello House? Hello Modern Family. There are the EMMY AWARDS mind you. So stop looking down on TV stars as if they are not worth anything. If there were no TV stars, we would be stuck with reality shows.

    BTW, why criticize Josh for doing TV when your girl Anna is ALSO doing TV. Huh?

    ReplyDelete
  111. Oh and before I forget, you wouldn't have noticed Anna if it wasn't for this TV SHOW.

    ReplyDelete
  112. I think Anna did a great job in season 3. But Josh Jackson has something she doesn't have. Natural chemistry with anyone in a scene with him. So, we can argue until the cows come home who is more talented or who will have the bigger career in 20-years (Jackson, since Hollywood is still a man's game and women mostly get pushed out of big roles after 40), but there is no denying that he wins in the chemistry department.

    Anna has chemistry with... let's see... Josh, sometimes, and... John. The two guys on the show who could have chemistry with a toaster.

    ReplyDelete
  113. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Alright... I can deal with you people shitting on each other, but this bullshit judgement of someone's private life, I don't go for. So, say what you will about Anna's talent, but if you start with private life shit, it gets deleted.

    Deal? This isn't that kind of site, peeps.

    ReplyDelete
  115. Whew, now I know why the origin of "Fan" comes from 'Fanatic'. Fans can become obsessed with a character.
    My biggest beef has always been that the show is slowly dying, thanks to one character being thrust into the lead, while the others whom I'd fallen in love with are shoved into the sidelines or have become furniture. Looks nice but kept in the background.
    If 'Uncle' is taking a part in this, then as the saying goes, "Why kill the goose that laid the golden egg?"
    Why risk lowering the ratings just to make one person happy...Oh wait a minute. Just thought of something. How many shows does it take to make it profitable in reruns?
    Perhaps 'Uncle's' thinking is. the show has hit that mark, and now he's just trying to give 'Flame Wars' a try at being lead. 'Cause if that's the reason, to me at least, she isn't cutting it!
    I am bored out of my gourd, with the past few episodes. I think it's time for the show to wake up and smell the bad reviews and lower viewership. Because no matter what network you're on, both spell canceled.

    ReplyDelete
  116. As I seem to have to mention over and over... the show is written well in advance of you seeing the episodes. And by the time they get fan feedback about what people want, the episodes have already been shot. Not that they should listen to fans or critics. They should just try to create the best possible season.

    ReplyDelete
  117. If that's the case, than that makes it even scarier. Someone actually looked at the scripts and thought they were were on par with the previous three seasons?
    I'm an amateur writer, and the scenarios I had running through my mind after the end of last season had me so hyped for this season. I just wonder what happened to the writers imagination. Such a myriad of possibilities wasted.
    All those people that died, or lived, or creatures killed, because Peter was alive. With Peter non-existed the world could have been super-fringed, monster city, dimension battle centraled. Instead we get, "Do I look sexy in these glasses?" Now I get the Furious in your name.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Well, we are still early into the season. Maybe they figured something out later in the writing process. Lots of people abandoned LOST during season 3, but that show picked up in the final few episodes of that season and really took off during the next two.

    ReplyDelete
  119. i think that if they had cast an unknown actor for the role of peter, there would not have been such anger and critic between the fans.

    i compare it with bradley cooper and alias.
    bradley is now very famous, but back than in alias, he had such a small role in the show, but nobody complained, because he was not a known actor. if you put bradley back in that show now and you give him a litlle screentime as he had before in the show, i would garantee that fans WILL complain.

    fans or people , who knew joshua jackson, are being used to the fact that josh gets a lot of screentime ,especially in a tv-show.
    so when the fans found out that josh will play in a tv-show, they assumed that he will have a lot of screentime.
    an actor like josh, who like you said , has the most experience than noble and torv, you assume his acting experience would actually GET USED in the show.

    so what i'm trying to say, they could have avoided this war between the fans, if they just had gone for someone not famous.
    so nobody would than have complained if anna took all the screentime.

    i mean, how ignorent are the writers/producers?
    do they really thought that the fans of josh , would accepte that his character is set to be a plotdevice AND give him so much less screentime on top of that?? i mean, really.

    btw, if i recall , the ratings began to drop, when they introduced the altuniverse and cut back on the sceentime of josh.
    if season 3 was the best of fringe, why did the ratings drop at this perticular time?
    i always wonder that if they havent gone to the altuniverse and josh would actually be in every episode, would fringe have increased in ratings?
    guess will never know...

    ReplyDelete
  120. sometimes i think that the producers of fringe take advantage of the charisma of josh.

    they LOVE to use him in interviews, or promos.

    he is always the one ,who is the most fascinating and the most fun in those interviews.

    and i really think that they insisted to bring josh to those comic cons event.
    can you imagine, if he wasnt there? it would be so boring. he is always the one who makes the crowd laugh.
    anna? just stands there, being so quiet.
    they just use him, when it suits them.
    that makes josh a clown, a puppet of them.

    so using josh for entertainement and using anna for acting.
    yeppe, that how it goes.

    ReplyDelete
  121. I think the biggest detriment to ratings was the alternate universe stuff. Mind you, that's my favorite story element. But the general public probably felt it made the show too sci-fi and not just weird-fi. Which is funny since the stuff about the alternative universes is probably far more realistic than the hyper cancer cell one-off story lines the general public seemed to like.

    ReplyDelete
  122. i have to agree with the comment about going for an unknown actor for the character peter.
    than anna would have had all the screentime to herself without any complaints.

    i also read here that some of you dont see a big movie carrier for anna after fringe. why is that?

    ReplyDelete
  123. Anna won't have a big movie career unless you consider a big movie career being in lots of movies. I doubt she will ever be an A-list actor. She is already getting old (for Hollywood) and isn't one of those shockingly beautiful women that seem to be able to hold long-term careers in the business.

    As I have said many times, Hollywood is unfortunately still a men's game... and mostly men in their late 30s and well into their 40s. That's when most actors go A-list. Very few women are part of that club.

    ReplyDelete
  124. I mean, I've been worried about Yvonne Strahovski's movie career and she's not even 30 yet. You have a limited time as a woman in the business. Every extra year ticks away your chances.

    ReplyDelete
  125. so there is hope for joshua than, i hope.

    ReplyDelete
  126. yvonne strahovski is very beautiful indeed.

    you are right, every year counts as an actress in hollywood.

    i think anna torv is starting to be very aware of that. i read an interview with her in which she said she hoped that fringe will end after the fourth or fifth season and she didnt want a fringe movie.

    apparently she wants to use her time to persue a movie carrier.

    i think anna wasted a lot of time, where was she in her twenties??

    ReplyDelete
  127. She was apparently doing Australian TV from 2002 until 2008.

    ReplyDelete
  128. The parallel universe would have been interesting to me if they hadn't made it so unbelievable in the first place and if the differences weren't so shallow. The event that created the parallel universe happened way before Walter was born. Early enough to make the US history and geography quite different. However, for some reason exactly the same people exist over here and over there. What are the odds? The same people would have to meet and have the same offspring successively, until they produce exactly the same characters over here and over there. The DNA would have to behave exactly the same at a molecular level. How convenient! I understand they save money using the same actors for different roles, so there is that, but why are the differences limited to a few cultural references and a couple of technologically advanced gadgets? There is no true exploration of the other side, just props that indicate the action is taking place in another world, that's why I find it disappointing.

    I don't think they have done a good job at exploring the alternate characters either. The only one that got some character development was AltBroyles, the rest of the characters and time were used to serve the character of Olivia in a very heavy-handed way and that's it. I don't think those episodes over there were that amazing, there were a couple of good episodes and a couple mediocre ones, but the writers succeeded in doing something very well during the first 8-episode arc: conveying a sense of urgency and danger, keeping the viewers on their toes, but I also remember people getting frustrated at the writers for stretching that storyline unnecessarily and for some weak writing.

    Regarding Torv's future, I don't really care. I'm not going to follow her after this show is over and I'm not interested in knowing if she's successful or not. Personally, I don't think she's good or charismatic enough to be lead in anything, but seeing her family connections, I wouldn't be surprised if she landed an important role in a B-movie or pilot, but it is possible that she will fade away from TV land sooner than later. See for instance Katee Sackhoff from Battlestar Galactica, a much better actress than Torv by a mile, who also had a promising career, also with movie and TV show deals. Where is she now? I know Tricia Helfer, who did multiple variations of the same character much better and earlier than Torv, is busy guest starring and doing TV movies, but she hasn't made it to the big screen and she hasn't landed a lead role in a established series yet. Out of the incredibly talented cast in BSG, Grace Park is the only one that got lucky. Who would have thought?

    ReplyDelete
  129. You just answered your own question about why the differences are so minor. Budget. Plus, time. I imagine it would take them much longer to write and shoot a more complex script. The simpler the differences are, the easier it is to construct.

    ReplyDelete
  130. Of course, but that hardly makes the alternate universe unique or interesting. It was like watching the actors play with clothes and wigs, instead of feeling like a real place. However, I understand that making it more complex might have scared even a larger portion of the audience.

    ReplyDelete
  131. I don't agree. I think it is interesting when utilized well, like when they switched the Olivias. Now, if you want to argue that it is underutilized, fine. But I'm not going off this cliff of "it's not interesting" with you.

    ReplyDelete
  132. I should have said "underutilized and under-realized."

    ReplyDelete
  133. jonxproductions Ari Margolis
    #FringeBinge 408 Teaser #1 - You will get at least 15 scenes with Peter.

    it's a message for twitter.


    so basically what they are trying to say
    with this message is: hush, hush peter fans, joshua will appear 15 times in this episode, happy now?

    well , lucky us , right? right? NOT.

    what a way to patronize josh his fans!!
    wow, if you have to start TO COUNT how many times peter will appear in one episode, than there is something really wrong.

    if they send a message saying that olivia will appear 15 times the next episode, then her fans will say: AND? SO? what are you trying to say?

    but for us, the fans of josh , i suppose you think we must start jumping of joy,or what?

    ReplyDelete
  134. Sounds like you just really want to be negative, even when you get what you want.

    ReplyDelete
  135. <>

    I'm sorry, now I'm really confused. With all the flame wars I wonder when did Fringe turn into the Anna Torv show? I thought it was about a world where a grief stricken genius stole an alternate of his dead son from another dimension and brought upon a war of two dimensions.

    Do you honestly believe that the show is better with just Anna as the lead? I've heard so much praise for John Noble as Walter,fans have screamed EMMY for three years, yet no one is complaining about him taking her screen time.
    Oh wait, he isn't, he's been cooped up in a basement.

    I just ask this of the Anna Torv fans. Do you seriously believe that the show would be better without John Noble, and Joshua Jackson?

    I loved the emotions that John and Joshua has showed for each other in the three years of the show. The love that Walter has for Peter is so deep. That is what I miss the most. Two grown men, a father and son not afraid to show that they care for one another. Even after Peter found out our Walter was not his father, in the end he still loved him.

    The heart and soul of Fringe is a story about a man that dared to go into another dimension to save another man's son, just because he couldn't bear to see his son die again.

    Very deep stuff, that the writers seemed to have forgotten.

    ReplyDelete
  136. And when Joshua Jackson and John Noble are in virtually every scene for 10 straight episodes, you will look back on this comment section and not feel any shame in the melodrama.

    Oh fandoms.

    ReplyDelete
  137. No, the problem isnt about casting an unknown actor, it was fox promoting josh as one of the leads and the fact that Peter/josh did virtually nothing in the first season, he didn't even have an episode that centered around him. So all this frustration isnt something new, it's been happening since the very first season. So if Peter had his own storyline since the 1st season, there would be no complaining.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Didn't Peter have his own storyline at the end of season 2?

    ReplyDelete
  139. yes, Peter did have the storyline with the machine and look where THAT ended up, Peter was "weaponized" and that was dropped, Peter told Olivia about the killings and it went to Bellivia, Henry activated it, Olivia shut down the machine and all Peter had to do was step into it. Peter never had a storyline where Olivia wasn't part of it.

    So it seems Peter can never have his own storyline without OLIVIA getting some credit for it.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Couldn't you say that about every character? That no one gets their own story line without another character getting some credit for it?

    ReplyDelete
  141. Not when the character is known as a plot device. Nobody EVER calls Walter or Olivia a plot device now do they?

    ReplyDelete
  142. I go around fringe sites and the only words that come out people's mouths when it comes to Peter is "plot device", "less developed", etc while Walter and Olivia are being praised for how "perfect" they are.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Fringe fans are not very passionate are they! During season 3 of chuck one fan suggested that the show be boycotted until they fixed the bullshit that was on screen. Why are there no fringe fans doing that now? Where is the fan who says we should quit the show if we do not get at least 15 episodes of Peter and nothing but Peter? Come on guys get your shit together?

    As for reality fringe has a formula and they will stick with it to the detriment of the show. Why? Because they do not know better

    ReplyDelete
  144. Lost made the same mistakes.....they spent so much time on the most annoying characters like jack and Kate (and worst actor on the show) that they could not course correct because they already invested too much time on them. Secondly lost spent too much time going over the same character material instead of advancing the plot especially in seasons 2 and 3. That is where fringe is now...they keep going over the same character material for Olivia and Walter instead of moving forward with other more interesting and underused characters like the observers and Peter. They need to cancel this show and cancel it quickly. They are fucking up too much and the worst thing is they are making the same mistakes lost did but they did not have to because lost finished 2 years ago!

    ReplyDelete
  145. Another thing is that lost had over 10 characters to balance and so I accepted when they could not flashback on some characters or flash forward. But fringe has 3! Only 3! And they are still fucking up....counts wankers and useless assholes who should know better and do better.

    ReplyDelete
  146. Oh and if you are wondering what the formula is, it is this...they spend 95% of the episodes in a season slow burning Walter and Olivia's stories and they use one episode for Peter's story. Case in point..this season it took them 4/5 full episodes to realise that something is missing in their lives. Peter had one half episode in 4.06 and he came to the realisation that this was not his universe that something was missing. So they get 5 episodes and he gets a half. That is their formula and it will not change I can guarantee that! I will bet my house that his story will be half assed..they just do not know any fucking better. Whyman and Pinkner are basically a poorer version of Cuse and Lindleoff. They are dumber, more arrogant, more dismissive, more insulting and more cheesy in their approach to storytelling they are frauds that should not be trusted. They said this is a peter season...yeah right! 7 episodes and he has been in 30 minutes of those....what lying wankers.

    ReplyDelete
  147. Oh and Peter = Lost mythology...they will never give you the answers...ever.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Boycotting? LOL! Why would anyone ever listen to a boycott? It just makes the fans sound like idiots.

    ReplyDelete
  149. anna will have a big carrier after fringe!!!

    maybe the biggest of them all!!!

    john noble is too old and the rest of the cast is too unknown.

    oh yeah, i almost forgot about josh. i think he will just disappear and people will forget about him.

    anna will have a great start, because she signed a two-picture deal with FOX.
    and that's a GREAT start, doing commercial films.

    anna, will get her golden globe and oscar very soon after fringe, trust me.

    she is the greatest actress of our generation.

    ReplyDelete
  150. "anna will have a big carrier after fringe"

    A fat guy who carries her around?

    If you mean CAREER, then I doubt that very much. And anyone who calls her "the greatest actress of our generation" is a bit nutty.

    ReplyDelete
  151. i just saw that latest promo for fringe; the wait.

    i'm really curious, what's going to happen with olivia. she will obviously get the most action, along with lincoln. i could tell from the promo.

    peter? LOL, i swear that peter -character is just a joke.
    from the promo, i saw peter running with a gun and a bulletproof vest.
    WTF?
    it doesnt even make any sense, he is not a FBI agent, what is he doing with a gun????
    let the action with a gun to olivia and lincoln, broyles and astrid; they are agents, peter is not.

    peter is at his best, when he is used as a plot device, being olivia-boyfriend, or just sitting looking pretty.

    it's like; the writers dont have anything to do/write with the peter character, so they just give him gun and a bulletproof vest, and let him run...LOL!!!, with no meaning at all.
    so he can have at least a little screentime.

    i really hope this upcoming episode will be good and intresting for olivia and walter.

    i hope they let peter/josh just run meaningless with his gun/bulletproof vest in this episode

    while the best scenes will be with the other characters, especially olivia and walter.

    ReplyDelete
  152. "it doesnt even make any sense, he is not a FBI agent, what is he doing with a gun????"

    That's why you watch the episode. To find out.

    ReplyDelete
  153. This show has jumped the shark at the end of season 3.

    ReplyDelete
  154. Anonymous, you REALLY REALLY REALLY need to shut up. I am so sick of your constant bashing on Josh/Peter. Just shut up, we get it already.

    ReplyDelete
  155. Bladmissbliss

    I would not worry about Peter bashers, this season will be Fringe's last. Kevin Reilly came out at the beginning of the season and said all the right things about how Fringe may get renewed if it can stay at a 1.5 all season and all that..knowing fully well that Fringe will be lucky to finish at a 1.0. Also the WB probably gave the show away for free and I doubt they will do so again.

    Fringe is toast, it is done.

    This time next year Josh Jackson will be in a movie enjoying actual screen time.

    If by some huge mirracle that Fringe is renewed, I hope Josh is cut for his own good.

    ReplyDelete
  156. There won't be a 5th season of FRINGE unless Torv's uncle REALLY loves her.

    ReplyDelete
  157. I love how a network executive like Reilly spins Fringe's renewal as Fox actually caring about the medium when everyone (thanks to you) knows that its existence is purely thanks to The WB giving it away for syndication purposes. Fans actually think they saved the show! The network execs obviously feed that delusion but I mean what incentive does The WB have in renewing it for a 5th season.

    If Torv's uncle did help their renewal I doubt he paid a lot for Fringe, I mean this season you can clearly see the budget cuts. No Peter, no Observers, we have hardly seen the other universe, etc. If it is renewed they will basically be like Chuck...look really cheap and the story will go in more circles.

    ReplyDelete
  158. Except CHUCK actually looks more expensive this season than last.

    ReplyDelete
  159. Have your sources at the WB hinted at what it would take for Fringe to get a 5th season even if it was a shortened one?

    ReplyDelete
  160. Unfortunately, my sources at WB have no idea. I would need FOX sources for that and I don't have any (at least not in a department of that level of importance).

    But what I have heard is that no one is seriously expecting FRINGE to go past the 4th season, especially since it will make it to syndication this season. There is NO WAY WB will lower its licensing fee for a 5th season, and virtually no way FOX will pay MORE for less.

    ReplyDelete
  161. So for Fringe to come back The WB will produce more only at the same price they are selling it now and Fox will not pay that price. They will want to pay less...I understand.

    That sounds simple to understand, I do not understand why the show runners Whyman and Pinkner do not know this? They keep saying that they expect the show to go on for 8 seasons and are not planning its end. This sounds confusing, either they are the biggest dumbasses alive or they are incredibly smart and are saying these things so when the show is cancelled they can say that they had no idea and would have done certain storylines differently if they had known earlier. So they are giving themselve plausable denyability.

    ReplyDelete
  162. No, WB would produce more episodes for MORE than FOX is paying now.

    ReplyDelete
  163. "They keep saying that they expect the show to go on for 8 seasons"

    Just show runner bullshit. Never believe anything a show runner says.

    ReplyDelete
  164. Oh well Fox would really have to care about the medium for that to happen...and I see pigs flying outside of my bedroom window.

    That will never happen, Fox is a very strong network, I just do not see that happening.

    ReplyDelete
  165. I mean they accept kitchen nightmares at a 1.6 or so but that show must be so cheap to produce. There must be so little profit margins for Fox with Fringe.

    ReplyDelete
  166. I remember reading somewhere, and this was some years ago, that a reality show on NBC could cost them $200,000 per episode, while a similarly rated scripted show could cost them $2 million (or more) per episode.

    ReplyDelete
  167. Well there you go...the cost is a tenth of the price and probably a lot more profitable because they just keep renewing kitchen nightmares. Why even bother with scripted tv? American idol must be so cheap compared to how much they get from advertising.

    It really surprises me that they keep fringe.

    ReplyDelete
  168. yes, im a huge anna torv fan. so what??

    she made fringe.

    and stop being so delusional, okay?

    joshua will start in 2 upcoming movies, but they are independant movies. so , the chance that somebody will ever see them is very small.

    anna will start in 2 commercial movies. so we will hear from her very soon after fringe.

    so to the peter/joshua fans; enjoy his screentime, even if it's not much.
    after fringe, you are not going to see him anymore. so be grateful, that they give him that much of screentime in fringe. thats more than enough for joshua.

    ReplyDelete
  169. Take your shit and shove it you stupid Anna torv fan. you call us delusional, you are delusional yourself you asshole.

    ReplyDelete
  170. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  171. This show needs to do a 15 episode straight Peter arc. Everything has to be about Peter, nothing but Peter.

    I have a feeling that Peter is the equivilant of the Lost mythology. The writers do not know what to do with him and so just keep raising questions with no payoff. I do not know if they are able to provide enough answers to the questions they have raised. This could take the whole series down if not answered properly. The Fringe show runners have really shot themeselves in the foot with how they have handled him.

    ReplyDelete
  172. i really begin to think that anna'a uncle murdock, is behind a lot of thinks.

    for example:

    mark valley,ex-husband of anna torv, was an unkown actor, he just did soaps or bad tv-movies.

    he then married anna.

    result: a new show has offered to him:
    human target on fox.

    a year later they divorced:
    result: after a while human target gets cancelled.

    the moral of this story: always be on the good side of anna, otherwise you pay for it.

    ReplyDelete
  173. Will people EVER stop making FRINGE all about Anna freaking Torv?

    ReplyDelete
  174. About the shooting costs, Fringe is shooting HD this season, they seem to cut costs on locations and sets
    The leading lady must have the cheapest wardrobe and hair bill, always the suit and same shoes and either hair loose or ponytail, so not much to do there.
    And you have a cast that plays multiple characters, especially the awesome Anna Torv, who even replaced Nimoy without getting paid extra.
    Irony is that the most expensive actor on Fringe is Jackson, probably gets 4-5 times the amount of Anna Torv, but Anna Torv is playing all these characters and working and promoting constantly, even on her holidays.

    ReplyDelete
  175. where did you hear that joshua jackson is the most paid actor on fringe?

    i must say that this is not the first time i hear about this.

    i always assumed that anna torv was the most paid actress.

    but then again, jeff pinkner once said that they pay joshua jackson too much money to have him just sit around at home.

    ReplyDelete
  176. Josh has the most time in the biz. He makes the most money. But fans have the most misguided beliefs about actor salaries on most shows. Outside of a handful of TV show actors, most production costs aren't being weighed down by that. They spend more money on craft services per month than on actors.

    ReplyDelete