Fringe ep. 2, and Others

[handful_ofdust]

I gotta say (as ever) that while the show itself still leaves me undecided yet willing to give it a few more weeks, even if I wasn't, the virtual landslide of hate this poor MF is getting everywhere on tha Intranetz would make me determined to at least try and like it. I think Jim Henson says it best, over at Uninflected Images Juxtaposed: Pity the poor showrunners these days, all of whom have been charged with the utterly impossible task of automatically jump-starting their various new TV shows at that nebulous point somewhere in the first season where things stop being awkward and hand-wavey, where the chemistry really starts to pop, where the show has firmly branded itself and become the thing it's going to be from then on. And yes, the Lost pilot has pretty much become the gold standard of this, and yes, Abrams was involved with that. But guess what? It's the exception, not the rule, and even so, there were people somewhere who had enough problems with it to complain in print--vociferously, loudly--the morning after; people who Hated On Jack and Hated On Kate, people who Just Didn't Get It, and didn't want to.

Nothing is perfect straight out the gate, fellas. On Prison Break, they introduced T-Bag in Ep. 2 as a plot complication; by Ep. 6 or so, he'd become one of the primary driving forces (so much so that it's Bellick taunting him about his insanely Southern Gothic genepool which actually sparks the riot), and that's entirely due to Robert Knepper being the bomb. And while I have no doubt that Paul Scheuring had a fairly good idea of Michael's plan throughout, in terms of its various stages and potential complications, just like Michael himself, where he kept getting surprised was with people, because this is how TV works, thank GOD. This is how Paul Kellerman can go from being Asshole Number One in Season One to a good soldier gone bad dying a surprisingly honorable death in Season Two. This is how Shane Vendrell goes from being Vic Mackey's buttboy sidekick to his self-created nemesis (on The Shield, now entering its Jacobean/Ellroyian final season)--both because Walton Goggins is just that good and because Shane Ryan is on the ball enough to register it, and change accordingly.

I can tell you exactly when things snapped awake for me with a bunch of shows I've loved. The X-Files: "Squeeze", Ep. 3, Season One...except that I actually saw that one out of order, at the top of Season Two, during a retrospective. Firefly: "Jaynestown". Supernatural: "Scarecrow". Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles: "The Turk". Heroes: "Six Months Earlier". With The Shield, the absolute last second of the pilot hooked me deep, but I didn't start to love the show rather than be consistently amused and appalled by it until Dutch broke his serial killer, which might have been ep. 6. Same with OZ, which was such a fucking gangbang that it wasn't until Beecher took a crap on Vern's face that I realized I was committed for life. With most shows, however, it's a long, slow haul--they break you down, like Law & Order classic, which punches you over and over until you get tenderized to its ridiculously formal structure, and begin to see all the very subtle shadings which lurk, lacuna-like, between its lines. Or Star Trek: The Next Generation, which began awful, and ended as an old, eccentric friend. (Don't even get me started on Trek classic.) Or, heresy of heresies, Mad Men. I can't really tell you why I kept watching Season One, in a lot of ways, but I did--and now I'll never miss an ep. of Season Two, because I know that no matter what happens (or doesn't), it'll be utterly mesmerizing.

So what am I saying here, exactly?

If you genuinely don't like Fringe, then fine: Step away, put down the pipe; we'll agree to disagree, and no more (obviously) need be said about it. Because you stopped watching, right? Since that's what you DO, when you don't LIKE something. But if you're talking so loud and unpretty because you wanted to like it better and don't, then give it some Goddamn time, and stop pretending the stuff you've loved has always been perfect in every way, because it just damn hasn't. Not Dexter, not Mad Men, not The West Wing, not nothing. More than any other form of storytelling, TV is where you get to see things put through their paces--come together, fall apart. Live out their life-cycles. Just let it happen, man. Just let it fuckin' happen.

Then see what you get, and see if you like that any better.

Comments

[autobotsrollout.livejournal.com]

I dunno about Mad Men - the way I look at it, that show makes its "grab you by the throat" moment right at the end of the first episode, when you suddenly find out that Don Draper isn't just a charming, intelligent adman, but a guy who's cheating on his wife and you've spent the entire episode liking him and then WHAM. That's a snagger, right there.

West Wing tottered a bit in the beginning, but kicks into full gear the moment they introduce Charlie and that lasts until, oh, a chunk of the way into season five. Then the rest of five and the beginning of six sucks, and then it becomes a different but again very good show until the end.

[handful-ofdust.livejournal.com]

Again, re Mad Men, I'd say that while this sort of eleventh-hour whammy is the mark of a damn good pilot, I didn't really connect with the characters--including Don--until later on, and I was always far more interested by Peggy's truly opaque motivations than by Don's, anyways (was she naive? A Machiavel? A bit of both?). I was snagged, but not in love. And as with OZ, the initial lure was watching an alien world go through its paces...how different the familiar can seem, when run through a new lens. All that.

As for The West Wing, I'll take your word for it--the lost me at their premise. I mainly mentioned the show because I know a lot of other people love it (including you).;)

[autobotsrollout.livejournal.com]

Don't make me lend you the box sets, woman!

[handful-ofdust.livejournal.com]

My Lord, dude! What earthly good do you think that would do either of us, outside of depriving you of them for a while? I'm just not interested in watching something (halfway realistic) about American politics, and even the prospect of character actors I like talkin' smart and having UST really does not change that simple fact. Sorry: I'm 40, and my years of watching stuff I wouldn't gravitate to on my own are officially over (unless someone's paying me to do it).

Hope we can still be friends...

[blixie.livejournal.com]

I didn't hate the Fringe pilot, and like you I see a great show kind of dying to come out of what is for me a hot mess of boring and overbaked mixed with compelling and intersting in a funny-gross way. I used this analogy somewhere else but I think JJ needs to take off a few pieces of jewelry, y'know, there's just TOO MUCH going on without a strong enough center.

The second ep didn't help matters since the main issues for me is that I think Kirk has the best chemistry with the lead, and yet his character is almost superfluous at this point, and it still feels way too disjointed. Denethor/Peter are great, Nina/Broyles are great, Charlie/Livvie are great, but Torv just doesn't work for me as the third wheel to Peter/Dad, nor does her chemistry with Josh seem solid enough to build a show around ala The X Files. It's frustrating because I really want to like the show, but at some point I'm going to have to question how much I have to work to like it.

Hee which all boils down to there is not enough Kirk Acevedo in this show for me, and why will no one recognize that Kirk is not a side dish, he is the main dish, you are not going to find a better actor people WTF! *g*

[handful-ofdust.livejournal.com]

Ah, re Kirk: It's true, isn't it? And all the sadder because you can see him visibly getting older, still untapped to his full extent by anyone but Fontana (wait, that sounds really bad)...

But yeah, the equation always breaks down like that: How hard are you going to be made to work? Especially when what you want from a product is less yet another chance to work, say, than an opportunity for play. Either it pays off, or it doesn't.