'Fringe' review: New show is 'uneven but promising'

"Fringe," the new show from J.J. Abrams, premieres Tuesday night (8 p.m., Fox) and Abrams has been pledging for weeks that it will be easier to follow than some of his other shows, which he believes left some viewers feeling, well, "Lost."

How does "Fringe" compare to his past work?

Is it too derivative of shows such as "The X-Files" or his own baby, "Alias"?

Here's the lowdown from Los Angeles Times television critic Mary McNamara, who has a mixed-bag review of the show:

The poor airline industry. As if rising gas prices, increased security measures and constant cost-cutting were not enough, now there’s another J.J. Abrams pilot. Travelers who have finally shaken the anxiety-provoking images of cult-inducing “Lost” can look forward to a whole new set of phobias thanks to the opening moments of Abrams’ new show “Fringe.”

As lightning crackles around an international flight to Boston, a wild-eyed passenger injects himself with something one can only hope is a tranquilizer and then next thing you know ... well, I don’t want to spoil anything for the 19 people who haven’t seen the pilot online, but it results in the assemblage of every law enforcement agency in the country donning hazmat suits.

Because comparisons are unavoidable, it must be noted up front that this is not the same sort of jaw-droppingly, what-the-heck-kind-of-show-is-this pilot that “Lost” had. Frankly, we know what kind of show this is going to be. “Fringe” stands for Fringe Science, which includes everything from mental telepathy to reanimation, so much of your enjoyment will depend on how much you still miss the “The X-Files.”

While “The X-Files” told us the truth is out there, “Fringe” posits the equally vague notion that “Everything is Part of a Pattern.” So, if you’re the type of person who needs every little thing, or indeed any little thing, to make sense in a pilot, then you should probably watch “Fringe” in solitude, preferably with the door closed, so the rest of us can enjoy it for what it is — an uneven, but promising jumble of horror, thriller and comedy that is not afraid to reference SpongeBob and “Altered States” in practically the same scene.

Let the games begin.

You can read the rest of McNamara's review right here.

Also on the cover of the Calendar section on Tuesday is a feature on "Fringe" by Matea Gold, one of the paper's New York-based staff writers.

Here's an excerpt from her piece, which is extremely well done:

The premise may sound familiar, but the show's creators insist that "Fringe" is not "The X-Files" circa 2008.

"There are obviously fair comparisons," admitted executive producer J.J. Abrams, the writer behind hits such as "Lost." "It's definitely federal agents investigating a lot of crazy, scary stuff. But 'Fringe' differentiates itself very quickly in terms of different characters and tone, and the overall story could not be more different."

The sci-fi thriller came about as a "planned pregnancy," said fellow executive producer Roberto Orci, who developed the drama with Abrams and Alex Kurtzman. "We sat in a room and said, 'Let's create a show.' "

The next several months resembled a graduate seminar on television, as the three men -- who worked together on the ABC spy thriller "Alias" and the upcoming "Star Trek" movie -- dissected their pop culture passions. The final product reflects their influences: not only "The X Files" but also "Twilight Zone," "Night Stalker," "Twin Peaks" and the 1980 movie "Altered States."

"We asked ourselves, what did we as viewers feel was missing from television?" Kurtzman said. "The answer was, 'Where is the procedural that's rooted in genre?' It felt like there was a vacuum to fill."

I'm looking forward to hearing what all of you Abrams fans (and non-fans) think of "Fringe," please be sure to come back and let us know.

-- Geoff Boucher

RELATED: All "Fringe" coverage at Hero Complex

ALSO: 2008 fall television premiere dates and times

Photos by Ben Mark Holzberg/Associated Press

Comments

[Tuttie]

Once again a TV universe is created where there are only women over the age of 30 are evil. It makes you wonder about the creators of this show, do they all hate their mothers or wives?

[aa]

Started off well but till I realized it was a pathetic attempt to recreate X Files - except the female FBI agent was hotter than Gillian.
20 minutes down and I don't know why I am wasting my time on this crap.

[LynJ]

It's so horrible! And not in a good way. Lame dialogue, really bad acting (especially by the son of Walter Bishop), ridiculous plot lines...maybe it gets better after the 1 hr 10 min mark but I wouldn't know because I've stopped watching. What a disappointment.

[Mark Schmitt]

I watched the pilot for about an hour yesterday and stopped when I got the feeling that this was just another government-and-evil-corporation-are-collaborating-to-do-bad-mysterious-things-to-the-people-and-for-the-people plot. Yawn, yawn, we seen it all before.

[Ryan]

Yeah, the pilot wasn't perfect, but it was far better than most of the new crap that will surely get put out. I think it's a mistake to hold all of the hype against it - without it, we might be calling this pilot a pleasant surprise.

Check out my full review at http://wewatchforu.blogspot.com/2008/09/foxs-fringe-unexpect-expected.html

[RonB]

I thought the show was well done. Maybe expectations were set a bit high for others but I went in with an open mind.

This show is far better than Lost, which I thought was a waste of time. It will compete for the old X-Files viewers and with House as a lead-in, it will hold an audience.

We finally get a new show that is not CIS, Reality, or some other waste of 30-60 minutes of my life. This gets you thinking. Isn't that what this format is all about?

[JG]

My wife checked out in the first 10 minutes because of the terrible acting, terrible dialogue, and rehashed motifs. I hung on for an hour to see if the story got any more compelling. It didn't, so I promptly deleted the Tivo season pass that I'd created hoping that this would be the next Lost or Heroes. I'd be shocked if this makes it through an entire season, much less gets picked up for a season 2.

[kc]

Good enough to get a second look.
I thought the 'Fringe' pilot was well done, considering the "meet the cast" imperative of any new series. Cast is fine.
But 'Fringe' is hugely derivative, from the mysterious cabal down to the handprint in the opening - sometimes an "homage" cannot be distinguished from a blatant ripoff.
No, say the makers, they're not doing 'X-Files' with the aliens and mutants and werewolves and whatnot; it's about sience!
Like...reanimation, telepathy, invisibility...all topics which were addressed not only in 'X-Files' but by 'Buffy' (which probably did them better, owing to Whedon's superlative writing staff).
They have to go a long way to keep up.
Also, with networks ever-ready to dispatch a series at the first sign of weakness, do we really want to get caught up in an ongoing mystery that may never be resolved? (See 'John Doe', 'Invasion', 'Threshold', et al)

[MAH]

The opening scenes on the plane were poorly done. The chemicals being able infect someone (entire plane), so fast as to having their faces falling off in a matter of seconds...this put a comical spin on the story. Then, for the FBI to be able to identify the crime so fast was another terrible delivery. I don't plan on watching this show because I don't see it being around for too long?

[Jim]

Very heavy X-Files influence, to be sure. And it features one of my least-favorite Sci-Fi tropes: The Scientist Who Is An Expert On Everything. Bishop was working on "lots of strange stuff" before he got locked up, so I expect he'll be expert on all the subjects mentioned in passing: Telepathy, Teleportation, Regeneration. By the way, the quick list of phenomena sounded almost identical to the list often used in Heroes, which struck me as more than a bit coincidental.

Having said all that, I did enjoy parts of it, and didn't see the big "gotcha" ending coming. I expected the series to be built around Olivia and John's relationship among other things.

I think the cast has real potential. If they let John Noble actually act, he could carry a good chunk of the show, and Anna Torv (as Olivia Dunham, the main character) did a competent job. I think she could be compelling if given good material.

[MS]

My expectations were up in the clouds when I first saw the previews months ago.
I could not be happier with the pilot. Other shows on the air at the moment are graded as soap opera's compared to FRINGE. This is diving deeper and more intense than any show like it in the past. I think Fringe will force other creators to step up their level to JJ Abrams brilliance.

Im shocked to see bad reviews of this show. You must like low quality shows like House, Bones, Greys Anatomy. Sad to see people with a negative attitude towards everything when finally something good hits the air.

[Jason R. Johnston]

House is a low quality show, huh? Okee dokee. That's why people compare it to Grey's Anatomy and ER all the time, I suppose. Fringe is terrible. I checked out when they started doing the whole J.J. Abrams flashback crap. The guy who did Lost and the guys who did Transformers need to just stop. Whedon could have done it better and WILL do it better when Dollhouse premiers.

[RG]

Details, details, details... I knew the show was poorly done for two reasons:
1- Peter Bishop (Joshua Jackson), who was meeting with two Iraqi officials in the Green Zone in Baghdad, said to them "I speak Farsi" when they whispered something to each other in their own language.
In Iraq they speak Arabic, in Iran they speak Farsi. These are two different countries and two different languages.
2- Dr. Bishop (John Noble) mentioned that he successfully comunicated with a dead body, so why didn't they keep agent Scott and interrogated him?
Please guys do your homework.

[Dr. Z]

To RG September 11, having actually been to Iraq, with a fellow Marine who spoke Farsi to Iraqis, I suggest you do your homework. As far as Scott, it was obvious he was pulled by his immensely powerful bosses.

[sw]

i enjoyed the show. was a huge x files fan as well. we need more shows like this and less reality tv.

[Mal Moris]

I thought the pilot was 'A' material. All of my excitement wasn't spawned by this one pilot in itself, but also the shows ability to generate curiosity for future episodes. Every show about science gone awry isn't the X-files. It's about the way that subject matter is approached, and from the tone of this show, I know it's not the X-files.
As someone here noted, I too am surprised so many people here seemed to dislike it. Sure, the pilot wasn't perfect but:

The acting was NOT HORRIBLE.
The dialogue was NOT AWFUL.

I've seen a lot of shows come and go, and for most, it was obvious why. This is one of the FEW shows I'll be willing to carve time out of the week for.

[KB]

The writing was so terrible. Nothing was close.

First of all, imaginary autopilot or not, if a plane was approaching US airspace and was not responding to calls from air traffic control it would result in fighters being scrambled. If the pilot of the plane did then not respond to visual signals from the fighter pilots then it would probably be a couple of heat seeking missiles into the Rolls Royce engines.

Then you have th LSD plot for mind reading. The person we are supposed to trust that this will work is a scientist, who not more than a couple of hours before looked like Saddam Hussain and was showing signs of dementure. He, apparently, read someones mind who had been dead for 5 hours after taking a mixture of drugs - including LSD. Give me LSD and I might tell you I could read the mind of a bird sitting on my porch.

Then the Farsi/Arabic mistake (although that could have been on purpose if the officials were trying to be secretive given that so many US agents on the ground in Iraq now speak Arabic) - but I'm going with mistake, given the rest of the writing.

So it's sci-fi. I get it, it's supposed to be out of there. But, good sci-fi is supposed to be believable and based on a growing, science aware audience. This just played on us being up for watching anything based on the fact that Abrams wrote it. How arrogant.

[NC]

I am huge X-files fan, needless to say I liked the pilot. Yeah I wasn't a big fan of the acting, and it was too unrealistic that only one FBI agent is running around and investigating a crash and bio attack. I will give it couple more weeks before I decide to stick to the show, but I think most X-files fan will enjoy this show, purely because of all gov conspiracy, paranormal stuff and what not.

[Lori]

Finally got around to watching the pilot and then the first episode -- I enjoyed the show for the plot, the action, the sci-fi aspects.

I did not enjoy the gore. It's over the top and not necessary. "Lost" did gore in a less disgusting way. The idea of someone having their pituitary gland pulled out through their throat or whatever (and why could the women have not been unconscious for that? that was not explained) is enough -- we don't need to see photos of the victims and eyeballs and ... eww. Sometimes leaving things up to the imagination is more powerful anyway.

There were a lot of inconsistencies and things that just didn't make any sense at all, little details.

The main reason I am not sure if I will continue watching the show for long is that the acting is really lacking. I am a 'Lost" fan so I can't help but compare it, and the acting on 'Lost" for the most part is just far superior to this acting. Pacey (whatever he is called in this show) just isn't very talented, I'm sorry. He has about two facial expressions, maybe only one. The Olivia character has two or three expressions at most -- and their line delivery is just ... weird. It's not TERRIBLE acting but it's not fantastic. I was not an X-Files fan but I think they were better actors than these folks. Some of the smaller characters are a bit more interesting and seem to be more talented, particularly the African-American FBI agent working with the team. Not sure about the doctor yet. The creepy FBI overling is a bit annoying.

[Tan]

I think most of the bad reviews the show had was due to over expectations. To be frank I really did enjoy the show. And this is the best stuffs Fox has put up since 24.

The subject matter is sci-fi, and it gets unbelievalbe at times, but it's forgivable due to the way it is directed, how it was spin and blurred between the line of a thriller, a sci-fi and a action pack cop shows. And seriously there's nothing wrong with a show having resemblence with X-files, because X files were brilliant and original. How many good shows these days are from totally original ideas? (Except for maybe Six Feet Under)

Some say it's because it's from JJAbhram that people watch it. Think of it the other way round, if it was not from JJ Abhram, would people make so much noise? Lost is doing terrible, but when it just came out it shaked the whole TV landscapes up. And judging one show by another that has the same creator is so naive.

And I would applaud the show for having one of the very good ideas: The woman being the brawn, the action hero while the men are the brain, the side-kicks. Aren't we all a little too tired with male action figures and smart gentle women? Bones, Heroes, Lost or even Pushing Daisies to name a few (unless you count Ugly Betty as an action figure).

[Corey]

I thought the show was very good. I think people are far to critical. To me, what is important is was I entertained for an hour. My answer is yes I was. I personally will continue to watch this show, as I think it is one of the better shows to come out in recent memory. Another thing I love is that the commercial breaks seem so short during the show. That is a very welcome occurance.

[David]

Far too critical? This show is terrible. I've watched it since it started, thinking, "okay, maybe it will get better.." but it got worse. The funny, off-beat lines from the Dr.Bishop character are the only thing that make it even close to redeemable. The writing, dialogue, and plot construction are infantile.

The show began with the intent to leave the viewer intrigued about a character's past that they hardly got to know. I'm not watching it anymore to see if it gets better.

[scifi fan]

I love sci fi and hated this show. A cross between X files and CSI, this show left me wondering why I wasted my time. Conspiring government and big business mixed with terrible sci fi plots (Taking out the dead girls eyes and seeing what she saw on TV? Please!!!) Great shows are being taken off the air and replaced with show's like this with terrible writing and acting it makes me wonder why I even turn on the TV. At least in a book I don't have to look at golf balls painted to resemble eyeballs. Jericho got cut but this peice made the air? Very sorry to see them advertised as best best new series of the year.

[tianzi_yuan]

To be fair, the actors probably did as best as they could have, given the poor material to work with. Why poor? Couple of reasons:

1) Bad science - the whole LSD and sharing the brain science is so bad it's hilarious. All the while I'm trying not to look stupid watching the show next to my partner who is a neuroscience professor. Some shows can get away with shonky science i.e. Heroes, X-men but not this one. It takes itself way too seriously and the more it tries to explain how it is all possible, the lamer it becomes.

2) Poor character development. I'm supposed to sympathize with the female protagonist's desperate attempt to save a loved one but all I see is an irrationale lunatic whom if in reality holds a job like that, we should all be very very afraid. I know it's very little time in one episode to develop a character but the plot is trying to move so quickly from point A to B that by comparison, the characters have really suffered. When you don't care about anyone, it's hard to care about the show.

3) Cheesy dialogue. All the 'do you love me' conversation and kissing in the middle of investigating some sinister lab is really over-the-top cheesiness. Again, it's as if the scripwriters need to put this sequence in to justify why she would save him later but can't find an appriopriate time in the middle of all the swift action. So they thought... hey why not add a quiet moment of romance? Thanks for making me cringe!

I'm a big X-Files fan but Fringe is no comparison/competition. The X-Files slowly builds suspense over time, always leaves its science open to interpretation and ultimately places character development above action or shock moments. And it never had to pull out any cheesy romantic lines.

[Shadow]

So I liked teh show, and I find nothing cheesy about it either -- I think if it fleshes out well, it will be a GREAT show

Shadow
www.fringefancenter.com