I would imagine at this point that season 1 is going to end with the second blackout occurring, and then the show getting canceled so we never get to see what comes of it.

I'm hoping they'll be allowed to reach some kind of closure with the story. Whether that means re-writing, re-editing, and shooting additional scenes or a two hour telemovie, there needs to be something. ABC invested a lot in this show. You could tell it was expensive. It didn't achieve the success they wanted. But they do have an obligation to the fans that stuck with it to wrap things up in some kind of coherent fashion. That is, if they want them to tune into their next high concept drama. They've got to earn some trust back.

I think that's been one of the problems with serialized dramas attracting a decent sized audience. So many of them have been canceled without really resolving anything that the viewers have become gun-shy about sampling them in the first place and then quickly abandoning them if they're not instantly captivated, figuring they're just going to get canceled anyway. Television, at least on the broadcast nets, has become so risk adverse that soon the only thing that will get greenlit will be more variations on the cop/doc procedural, insipid reality shows, or sitcom clones. That's it, folks. That's the homogeneous, risk-free TV lineup of the future.

But if that's all we care to watch, I suppose that's all we deserve.

:eek::eek:
I had no idea James Callis played Gabriel until I read your post.

Then you either need a bigger TV or new glasses, or both. ;) Callis hasn't exactly morphed into the character in a way that renders him unrecognizable. He is doing a good job with the roll, which is conceived and written such that it could be the low point of any fine actor's career. He's not too far from going full ******, which we all know is dangerous territory. (Tropic Thunder reference -- don't get your underpants in a bind if you are an overly PC threadwatcher.)

--

Anyone hoping that they'll reshoot scenes from the finale episode if the show gets canceled better prepare themselves for disappointment. Ain't happening; if the show didn't make enough money to keep it around, it sure as hell didn't make enough money to pay for post-cancellation fan service. Unless they were smart enough to shoot alternate scenes during regular production, we're not going to see it. The best you could hope for would be some storyboards with audio commentary track on the DVD release.

My guess is that they'll shop the show around to SyFy or other cable networks, so they wouldn't want to let the cat out of the bag on what was planned anyway.

I thought last weeks episode was greatness! The opening scene when the camera moves closer to the screen showing the accelerator thingy and then moves though it was really cool. I also liked the wide angle shot of rain man bitching about pickles and lettuce on his burger.

Probably my 2nd favorite episode next to the somalia episode.

Weird - I was watching 'Angels and Demons' last week, and they had an 'accelerator' scene that was very, very similar. Uncannily similar.

That said, I really starting to enjoy this show.

PS. Callis was great in the hamburger scene.

I'm hoping they'll be allowed to reach some kind of closure with the story. Whether that means re-writing, re-editing, and shooting additional scenes or a two hour telemovie, there needs to be something. ABC invested a lot in this show. You could tell it was expensive. It didn't achieve the success they wanted. But they do have an obligation to the fans that stuck with it to wrap things up in some kind of coherent fashion. That is, if they want them to tune into their next high concept drama. They've got to earn some trust back.

I think that's been one of the problems with serialized dramas attracting a decent sized audience. So many of them have been canceled without really resolving anything that the viewers have become gun-shy about sampling them in the first place and then quickly abandoning them if they're not instantly captivated, figuring they're just going to get canceled anyway. Television, at least on the broadcast nets, has become so risk adverse that soon the only thing that will get greenlit will be more variations on the cop/doc procedural, insipid reality shows, or sitcom clones. That's it, folks. That's the homogeneous, risk-free TV lineup of the future.

But if that's all we care to watch, I suppose that's all we deserve.

Yeah, we're having this same conversation in the LoTS thread, which also just got canceled.

You guys keep bashing the "crime procedurals," but the simple fact is that the best of those shows are VERY well written, directed, produced and acted, with consumate talent that keeps winning Emmys (can anyone say Mariska Hargitay, Michael Chiklis or Kyra Sedgwick, just to name three off the top of my head???).

I watch, or watched (in the case of "The Shield") all three of those shows, as well as what I consider the best of several others (I watch only ONE medical show -- "House" -- and I was LATE coming to even that party). I know most of the time they follow a set formula, but they can also be full of surprise twists and turns and the writing and acting is usually stellar -- as are guest performances, such as Sharon Stones current 4-episode run on "Law & Order: SVU" -- I thought she deserved an Emmy nod for her similarly breathtaking run on the final season of "The Practice," as well (William Shatner DID win one for his similarly over-the-top performance that season), and NO, I'm not a big fan of most of her work since the original "Basic Instinct" other than some of these engaging guest appearances on some TV shows.

The problem comes primarily from POOR WRITING and direction/producing. Better producers and directors would recognize the poor writing and either re-do it themselves, or find others who could do a better job. It makes me think they don't, or didn't have as clear a vision of what they wanted to do and where they wanted to go from the beginning as they should have (Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindeloff claim that although they DID make up a lot of "Lost" as they went along, they had a fairly clear idea of its endpoint from Day One. That sort of endpoint vision helps you focus everything else.) The production team on Flash Forward reminds me sort of the executives at BP, who keep throwing anything and everything at that leak at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, hoping something "sticks." They seem to have finally found more of a "true course," but so much meandering along the way has, I agree, cost the show dearly.

As for "The X-Files," I think a big part of what always made that show work was the fact that it was primarily a two-fer -- Mulder and Scully continually playing off each other, both somewhat attractive, and with there always the implication that their professional relationship was leading to something more. Plus, Mulder always wanted to believe in the supernatural or sci-fi and Scully refused to believe in ANYTHING but her "hard science," thus giving a satisfying feeling to viewers who chose to support either view.

"Bones," although not a sci-fi show by any stretch of the imagination, has a very similar dynamic between Brennan and Booth, amongst other things.

EVERYONE (except absolute UBERGEEKS) prefers stories with believable characters he or she can relate to and care about. Too often with both "Flash Forward" AND "V" many of the characters (or at least their actions) are either not very believable (at least the things they DO make little sense) or they're just people we're given little or no reason to care about -- either they're boring, or annoying, or just sort of ho-hum. They do things even someone with Down's Syndrome would have better sense than to do (such as the Benfords separating when their mutual premonitions showed they WOULD be separated and other things on the date of the Flash Forward).

So yeah, even though this show has vastly improved lately, there's still an incredible amount of damage control to be done whether it gets renewed or not. The best way to do that, I think, is to just ignore most of those past mistakes and not make them again. I hope they just don't continue forward with stories full of holes and characters spouting lines that make them seem more two-dimensional than the pages of a graphic novel.
Jeff

You guys keep bashing the "crime procedurals,"I think, for many people, it is easier and/or more satisfying to categorically disparage a "kind of thing" that they don't personally like, rather than thinking and commenting thoughtfully on the quality of programs with regard to how well they satisfy criteria for that "kind of thing".

I know, bicker. I've always had diverse interests in pretty much all areas of life, whether TV programs, movies, music or whatever, and I generally have little patience for the Us vs. Them attitude a lot of people seem to have towards whatever isn't their particular favorite. I've been going through that lately with the large garden club on which I'm a board member, and the local free horticultural garden, where I volunteer, and to which our club has long been a major contributor and had its nursery located. The board decided to relocate for various reasons, and there are a few (very few, but a few) people on the board who have that Us vs. Them attitude and who seem to want to totally sever this longstanding relationship (the founder of the garden, a man of moderate means who built it up from his extended back yard, was a club member who used club friends and labor to really get it going). The perception I get from some they want to BURN a bridge just toasts my buns!

I feel the same way about folks who see no legitimate dramatic value in shows like "Law & Order: SVU" and shows of similar quality, simply because they aren't sci-fi, or whatever genre is their preference. It's like the mechanics who have, at times, had the NERVE to change the radio preset in my car from the local NPR station while they had it to work on it (or even change the station, period). Yeah, I also have a classic rock station and others programmed in, as well, although I rarely listen to them.

We CAN have it all. There's room for everyone and everything on TV and in this big world. Why disparage one thing or another (except for true crap, and yeah, I agree, there IS some true crap on TV -- unfortunately, some of THAT has a big audience, as well). The best of the crime procedurals are not among that. Many such shows don't make it because they're not.
Jeff

http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2010/05/13/abc-cancels-romantically-challenged-scrubs-ted-flashforward/

yep cancelled. Renewed V

i wonder if we will ever get some closure as to what their ultimate goal was going to be

Another one bites the dust... that bites.

I wish ABC would have given this show a bit longer before pulling the plug. I was enjoying it. I wonder how they're gonna wrap it up?

No surprise here.

Stupid jerkwads!

The show's FINALLY got some LEGS to it and they're cancelling it.

Meanwhile, "V" just continues to get MORE AND MORE mundane and ridiculous, but IT'S getting renewed! GAWD I hope Ausellio got his shows backwards! I fear not. Perhaps there's hope a cablenet can pick this show up and at least resolve SOMETHING, or maybe the season finale will.

Starting "the break" as early as ABC did (regardless of problems with the show) and then not bringing back -- even if only for three episodes -- in January, were dual death knells on top of the weak early episodes. The blame for those lies squarely on a very poor plan for what the show was and where it should go and how it should get there... WAY too much vague meandering! What a waste!
Jeff

And another thing.

When both "V" AND "Flash Forward" came back on the ABC schedule, ABC LEFT "Flash Forward" at the 8 p.m. Thursday time slot to SLUG IT OUT against "Survivor," the powerful NBC Thursday-night comedy lineup, "Bones" and "The Vampire Diaries" -- the biggest hit of the season, new, or otherwise -- on The CW. On the other hand, where did they put "V"? They put it on at 10 p.m., immediately FOLLOWING the final season of "Lost," the most talked about, compelling science-fiction event on TV in A LONG TIME. Even though "Lost" isn't pulling -- even this season -- the kind of numbers it once did, it's bound to be pulling a HUGE number in the sci-fi category and the carry-over audience for "V," especially at 10 p.m. Tuesdays, had to be A LOT easier to get than what "Flash Forward" was facing -- if only for the fact that neither Fox NOR The CW has programming at 10 p.m.

So "Flash Forward" and "V" didn't compete on anything APPROACHING a level playing field as to which deserved renewal and which didn't from a ratings standpoint. Even I, being a more fervent fan of FF now than ever before, had to keep two dual DVRs maxed out to get it, as I also watch the shows at that hour on every other broadcast network but NBC (that's why I'm posting so late -- had to watch four different shows for a couple different hours tonight, lol). I would say of all the shows I watched tonight, "Flash Forward" was among the best.
Jeff

FlashForward did poorly on its own merits, not because of its scheduling.

I agree with that, bicker. I'm certain you've seen plenty of bashing comments from me about problems with the show right here.

My point is that WHEN both shows came back, ABC made what I consider to be a deliberate decision to give one PRIME PLACEMENT while leaving the other out for target practice. Everyone already knew both shows were floundering for audience BEFORE they took the break, and neither had a really stellar season afterwards, even with "V's" preferential placement. What I'm saying is that had "Flash Forward" been given that spot and "V" put in the "sacrificial lamb" spot of 8 p.m., Thursday, I'm guessing FF would have easily pulled at least as good numbers as did "V," if not better, AFTER the break, based on its much-improved stories, and the continued improvements as the season progressed (it didn't get really good until the past half dozen episodes).

Some folks would probably say I'm judging how "good" it is on how much of the story has been revealed and how much sense it's starting to make, but that's not it at all (although those factors certainly make it easier to enjoy on many levels). It's the fact that they simply appear to have abandoned some of the multiple story threads and most of the soapy parts of the story that were bogging down the true drama of the story. It was plodding along like a worn-out farm horse, rather than moving like a well-oiled machine.

Since none of us is aware of a way to turn back time and make ABC put the shows in the reverse time slots, there's no way to prove my theory, but I'm willing to bet had they done that, "V" would be the show currently on the chopping block.
Jeff

My point is that WHEN both shows came back, ABC made what I consider to be a deliberate decision to give one PRIME PLACEMENT while leaving the other out for target practice.Which most of the time would be presented as, "They jerked 'V' around, moving it around on the schedule, while they left FlashForward where its viewers knew it would be broadcast." What you are this time presenting as a good thing, most of the time online posters would present as a bad thing . It smacks a little of crafting a criticism to fit the circumstances, rather than basing a criticism on well-established principles.

Everyone already knew both shows were floundering for audience BEFORE they took the break, and neither had a really stellar season afterwards, even with "V's" preferential placement.You still keep saying this, even though all indications are that the opposite is the truth:

Again, 'V' was moved -- strike one. And it was put up against The Good Wife and Parenthood, both of which are almost surely going to be renewed, so both of those shows 'V' was put up against were also dramas that were both considered successful -- strike two. And 'V's mid-season hiatus was two weeks longer -- strike three.

By comparison, FlashForward was left in its original timeslot -- advantage one -- in a timeslot where its competition was not entirely dramas (comedies on NBC and reality on CBS) -- advantage two. And its hiatus was two weeks shorter -- advantage three.

I just don't see any way to present this that doesn't put FlashForward in a better situation than 'V' was in.

There could be a business school case on FlashForward. How to take a show with such a great premise, but totally run it into the ground with awful execution - writing (storylines, plotholes, dialogue) and acting.

I'll admit, I gave up on the show just before the hiatus (around Episode 8 or 9) and am pretty thankful I did. According to Jeff and others, I understand it may've found its legs somewhat but what good is that when it had already lost so many viewers.

"V" on the other hand maintained a bigger audience despite only having 4 episodes before the break. That said, "V" is also starting to suffer from much of the myopic meandering that plagued Flash Forward, esp concentrating too much on micro-level events and ignoring all the interesting macro-level dynamics - and common sense.

I've stuck with "V" because there is just something more intriguing with its presentation for me and the acting seems to be a little better.

Jeff correct me if I'm wrong, but V only ran 4 episodes pre hiatus where as Flasforward had 9 or 10, so there was a much larger data set as to where the ratings for FF were going already.

And as others pointed out, the time slot was changed.

V also had a change in show runners or producers during the hiatus and the show improved. FF improved in content as well but the numbers didn't change much.

There could be a business school case on FlashForward. How to take a show with such a great premise, but totally run it into the ground with awful execution - writing (storylines, plotholes, dialogue) and acting.


Honestly, it's just another reason to not give Brannon Braga yet ANOTHER show. You've pretty much nailed on the head what's wrong about everything he makes. Interesting premise let down by everything else.

You only have to look at his recent history. ST: Voyager, ST: Enterprise, Threshold are all examples of things that could have been good but ended up handicapped by the execution.

The guy is a hack and shouldn't be let near TV again.

The last episode I watched was the one where Janice revealed herself to be a mole as well. I just couldn't watch anymore. It's VERY rare that I give up on a show before it has run it's due course, but I couldn't take it any longer.

I still watch V. I'm under no delusions that it's good, but it at least holds some interest for me. Flashforward was just flat out put together wrong and my interest in the actual progression of the plot couldn't override how bad the other aspects were.

Which most of the time would be presented as, "They jerked 'V' around, moving it around on the schedule, while they left FlashForward where its viewers knew it would be broadcast." What you are this time presenting as a good thing, most of the time online posters would present as a bad thing . It smacks a little of crafting a criticism to fit the circumstances, rather than basing a criticism on well-established principles.

You still keep saying this, even though all indications are that the opposite is the truth:

Again, 'V' was moved -- strike one. And it was put up against The Good Wife and Parenthood, both of which are almost surely going to be renewed, so both of those shows 'V' was put up against were also dramas that were both considered successful -- strike two. And 'V's mid-season hiatus was two weeks longer -- strike three.

By comparison, FlashForward was left in its original timeslot -- advantage one -- in a timeslot where its competition was not entirely dramas (comedies on NBC and reality on CBS) -- advantage two. And its hiatus was two weeks shorter -- advantage three.

I just don't see any way to present this that doesn't put FlashForward in a better situation than 'V' was in.

Ordinarly, bicker, I'd agree with you about changing time slots, but with NEW shows, as both of these were -- and especially with "V" having only FOUR episodes prior to its break -- nobody really had time to get USED to it "having a time slot." So it's really NOT legitimate to say it had "the disadvantage of having its time slot moved, whereas FF had the advantage of remaining in the same time slot."

On your second point, FF was ALWAYS at a disadvantage in that time slot -- ANY new show is -- because no matter WHAT genre it's in, it really doesn't matter, all those DIFFERENT genres on the other networks are SO popular with so many different audiences there's NEVER much left unless you just have an outright blockbuster out of the gate. Add to that the anomaly of a new runaway hit on The CW in "The Vampire Diaries" (a truly great new show I avoided for three weeks, then watched just once and had to find the first three eps online to catch up because I was INSTANTLY HOOKED!), and FF had STIFF competition out of the gate.

As for the competition from "The Good Wife" and "Parenthood" and the fact that "V" started back two weeks later. OK, both of those were new shows, too, BUT, "The Good Wife" was already an established hit that never took a break, other than maybe to run re-runs of the SAME SHOW during the Olympics. As for "Parenthood," it didn't start until March 2. So both shows were in Episode 5 March 30 when "V" returned. And that show AND "The Good Wife" are both very different from each other AND from "V," so they're not really competition. And again, there's NO competition from either FOX or The CW at that hour.

Now I can already hear you on my prior comment about the two shows being "different," therefore not "true competition." But at 8 p.m. Thursdays, there are FOUR other shows competing, and although none of them is sci-fi/drama, either, ONE of them is fantasy/horror/drama (related and pulls a lot of similar demographics), and "Bones" pulls whoever? I'm not sure, but it's a diverse crowd not just interested in crime procedurals, but also science, hot women (all three of the female leads -- at least I think they're HOT, lol), David Boreneaz (including, possibly old "Angel" fans); whoever likes the NBC comedies (not generally my cup of tea -- never have cared much for NBC comedies), and "Survivor," which always pulls a strong audience, regardless.

I'm really NOT trying to "make excuses" for "Flash Forward." I got over that after about the third episode, when I realized just HOW BADLY they were executing the premise for real, after doing my best to hold on to hope for the first couple of episodes. But after about Episode 14 (Better Angels -- the Somalia episode), as promised by one of the showrunners in the Entertainment Weekly article that ran in December (that episode was originally scheduled to air the last week of JANUARY, by the way, prior to the Olympics hiatus -- three eps. in January, then another break) the show has been getting progressively better by leaps and bounds.

Of course a break from Nov. 30 to March 18 certainly didn't help, but I agree "V'"s break from Nov. 24 to March 30 was actually 18 days longer. Even so, I'm betting the folks over at FF would have KILLED to get to follow the final season of "Lost."

I'm happy for "V," but I'm sad for us viewers of FF because I thought it was finally going somewhere and now it looks like we'll never know where. It's like "Invasion" all over again. At least this time we know in advance. ABC let Season 1 of "Invasion" end with PREVIEWS of a Season 2 that NEVER happened. That REALLY SUCKED!

That was the only one of the three sci-fi shows the three nets premiered that year that actually had a shot at a second season, but it never did. "Threshold" was so bad they killed it the first week of December, while "Surface" on NBC made it a full season, but it wrote itself into a corner that left it with nowhere to go.

It was a fun show, but so full of BS it was impossible to take seriously -- Diving Bell made out of an old boiler that's supposed to be good for a couple thousand feet... cable snaps and it drops them several thousand more, with NO pressurization equalizars, and while the metal creaks and groans, and starts to leak, it never collapses... Then they find some fantastical way to get it back to the surface, and when they did it popped back up at some sort of record speed, like a balloon -- and of course they were all out of air, so they had to pretty much immediately open the hatch to breathe... No depressurization; no benz... YEAH, RIGHT. BS! BS!! BS!!! That, plus the underground "conveyor belt" that took animals and other "specimens" under the Earth all the way from Wilmington, NC, to somewhere in CHINA?!?!? Say WHAT, Jack??? :eek: There was MUCH more, but it was still a fun show to watch. I got HD the next year and Universal HD reran the entire series a couple times. Since I didn't have HD when it first ran on NBC, I rewatched the whole thing on there. Even more ridiculous and more fun in HD, lol... Kinda like watching Anna smirk in HD on "V" :rolleyes:
Jeff

The last episode I watched was the one where Janice revealed herself to be a mole as well. I just couldn't watch anymore. It's VERY rare that I give up on a show before it has run it's due course, but I couldn't take it any longer.


Yeah, but when you discover not only WHY Janice is a mole, but also what she's BEEN THROUGH because of it -- and especially what she did in last night's episode because of it, to avoid having to do something terrible to someone she cared about -- it made her a very much more compelling character and FINALLY someone I actually care about. Until last night I really didn't like Janice. Now I do.
Jeff

Yeah, but when you discover not only WHY Janice is a mole, but also what she's BEEN THROUGH because of it -- and especially what she did in last night's episode because of it, to avoid having to do something terrible to someone she cared about -- it made her a very much more compelling character and FINALLY someone I actually care about. Until last night I really didn't like Janice. Now I do.
Jeff

It wasn't the reveal that made me quit the show, it was the rest of the episode. The biggest one was the whole "his chess moves are morse code" scene. It's like the writers couldn't figure out a logical way to progress the plot so they would just have their characters suddenly connect the dots in no way a rational human would. Don't even get me started on the shootout scene where the only competent shot in the whole FBI building was apparently the skittish mole. I also liked how everyone shot had to fall though a pane of glass. Also, it's great that a mysterious rider in black happened to be zipping past the building at the exact moment she came running out.

Watching the show was like trying to assemble something based on blueprints authored by M.C. Escher. If you didn't look at it too closely, you could make out what you were supposed to be seeing. However, once you started actually following the lines and tried to construct something coherent, the whole thing bent back on itself in a weird and twisted way that couldn't possibly be.

bull3964, my favorite was still how it took the suicide death of a fbi agent many weeks after the blackout for the world to figure out that you can alter your future (by dying).

surely, using the great Mosiac database, they would've already found many others who were in flashforwards but had since died, whether suicide or not. and if nothing else, this should've been expected or at least questioned from the very beginning; instead, it was clumsily revealed to us as some big reveal.

it was almost like this show wanted to insult the viewer's intelligence at every step. i know it is only network tv so my expectations shouldn't be so high. i will have to stick to HBO if I want shows with more depth.

from the blue hand stuff, to the overreliance of self-fulfilling flashforwards, to the forced love triangle, to the cheesy action scenes, this show was a trainwreck IMO. i really wanted to like this show based on its premise.

Hey man, I LOVE the work of M.C. Escher! :cool: But I also REALLY get your point. Then again, that mole may have been specially trained for such a situation and caught everyone else totally off guard. Still, it was ridiculous to think she could have done what she did without getting shot herself AND also that they would all hit glass like that. I agree all of that scene was just FOR SHOW.

As for the motorcyclist, it's easy to believe the secret organization the mole was working for knew she was being scrutinized and would try to make a break for it and had a getaway biker hiding around the corner. I can "bite" on that one. I don't recall the exact details of how they decided Frost's chess moves were Morse code, but they already knew this guy's mind worked in odd and perverse ways, so I'll leave that one alone for now. I agree it requires a lot of latitude more often that it should. It still got better as the season got closer to the end. But it remains to be seen if they'll give it a decent wrap.
Jeff

from the blue hand stuff, to the overreliance of self-fulfilling flashforwards, to the forced love triangle, to the cheesy action scenes, this show was a trainwreck IMO. i really wanted to like this show based on its premise.

Oh come ON, dude! Who doesn't like blue hands??? :D

I mean siriusly, I thought that was a shining moment! :rolleyes:

I don't think anyone EVER explained why the hands were blue, either, lol. One of this show's "Twin Peaks" moments. I have to agree there were times I was almost looking for "the log lady."
Jeff

The buzz on the web today is Flash Forward has been cancelled. Not unexpected. Darn!

Get outta here, Steve...back to the "million-dollar forum" with you! :p

The buzz on the web today is Flash Forward has been cancelled. Not unexpected. Darn!

Sad to hear; I like this show. Time to start a campaign to send rings to ABC.

According to this article (http://www.tv.com/flashforward-cancelled-by-abc-because-of-low-ratings/webnews/81189.html) ABC will try and edit the final episodes to bring some kind of closure to the series. We'll see...

I certainly think they owe it to the viewers to do that. Then again, the folks running the show should have been smart enough to begin with to write the season finale as a potential series finale, considering the continuing low ratings this show was pulling. To do otherwise was simply arrogant and just one more sign they either didn't care, didn't know what they were doing or how to do it, or some combination of the three.

I thought that brief article about how one-dimensional Fiennes' character was, making viewers care much more about secondary characters like Dimitri and Janis was right on target, as well. He must work really cheaply is all I have to say. Coming off the high of "Lost," this is a TRUE "disaster show" for the likes of Sonya Walger, even as minor as her character of Penny was.
Jeff

According to this article (http://www.tv.com/flashforward-cancelled-by-abc-because-of-low-ratings/webnews/81189.html) ABC will try and edit the final episodes to bring some kind of closure to the series. We'll see...

I am hoping they can pull this off successfully.

fafner

It's not unexpected they canceled FF and renewed V because FF is a more expensive show to produce. It's shot on location in LA, while V is shot on a lot in Canada. Most of V is people standing around in front of a green screen.

Oh well, let's see how they end this one.

Yeah, that's pretty much one of the things I just said, too, Dave. All other things being equal, I'm guessing FF was easily twice as expensive as "V" -- even if they managed to shoot all of "Somalia" and "Afghanistan" in some of the studio-owned L.A. mountain locations, and at least part of the "Afghanistan" shoot looked too remote for that to me.
Jeff

I'm fairly certain the Afghanistan scenes were most likely shot right outside LA. As LA residents know, you don't have to go far for desert/mountainous regions. But still, moving equipment is expensive- V's so called FX is cheap- barely any makeup is involved and the green screen FX sucks.

I am hoping they can pull this off successfully.

fafner

I doubt it, not without it being a hack job as both episodes that are left to air were undoubtedly completed before the news of cancellation, a week-10 days is hardly enough time to change things around, I guess we'll see. I don't think they're going to change anything, the show will end with a season ending cliff-hanger, and that'll be all she wrote.

To me, FLASHFORWARD was a concept of limitless proportions that was executed so badly as to be insulting. At times the writing not only strained credibility, it pissed all over it. Shows like LOST (love it) and FRINGE (indifferent to it, I guess) worked for the masses because they had characters who were believable and engaged in believable activities. Time and time again FF made its characters do things that they would never EVER do under any circumstances. About a month ago I started yelling at the TV in anger and realized the show was just toast and wasting my time, so I stopped watching.

V is even worse. It's an embarrassment.

Once LOST is done I will be watching exactly one show on television: Breaking Bad. Nothing else.

Once LOST is done I will be watching exactly one show on television: Breaking Bad. Nothing else.

OT, but I just finished watching season 2 of BB on Blu-ray disc, and in my opinion, that is the only way to watch that show. Not only was it not censored, no snipes or ID bugs, and the PG and AQ were outstanding, can't wait for S3 to come out as I'll never watch this show on TV, it just looks and sounds too good for the mediocre medium of TV.

Once LOST is done I will be watching exactly one show on television: Breaking Bad. Nothing else.

Since replacing my Sony BDP-300 BD player with a Samsung player with Netflix, Vudu and the like its getting to be that way for me too. Why mess around with "restrained" broadcast TV series when there are plenty of "unrestrained" movies to watch and even foreign and domestic "premium" mini-series. I think that viewing paradigms are shifting dramatically. Sometimes it's like I'm watching the broadcast shows to see what they do to keep the "video divertmento" going. ;)

I was once told by a friend who had been trying to get a TV series going (and very much had the means and experience to do so) that people in the business were asking him "if he really wanted to do this." IOW, it was a dreadful process and particularly dreadful to deal with the networks and maintaining an audience. He eventually opted not to do the series.

I'd give my left nut to do a series right now. The steady money is like Gold and then some. Freelance and spec is a b!tch.

FRINGE (indifferent to it, I guess) worked for the masses because they had characters who were believable and engaged in believable activities

Fringe works because John Noble has taken the most astonishingly evil character imaginable and made him sympathetic. It's like watching a Hitler biopic, but somehow your feelings for Hitler end up somewhere around where you're supposed to feel for Henry Fonda at the end of On Golden Pond. It's one of the most ****ed up things ever put on TV. But it works.

Fringe works because John Noble has taken the most astonishingly evil character imaginable and made him sympathetic. It's like watching a Hitler biopic, but somehow your feelings for Hitler end up somewhere around where you're supposed to feel for Henry Fonda at the end of On Golden Pond. It's one of the most ****ed up things ever put on TV. But it works.Yes, sounds reasonable, and while I think John Noble does a better job at it, personally, I think the effect, overall, including how the other characters interact with him, is superior with Michael C. Hall's Dexter.

Wow, bicker, I find it practically impossible to compare the performances or the characters played by Noble and Hall, although I agree both are brilliant in their respective roles... I wouldn't have thought of it, though.
Jeff

Yeah, the specific performance -- really any specific performances of different roles -- are difficult to compare, but the point here is that both portray certifiably evil people, and both are presented in such a way that they are supposed to be viewed, at least to a great extent, in a sympathetic manner by the audience -- and it works, very well, in both cases.

The reason why it came to mind is that in another forum I'm participating in, someone is contending...... the problem I have with the show [is that they] try to have a serial killer as a protagonist, but instead of doing that honestly, they make him target "bad guys" so that the readers/viewers won't be too turned off. They could still convey moral ambiguity even without such an obvious compromise. She went on and on and on about this, asserting even... I won't excuse something that I think is a poor decision by saying that it's faithful to the book.Yeah, my head exploded at that one, too....

Fringe works because John Noble has taken the most astonishingly evil character imaginable and made him sympathetic. It's like watching a Hitler biopic, but somehow your feelings for Hitler end up somewhere around where you're supposed to feel for Henry Fonda at the end of On Golden Pond. It's one of the most ****ed up things ever put on TV. But it works.

John Noble is fantastic. The show would be a dud without him as Walter. I also think that Josh Jackson has this everyman Tom Hanks thing going for him which is nice. I think the growing relationship between Peter and Olivia has been nicely handled. There is certainly further exploration of that development which needs more consideration.

John Noble is fantastic. The show would be a dud without him as Walter. I also think that Josh Jackson has this everyman Tom Hanks thing going for him which is nice.
I agree that John Noble has done a wonderful job as Walter and recently as Walternate. Noble is the linchpin of the show. There is, indeed, something especially appealing about Josh Jackson. He has worn extraordinarily well playing a character who in less capable hands might have been wearing thin by now.

Opinions wanted! We watched FF up to when it went on hiatus, and have the episodes since Tivo'd. Now that it's been canceled, is it worth the time to watch the remaining eps? Did the series pick up steam after the hiatus? Thanks in advance!

Opinions wanted! We watched FF up to when it went on hiatus, and have the episodes since Tivo'd. Now that it's been canceled, is it worth the time to watch the remaining eps? Did the series pick up steam after the hiatus? Thanks in advance!

For me the answer would be yes. I love the primary story-arc and want to see how it ends, love the mystery, love the general idea for the series. I wish they could go back with some stronger writers and work out the flaws that turned so many off at the beginning. Notice they've completely ditched the subplot about Bryce and his love for sushi...? It wasn't going anywhere. And the whole thing with Lloyd & Olivia hasn't added much either since their behavior has been anything but organic and believable. Gabrielle Union has been wasted in another subplot that defied logic. But they created this huge cast that could hopefully provide lots of plot propulsion if the series had caught on. They were following the LOST model. But they took a series of wrong turns.

In retrospect, it probably would have been better to focus on a smaller subset of the characters and get into the mechanics of the conspiracy right off the bat. They were trying to inject an element of forbidden romance, presumably to entice the distaff portion of the audience, but none of that worked and it was clumsily executed. Could it have worked with more accomplished writers? We'll never know.

At any rate, I mourn the loss of yet another high-concept, high-production-value sci-fi serial that could have run for years. When are they going to get it right? They can't simply try to follow the LOST model with a cool concept and a huge cast. It takes more than that.

Shows like LOST (love it) and FRINGE (indifferent to it, I guess) worked for the masses because they had characters who were believable and engaged in believable activities. Time and time again FF made its characters do things that they would never EVER do under any circumstances.

Lost definitely has 10000x more likeable characters than FF, but engaged in believable activities? C'mon. Especially the last few seasons, Lost characters take off on random escapades for no logical reason, switch which side they're on as much as three or four times in an episode with no explanation, and of course in the most unbelievable action of all, refuse to share even the simplest of information with each other.

Even if you go all the way back to the season 1 and 2 Lost threads, you'll find a gajillion examples of people in them caps-screaming "WHY IN THE HELL WOULD HE DO THAT??" or "WHY IN THE HELL WOULD HE NOT JUST DO THIS?!?!".

It's just kind of funny that you brought up Lost, because really if I was going to pick *one* show to be an example of people *not* engaging in believable activities, that would be the one ;)

Opinions wanted! We watched FF up to when it went on hiatus, and have the episodes since Tivo'd. Now that it's been canceled, is it worth the time to watch the remaining eps? Did the series pick up steam after the hiatus? Thanks in advance!

I think the show was MUCH better after the break.

It basically went the same route as Jericho. Both tried to follow the Lost model (focus on the characters early on and only hint at the big story arc, then really dig into the big arc in future seasons), but like Jericho the characters weren't strong enough to hold the show together like they did for Lost, so after the break (again, same as Jericho) they basically ditched all the character subplots and focused pretty much solely on the main story arc, where things really got good.

I think the Bryce thing has had like 2 or 3 scenes total since the break, and the Olivia/Mark thing has been pushed way to the background as well. I basically gave up on the show at the break (didn't even watch the first episode after the break until like a month later), but now I'm really into it, and am very sorry it's canceled.

Thanks for the input. That was the sense I was getting, so we'll resume watching and hang in until the end and see how it goes.

I can't believe ABC renewed V but axed FF ... neither was stellar but FF has gotten way better and V continues to disappoint ...

As a general rule, the more simple and straightforward a TV show, the greater its chances for success. The more complex the concept, the more thinking that's required, the more difficult it is to find a mass audience. This is the world we live in. That's not to say the faults we've noted and bemoaned don't matter; they do. But just due to it's relatively complex subject matter and serialized nature, FF was always going to have a rough road in front of it. 'V' goes down a lot easier: Lizards bad! Humans good! Stuff blows up! Yea humans! *sigh*

As a general rule, the more simple and straightforward a TV show, the greater its chances for success. The more complex the concept, the more thinking that's required, the more difficult it is to find a mass audience. This is the world we live in. That's not to say the faults we've noted and bemoaned don't matter; they do. But just due to it's relatively complex subject matter and serialized nature, FF was always going to have a rough road in front of it. 'V' goes down a lot easier: Lizards bad! Humans good! Stuff blows up! Yea humans! *sigh*

This reminds me of what a writer from CSI said about how to write for network TV. He said that he would hand in excellent scripts with plenty of turns and genius symbolism. Producers and (mostly) Network execs would tell him to dumb it down. They wanted "dish washing TV". Basically they wanted the housewife that was cleaning up the table and doing dishes with her back to the TV to be able to follow plot of CSI without trouble. This used to upset me a lot about TV until I found myself doing the same damn thing as I got older. ;)

I would say that FlashForward's failure as a show is more to be blamed on its poor pacing, horrible character development and its ever changing rules of what the "Flashforward" actually is, than the masses just not wanting a complex story.

It's a shame that the "lowest common denominator" (with very few exceptions) dominates TV programming. :(

I can't believe ABC renewed V but axed FF ... neither was stellar but FF has gotten way better and V continues to disappoint ...

Why blame these shows on each other?
I cannot believe ABC renewed Desperate Houswives and canceled FF...or I cannot believe ABC renewed Castle and canceled FF.


It is not "V's" fault that FF got the axe.

Why blame these shows on each other?
I cannot believe ABC renewed Desperate Houswives and canceled FF...or I cannot believe ABC renewed Castle and canceled FF.


It is not "V's" fault that FF got the axe.

I'm not blaming them on each other and fail to see how you came to that illogical conclusion. Both were similar in genre (Sci-Fi) and came out about the same time ... and were both subject to the cancellation ax. BTW - nice comparison of oranges and apples ... :rolleyes:

I'm not blaming them on each other and fail to see how you came to that illogical conclusion. Both were similar in genre (Sci-Fi) and came out about the same time ... and were both subject to the cancellation ax. BTW - nice comparison of oranges and apples ... :rolleyes:

Exactly. And if I remember right didn't an ABC executive say in an interview that basically V or FF would take over Lost's spot? Reading between the lines, it was understood that unless both series were wildly successful, one would get the pick up and the other would be canceled. I think if ABC did not have this mindset going into this season, neither show would have been renewed. The worst case scenario happened and it honestly became contest of a 1 legged 40 yard dash.

While I wont bet on it not finishing its run of ~12 episodes next year, I am confident that V will not be picked up this time next year.

It's just a shame FF couldn't clear one of the lowest set bars for a TV show in recent history.

I would say that FlashForward's failure as a show is more to be blamed on its poor pacing, horrible character development and its ever changing rules of what the "Flashforward" actually is, than the masses just not wanting a complex story.

Exactly, there are way too many people white knighting Flashforward as a concept lost on audiences and a victim of poor promotion by ABC. Honestly, the concept was lost on the writers too and they never managed to gather anything coherent to capture people's attention. The show had poor pacing, meandering plot, ill defined characters, absurd twists, internal consistency problems, often atrocious editing, and unnatural dialog. The only real redeeming quality about it was the concept but the execution could easily be a case study for how to not construct a series.

V is far from good too, however the worse offense it commits is being slightly dull, having poor cgi, and slightly too much cheese. It might actually be salvageable by simply tightening up the story lines and moving the plot. I will agree though that the next 13 episodes will probably be it unless something dramatically changes, it's not even due to come back until midseason.

The choice between the two probably wasn't anything that ABC was particularly ecstatic over. I can imagine them looking at the shows and going "Whelp, we NEED to renew one of these things, we don't really have a choice. Which one will be better able to fill a half season hole in our schedule next year?"

FF was always going to be a tough sell on a long timeline. It's a show that should have openly committed to short run, and then molded the story accordingly. Then, if it's a ratings bonanza, just throw that all to the wind and keep writing.

FF has a better story than V. But, V generally is better acted. Also, the story makes more sense to the audience.

I also wish to badly and angrily fault FF for its downright retarded villains. Seriously?! The bad guys are the guests from last week's episode of Sprockets?! WTF?

What they should have done is had Jim Parsons come on for a guest spot as the mastermind. Not only would fans of The Big Bang Theory just peed themselves and cheered and screamed and hooted and cetera, but at least then the villain would have been credible.

Why the hell are the villains new money Eurotrash?!!?!?!11!

Villains haven't sucked this bad since the Trade Federation attacked Naboo.

Opinions wanted! We watched FF up to when it went on hiatus, and have the episodes since Tivo'd. Now that it's been canceled, is it worth the time to watch the remaining eps? Did the series pick up steam after the hiatus? Thanks in advance!You may want to keep recording until the series finale on May 27 and then ask your question again. The producers of FF are trying to edit the final two episodes to placate the viewers. I doubt if it works.

Why blame these shows on each other? I cannot believe ABC renewed Desperate Houswives and canceled FF...or I cannot believe ABC renewed Castle and canceled FF.This, though, really shows the futility of such exhortations -- all of them. Clearly, more people think that Desperate Housewives should be renewed over FlashForward -- and they are not wrong to hold such a preference, and networks are not wrong in serving that preference. The preference many folks have for Desperate Housewives is every bit as deserving of respect as anyone's preference for FlashForward. Same with Dancing with the Stars for that matter. The only useful information coming out of disparaging the preferences of others is insight into the poor character of the person doing the disparaging.

Personally, I put Castle over all of these shows, including FlashForward.

Villains haven't sucked this bad since the Trade Federation attacked Naboo.

LOL. At least the villains aren't poorly-masked Asian stereotypes. Meesa hate stereotypes, mon!

Well I am continuing toi watch to see how they decide to wrap it up, but I have to say I was alittle underwelmed about this episode.

It's interesting that they did a poll (http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2010/05/canceled-shows-you-want-flashforward-back.html)on Zap2it.com about which canceled show people would miss the most. FF lapped the field with 40% of the vote. Ghost Whisperer was second with 17% (and I suspect most of those are simply going to miss JLH's impressive assets). L&O was third at 10% (and I suspect most of those were our own dad1153 posting from every computer he could find. :p )

The thing about serialized sci-fi is that genre tends to generate the most passionate support, but there just aren't enough supporters to keep them on the air. :(

As to last night's show, I just hope we get some resolution in next week's finale. Looks like we will, although it's probably going to be a little choppy from hastily commissioned re-edits once it became clear the ax was going to fall. We now know the conspirators' motivations - money and power from being able to predict the future. Who woulda' thunk it? ;)

This is a MESS of a series. Nice concept, but totally disappointed in the application.

This is a MESS of a series. Nice concept, but totally disappointed in the application.

Well, that's okay. Don't despair. There will most certainly be a by-the-numbers cop/doc/law procedural, "high-concept" reality show, or a couple of mindless sitcoms in this time slot next year which, if they're sufficiently pedestrian, will almost certainly draw a suitable number of glazed eyeballs to please the network suits. And I predict it will be years until the broadcast nets risk another long-form serialized sci-fi drama in prime time again. The way I look at it, we were lucky to get this one for as brief a time as we did.

Well, that's okay. Don't despair. There will most certainly be a by-the-numbers cop/doc/law procedural, "high-concept" reality show, or a couple of mindless sitcoms in this time slot next year which, if they're sufficiently pedestrian, will almost certainly draw a suitable number of glazed eyeballs to please the network suits. And I predict it will be years until the broadcast nets risk another long-form serialized sci-fi drama in prime time again. The way I look at it, we were lucky to get this one for as brief a time as we did.

It would ahve been nice for Fox to pick it up, then they could do a Flashforward\Fringe Sci-Fi night...Hell Id even take a Friday to bring back the name "Sci-Fi Fridays" ;).......At there is still Fringe for sci-fi\drama......

I actually prefer the serialized sci-fi\drama...I hope they give it more of a chance in the future....

Opinions wanted! We watched FF up to when it went on hiatus, and have the episodes since Tivo'd. Now that it's been canceled, is it worth the time to watch the remaining eps? Did the series pick up steam after the hiatus? Thanks in advance!



Yes, especially because intro for the episode two weeks ago. It was worth all the bad dialogue just to see that scene.


For those that watched already i'm talking about the blackout machine intro

It's interesting that they did a poll (http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2010/05/canceled-shows-you-want-flashforward-back.html)on Zap2it.com about which canceled show people would miss the most. FF lapped the field with 40% of the vote. Ghost Whisperer was second with 17% (and I suspect most of those are simply going to miss JLH's impressive assets).However, I think these numbers may illuminate a bias inherent in the source of the poll. I suspect that most of the people who are sad to see GW go are people who have, ahem, assets of their own and aren't necessarily attracted to GW by JLH's impressive assets, yet these folks are probably not participating in polls on Zap2it. While I'm not sure that the 40% is inflated and the 17% is depressed, I do suspect that those numbers, in reality, across the entirety of the viewing public, would probably be closer together.

(In other words, I think polls on Zap2it tend to reflect geek-boy bias. ;))

The thing about serialized sci-fi is that genre tends to generate the most passionate support, but there just aren't enough supporters to keep them on the air. :(Precisely... if poll votes could be turned into cash, serialized sci-fi would be a winner. Because money comes from actual consumers watching commercials (and presumably buying things), we have the disparity you're pointing out.

Well, that's okay. Don't despair. There will most certainly be a by-the-numbers cop/doc/law procedural, "high-concept" reality show, or a couple of mindless sitcoms in this time slot next year which, if they're sufficiently pedestrian, will almost certainly draw a suitable number of glazed eyeballs to please the network suits.Let's turn it around: How can we craft the most inanely disparaging characterization of the television we like? ;)

I know that this is a FF thread, and so presumably "inane" bias toward serialized sci-fi has standing, while preference for procedurals and unscripted fare are valid targets for wildly self-indulgent and vicious attack, I'm not really sure it helps anyone, in any way, to go down that path. While I regret the loss of Lost, and remember fondly shows like Babylon 5, I don't think it helps "us" to look at the values of others in such a negative and scathing manner. I think it just makes our own stew more bitter. :)

And I predict it will be years until the broadcast nets risk another long-form serialized sci-fi drama in prime time again. The way I look at it, we were lucky to get this one for as brief a time as we did.Yes, true. One thing we see posters post a lot on these forums is the contention that the model for broadcast television is changing, and that the networks aren't adjusting to that change, blah blah blah. The reality is that the model is indeed changing, but it is we viewers who aren't adjusting to the change. The networks are. That's why we're disappointed. They -- really the whole business side of the equation, starting from the advertisers -- are realizing that our eyes are just not worth what they used to be worth, and that is driving the business to adjust to how little viewers are worth now.

Let's turn it around: How can we craft the most inanely disparaging characterization of the television we like? ;)

I know that this is a FF thread, and so presumably "inane" bias toward serialized sci-fi has standing, while preference for procedurals and unscripted fare are valid targets for wildly self-indulgent and vicious attack, I'm not really sure it helps anyone, in any way, to go down that path. While I regret the loss of Lost, and remember fondly shows like Babylon 5, I don't think it helps "us" to look at the values of others in such a negative and scathing manner. I think it just makes our own stew more bitter. :)


I go down that path because I'm bitter bicker (say that 3 times fast). :p Dagnabit, I just lost another one.

I admit that all these procedurals that litter the landscape are competently produced and well acted. They are little machines of efficiency, following a formula that by now is so well defined that the stories essentially write themselves. Take a little current events, mix with a few red herrings, leaven with some buddy-banter, shake for 5 acts and voilà! Another hour, another solved case. No commitment required.

Reality shows, same thing. They've got that formula down, too. And there's no shortage of eager contestants, all looking for that 15 minutes in a society obsessed with fame.

The problem I have is that in this vast television landscape, there doesn't seem to be room for anything else. We've seen how many high-concept serialized dramas, especially if they have any sci-fi elements, have crashed and burned in recent years. I wouldn't mind all the procedurals and reality shows taking up the bulk of the TV landscape if we could just also have some meatier fare for those who like that kind of thing. I just want a little equality, man.

I understand the economic pressures; I understand it's a business where people gotta' get paid. It's just a shame there aren't enough of us to ensure the survival and health of a few alternatives to the procedural and reality onslaught. I don't begrudge those shows to those who like them, I just want a blasted serialized drama on broadcast TV to last long enough to reach a thematically satisfying conclusion. LOST is the exception. 'Fast Forward' is the rule. :(

I go down that path because I'm bitter bicker (say that 3 times fast). :pHeheh... well I suppose some folks are happier living that way... not me! :D

The problem I have is that in this vast television landscape, there doesn't seem to be room for anything else.There is room for whatever loads of people are going to watch. Heck, we used to have only three or four channels, now we have literally hundreds, and that's not just empty space. There is room. Room is not the problem. The problem is will -- will on the part of viewers to watch, and specifically to watch what we want them to watch instead of perhaps what they current want to watch. I word it that way deliberately because it shows the path forward: If we want more of the available room used for what we want to watch, then it is up to us to motivate more people to like what we like.

There are four churches in the town center just south of where I live. One of the four churches used to be a church for my denomination -- and had been for over a hundred years. For whatever reason, it is now a church for another denomination. This example shows both sides of the coin: My denomination dwindled, and therefore attracted too few congregants to justify our continued use of that (historic, and costly-to-maintain) church building, while another denomination attracted a significant amount of additional adherents, and therefore attracted enough congregants to justify their use of that church.

Even though its called "economics" it even applies to things that only tangentially are affected by business. :)

I just want a little equality, man.Even in this land of the free and home of the brave, equality still means, to a great extent, equality of opportunity, not equality of riches. We have equal opportunity to get the kind of programming we want presented -- all we have to do is make it a better proposition for the folks who invest their resources producing programming than what they're doing instead.

Of course, if we could get our preference classified as a protected class, along with race, color, religion, national origin, age, gender, etc., then we'd be golden, eh? (Though, as you can see from my example, above, even religions don't get equality of riches.)

It's just a shame there aren't enough of us to ensure the survival and health of a few alternatives to the procedural and reality onslaught.Amen.

I guess it shouldn't surprise me that ABC took the easy way out of their Sci-fi dilemma. They go for the show that had already been on the air once before and abandoning the show with more originality.

I'm not sure I'd credit FlashForward with significantly more originality.

ABC took the profitable way out.... going with the show made in Canada, instead of with LA talent.

I'm not sure I'd credit FlashForward with significantly more originality.

ABC took the profitable way out.... going with the show made in Canada, instead of with LA talent.
That definitely would be the more logical reason for keeping V and canceling FF. In any event, I will really miss FF.

I'm not sure I'd credit FlashForward with significantly more originality...

You don't credit FF with significantly more originality than a remake??? Sheesh :confused:

They are little machines of efficiency, following a formula that by now is so well defined that the stories essentially write themselves. Take a little current events, mix with a few red herrings, leaven with some buddy-banter, shake for 5 acts and voilà! Another hour, another solved case. No commitment required.

Reality shows, same thing. They've got that formula down, too.



The majority of todays network dramatic programming is nothing more than fancy MAD-libs. Fill in the blanks with the ingredients mentioned above, stir, bake & serve to the public.

No wonder the big 3 (and a half) is losing viewership to the cable networks.
All they serve up is crap for the most part.

Regarding the last episode shown, it seems the writers are trying very hard to make us think some of the FF will be true and some not.

They show Benford in jail. True, someone can come to bail him out in time to go to the office. Who will it be? :rolleyes:

Benford's wife is determined not to be in bed with her boyfriend when the blackout occurs. What will it take for her to be in bed at that time?:p

The father and daughter in Afghanistan is already off the FF timeline. The daughter is dead. How can she be alive talking to him when the FF moment occurred?:confused:

In other words, the writers have created doubt in my mind that all the FF will happen on time. Thats why I can't wait for the next thrilling episode (to borrow a line from an old superman serial) to find out what actually happens. I hope they can pull it off. It will be a great send off to what could have been a very promising show.:D

I think the point they've been making is that the Global Flash Forward was simply a snapshot of that particular future at that particular time. We've seen that there are an infinite number of possibilities based on significant characters actions or inactions. The future is always changing because more futures are always being created. That's basic multiverse theory.

What the conspirators did was use a vast number of flash-forwards by many people, both themselves and conscripted innocents like Gabriel to come up with probabilities of what's most likely to occur. They then bet on the outcomes that looked profitable.

You don't credit FF with significantly more originality than a remake??? Sheesh :confused:FF is a remake, of a book.

And no, FF was not more original than the 'V' remake. Just because something is different (and again, it wasn't, but even if it was) doesn't mean that it actually was more original.

No wonder the big 3 (and a half) is losing viewership to the cable networks. No not even close. The Big 4 are losing viewership to the cable networks because many cable networks are offering programming where they haven't before, and/or offering more programming than they have before. If you cut a pie into more pieces, then each piece is naturally going to be smaller.

What the conspirators did was use a vast number of flash-forwards by many people, both themselves and conscripted innocents like Gabriel to come up with probabilities of what's most likely to occur. They then bet on the outcomes that looked profitable.

Good point:)

FF is a remake, of a book.

And no, FF was not more original than the 'V' remake. Just because something is different (and again, it wasn't, but even if it was) doesn't mean that it actually was more original.

I would think that, by any reasonable definition, a copy of a copy is not very original. But I expect that we significantly disagree with the definition of reasonable definition.

FF is a remake, of a book.

And no, FF was not more original than the 'V' remake. Just because something is different (and again, it wasn't, but even if it was) doesn't mean that it actually was more original.
I didn't realize my "originality" comment was going to create this firestorm. I am sure most of you know that my comments were referring to the fact that 20 years or so ago there was an identical series called - V. Fast Forward is a series that has never appeared on TV before. I will concede that FF is not an original concept, but it is an original TV series.

No not even close. The Big 4 are losing viewership to the cable networks because many cable networks are offering programming where they haven't before, and/or offering more programming than they have before. If you cut a pie into more pieces, then each piece is naturally going to be smaller.

plus those cable networks are owned by the big 4 to begin with.

I didn't realize my "originality" comment was going to create this firestorm. I am sure most of you know that my comments were referring to the fact that 20 years or so ago there was an identical series called - V. Fast Forward is a series that has never appeared on TV before. I will concede that FF is not an original concept, but it is an original TV series.No problem. It's not a book, it's a TV program. And one never seen before. If anything, it's an "adaption".

I would think that, by any reasonable definition, a copy of a copy is not very original. A copy isn't original either. A copy of a book is a copy. FF is a remake of a book. And given the context of the message I replied to, a point made specifically about something being a "remake", with no other point made, it basically boils down to something being original or not.

plus those cable networks are owned by the big 4 to begin with.Yes, very good point.

A copy isn't original either. A copy of a book is a copy. FF is a remake of a book. And given the context of the message I replied to, a point made specifically about something being a "remake", with no other point made, it basically boils down to something being original or not.



Oh come on, give it up, you blew it, you overlooked the fact that the current V is a remake of the same show from many years ago, FlashForward is not. To try and expand the universe of the discussion to includes books, graphic novels, poems, magazines, toys, architecture, boats, cars, what ever, is pretty weak just to back up a faulty statement.

Your opinion may be that FlashForward is not original, but within the television programming universe, IT IS - and V, by virtue that it's already been a TV show that aired 25 years ago IS NOT original.

Oh come on, give it up, you blew it, you overlooked the fact that the current V is a remake of the same show from many years ago, FlashForward is not.What are you talking about? I'm old, but I'm not so old that I've forgotten anything of the sort. You're having trouble differentiating between "overlooking" something and determining that it is irrelevant.

The point you seem to have "overlooked" is that both shows are copies; neither show is an original idea. And each show is, within itself, a showcase of the creativity that its production team has the capacity and inclination to contribute to it.

And again, FlashForward sucked in that regard. It did. I'm sorry -- no really, I mean that literally -- that I'm sorry it sucked. I really wanted it to be better. I really wanted it to be better than the book. It wasn't. That's life. We don't always get what we want. By comparison, 'V' was much better than the original.

Now I'm not suggesting that 'V' was necessarily better than FlashForward, because it was so much better than its original source than FlashForward was. In reality, my wife and I felt that the shows were pretty comparable in entertainment quality. However, being comparable represents a "loss" for FlashForward two ways: Because it let down the original source, and belied its allegedly superior cast, crew and production.

To try and expand the universe of the discussion to includes books, graphic novels, poems, magazines, toys, architecture, boats, cars, what ever, is pretty weak just to back up a faulty statement. First: Not at all, and Second: Not necessary. See above. I didn't raise the issue about source, original, etc. Willie_Tee did, and I pointed out why it was ridiculous. And your litany of possible sources underscore why failing to look at both series as derivations was an error on his part.

Your opinion may be that FlashForward is not original, but within the television programming universe, IT IS - and V, by virtue that it's already been a TV show that aired 25 years ago IS NOT original.And when television doesn't exist, that means everything in whatever medium we're using then is suddenly original again? That's inane. You don't get to define what the "television programming universe" is, or even define that there is such a thing. You made that up to fit your argument, and what's worse, in the process missed the core point.

As a general rule, the more simple and straightforward a TV show, the greater its chances for success. The more complex the concept, the more thinking that's required, the more difficult it is to find a mass audience. This is the world we live in. That's not to say the faults we've noted and bemoaned don't matter; they do. But just due to it's relatively complex subject matter and serialized nature, FF was always going to have a rough road in front of it. 'V' goes down a lot easier: Lizards bad! Humans good! Stuff blows up! Yea humans! *sigh*

V is by no means what I'd call an intelligent show, but Flash Forward insulted my intelligence many times in each and every episode. The premise might have been intelligent but the execution was clumsy and plothole ridden.

Exactly, there are way too many people white knighting Flashforward as a concept lost on audiences and a victim of poor promotion by ABC. Honestly, the concept was lost on the writers too and they never managed to gather anything coherent to capture people's attention. The show had poor pacing, meandering plot, ill defined characters, absurd twists, internal consistency problems, often atrocious editing, and unnatural dialog. The only real redeeming quality about it was the concept but the execution could easily be a case study for how to not construct a series.

V is far from good too, however the worse offense it commits is being slightly dull, having poor cgi, and slightly too much cheese. It might actually be salvageable by simply tightening up the story lines and moving the plot. I will agree though that the next 13 episodes will probably be it unless something dramatically changes, it's not even due to come back until midseason.

The choice between the two probably wasn't anything that ABC was particularly ecstatic over. I can imagine them looking at the shows and going "Whelp, we NEED to renew one of these things, we don't really have a choice. Which one will be better able to fill a half season hole in our schedule next year?"

Well-stated :D

I thought the concept was strong. I saw the flaws, but the concept was fun. The idea of free will and what your actions would be if you could see your future are grand philosophical questions and maybe more talented people could have crafted a better, tighter storyline around it *cough* Whedon, Abrams, Lindelof, Moore *cough*. But this is what we got. TV has certain conventions and an action adventure has to have plenty of action. You've got to have a little romance to attract the fairer sex. You've got an intriguing plotline with plenty of mystery and opportunity for dramatic twists. It's takes special skill to combine all of that in a package that will make a large number of people, many of whom are used to lowest-denominator-programming, sign on for the long haul. This show never found that combination. But I enjoyed it for what it was, am glad we got it, and wish it could have continued.

V is by no means what I'd call an intelligent show, but Flash Forward insulted my intelligence many times in each and every episode. The premise might have been intelligent but the execution was clumsy and plothole ridden.

I wouldn't even go that far in critiquing FF. FF's main failure is that it never answers the great question all shows much answer if they are to survive: why should we care what happens to these people?

FF is littered with unsympathetic heroes. Joseph Fiennes has all the energy of a dog hip dysplasia. I like John Cho as an actor, but if this was his crossover to TV, he might just want to stick with being the straight man in stoner flicks.

The villains are laughably stupid and don't even come from a class that produces villains -- unless sci-fi shows are now casually stealing from episodes of Ugly Betty.

The only character I liked was the CIA double-agent handler from the bad guys' side (the chick in the pet store).

Who cares what happens to these people?

I mean, frankly, except for watching the hobbit being brutally tortured, I can't think of a pay-off this show could offer that would make me want to do a Jericho-style peanut siege to rescue it.

FF is a great concept that just never paid off because the characters suck.

MeowMeow -- Your post touched on a couple of the things I liked least about FlashForward. Joe Fiennes was not ready for prime time. Most of the time he seemed to be walking around in a catatonic state while sucking prunes. I also agree that too many of the recurring characters were uninteresting. This is one scifi series with whose end I approve.

No not even close. The Big 4 are losing viewership to the cable networks because many cable networks are offering programming where they haven't before, and/or offering more programming than they have before. If you cut a pie into more pieces, then each piece is naturally going to be smaller.

Not only that, but some of the BEST new programming is often turning up on cable channels, procedural, or otherwise... "Burn Notice" is the first show that comes to mind. "In Plain Sight" on the same USA channel (part of the HUGE NBC/Universal family) is another. Both could be loosely called "procedurals," I guess, although I don't see either that way. I LOVE Jeffrey Donovan's narration and the (sometimes almost snarky) labels they put underneath whoever he's introducing at the time with his narration at the moment... Emmanuel Vaugier just seems to get more beautiful (and HOTTER) every year; and Bruce Campbell, well, what can you say about one of the greatest horror-camp-actors ever now pulling of his version of sarcasm on this show... I hadn't seen much of Sharon Gless since "Cagney & Lacey" went off the air, but she's quite the character on this show, as well, really "blowing smoke," so to speak. :D

TNT and FX have and have had a fair share of excellent shows, as well. Even some of the original shows on the SciFi channel are of decent caliber (my personal favorite, at present, is "Eureka," which some like to slam but I think is underrated). I also think "Stargate: Universe" is improving, though it still has a way to go to match its two predecessors (I DO enjoy seeing Lou Diamond Phllips get beaten up occasionally, though ;)).

And the Discovery family of channels has quite a bit of excellent original programming -- much of it "reality" programming, but good nonetheless. I'm not sure HOW you'd classify "Mythbusters" or "Dirty Jobs." I just call them both great entertainment, and usually educational, as well.

So the simple fact is that the pie isn't just sliced more thinly, but there actually is a lot of REAL MEAT in many of those other slices. There are literally hundreds of other channels I didn't come close to references... sports channels I really don't watch -- same with music channels, game channels, news channels, for the most part (I watch the news, but usually nightly on a network). And many more -- PLUS the Pay Channels such as HBO, Showtime, Cinemax and Starz -- ALL of which have SOME original programming, as well, and MOST of which is worth watching (as is obvious from the overwhelming number of Emmy nominations HBO gets every fall, for example, contrasted with the relatively SMALL amount of original programming it has).

I contend that IF "Flash Forward" had begun as well as it ended it MIGHT have been the one of the two to be renewed (I think the assertion that only ONE of the two was likely to be renewed unless BOTH burned up the ratings -- and ONE was all but guaranteed, as a replacement to lost -- is correct). But I also agree that the show started off with a decent concept that was almost immediately ruined even BEFORE the Flash Forward happened, by poor pacing and lethargic acting. I was fairly blown away by the actual FF and the few minutes after that, but then it dragged again, pretty continually until about Episode 13, or so -- with only occasional flashes of brilliance -- and by that time so much of the audience vital to keeping the show on the air had jumped ship. Only those of us determined to "see it through" and true sci-fi geeks were left.

These shows need to HIT THE GROUND RUNNING! People say, "well, 'Lost' did this and did that and didn't really answer any questions or address things or move the 'story' along until the end of the first season." But they MISS the point with "Lost." First, "Lost" was a phenomenon for a variety of reasons...

1. It was the FIRST new Sci-Fi mystery/drama on TV in quite some time, so people had NO burn-out factor.
2. It had really interesting and intriguing characters, and in the end the CHARACTERS ended up being what the show was ALL ABOUT, not "the island," or anything else.
3. None of these folks except Jin and Sun knew each other, so everyone was new to everyone else, thus all the budding romances and conflicts, etc., had a "natural" freshness to them, greatly enhanced by much better writing and directing.
4. They actually DID really INTERESTING things on the show EARLY ON that made people feel like they HAD TO keep coming back to see WHAT was going to happen next... WHAT pulled a 747 pilot out of the cockpit of his plane more than 20 feet off the ground, killed him, and left his body in the top of trees 40 feet or so in the air? WHERE in the heck did a POLAR BEAR come from on a TROPICAL ISLAND? HOW on EARTH has the SAME DISTRESS MESSAGE been repeating from some unseen radio source on the island for almost 16.5 YEARS with STILL no response or rescue??? ALL that happened within the first FOUR episodes -- all that and MORE!

We got nothing APPROACHING that sort of mystery and intrigue in the first four episodes of "Flash Forward." If we had, it could very well be looking at a second season.
Jeff

Jeff -- I agree that the multiple TV series, which are airing these days on nets such as FX, USA, TNT, et al., have put a lot of added heat on the Big Four. Many of those shows, Damages, The Closer, and Justified come immediately to mind, are better than most of the dramatic series currently showing on the Big Four. The TV landscape is changing dramatically.

FF's villains are these guys:
http://www.kilala.nl/Images/Blog/Nihilists.jpg

Meow: Stop stealing his bandwidth!!!;)

I guess if you like this show then you might have to settle for a DVD or Blu-Ray version which will ultimately arrive. That said I don't see much point in watching it again if you already know how it ends.

The more I think about "Flash Forward," the more ANGRY I get at what it could have been and failed to become, even though it showed a number of flashes of that brilliance late in the season -- enough to justify renewing it had they not so ROYALLY screwed things up in the beginning!

When this show began, ABC billed it as "the next 'Lost'," and considering it had the same creator and some other similarities -- including two of the same cast members -- there was more than a little credence to that comparison in the beginning. But it quickly became apparent the writers and directors working on FF were nowhere NEAR as competent as the folks behind "Lost."

For one thing, "Lost" began with "the event." The very first scene began with Jack Shephard opening his eye on the beach after the crash, then slowly getting his senses, getting up, wandering out of the bamboo, hearing the sounds of the still-whirring jet engines, and stumbling over to help survivors, etc.

Whereas FF spent the first 20 or 30 minutes boring most of us to tears setting us all up with "character development..." How "loving" the relationship was between Mark and Olivia, plus the fact that he was a reformed alcoholic -- too much too soon! Making SURE we know about the babysitter and Charlie AND the babysitter's boyfriend she sneaks over while she's supposed to be watching Charlie... "Stuff" at the hospital with Olivia... and on and on... Too much JUNK. SOMEBODY who is very sophomoric in his or her thinking on how to WRITE DRAMA thought we needed ALL THAT CHARACTER development and exposition PRIOR to the FF so we would UNDERSTAND who these folks were and could better comprehend their FFs afterwards... Bull's Balls!!!

The show SHOULD HAVE STARTED with Mark getting into the car and asking Dmitri what's going on (I hope I'm remembering who got in last correctly -- haven't watched that since October), and given us JUST THAT MUCH exposition, so we had just enough time to get a feel for what was going on, where the "action" was -- that it was L.A., a busy morning with heavy traffic and offices full of people, etc. -- and BLAM, the FF, just like it happened! ALL the rest could have been accomplished pretty much the way it was afterwards, through showing the FFs and very brief explanation/exposition and flashbacks, when needed, to explain the other stuff.

Now before anyone objects that this is "too much like how 'Lost' did things... that it would look just like they were copying 'Lost'..." they ended up doing all of that stuff ANYWAY, just not nearly as effectively. The show was full of flashbacks (not nearly as many as "Lost" had, but it had its share, and I fail to see how more could have hurt anything). Every single time they showed someone's FF it was via a FLASHBACK (except the few they showed WHILE they were presumably happening).

Instead, as has been pounded ad nauseam already on this thread, they plodded tired and trite soapy themes most of the afternoon shows would probably even be ashamed of. The first half of the season, MOST of the cast seemed to be practically sleepwalking half the time, except for Mark Benford, who looked like (probably due to his flash forward that he would be assassinated while frantically searching for the solution to the FFs) he was constantly angry and on a mission... The only problem was that he had NO FREAKIN' IDEA who to be angry at or WHAT mission it was he was on, so he generally just ran around "willy nilly" with this look on his face that can only be described as something like he was fighting off constipated diarrhea, complicated by raging heartburn, and he can't find any Pepto Bismol, Kaopectate, Imodium OR Tums!

Oh yeah, and Dmitri follows him around like a faithful puppydog. Heel, boy! Heel!

Note, I'm NOT talking about the entire season, just the part that doomed it -- although the entire series had its share of flaws, with only a couple of episodes that were really great. But the first 10 or so episodes... well, they would have been better served if compressed into about 3 or 4 episodes and all the crap taken out! And if you look back, I was feebly trying to DEFEND this show during those first few episodes before I finally joined the "constructive criticism" crowd, myself.
Jeff

Meow: Stop stealing his bandwidth!!!;)

How does still serving an image prevent bandwidth from being used? Gosh . . . hotlink one itty bitty jpeg . . .

When this show began, ABC billed it as "the next 'Lost'," and considering it had the same creator and some other similarities -- including two of the same cast members -- there was more than a little credence to that comparison in the beginning. But it quickly became apparent the writers and directors working on FF were nowhere NEAR as competent as the folks behind "Lost."Jeff, perhaps FF was a bit premature with its debut. 'Cause if it had waited and obtained the writers from that "other" show, it'd certainly be head-over-heels better than it is now and probably not canceled. But there's no telling how it would've ended...;)

Well, I for one am looking forward to tonight's finale. Hope they wrap it up well and do their few remaining fans a solid. Flash Forward, we hardly knew ye'. :(

Well, I for one am looking forward to tonight's finale. Hope they wrap it up well and do their few remaining fans a solid. Flash Forward, we hardly knew ye'. :(

Same here. I didn't start watching it till about 2 weeks ago (my wife was watching it and I was like "I already watch too much tv") because my wife saved them on our DVR.

It's too bad it is being killed off but, I hope they close the story line and don't keep us hanging for something we will never see.

Wow. That's how you end a series; bitter and sweet..

That was a good finale. Too bad there's not going to be a season two.

With the level of writing and direction this show had, it was an uphill battle just to finish one season. This is one of a few episodes I thought were really well done, though I did miss a couple.

If that was the version edited to provide closure, I would hate to have seen the original edit.

If that was the version edited to provide closure, I would hate to have seen the original edit.

Was it even edited at all? That was as much a cliffhanger as you can get.

Mark was trying to "Get to da choppahh!"'

Shout out to one of my favorite bands-Band of Horses for the song at the end "The Funeral"

Was it even edited at all? That was as much a cliffhanger as you can get.The flashes were all over the place as far as when they were flashing to. 2011, 2015, Charlie... much, much older, etc.

I'm guessing that was the change. Seems like the point of the flashes was to show that Benford survived (or at least, that's what you can believe if you want) and they successfully resolved the 2012 issue.

It's fast and loose, but they painted themselves in a corner if they weren't going to get renewed. My guess is they planned this finale from the beginning, basically assuming they'd have a second season to wrap up some loose ends even if things didn't go all that well ratings-wise.

Wired- Farewell FlashForward: 5 Reasons It Should Have Stayed On Air
(http://www.wired.com/underwire/2010/05/farewell-flashforward/)

I thought the finale was reaonably satisfying, but I now have a somewhat quizzical feeling about whether this actually was a true SERIES finale...

The reason I ask this is that both "Law & Order" AND "Flash Forward" ended this week. "Flash Forward" got the official AXE from ABC at least a week sooner than did "Law & Order" from NBC, yet the older show's last episode was listed on my Tribune Media Services DISH guide as SERIES finale, whereas the FF episode was listed as a SEASON finale... That makes me wonder if there aren't, perhaps, SERIOUS discussions behind the scenes that have yet to even be hinted at in the entertainment media about bringing this show back on one of the cable channels, or something.

While I have serious doubts about that, given the obviously high budget for the show (and few ways I can imagine of doing much about that), I see nothing as impossible. It's also possible one of the other Big 4 networks will decide to pick it up, although the fact that it's an ABC Studios production and even THEY canceled it makes such a prospect seem DIM, at best... But anything is possible in TVland; I'm certainly not holding my breath, however.

At any rate, the way those two shows were listed on the guide is odd, at the very least.
Jeff

Not only that, but some of the BEST new programming is often turning up on cable channels, procedural, or otherwise... "Burn Notice" is the first show that comes to mind.

I agree with you on Burn Notice, which was far too short this season. Let me also add Warehouse 13 on Syfy, returning for it's sophomore season this fall.;)

As for the ending of FF tonight, I know the show was canceled, but it felt more like a season finale rather than a series finale. Perhaps it was the original season finale and they either didn't care, or ABC said "no" to any other editing changes. I dunno...

I agree with you on Burn Notice, which was far too short this season. Let me also add Warehouse 13 on Syfy, returning for it's sophomore season this fall.;)

As for the ending of FF tonight, I know the show was canceled, but it felt more like a season finale rather than a series finale. Perhaps it was the original season finale and they either didn't care, or ABC said "no" to any other editing changes. I dunno...

Oh, I would have included "Warehouse 13," "Saving Grace" on TNT (which has been canceled and is currently running out its final few episodes) and several other shows, but I...

1. Just felt it necessary to list a few of the best examples I felt practically NOBODY would "pick apart," since they seem to be just about universally acclaimed, and;
2. Didn't list ANY shows I've either already seen criticized ("Warehouse 13," for one -- although I like it), or that have any "spiritual" content in them, such as "Saving Grace," because some folks just seem to get ALL RILED UP about any show that has angels or anything in it. Whether you believe in that sort of thing or not, I contend that you could take the angel angle entirely out of "Saving Grace" and still have an excellent show. Personally, I have no idea if "angels" really do exist, but I think it's a sort of neat concept that they might, and some might sometimes appear to people in need who pray for help and do the sorts of things and act the sort of "country-boy" way "Earl" does on "Saving Grace." And I also like the fact that he helps not only good, pious people, but very flawed people -- even prison inmates on death row, and has made connections between some of these people that would have otherwise not existed.

"Damages" is excellent, too, but I wasn't recording it when it first started, and got distracted and got behind on episodes and so I quit watching. I'll have to pick it up in re-runs, sometime. What few episodes of "Leverage" I've seen also look very good.

"Monk" was one of the best quirky comedies ever on TV -- cable or otherwise (as evidenced by several Emmy wins by star Tony Shaloub) -- so good, in fact, that ABC re-ran USA network seasons two years running, but didn't get high enough ratings to continue. "Nip/Tuck" was sort of Bizarre, but never failed to be entertaining... Same with "Rescue Me," although it's less bizarre -- best/most acting I've seen Tatum O'Neil do in AGES.

All that said, I think there's still a viable market for excellent scripted dramas on network TV. They just have to adjust their business models to match the new realities. I fear dropping high-budget shows like FF, and failing to pick up many new high-budget shows is likely a big part of that.
Jeff

Given how poor the series was, in general, I found the finale to be remarkably good as a finale. It was far better than, by rights, it should have been.

I agree with you on Burn Notice, which was far too short this season. Let me also add Warehouse 13 on Syfy, returning for it's sophomore season this fall.;)

As for the ending of FF tonight, I know the show was canceled, but it felt more like a season finale rather than a series finale. Perhaps it was the original season finale and they either didn't care, or ABC said "no" to any other editing changes. I dunno...

Warehouse 13 returns in July, not the Fall.

I was a bit disappointed, but understand that the show was cancelled so they couldn't do a proper ending.

I was most impressed they were able to notify (within like 3 minutes) the white house and press that another flash forward was going to occur and got the word out :rolleyes:

Also, I guess I didn't know who the woman in the hospital was that wheeled away Janis during the flash forward. Was I supposed to know who she was?

Also, I guess I didn't know who the woman in the hospital was that wheeled away Janis during the flash forward. Was I supposed to know who she was?

She was the lady working with Hellenger, who slept with Simon to keep him occupied until he got there.

Also, I guess I didn't know who the woman in the hospital was that wheeled away Janis during the flash forward. Was I supposed to know who she was?

She recruited Janis and slept with Simon to keep him busy while waiting for Hellinger, then got sent for ice.

So yes, you were supposed to know.

She recruited Janis and slept with Simon to keep him busy while waiting for Hellinger, then got sent for ice.

So yes, you were supposed to know.

Ah yes...guess I just didn't recognize her. Oh well.

Ah yes...guess I just didn't recognize her. Oh well.

Anabeth Gish.... also on the X-Files and The West Wing.

Ah yes...guess I just didn't recognize her. Oh well.

Well, in the scene with Simon she was half dressed, so I can understand you not remembering her face. And while she was fully clothed when recruiting Janis, it was weeks earlier.

I agree with you on Burn Notice, which was far too short this season. Let me also add Warehouse 13 on Syfy, returning for it's sophomore season this fall.;)


W13? Really? Tried a few episodes and it just seemed like the usual same-old same-old formula show to me. Pretty much the same premise as the old FRIDAY THE 13TH tv series. At least FF had a unique premise.

I thought the finale was an OK ending to a mediocre TV series, which was not as good as the novel on which it was loosely based. The only things in common between the novel and the TV series are the basic concept of the flashforwards caused by particle accelerators and character named Lloyd Simcoe. They have little else in common.

I thought the finale was an OK ending to a mediocre TV series, which was not as good as the novel on which it was loosely based. The only things in common between the novel and the TV series are the basic concept of the flashforwards caused by particle accelerators and character named Lloyd Simcoe. They have little else in common.

What is the name of the novel? Is it a good read like Manifold Time?

Oh, I would have included "Warehouse 13," "Saving Grace" on TNT (which has been canceled and is currently running out its final few episodes) and several other shows, but I...

1. Just felt it necessary to list a few of the best examples I felt practically NOBODY would "pick apart," since they seem to be just about universally acclaimed, and;
2. Didn't list ANY shows I've either already seen criticized ("Warehouse 13," for one -- although I like it)...

Didn't mean to give the impression I disagreed with the other shows you listed. I saw Burn Notice and focused in on that as it's one of my faves. I have Eureka in my Netflix queue and need to watch all 4(?) seasons before it starts up here soon.

Warehouse 13 returns in July, not the Fall.

Hehe. My bad. That's what I get for posting late at night.:o

W13? Really? Tried a few episodes and it just seemed like the usual same-old same-old formula show to me. Pretty much the same premise as the old FRIDAY THE 13TH tv series. At least FF had a unique premise.

I really enjoy WH13. At first it reminded me of the old Friday The 13th series too. But's it's so much better, IMO. I really dig the characters in WH13. Never tried to compare it to FF.

What is the name of the novel? Is it a good read like Manifold Time?


Flashforward, just like the show:

http://www.amazon.com/Flashforward-Robert-J-Sawyer/dp/076532413X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275070693&sr=1-1

Annabeth Gish was also great in the Showtime series "Brotherhood" which also starred Brian O'Byrne.

I think we're starting to see a division in TV viewers given the availability of more kinds of viewing options and the side that likes to invest time in an ongoing weekly series may be dwindling.

I didn't like the "finale" much at all. It seemed like this wasn't re-edited at all at was just meant to be the season finale.

Did the creators of the show really expect the series to last to 2015? It sure seemed that way from the second FF. Was the girl we saw in the 2nd FF was supposed to be an older Charlie? I guess we'll never really know what any of the flashes meant. That's why I find it less than satisfying.

I didn't like the "finale" much at all. It seemed like this wasn't re-edited at all at was just meant to be the season finale.

Did the creators of the show really expect the series to last to 2015? It sure seemed that way from the second FF. Was the girl we saw in the 2nd FF was supposed to be an older Charlie? I guess we'll never really know what any of the flashes meant. That's why I find it less than satisfying.

Yes it was Charlie, thats why right after we saw it, the camera zommed out to her "now". her falsh we can only assume means that Marc Benford wasnt really dead aferall.

As far as the show lasting to 2015, remember that many shows like FlashForward have a multi season (year) arch. I would expect that the show had a 5-6 year plan to tell the story in full. Most of the flashes were jsut showing the characters futures, so instead of it playing out in the short term we saw the long term FF.

So, we're to assume Benford leaped out of his shattered office window after having dispatched the Conspirator Hit Team, all Jack Bauer like, and "disappeared". He was missing until 2015 when they "found him"...?

Wow! What would a second season have looked like? Who caused the second Global Flash Forward - Simon, mucking around with the particle accelerator? Because there couldn't have been a second GFF without it, and without the conspirators amplifying it as before, right? But I guess we'll just have to fill in the blanks with our imagination, I guess.

AAARRRRRGH!!!

As LOSt has shown (being unable to wrap-up or ignoring some plot aspects), these multi-season serial programs are pretty much a waste on time, I feel. I generally avoid them now, as a series that takes years to resolve is just to big a committment. And writers tend to add stuff to stretch the story out, only to ignore them when it's time to go. Why not have some limited-series with arcs that are only meant to last one or two seasons? It would hopefully eliminate finales without resolutions. Life's too short to devote years to some of these TV shows.

That makes me wonder if there aren't, perhaps, SERIOUS discussions behind the scenes that have yet to even be hinted at in the entertainment media about bringing this show back on one of the cable channels, or something.

I would be incredibly shocked. The show was easily the most expensive new series for 2009-2010, and probably the most expensive first season for a television series in the history of broadcast television.

I bet any cable channel interested in showing it (and I doubt there are any given the ratings), would demand the budget be cut by 50-60%.

I would be shocked if it topped LOST. It was mostly shot in and around Hawaii, and I'm fairly sure the cost of producing (and living) is not cheap there. FF's pilot ep looked hecka-expensive, but I doubt even it topped the "castaway" show. But I could be wrong..

I would be incredibly shocked. The show was easily the most expensive new series for 2009-2010, and probably the most expensive first season for a television series in the history of broadcast television.

I bet any cable channel interested in showing it (and I doubt there are any given the ratings), would demand the budget be cut by 50-60%.

Just curious, but what made it so expensive? There weren't really any big name actors, and outside of the premiere and finale there weren't many effects shots that looked particularly expensive. Not really any big car chases or anything either, and it seemed like almost everything could be shot on location in LA.

and it seemed like almost everything could be shot on location in LA.That was part of the problem. The big expenses in shows these days go to location shoots. Most shows (that aren't reality shows) these days are shot on a closed set, with green screens, etc. Every episode of this show was essentially like a mini-movie. Yes Lost probably cost a lot more to produce, but it was an incredibly popular show- FF was not.

these multi-season serial programs are pretty much a waste on time, I feel. .

While I disagree with the wild generalization, I completely agree with Flashforward. I wasted alot of time hoping FlashForward would give me some sort of closure. I should of ditched the show when David Goyer left the show back in February.

Jessika Borsiczky, Lisa Zwerling and Tim Lea (depending on who actually was doing the show running) had more than a month to change this ending in post, but didn't. They have all joined my list of shows I will refuse to watch if they are involved. Off the top of my head, people on my list have absolutely ruined shows that I loved.
Mike Scully
Ryan Murphy
Tim Kring
Hart Hanson

I would be shocked if it topped LOST. It was mostly shot in and around Hawaii, and I'm fairly sure the cost of producing (and living) is not cheap there. FF's pilot ep looked hecka-expensive, but I doubt even it topped the "castaway" show. But I could be wrong..Given that Lost's first season ran six years ago, and all indications are that budgets have only continued to balloon (for the marque shows like FlashForward), I highly doubt that Lost had a larger budget for its first season.

There are plenty of shows that cost more to produce than FF, just none on broadcast and none for their first season. Unfortunately, since FF was a flop, I doubt we'll ever know how much it cost. In this interview (http://www.thewrap.com/article/david-s-goyer-grilled_7021?page=2) with David Goyer prior to the show's debuted, you can see that he was very uncomfortable talking about the price of the show, but here's one thing he did say:I think “FlashForward” is going to have reach a much broader audience than a lot of movies I’ve been involved in. If you take a movie like “Blade” where we grossed about $70 million and you divide that by the $10 cost of a movie ticket, then roughly about 7 million people saw that film. We’re going to have to have a lot more than 7 million viewers for “FastForward” to be a hit.Consider how much HBO spends on its productions. In 2002, HBO committed $85 million for the first twelve episodes of Rome--at the time, the most expensive venture in the history of scripted television, I believe. But we're eight years out now, and I just read that the pilot alone for Boardwalk Empire will run HBO $50 million.

By contrast, the two-hour pilot for Lost cost $11.5 million, or about $5.75 million per hour. So the actual budget for the first season was probably about $3 million per episode. Based on Goyer's comments, I think it's safe to say that FF ran at least double that.

Just finished the book (I needed some sort of closure). As previously mentioned, few similarities to the show, although at least the name Mosaic Project made more sense (in the book, the supercollider was at CERN, where the World Wide Web was invented, and it was named after the first web browser).

Good book. No Benford. No FBI. None of the things that made the series so annoying. Much more physics and philosophy. I liked it much more than the show.

So, we're to assume Benford leaped out of his shattered office window after having dispatched the Conspirator Hit Team, all Jack Bauer like, and "disappeared". He was missing until 2015 when they "found him"...?

How old was Charlie, around 9 or 10? In the new FF's Charlie was a heck of a lot older than 15 when she gets the news that someone was found. That girl was definitely in her 20's so who knows who they were talking about. Unfortunately, we'll never know.

Due to the combination of the flash and the bomb's detonation, he was thrown into a "sideflash" where he's still alive. ;)

By contrast, the two-hour pilot for Lost cost $11.5 million, or about $5.75 million per hour. So the actual budget for the first season was probably about $3 million per episode. Based on Goyer's comments, I think it's safe to say that FF ran at least double that.

If you're even HALF RIGHT about that, Matt, then I'm really surprised ABC didn't dump this show before the season got even CLOSE to the end, because I can't imagine with the numbers "Flash Forward" was pulling it managed to gross even $3 Million an episode, much less twice that!

As for whether or not the showrunners "expected" it to run for 6 seasons, that's probably a difficult call, but from what little I know of the industry (mostly from watching shows ABOUT the industry), whenever a new show is "greenlit," pretty much EVERYONE involved is required to COMMIT to a six-year contract from DAY ONE, with no guarantee that they'll get past the first episode (a pretty one-sided arrangement, I'd say, but that's the TV business), so perhaps the showrunners figured "why not give it a 6-year presumptive arc?"

I THINK the thinking behind the 6-year commitment is that 6 years is the average run for a "successful" TV show -- not a blockbuster, but not a limper, either. The BIG HITS run 8 seasons or more, whereas those that burn hot at first, but lose steam (think "My Name is Earl" or "Heroes") average 3 or 4 years.

Two seasons or less. Well, unless the show's deliberately planned that way, I think everyone considers those shows a failure, even if they enjoyed them ("TSCC," "Dollhouse" -- both of which I wanted to see renewed -- especially "Dolhouse" -- although "TSCC" left us much more "in the lurch" with a hanging season-ending cliffhanger that ASSUMED renewal, whereas Joss Whedon had time to "prepare for the end" with "Dollhouse" and really did it RIGHT).

I can settle for FF's season/series finale -- especially since none of us likely has any choice, and none of us will likely care in a few weeks or months, anyway (although I'm STILL steamed at the way ABC let "Invasion" run a 5-minute promo for Season 2 at the end of Season 1 and then DIDN'T renew it! Talk about a LETDOWN!!!) I wasn't following this stuff online at the time, either, so I was just left waiting the following fall until it FINALLY sunk in there WOULD BE NO Season 2. ARGHHHHHHHHH!!! ABC is the WORST NETWORK EVER (except for NBC, CBS, Fox -- and all the rest) :eek::mad::rolleyes::p;):o:(:D:cool:
Jeff

Due to the combination of the flash and the bomb's detonation, he was thrown into a "sideflash" where he's still alive. ;)

L O S T:p

L O S T:p

He's probably stuck in a recurring series of "sideflashes," too, causing him repeated headaches and nosebleeds until he figures out how to turn the Magic Merry-Go-Round the left way and get it back on track so he can climb back out the rabbit hole and save Dumbledore from Darth Vader and his evil Gollum so the Na'Vi can be free of the Kraken! :p

Due to the combination of the flash and the bomb's detonation, he was thrown into a "sideflash" where he's still alive. ;)

Actually, I think that's probably it. But all that time could flash by in the blink of an eye if he's somehow thrown outside the boundaries of space and time, while his comrades go on with their lives, his cheatin' wife marries Lloyd, Marcie delivers & raises her kid and Dimitri is otherwise a typical "divorcee" father, Bryce marries his sushi chick, Wedick gets promoted, blah, blah, blah. I'm just bummed we'll never get to blah. I wanted to blah with this show. :(

If you're even HALF RIGHT about that, Matt, then I'm really surprised ABC didn't dump this show before the season got even CLOSE to the end, because I can't imagine with the numbers "Flash Forward" was pulling it managed to gross even $3 Million an episode, much less twice that!

If I had a thousand fingers, I still don't think I could count on one hand the number of strange scheduling and pick-up decisions that ABC has made over the last decade.

FlashForward was actually doing fine in the ratings until the hiatus, though. Not great, but it was on the bubble, and they probably figured DVD sales would make up the shortfall, and they'd just reign in the budget with the second season. After it came back and dropped off, at that point, it was probably more financially sound to let it limp to the finish than open up an hour-sized crater in a lucrative but highly competitive Thursday night time slot.

But, like I said, ABC has killed more quality shows with idiotic scheduling choices in the last decade than NBC has even put into production.

He's probably stuck in a recurring series of "sideflashes," too..That's right. I'm stuck here with Claire and Kate; wish you were here? :p

Two seasons or less. Well, unless the show's deliberately planned that way, I think everyone considers those shows a failure, even if they enjoyed them ("TSCC," "Dollhouse" -- both of which I wanted to see renewed -- especially "Dolhouse" -- although "TSCC" left us much more "in the lurch" with a hanging season-ending cliffhanger that ASSUMED renewal, whereas Joss Whedon had time to "prepare for the end" with "Dollhouse" and really did it RIGHT).

Yeah, it's Dollhouse that makes me wish the networks would give the shows a few months warning prior to cancellation. That was probably the most satisfying ending to a show I've ever seen.

How many shows really turn things around in the last 2 months anyway? If a show is trending heavily downward in the first 13 episodes they always follow the same pattern through the end.

(although I'm STILL steamed at the way ABC let "Invasion" run a 5-minute promo for Season 2 at the end of Season 1 and then DIDN'T renew it! Talk about a LETDOWN!!!) I wasn't following this stuff online at the time, either, so I was just left waiting the following fall until it FINALLY sunk in there WOULD BE NO Season 2. ARGHHHHHHHHH!!! ABC is the WORST NETWORK EVER (except for NBC, CBS, Fox -- and all the rest) :eek::mad::rolleyes::p;):o:(:D:cool:
Jeff

Invasion was one of my favorites also. Fortunately I was following this board at the time so I knew it had gotten canceled (and if I recall it was actually pulling in decent numbers at the time, much better than Flash Forward). I don't recall ever seeing the season 2 promo though. Is there a link to that online anywhere, just for kicks?

... that makes me wish the networks would give the shows a few months warning prior to cancellation.Some companies letting people go typically walk them to the exit of the building just a few moments after they tell them that they're being let go...

Some television series are given more advance notice; by the same token some employers give employees months notice and help them find new jobs, too....

Some companies letting people go typically walk them to the exit of the building just a few moments after they tell them that they're being let go...

Some television series are given more advance notice; by the same token some employers give employees months notice and help them find new jobs, too....

Yeah, bicker, some companies treat their employees like parts in the assembly line, to simply be summarily discarded in the trash bin when they're done with them (I frankly hope every single company with that attitude eventually goes bankrupt!), and some TV shows get the very same treatment from the networks, whereas, thankfully, a very few (such as "Dollhouse") have a chance to properly wrap things up. I think a big part of why "Dollhouse" had this opportunity may have to do with Joss Whedon's combination of respect and rabid fan base -- much more loyal than perhaps any other TV creator. I just think it's a shame there can't be a way TV shows can be made both entertaining AND at budgets small enough to keep them on the air even with a limited audience. But that's just not the economic realities of the business in this country -- unless the show's on PBS -- and even then the shows need underwriters and a certain amount of viewer support during fundraising drives to continue running.
Jeff

Come on give us one more season !

IF we wanted to REALLY try to get ABC to renew this show at this point, I think the ONLY chance would be some kind of true, fan-driven stunt that would PROVE to ABC that the fans would make the show FINANCIALLY VIABLE for the network if they renew it... NOT sending tons of bags of peanuts to the network, like fans of "Jericho" did to get THAT show back on the air -- which only KINDASORTA worked, anyway, because although CBS gave in, they waited until about FEBRUARY to "slot" the show as a LATE mid-season replacement (thus giving it WAY TOO MUCH time for marginal fans to forget about it, and/or lose track/interest in where the show had been), and THEN gave it only a SHORT run for its second season before pulling the plug for good (off course second-season ratings were as bad or worse after the way they brought it back, anyway).

And viewers can't really go buy a bunch of PRODUCT from the main sponsor, like they did by buying $5 subs from Subway, because "Flash Forward's" primary sponsor is Ford's luxury-car division, Lincoln, which although it likely means they figured the show attracted a lot of affluent viewers NONETHELESS doesn't put every viewer in the position to just drop into the local Lincoln dealership and buy a new car and say, "I'm doing this to get 'Flash Forward' renewed!" HUH???

About the ONLY possibility that leaves is something along the lines, perhaps of a fan-based movement for as many fans as possible to PRE-ORDER Season-2 DVDs/Blu-Rays of the show to prove both a commitment to it to ABC and that it would, at the very least, have a minimum BACK END coming off a second season, but I'm not sure HOW that would work (maybe someone could get Amazon.com, for example, to set up a pre-order system), and if they STILL didn't go along, there'd be a HECK of a mess cancelling all those pre-orders -- especially if they involved actually making deposits to prove you were going to put your money where your mouth was.

And there's the rub if they DID require fans to spend $10 or $20, or so, to support a 2nd season just in HOPES ABC will RENEW the show... Ratings were already low, and just HOW MANY of the people who were still watching -- especially in the current economy -- would actually plunk down even $10 for the CHANCE a show they like MIGHT get renewed?

I guess a fan-based movement IS possible. But I don't see the chances of one being very successful.
Jeff

I just think it's a shame there can't be a way TV shows can be made both entertaining AND at budgets small enough to keep them on the air even with a limited audience. But that's just not the economic realities of the business in this countryYes very true.

IF we wanted to REALLY try to get ABC to renew this show at this point, I think the ONLY chance would be some kind of true, fan-driven stunt that would PROVE to ABC that the fans would make the show FINANCIALLY VIABLE for the network if they renew it...Absolutely.

NOT sending tons of bags of peanuts to the network, like fans of "Jericho" did to get THAT show back on the air -- which only KINDASORTA worked, anyway, because although CBS gave in, they waited until about FEBRUARY to "slot" the show as a LATE mid-season replacement (thus giving it WAY TOO MUCH time for marginal fans to forget about it, and/or lose track/interest in where the show had been), and THEN gave it only a SHORT run for its second season before pulling the plug for good (off course second-season ratings were as bad or worse after the way they brought it back, anyway).And beyond all that equivocation, Jericho's second failure essentially poisoned the pool for such low-end efforts to get a show taken-up. Only an idiot would fall for that sort of thing now, given that the peanuts did not prove that enough folks would watch religiously enough.

And viewers can't really go buy a bunch of PRODUCT from the main sponsor, like they did by buying $5 subs from Subway, because "Flash Forward's" primary sponsor is Ford's luxury-car division, LincolnThat doesn't mean viewers can't -- it just means that fewer viewers can (and with big ticket items like that, fewer viewers need to, to make the point). And if we give into the notion that television isn't a viable platform from which to drive purchasing decisions for automobiles, then expect a commensurate (4%?) decrease in television.

About the ONLY possibility that leaves is something along the lines, perhaps of a fan-based movement for as many fans as possible to PRE-ORDER Season-2 DVDs/Blu-Rays of the show to prove both a commitment to it to ABC and that it would, at the very least, have a minimum BACK END coming off a second season, but I'm not sure HOW that would work (maybe someone could get Amazon.com, for example, to set up a pre-order system), and if they STILL didn't go along, there'd be a HECK of a mess cancelling all those pre-orders -- especially if they involved actually making deposits to prove you were going to put your money where your mouth was.That's really what it comes down to: People who think that making television happen is without risk are misguided, and that means even the risk of buying the DVDs/BDs of Season 2, actually getting them, and then waiting to see if it is enough to incentivize a Season 3 or some television movies two or three years from now.

I have the last 3 episodes recorded. Will I waste my time watching these in case the outcome leaves me hanging?

I think if you want to be disappointed then you will. If you don't want to be disappointed... and you're willing to project your own conclusions to the story... then you won't be disappointed.

Yeah, bicker, some companies treat their employees like parts in the assembly line, to simply be summarily discarded in the trash bin when they're done with them (I frankly hope every single company with that attitude eventually goes bankrupt!)

Then nearly every major corporation in the U.S. would be bankrupt. In today's environment, corporations demand unquestioning, unwavering, unconditional loyalty from employees...and offer none of the same in return.

By the way, unresolved series are nothing new...the Robinsons never got back to Earth and Gilligan's gang never got off the island (altho I think a many-years-later TV reunion showed them doing so).

By the way, unresolved series are nothing new...the Robinsons never got back to Earth and Gilligan's gang never got off the island (altho I think a many-years-later TV reunion showed them doing so).

The earliest example I can recall is The Fugitive never finding the One-Armed Man ... the producers said it would hurt syndication.

By the way, unresolved series are nothing new...the Robinsons never got back to Earth and Gilligan's gang never got off the island (altho I think a many-years-later TV reunion showed them doing so).I was unaware that the original "one-armed man" was never captured; what kind of payoff is that??

And as far as Gilligan goes, them not getting off the island didn't bother me. What bothered me was a lack of children on the island. Mr and Mrs Howell had each other, the Professor was essentially married to his work. That leaves 2 hot women and Skipper and Gilligan are only interested in each other? What-the-frak!?

The earliest example I can recall is The Fugitive never finding the One-Armed Man ... the producers said it would hurt syndication.

Except that he did, in one of the first huge planned series finales.

I just think it's a shame there can't be a way TV shows can be made both entertaining AND at budgets small enough to keep them on the air even with a limited audience.They can and do all the time. It's just not in the cards for a big budget production like FlashForward.

An example: Chuck. Another example: L&O Criminal Intent.

I have the last 3 episodes recorded. Will I waste my time watching these in case the outcome leaves me hanging?

If you have been watching the entire series up to that point, I don't think it will be a waste of time watching the last three episodes. As mentioned by others, the finale was very good. It upsets me I won't be able to see any new episodes of this show.

Except that he did, in one of the first huge planned series finales.I just remembered obtaining the final episode on CED Videodisc several years ago, but I never got a chance to watch it...:(

That's right. I'm stuck here with Claire and Kate; wish you were here? :p

If I can find you, I'll banish you back to the Island, and stay there with Kate and Claire as long as I can -- even the wire-haired, half-crazy Claire! :p

With TV you take what you can get and enjoy it while you can. We don't control anything. Plots, stars, time slot and syndication are all out of our hands.

I was unaware that the original "one-armed man" was never captured; what kind of payoff is that??

And as far as Gilligan goes, them not getting off the island didn't bother me. What bothered me was a lack of children on the island. Mr and Mrs Howell had each other, the Professor was essentially married to his work. That leaves 2 hot women and Skipper and Gilligan are only interested in each other? What-the-frak!?

Re: Gilligan. Please get your mind out of the gutter. The series used the sensibilities of the early 1960s.

There was nothing wrong with ladies being simply friends with ladies and guys being simply friends with guys. Gilligan simply was a boy in a man's body, not interested in girls (or somewhat afraid of them). Jonas Grumby (the skipper, betcha you didn't remember his name! :D) was a dedicated sailor, not remotely interested in women (or so we thought).

Things were a lot different, society wise, 50 or so years ago. (Cripes, it's been that long??? :eek:)

But Gilligan eventually did get rescued, then re-marooned, then re-rescued, and finally worked at a hotel on the island.

Regardless of whether anything ever went on between the guys and gals on "Gilligan's Island," the FANS spent (and still spend) PLENTY of time on the "Ginger vs. MaryAnn" debate, lol, and as a kid, and later as a young teenager and older teenager watching re-runs, I had to hots for first one, then the other, then both, finally settling on MaryAnn (the REAL MaryAnn -- Dawn Wells -- got busted for smoking dope in California a couple years back -- something that likely won't even be a crime in California for much longer, lol). I always KNEW there were reasons I liked MaryAnn best. :cool:

Re: Gilligan. Please get your mind out of the gutter. The series used the sensibilities of the early 1960s.

There was nothing wrong with ladies being simply friends with ladies and guys being simply friends with guys. Gilligan simply was a boy in a man's body, not interested in girls (or somewhat afraid of them). Jonas Grumby (the skipper, betcha you didn't remember his name! :D) was a dedicated sailor, not remotely interested in women (or so we thought).

Things were a lot different, society wise, 50 or so years ago. (Cripes, it's been that long??? :eek:)Who said anything was wrong? I just think 15 years marooned together is a looong time. And as far as the 60s went, a whole lot of non-sensical stuff went on, but not near as much as today. But back to the topic at hand...what? That's the end? Aww, frak!

You used the "f" word, Rezzy... you know, the one bound to be considered as profane as the one it replaced in another generation, or so, as it comes to mean what it replaces as universally, lol... which leads me to another little OT mention...

EW decided to rate the Top 100 Characters of the past 20 years in its latest issue (to celebrate its own 20th birthday -- frankly, I didn't realize Entertainment Weekly was only 20 years old, but what the hey?). At any rate, the ratings are, of course, entirely subjective to the EW staff, and probably quite different from what other mags, or even the public at large might rate, although I agree with a lot of them... At any rate, they put just ONE character from the new BSG on the list -- Kara Thrace, aka Starbuck (John Locke was the only "Lostie" who made the list, as well). Considering Starbuck probably said FRAK! more than all the other characters combined, I'm wondering if that played any part, lol.

As for the Top rated??? Homer Simpson as No. 1, Harry Potter, 2, Buffy Summers, 3, and Johnny Depp was TWICE in the Top 13 -- 7 as Edward Scissorhands and 13 as Captn. Jack Sparrow. (I LOVED Edward Scissorhands, but that was a fairly minor film to a lot of folks -- few today likely remember it -- so I have a hard time seeing how that scored that HIGH).

The gang at EW is a rather "eclectic" crowd, at any rate, lol. They put Sue Sylvester of "Glee" in their Top 20, which although I agree she's a FANTASTIC character, I have to wonder if giving a character THAT NEW a spot in the Top 20 of the past 20 years isn't a bit premature.
Jeff

But Gilligan eventually did get rescued, then re-marooned, then re-rescued, and finally worked at a hotel on the island.

I thought Gilligan finally met his dad in a pan-religious church and accepted that he was dead. Matthew Fox was always my least favorite Gilligan.

- - -

I don't know what to make of the finale for FF. I didn't really give a **** anyhow. And hell, they even dumped on the hot chick with that guy chasing after the Asian chick.

Am I the only person who laughed at a Hobbit giving a ring to someone else? I also laughed when I realized that here was yet another Hobbit with a magical ring who managed to lose a finger at the hands of some slimy crud monster.

Final complaint:

This was all because our villains -- the nihilists from The Big Lebowski -- wanted to engage in stock market manipulation?!

Think about this. Think hard. Because it's the goddamned plot to Back to the Future 2. Our villains are a bunch of Eurotrash nihilist anarchocapitalists tech freaks, and their plan wasn't any better than Biff Tannen's plan.

Your villians, FlashForward fans . . .

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/7057/nihilistsmedium.jpg

AND . . .

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/9446/biff1.jpg

Ya wanna know why this show sucked? Because the villains sucked!

Ben Linus and the Others would mop the floor with these punks.

Just finished the book (I needed some sort of closure). As previously mentioned, few similarities to the show, although at least the name Mosaic Project made more sense (in the book, the supercollider was at CERN, where the World Wide Web was invented, and it was named after the first web browser).

Good book. No Benford. No FBI. None of the things that made the series so annoying. Much more physics and philosophy. I liked it much more than the show.
Thanks for the recommendation. I immediately logged onto my local library's website and requested the Flashforward novel (which is currently signed out by someone else). I'm pretty sure I'll enjoy it more than the series, even though I stuck it through to the end.

Final complaint:

This was all because our villains -- the nihilists from The Big Lebowski -- wanted to engage in stock market manipulation?!

Think about this. Think hard. Because it's the goddamned plot to Back to the Future 2. Our villains are a bunch of Eurotrash nihilist anarchocapitalists tech freaks, and their plan wasn't any better than Biff Tannen's plan.

I think it's highly unlikely (and pretty silly to believe) that this was the villain's end goal. If this was their end goal, what was the point in a global flashforward? If all they wanted was money wouldn't they just keep running their little tests on their small group of 20 guinea pigs while getting them to keep telling them the future?

I think it's much more likely that they were using the early Flash Forwards to make a bunch of money to fund whatever their end goal was (via the global flash forwards). They needed money to pay off all those scientists/moles/hired guns who were working on their true end goal (which was never revealed to us).

I think it's highly unlikely (and pretty silly to believe) that this was the villain's end goal. If this was their end goal, what was the point in a global flashforward? If all they wanted was money wouldn't they just keep running their little tests on their small group of 20 guinea pigs while getting them to keep telling them the future?

I think it's much more likely that they were using the early Flash Forwards to make a bunch of money to fund whatever their end goal was (via the global flash forwards). They needed money to pay off all those scientists/moles/hired guns who were working on their true end goal (which was never revealed to us).

The end goal wasn't just money (although who doesn't like gobs and gobs of money?). Their goal was political power. There was a conversation between Benford and Wedick, I believe, that mentions it. Like all villainous megalomaniacs, they just want to rule the world.

I suspect that had the series continued, we would have gotten a much bigger and better picture of the Conspiracy, of which only the outside layers had thusfar been peeled away. You know, the '24' model only over multiple seasons. At some point, earlier or later depending on how the show's "bible" was plotted out, we would have been introduced to their head guy - the Supreme Big Bad. Why, he may have been villainous enough to earn even MeowMeow's grudging admiration. ;) Pity we'll never know. :(

You used the "f" word, Rezzy... you know, the one bound to be considered as profane as the one it replaced in another generation, or so, as it comes to mean what it replaces as universally, lol... which leads me to another little OT mention...

EW decided to rate the Top 100 Characters of the past 20 years in its latest issue (to celebrate its own 20th birthday -- frankly, I didn't realize Entertainment Weekly was only 20 years old, but what the hey?). At any rate, the ratings are, of course, entirely subjective to the EW staff, and probably quite different from what other mags, or even the public at large might rate, although I agree with a lot of them... At any rate, they put just ONE character from the new BSG on the list -- Kara Thrace, aka Starbuck (John Locke was the only "Lostie" who made the list, as well). Considering Starbuck probably said FRAK! more than all the other characters combined, I'm wondering if that played any part, lol.

As for the Top rated??? Homer Simpson as No. 1, Harry Potter, 2, Buffy Summers, 3, and Johnny Depp was TWICE in the Top 13 -- 7 as Edward Scissorhands and 13 as Captn. Jack Sparrow. (I LOVED Edward Scissorhands, but that was a fairly minor film to a lot of folks -- few today likely remember it -- so I have a hard time seeing how that scored that HIGH).

The gang at EW is a rather "eclectic" crowd, at any rate, lol. They put Sue Sylvester of "Glee" in their Top 20, which although I agree she's a FANTASTIC character, I have to wonder if giving a character THAT NEW a spot in the Top 20 of the past 20 years isn't a bit premature.
Jeff
I thought the EW Top 100 Greatest Characters was a little suspect, too. For example, how on earth could John Locke from Lost be included but Al Swearengen from Deadwood be passed over? What's wrong with this picture? There are worse examples than the Locke character on the list,though. For example, EW even included Kavalier and Clay, although the movie hasn't even been made yet. In EW's defense, they did manage to include both Jack Bauer from 24 and Vic Mackey from The Shield. Their inclusion did wash some of the bad taste out of my mouth.

Any list that did not have Al Swearingen on it is crap. I'd say worse but it's against the TOS

You used the "f" word, Rezzy... you know, the one bound to be considered as profane as the one it replaced in another generation, or so — Jeff
I believe the progression goes the opposite way; words once considered profane are now accepted in mixed company and are allowed on the air.

Frequent use of "frak" (and "futz" and "fargin") will eventually lead to (or at least will not slow down) the acceptance of the one-and-only F-word (in a hundred years!).

For example, EW even included Kavalier and Clay, although the movie hasn't even been made yet.

Pick up a book sometime, gw. The list wasn't limited to TV & movies.

And ditto on Al Swerengen. There are a number of problems on that list, but I'd say that is the most glaring omission. Homer as #1 is a good call.

As for the FF finale, meh. It sort of matched the rest of the series. Some good parts, some bad. Didn't quite understand why Benford went back in the building in the first place. And of course he was able to take out a team of commandos single handedly :rolleyes:

But there were some good parts. They are escaping me at the moment, though. :o

I believe the progression goes the opposite way; words once considered profane are now accepted in mixed company and are allowed on the air.

Frequent use of "frak" (and "futz" and "fargin") will eventually lead to (or at least will not slow down) the acceptance of the one-and-only F-word (in a hundred years!).

Whatever, Syzygy... But I have my doubts about the PRIMARY "F" word. Whether or not the new "substitute" "F" words come to be considered so profane people start wanting THEM censored, the MAIN word is one of the few that seems to still have a long way to go before it crosses they bridge anywhere but Pay TV -- and it's been in the Lexicon AT LEAST since 1607, when the American Heritage Dictionary lists it as being referenced in a ribald poem about something priests supposedly were doing with nuns.

I find it quite amazing that words as OLD as that are still considered profane, but it is -- same with the "C" word, which I haven't researched, but I'm pretty sure it has a similarly long history. (That one's even MORE offensive to most women than the other one.)

Then again, I was QUITE shocked when I first heard "damn" and some of the other similar words first used in shows like "All in the Family" in the 70s... and have been similarly surprised to see the slow, but sure progression and acceptance of other words, such as "bitch" into common usage not only on cable channels, but on the networks, as well -- and a good deal MORE than that on some of the cable shows ("The Shield" being the most extreme example I can think of). I MAY HAVE actually heard even the "F" word once or twice on THAT show, but it's hard to remember... Then again, that show was the exception that proves the rule.

With the MAJOR societal backlash today, however, from groups like the American Family Association, I have to wonder if it WILL end at some point. Frankly, I think with a certified TV ratings system and practically EVERY TV set in existence now having a V-Chip in it (they've been in sets long enough now that only a few, really OLD sets don't have them), that shows airing after 10 p.m., bearing a TVMA rating on ANY channel, with proper warnings, should be fair game.

Here's to keeping "V" at 10 p.m. and rating it TVMA, by the way, lol.
Jeff

Pick up a book sometime, gw. The list wasn't limited to TV & movies.
I have read several books a week for most of my adult life. Thus, it should come as no surprise that I read Michael Chabon's Kavalier and Clay. I loved the book but it still seemed a little antic of EW to include it and a few characters from books that had not been made into movies on a list dominated by characters from movies and TV. In any event, we agree that Kavalier and Clay are memorable literary characters.

I just got around to watching the finale lat night. I really like it and I will miss the show.
Did people flash to different dates at the end? It looked like I saw more then one date but I didn't rewatch so I could be wrong.
I didn't really get why Marc needed to go back into the building so bad, I mean finding out there was going to be another blackout in two minutes isn't really worth the risk. They made that guy such a tool that by the end I was glad to see Penny with Lloyd.

You used the "f" word, Rezzy... you know, the one bound to be considered as profane as the one it replaced in another generation, or so, as it comes to mean what it replaces as universally, lol... Felgercarb! Is that better? Since I don't know what that means, perhaps I should not be saying it. I think it's from Firefly? :p

Felgercarb! Is that better? Since I don't know what that means, perhaps I should not be saying it. I think it's from Firefly? :p

Farscape. Firefly used a mishmash of Chinese and English epithets, as that was the predominant language mix of that time. That show gave a lot of attention to little details like that. Ah, I do miss it.

Farscape. Great; another "F" word. It was recommended to me, but I've still yet to see a single ep. I'll have to rent it one day..

Just finished the book (I needed some sort of closure). As previously mentioned, few similarities to the show, although at least the name Mosaic Project made more sense (in the book, the supercollider was at CERN, where the World Wide Web was invented, and it was named after the first web browser).


Mosaic was developed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign beginning in late 1992 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_(web_browser)].

The people who wrote it started Netscape and made it rich, and that code base is now mozilla.

I used mosaic quite a bit in those days on a grayscale portrait-format NCD X-Terminal.

Felgercarb! Is that better? Since I don't know what that means, perhaps I should not be saying it. I think it's from Firefly? :p

It's from the original Battlestar Galactica, (meaning B.S.) although it showed up in the new BSG as the last tube of toothpaste in the universe.

AKA "Feldercarb".

Farscape. Firefly used a mishmash of Chinese and English epithets, as that was the predominant language mix of that time. That show gave a lot of attention to little details like that. Ah, I do miss it.

Feldercarb was not from Farscape - that was Frell

Feldercarb was not from Farscape - that was Frell

Well, I'll be feldercarbed. You're right! :p

I just got around to watching the finale lat night. I really like it and I will miss the show.
Did people flash to different dates at the end? It looked like I saw more then one date but I didn't rewatch so I could be wrong.
I didn't really get why Marc needed to go back into the building so bad, I mean finding out there was going to be another blackout in two minutes isn't really worth the risk. They made that guy such a tool that by the end I was glad to see Penny with Lloyd.He didn't know that the next blackout was going to be in 2 minutes before he went into the building. He did manage to get the word out about the next blackout so at least people might have some preparation.

I just started reading the book. The passage about the Mosaic Project on page 103: "both in honor of the first popular (but now long abandoned) Web browser, and in acknowledgement of the now clearly established fact ... that each person's vision did indeed represent one small stone in a vast mosaic portrait ..." It has been interesting so far with some strong parallels to the TV show and big differences. I'm looking forward to seeing how this version of the story works out.

I hope that Robert Sawyer (the author of the book) or one of the producers gives us more information on how the TV show was going to develop.

Just catching up with OLD POSTS on last season's shows (and in this case, a DEAD show)... Kind of interesting reading some now VERY post-mortem comments about Flash Forward. Even this far out, I still think ABC flipped the coin and chose the wrong side, but it's all spilt milk at this point... At any rate, at least none of us will have to put up with that grimacing Joseph Fiennes character any more -- ARGGGGGHHHH!

As for Farscape, I came to that show VERY late, and never did see all of it -- mostly just the last season and a few reruns from previous seasons. I have to say what I DID see proved that was one REALLY STRANGE show -- interesting, but STRANGE! To me, the best thing about it was that its two biggest stars -- Claudia Black and Ben Browder -- fairly quickly moved over to new positions on Stargate: SG1, and I really enjoyed the character Claudia played on there: Vala Mal Doran, a sort of intergalactic rogue who eventually became an invaluable member of their team after they were finally able to "tame her" a little bit and convince her the best way to solve every situation wasn't to either lie, cheat and steal, or kill, lol. (Seriously, anyone who wasn't a fan of SG1 the first so-many years should try to pick up the last two or three seasons and see what it was like AFTER Claudia Black came on board, lol -- then again, she DOES have a few truly dramatic scenes, too, including ONE that's incrediibly horrifying, and that's all I'll say about that.)

As for "mosaic," WOW, think about it -- if ANYTHING were ever a "true mosaic" isn't that what the internet is???
Jeff

FlashForward to be saved by Starz? (http://www.tvovermind.com/abc/flash-forward-tv-news/starz-reportedly-seeking-flashforward/26509)

Today, SAVE FLASHFORWARD! reported another rumor: Starz might be looking to pick up FlashForward. Well, that's the word on the street, anyway. "I just called Starz and the rep told me that they are agressively (sic) seeking the license for Flash Forward (sic) and that a lot of people have been calling about Flash Forward (sic)," the site reported, according to Scott, someone apparently involved with the campaign.

FlashForward to be saved by Starz? (http://www.tvovermind.com/abc/flash-forward-tv-news/starz-reportedly-seeking-flashforward/26509)

My gracious; what a day! With the wonderful news that DirecTV is facilitating 2 more seasons of the brilliant 'Damages', Starz perhaps picking up 'Flash Forward' is making this a banner day for serialized TV. I feel like I've died and gone to TV Heaven! Now, if someone would just step forward and save 'Dollhouse', my day would be complete. :D

And what the heck, as long as I'm wishing, maybe ABC could cancel 'Castle' and 'V', freeing up Fillion and Baccarin, and somebody could step up and revive 'Firefly'! Hey, a geek can dream, can't he? :p

Hands off of Castle and V.....or draw back a nub. :)

Hands off of Castle and V.....or draw back a nub. :)

Hey, if I could get 'Firefly' back, it'd be worth it. After all, I have another one. :p

I just called that Starz number Joe mentioned above. Got a real, live operator who passed the request on; only took about 30 seconds. Just doing my part. :)

Hey, if I could get 'Firefly' back, it'd be worth it. After all, I have another one. :p

I'm 100% with you! But with Whedon busy handling THE AVENGERS, it's probably more unlikely than ever.

I just called that Starz number Joe mentioned above. Got a real, live operator who passed the request on; only took about 30 seconds. Just doing my part. :)

What number?!? I don't see no stinkin' (sic) number! :D

Seriously, IF there really IS a number and it somehow got lost, mislplaced, or removed, someone PLEASE let me know. Archie, YOU have my email, so you could send it to me that way.

I'd be more than willing to call them. I'd also say that since Dennis Hopper (sadly) definitely killed any chances of Starz having another season of "Crash," not that I think they planned another one, any way, since the second one seemed to end with a "resolution," and also made even less sense than the first -- TERRIBLE TV adaptation, even with all the talent involved -- BUT Starz' "Spartacus," which I think is pretty good, may ALSO be on hold, with its primary star in cancer treatment. So they could REALLY need a new show right now, and FF just MIGHT make a great fit!
Jeff

What number?!? I don't see no stinkin' (sic) number! :D

Seriously, IF there really IS a number and it somehow got lost, mislplaced, or removed, someone PLEASE let me know. Archie, YOU have my email, so you could send it to me that way.


The number is on the website. Sorry, should have been more specific I guess.

I actually looked at the article before I asked, but that 866 number is really BURIED way down in that article -- down in the last paragraph -- so I missed it the first time.

Anyway, I just called too. The guy who answered sounded like he was half asleep, but he DID take my comments and said they would be passed along to the programming department.

Perhaps if enough of us call it WILL make a difference!
Jeff

...As for Farscape, I came to that show VERY late, and never did see all of it -- mostly just the last season and a few reruns from previous seasons. I have to say what I DID see proved that was one REALLY STRANGE show -- interesting, but STRANGE!
By the 3rd and 4th seasons some original characters had already left the show and had been replaced by others who then left too and they were replaced- so it's kind of confusing when they make references to characters you never saw because you jumped in late.
To be fair- you should watch Farscape starting from S01E01 and go on from there. The first two seasons will prepare you for seasons 3 & 4 :D

Well, Rob, after years of resisting I finally caved and bought a Netflix subscription a few months back -- and I've been too busy to use it, lol -- but I got the unlimited subscription and I have a 20 Mbps cable modem service, so perhaps it's time to see if Netflix has "Farscape," since I've been paying them $9 per month for about the past 4 months for NOTHING, so far, lol (I'll MORE than make up for that once I "get busy,").

Heck, Hulu might even have it FOR FREE -- who knows??? But then it would probably have commercials every few minutes. I know I DID catch some of the re-runs from the first season, when Claudia Black's character was some sort of hunter/assassin who then went rogue and was being hunted by her former boss and all his minions.

At any rate, I'll have to get around to seeing it all, I think -- same with "Andromeda," which I also came to very late.
Jeff

At any rate, I'll have to get around to seeing it all, I think -- same with "Andromeda," which I also came to very late.
JeffI still need to finish watching Farscape, but I would recommend that you just pass on Andromeda. I thought Andromeda started off quite interesting, but then Tribune did the same thing they did with Earth: Final Conflict - they interfered and radically changed the show. (But that is a conversation for another forum somewhere.)