New Fringe Promo 408 Back To Where You've Never Been ~ Fringe Television - Fan Site for the FOX TV Series Fringe

New Fringe Promo 408 Back To Where You've Never Been

      Email Post       12/16/2011 12:26:00 PM      


Here's a brand new promo for episode 408. Fringe returns with new episodes, Friday January 13th on Fox.

117 Comments:

Daniel said...

I saw DRJ in there!

fringeobsessed said...

Yup, and I love it!

45 said...

Whose willing to bet that the "cliffhanger" will be about Olivia despite it being a "so called" Peter centric episode and Peter was mostly used so he can cross over, get in trouble, Olivia tries and saves him and then SHE is the one who is in trouble or that we find out she is special yet again? Just the fact that there is more of HER than anybody else in this stupid promo.

Gene said...

No offense 45, but you're kinda a drag when you post on these. Can't we be excited on our Fringe countdown to January?

45 said...

I'm sorry, but come on, don't you feel a "Over There Part 2" vibe when you watch these promos? I am just afraid it will end up just like over there part 2. Look at the similarities,

(remember this all is based on what I see in the Fox released promos)
Peter wants to go home, crosses over and he is in trouble

The observer "tells" Olivia something important

Olivia gets shot at and there is also AltOlivia

Peter meets Walternate (who probably has a vendetta against OLIVIA)

There is also a certain person who has a certain connection to Olivia.

Now, judging from all these similarities, I am willing to bet it will end up with a Olivia in trouble story arc for her. Count on it.

45 said...

Not to mention, Peter will do something that will cause OLIVIA'S troubles. I bet you.

Anonymous said...

well, i guess im the only one who isnt so exited about this episode.

how many times have they fooled us by giving us such promos and when you finally get to see the episode, you feel only disappointment.

when you read the summary about this episode, i cant help but feel that it’s going to be about olivia and lincoln and the shapeshifters (like the rest of this season) , while they going to sqeeze peter in that storyline.

so this episode is just going to deal with another shapeshifter-story.

so dont be fooled by this promos.

and remember my words after you watch this episode on januari and you feel yet again robbed anf fooled.

till then

Anonymous said...

45,

your reactions are very entertaining, but at the same time very true.

i agree with every comment you posted.

its NOT going to be about peter in this episode.

the writers are just showing josh in this promos so they can attrack the lost josh fans.
who had given up after the so called peter season.

this episode (and this season ) is going to be about olivia , then lincoln and then the shapeshifters. and before the commercial break they are going to show some peter scenes (lol) to keep us idiots happy.


did you hear they going to make a astrid episode?

yeah, the writers are like: oke , we develloped the peter karakter enough , we have written for him more than enough and we spend too much time on him. so lets give other castmembers the spotlights.

NOT!!

note to the writers: first begin with writing for peter and than look for other karakters!

Zepp said...

This is a big difference of Fringe, even small videos promos for future episodes, give us strong arguments and divergent positions among fans. That's why Fringe is the best!

James said...

Wyman and Pinkner know that this is the final season....they say they do not so they can claim that they thought they had more time to write for Peter in future seasons that are never going to exist. They did not know really how important Peter was until Fox sat them down and played the Where is Peter fan video and basically Fox made them bring back Peter more quickly. You can tell they have no interest in telling any Peter stories...the other actors in interviews have been told to say that this is a Peter season. Anna Torv said that the producers have told them to tell us that this is a Peter season, lol. What a joke! Josh Jackson looks just so frustrated in these interviews, at comic con he said his character is a mcguffin and he is frustrated and he knows that this never going to change. Wyman and Pinkner are lyers and cheats they have no principles or integrity. They have blown away any support they could have had by being more honest and truthful about how things would play out.

This whole season is a sham....they just do not know how distasteful and obnoxious this show has become. FYI....A Peter season should actually have Peter in it you morons! Never ever trust these two again...not only that but they are cowards and wimps and blame Josh Jackson for all these terrible decisions, at comic con they said ask josh how he feels about this story? If I ever saw these two I would just punch their faces for being such douchebags.

This show is another Lost.....total lack of payoff.

Anonymous said...

@ James
And a season is more than 7 episodes, so just calm down. We get it youre not a big fan lately, do you really need to keep commenting on every post with the same observations?

Also Lost had answers just not the ones that you specifically wanted. :)

James said...

@Anonymous

I understand that fans if these type of shows either like the mythology or characters or both. But Lost had so much time to give these answers and just did not bother. Fringe does not have the time and yet they are wasting what little they have and it does not make any sense at all.

I will keep repeating these observations until the show actually bothers to address them. 1 episode of Peter in the drivers seat is not enough...Peter being a Macguffin is just not going to do it for me anymore. I look at the interviews that Josh does and it is heartbreaking that his character just gives him nothing to really talk about.

Zepp said...

I'm reading and hearing this "story", rumors of this last season of Fringe, since the end of the first. It was always a fallacy, an issue pessimistic and defeatist, an "old story" that ultimately comes to nothing, because Fringe is renewed, always and every season finale. And since we are in the 4th season, and come to the fifth and so on. In my opinion, Fringe has two executive producers (Pinkner and Wyman) of the first line, excellent communicators, super acting. I venture to say that if not for the actions of these two showrunners, Fringe would have been canceled. Another "conversation" that is to say that speaking in cancellation of Fringe, are being "realistic." Come on, realism is this excellent 4th season of Fringe, but this is what is real and the "harbingers of doom" who "predicted" the end of Fringe for long before, have not stopped playing their fanfare?! Come on, let it!

James said...

This is the first time that I have mentioned that Fringe would be cancelled and I only say it because a) They have reached their required amount of episodes for syndication. b) At the Fox press tour Kevin Reilly their network president said that they renewed Fringe to help get them over 80 episodes and thus to syndication. c) Every critic in the business is now saying that Fringe will finish this season because they know that Fox will not pay much for it and the WB that produces it will not give it away and lose money if they do not have to. The WB gave CHUCK away for a long time to get it to syndication and once they got passed 88 episodes they were not going to go for sentimentality and try and get it to 100 because they were not going to lose a penny more than they had to. d) The WB will not waste money on Fringe and also Fox is a lot stronger network than NBC, Fox Hell's Kitchen gets a 1.6 and that cost basically nothing to produce...why would they pay tons for Fringe?

I put money on Fringe not coming back next season.

Zepp said...

I respect your opinion and your knowledge about the administrative policies of the networks in the maintenance of the shows they produce. But I, like you, I watch Fringe and I'm always updating with respect to matters of this nature. Reading, watching, a rumor here, a second opinion there, and from that I form my personal opinion on this - alleged - Fringe situation. Fringe is already a "Cult", not only in the USA level, and, yes worldwide. There are millions of fans super seasoned, active and passionate, the ratings currently has more or less stabilized, and the "quality" of these viewers is much coveted by advertisers, and other points in favor of Fringe. I dare say, that if FOX cancel Fringe, already has more than one network, hoping to produce the following Fringe. Being the producer of Fringe, it's "status" of high-quality science fiction, not only in American level, but also worldwide, which network would not want that?

For my part, I bet that Fringe will have a 5th season (and 6th, 7th...). I do not know where (FOX, CBS, SyFy...), but will.

CuriousGirl said...

I hope this isn't Fringe's last season, too. There's so much storytelling and storylines to resolve. I read early on (so no telling what's changed since) that writers/producers intended to be a six-season series. It'd be great to see a television show envisioned from start to finish, instead of so many other disappointing efforts.

Anonymous said...

But if you dont think its coming back then surely they dont have much room to change things they already have planned. So maybe its best to just sit back, accept whats happening and if it gets renewed itll be a nice surpirise and maybe than they can work on things that you commented on.

James said...

Zepp,

The ratings are still decling and we do not know what kind of affect the show will have when daylight savings is taken when the show returns. Also all shows lose more viewers over the course of a season...so Fringe could go below 1.0. Fox does not care about the quality of viewers, lol. They are a business! They will only put something on air if it can make them money. The WB is a huge studio and carries a lot of wieght and so they got Fringe to 88 episodes, but they are also a business and they will not be willing to lose money if they do not want to. Networks and Studios like to talk about fans passion and being invested in the story and other stuff but in the end it all comes down to dollars and cents, it has to. People invest in those businesses...shareholders and other people. Those businesses are accountable to boards of directors and shareholders like potentially you or me..if we invest our money do we really want a business to throw it away? no!

I understand as a fan that you want your show to go on but that is not always plausible and an end date will always approach unless you are really successful which Fringe is not.

But in truth it is probably for the best for someone like Josh to actually get a fresh start...so there are some silver linings.

trent said...

Well, I am not going to criticize an episode that hasn't aired yet. I don't think it's productive in any way. There's some stuff I'm looking forward to, like Peter and Walternate, but I have to be cautious. They have a habit of putting all the Peter's scenes in the promos and the actual episode doesn't have more than that. We'll see how this one goes.

I don't know if Fringe is going to be renewed or not, but as optimistic as the fans want to be, I don't think the producers should choose to be blind to the current ratings. If they are not prepared for the worst, I would consider them negligent. The numbers for the next two episodes will be important to see how many are still sticking around. Who knows? Maybe they decide DVR +7 numbers should count as much a live and we'll get a 5th season.

lafra08 said...

Hi Guys!why can't you simply enjoy the promo?because it is amazing!are you really Fringe fans ?Because as far as I'm concerned and I love this incredible show I 'm NOT interested in talking about the cancellation BUT I'm curious whats to come next; how this play out and I really care about All the characters and love Joshua Jackson as Peter Bishop and this is a very important character without him Theresia is no Fringe as well as without Walter and Olivia and Astrid and Broyles and Lincooln and Nina! FRINGE is a CULT show with a huge fanbase all over the world it is an intelligent show with the best talented adorable cast ever - and such a special show deserve to continue and it will !it is a real gift to the audiens!I can't watch it life because I'm from Europe but I want to support it as good as I can!I'mvery excited about the next episode and I have the feeling it will blow our mind !

JM said...

@lafra08

While i agree with almost all you have said, i would strongly disagree with your point that fringe isnt fringe without lincoln lee, it was fine without him perhaps better, and he adds nothing to the show

Anonymous said...

When is there going to be a Gene season? I watch week after week, waiting to catch sight of the beautiful heiffer when she was a bit player on an Anchor butter ad. Since then she has blossomed - but these awful Fringe writers are just stringing me along, promising other characters will get a look-in and instead concentrating on those three boring humans, Olivia, Peter and Walter. I feel betrayed.

Il Toro

Zepp said...

James,
I sincerely understand their points of view, are quite plausible, no doubt. When I mentioned the quality of the spectators, I referred to (good) purchasing power of the age of the viewers in question. Also you are right when you say that FOX is only interested in costs and profits with the productions that she performs and disseminates, yes, but have prestigious Fringe, means so much "money" also, I presume. The audience, already began to decline in the first season of FOX and expectations were low, but I see all this (personal opinion) as a strategic error of the network, as to the day of presentation of Fringe. I see that there have been many changes, many trading days of presentation of the episodes, a significant reduction in production reaching custor - in my view - the final film quality (lower costs with special effects and moving to digital images). All this and other factors are the cause of the effect of low ratings, I see. I've "heard" rumors that the producers of Fringe has a (hypothetical) contract with FOX to go to the end of the 6th season. I do not know if this is true, but somehow explain this placement of the Fringe Fridays. I think the show Fringe on FOX continues, even with the low ratings, but with noticeable reflections on cinematic end of the episodes. Related to these thoughts that I think is because I think Fringe will have a next season at least.

Anonymous said...

so let me get this straight:

in one episode, in 45 minutes: this is what’s going to happen:

olivia and lincoln are going to deal with the shapeshifters.
olivia and the observer are going to have a confrontation with each other.
peter and lincoln are going to cross over.
peter is going to meet walternate.
peter is going to meet elizabeth.
and mr jones is going to make an appearance.

well , i guess every storyline in this episode is going to be about 10 min each.

yep, that’s fringe for you.

they could have split the storylines in this episode in two episodes, but instead they gave us wallflower.

is this suppose to be a peter episode?

my answer to peter/josh fans: this is as good as it gets, now go sit in a corner and let olivia and lincoln shine the rest of the “peter”-season.

James said...

Actors have six year contracts when they start a series but not writers and I am not sure about show runners and other people. I do not think the crew (hair, makeup, wardrobe, stunt, etc) have these contracts and hence the unions. Even if Fringe had viewers that were consumers of high purchasing power their would have to be a lot of them....Boston Legal had 8 or 10 million high income viewers per week on top of a sound 18-49. Fringe has a million and a half high income earners watching? not enough to be honest. The lower production cost which are evident this season for example they have not been over their for like 6 episodes and the observers have dissappeared for like 7 episodes too. Joshua Jackson has missed most of the season probably due to a contract that states he can only be in certain amount of episodes...even with all of that the WB is losing money where probably the Fox licencing fee is still well below what it costs to run a show. As I said the WB will take these losses if it gets them to 88 episodes and they can sell it off for a half billion dollars and thus eradicated the red and go into the black. The WB has been losing money for Chuck since season 2...they basically gave away Chuck from episode 35 to 91...lol. But as soon as they got past 88...bang finished. Fringe is the same, if they renewed Fringe they would basically be giving it away to Fox at this point and each episode produced would be eating into their syndication profits. No business man or woman is that stupid that they would lose that much dough.

I am sorry to tell you that this is happening and I sincerly mean that, but it is what it is. Fringe just did not do what say the mentalist does for the WB. The mentalist is very cheap to produce and gets high numbers and they just milk it. The same goes for Two and a Half Men...very cheap and gets huge ratings. Yeah the cast make a ton but the WB and CBS and whatever make a killing that it is worth it.

Sentimentality just does not factor into it as much as people think nor does quality. Fox and The WB will say it does but that is just good PR, who wants to be known as a business who does not care about the medium they are in? That the bottom line is all that matters?

But think there is a silver lining, Josh Jackson will finally get a movie (which I heard he has been cast) and he can finally work! That is good news!

Anonymous said...

to james,

i have a couple of questions for you ?

do you really think that josh is not getting paid for the episodoes he is not in?
i thought that josh gets paid whether he is in an episode or not?

do you think that the cast gets paid less , now that the ratings are dropping?

what do you think the cast,especially anna and josh make per episode? i always wanted to know that. i thought maybe 30000/40000 dollar per episode?

James said...

They probably earn about that...but for some shows in later seasons they sign permenant actors on a 10/13 or something like that where they are a season regualar but will miss some episodes. This cuts down some costs. On Chuck the only regulars who have been in every episode is Zach, Yvonne and Adam. On Community it is the study group and on other shows it is the same. The cast does not get paid less but they appear less or some do. Anna and John probably are the only two actors who are contracted to appear in every episode.

Zepp said...

I do not think Fox would offer a contract lasting 6 years only for the actors, who at the time were known medium, without having agreed with the writers / producers authors, a similar contract in terms of length, I really do not think. For me it is very difficult to understand the issues involving contractual clauses between parties in the composition of a realization of a show. This is very sensitive and complicated, and I could not guess or say nothing at all. But looking out, I conclude that these contracts have similarities when the period of its duration, and is on top of that I do my placements assumptions. Nor do comparisons between networks, even similar, to take examples, because they are "worlds" commercial, similar but very different in the commercial line of business conduct that they have. FOX, I see, is one of the largest networks of the USA, and has a series of television shows, offering his audience. They are spectacles of every kind and type. And Fringe is (only) one of those shows, and - in my opinion - even if it does not offer big profits or gains money, he gives a return to "status" in prestige for the company, I think. Commercially speaking, I assume that having Fringe's own, or have in its programming the differential of the item "high quality scifi." Right here, this site Fringe Television, we saw the list of advertisers of "weight" that Fringe has, in the presentation of the episodes! It is an enviable list of advertisers! I assume this must be because currently being presented by nothing, I see, equals Fringe. Well, anyway, I still think that the FOX series Fringe will continue to until at least the 6th season, I hope, of course.

James said...

The actors for fringe do not work for fox, they work for warner brothers....the studio. Fox gets money from advertisers who pay for ad time and therefore the higher the ratings the the more money they make. Fox then uses that money from advertisers to pay studios like warner brothers or Sony to provide them with show like fringe. Fox only keeps fringe if they get enough ad money, which based on the ratings they do not. If a show under performs it cost fox money because they have not fulfilled their agreement with advertisers. Fox takes on a show like fringe if a studio like warner brothers reduces the licensing fee so much that fox can make a profit but at the same time warner brothers loses money. Now it goes back to what I said earlier....warner brothers will only lose so much and they will not want to lose money if they do not have to I.e. When 88 episodes are reached and syndication can be met.

Syndication is when a studio like warner brothers sells episodes in batches to smaller networks.

So fox does not really care about prestige but dollars and cents and so does the advertisers, why would they pay for fringe when they could pay for new girl and get more bang for their buck?

James said...

When I say warner brothers loses money I mean for example an episode costs say....3 million to produce....fox will pay 2 million or less and warner brothers makes the 1 million per episode back when they sell fringe off. So right now warner brothers could be losing 25- 30 million dollars per year on fringe....they do this because they know they can make the money back during syndication. Now if warner brothers were to continue making fringe at a loss for a season 5 and 6 they coul end up losing over 60 million dollars for those two seasons. That 60 million will come out of their syndication money....do you understand better now?

Zepp said...

But of course I understand. Numbers, costs, financial returns but all this is very important, I agree. But that's not all. See, we're already in the 4th season, even with all these numbers against, or not much for, is not it? And you talk about 2 million placed on FOX and 1 million (more or less) placed by Warner in the production of an episode, as if he had nothing in return! Come on! Of course you must have a good financial return, expected or may not be appropriate, but serves to keep the show on the air because no one puts money away. The ratings, leads directly to demand from advertisers, is not it? See that - wonderful - just the list of advertisers posted on this site, I see a lot of concern about that also has rates of DVR that records are compared with competitors, has also decreased operating costs with the production of development episodes of, among other forms of earnings of $. Honestly I do not see the end of Fringe, this 4th season. The route is difficult, but I have a feeling that goes on Fringe. They could at least put the show on a day better view, more appropriate to the type of audience of Fringe, a Sunday for example.

James said...

Ok you have lost me here?????? Why would they put them on a better day when they have tanked on tuesday after 20+ million American Idol viewers as a lead in or Thursday when they had 10 million from Bones and Both times they could not hold onto those huge leads!

The total loss that Warner Brothers has incurred due to trying to get Fringe to 88 episodes is probably over 100 million dollars...do you really think that they are going to go for upto 200 million dollars? What is their return on investment for making 2 more seasons of the show? They will not make 100 million more dollars by selling 44 more episodes in syndication. That will never happen, plus reducing costs no matter how much does not save millions of dollars, it limits the damage but does not equate to the kind of numbers you think they can make a show for.

Lets say by some miracle that they keep Fringe on for 2 more seasons...the production values will be so low that they will have to shoot in studios the whole time. Basically the whole show would be in either Walters Lab or the FBI office or Massive Dynamic. They would not be able to afford to go over there or over here nearly as much and the show would just look cheap and awful. Look at how bad Chuck's green screening has gotten.

I see you do not want the show to go and I understand when you love something so much that it upsets you to see it go but businesses will not go broke in order to keep such a small fan base happy...if a business made decisions with its heart instead of its brain it would go broke.

s said...

Yes, Fringe is an ensemble show and it wouldn't be the same without the Bishops, Astrid, Broyles, and Nina. But anyone who doesn't realize that Olivia Dunham has, from the pilot, been the central character, either hasn't been paying attention or is willfully ignorant. Storylines circle back to Olivia because Fringe is about events and people in her orbit and the revelation of how her life and the Bishops have been entangled.

Finally, judging an episode on 21 second promo? Ridiculous.

I'm sick of reading the petulant whining in these comment sections. Mr. Jackson is probably happy to have employment, period, and if you're a fan of his then you should too should be glad he's got a job.

The ridiculous "Peter fans vs Olivia fans" or wahtever it is sours the entire online Fringe experience and is totally childish. Seriously, are you people adults? It's just a show. Watch it and if you don't like it, that's fine. Stop watching. No one's forcing you to tune in. And if you choose to watch and don't like what you see, don't yell about it to us, because it was your choice.

Grow up.

Zepp said...

Hmm .. if so how to affirm and proclaim loudly, then FOX at the end of this season "break" the contract, and let the producers look for another network! Ah, there you will tell me who has to cover costs applied and .. After all, follows with Fringe, or not? Type one: love it or leave it. Keep changing the day of release, settling costs, a sporting event when it happens on a Friday, does not show episode, cut costs of production, undermining the quality end ... with that, with these actions FOX can not demand better rates , not even close. I may be totally wrong, but low ratings, has very much to do with sequential, with the fidelity of the viewer with their favorite show is always displayed at such a time, to the day. Interruptions, changes, cancellation risks, decrease costs, you go straight to the failure of the enterprise. Fringe in terms of cast, scenic design, production and content of the plot is great, bad are the media controls, these wonderful stories, I think.

45 said...

I am REALLY getting sick of people stating Olivia is the main character, which chearly means WHO CARES ABOUT THE OTHER CHARACTER'S. this show only shows Olivia's damn side to EVERYTHING that people like PETER gets bashed all the time because HIS side is NEVER EVER SHOWN. People have called Peter stupid, a moron, idiot, ALL BECAUSE OF OLIVIA EFFIN DUNHAM AND HER POOR FEELINGS. I hate the writers and Olivia for makin Peter look bad and people hating on Peter. Will people shut up about Olivia being the lead and understand that PETER's side matters too and that Olivia just wants to make Peter look like the damn enemy.

James said...

I know that Olivia is the head character and her point of view is the most important and I do not disupute that. But Breaking Bad is also all about Walter Whites descent into evilness yet they spend all episodes on other characters. They balance out the character stuff all the time, Jesse gets huge monologues and they keep the camera on him as a sign of respect when he talks. We understand everyones view all the time every season.

With Fringe there is Walter and Olivia and then Walter and Olivia and then Walter and Olivia. How are we supposed to invest in a story or its world of characters when the creative team half ass the rest of the characters? Especially with Peter? Why invest our time on a show that has only two characters?

With Mad Men we get a full range of Don, Pete, Peggy, Roger, etc. This is what makes Fringe a little poorer and what some of us are saying is....hey....expand your world a little let us invest in someone new, someone who has been on your show since the beginning and is a main character, someone who fans actually like (based on the world wide where is peter fan video?) someone who can hold their own episode. I mean spending 7 episodes going over stuff we already know about Walter and Olivia from seasons 1-3 is just stupid. Wasting so much time like that is stupid. This is why they are going to be cancelled.

trent said...

And then if "everything is Olivia and nothing hurts", why do the producers lie again and again, when talking about the 3 central characters? Why do they lie about this season being Peter's season? They focused on Olivia only, Walter took center stage many times throughout the past 3 seasons. S2 focused on him for the most part. Why do they keep forgetting and sidelining their male lead and with him part of the fanbase? Why do they try to make up for this in interviews, when they say how important and integral to the show he is, when we all know they'll make every excuse they can to kick him out of as many episodes as they can or put him on the background?

Saying a character is integral to the show or part of its DNA and not doing any efforts to write for that character is lazy and offensive for that part of the fanbase, they keep trying to ignore. Their contempt for the character and his fans is shocking on many levels and it shouldn't be ignored.

Oh, and s, if you're so sick of reading differing opinions, I think you should consider the option of not reading them. It should save you from the stress of going out of your way to lecture others, on what they have to do. Saying "Grow up" and that patronizing attitude of yours doesn't make you look as mature as you think.

James said...

Fox made them bring Peter back. They intended to do 13 episodes without him.

Anonymous said...

Seriously? 13 episodes? LMAO! I love that they use him so much to promote the show, but that everything they do shows the hatred they have for the actor. And then they have the audacity to say "We would never betray the audience". I guess they forgot to add "just once".

James said...

Yeah fox is the only ones pushing for Josh Jackson to be included in the series. Those scenes in novation and wallflower and those we left behind were fox making wyman and pinkner include him. Otherwise you would probably not see him this season. You
Might not see him much after the 10 minutes he gets in 4.08

LucyLuaua said...

BTW, its not about Olivia being the lead, its about giving the other characters THEIR OWN STORYLINE where THEY can shine. Everyone else on this show gets criticized for their acting all because they don't have a storyline for them sink their teeth into. I mean, Peter had a very good potential arc with being activated by the weapon and that was HIS storyline but instead, he spent most of his time hearing Olivia whine about Fauxlivia. Sorry but why bother introducing something about a character that is going to be dropped?

BTW, why not go and watch shows like Buffy, True Blood which despite having leads like Buffy, Snookie and Bill, everyone had their own storyline. I mean heck, Willow and Xander from Buffy weren't the leads and THEY had their own storylines, no matter how "not in your face" it is.

Now folks, don't criticize those who want to see Peter/Josh shine just this once instead of him being overshadowed by John and Anna. Its not about OLIVIA being the lead anymore.

James said...

It is not really Olivia/Anna or Walter/John hate either...shows that can balance their actors are just generally more enjoyable and compelling. I mean Chuck was very strong for 3 seasons by just focusing on Chuck and his journey and how people reacted to it. By season 4 and 5 the show should have switched to Sarah and Casey and fleshed their characters out more. I do not say this because I hate Chuck, I love him! But having Sarah and Casey revolve around Chuck started to dilute the product a tad...they needed their own agency to be honest. I still love it and I do not complain much because they live on half seasons and so it is impossible to plan anything long term based on that but there is no excuse for Fringe who know they have full seasons in advance to do full seasonal character arcs.

Great shows like The Wire, Breaking Bad, Mad Men know how to balance the main players and givce them appropriate material to play with and that makes the story more compelling in the end. I mean on Breaking Bad at times I am torn who to root for...Walter, Jesse, Skyler, Hank or Gus? I mean they all have their own reasons for me to root for them because Vince Gilligan has found a balance and found a way for us to be compelled.

Fringe is basically running in circles on how to service Olivia and Walter and I am now bored with having to listen to them keep going on and on and on and on and on about issues and stories that we have heard before! Try something new and push your show forward man. If I have to hear about cortexiphan or St Claires again I am going to go crazy....

Anonymous said...

you know what.

i hear all the time that olivia is the lead; oke, fair enough.
so now we can blame those poor ratings on anna , because she is the lead and the central character and anna cant attrack viewers. like i said fair anough....

jennifer garner (alias) and keri russel ( felicity) were also the lead characters in their whow. and guess what? high ratings, large viewership.

like i said, im fine by that know, i used to get angry at hearing anna is the lead , but now let her get blamed for the poor, poor ratings.
it's her show , so is responsible for the longlevity of the show.


those anna/olivia, make me laugh, if she gives just a simple interview or she blinks they start screaming : give her an emmy she is so perfect...


if she is perfect than she would be still married, you dont divorce a perfect woman right? NOT.

she is far from perfect, if she would , than she would have a high rating show, an emmy , and a boyfriend at least.

she is pushing her mid -thirties and her carrier still has to take off. and as a woman in hollywood that's OLd.
where has this so called "perfect" woman been in her twenties? right nowhere.

JM said...

I dont think the blame can be put on the actors/actresses, the decision to keep olivia and walter in the spotlight is the writers not theirs, however i agree the characters had their time in the sun in season 3, the writers should develop their other characters, lincoln has been developed more than broyles nina or astrid and tbh is quickly catching up on their screentime, not only does he demean olivias character (continues her trait of "office slut") he has taken over her role as detective, supposedly this is peters season, and i for one want him to take center stage, i think its unfair to attack the actors themselves, you dont know them so speculating on their personalities or lives is fairly harsh. However i agree Anna Torv has seriously gone down in terms of looks this season she has gone "hollywood" and become stick thin and slightly haggard, the burden of a show?

Anonymous said...

office slut, LOL

FringeFan said...

C'mon, fellow fans, stop arguing among yourselves.... I've seen these 'Peter Season' and 'Fringe Cancellation' conversations go from talk to debate to argument.

@James .... Why are you so keen on stating the obvious? We know Fringe is on the edge of oblivion, but we have held it safe so far and we will try our best that it gets another couple and more seasons. Did you forget the Red Licorice campaign. I agree that won't always work, but we saved Fringe once, and we can do it again.

@Anonymous & 45 .... Its obvious you guys want more Peter in the show, but slow down a bit. Don't forget it was the producers/writers who made the character you're so fascinated about. Be patient, they will do justice to Peter (& not just once). And btw, after Jacksonville from S2 & the whole S3, it was all about Peter.

And I intend no offense.

I would like to state that I absolutely loved the promo. Still, the first one at the end of Wallflower was a tad bit more interesting to me than this one.

Aifos said...

@FringeFan
"btw, after Jacksonville from S2 & the whole S3, it was all about Peter."
Finaly someone who sees things like I do!

I agree with you in every word.
And We should just sit back and enjoy the show. It's not over yet.

Alex said...

Hello everybody,

With this new deal that FOX holds with the UFC, I've heard that all the fights from their reality show (TUF) are going to be shown live at Friday nights through the whole season, which is about 12 weeks long. What do you think about that? Does it foreshadows the end of FRINGE? If it does not, can they fit Fringe and TUF live fights in the same Friday night?

I'm a very loyal fan and I would follow fringe wherever it goes!

Greetings from BRAZIL,

Alex.

LucyLuaua said...

FringeFan, season 3 WAS NOT ABOUT PETER. Why are people so naive or gullible to believe that season 3 was about Peter? The first 8 episodes centered around OLIVIA and FAUXLIVIA, then when Olivia came back, it was all about how Olivia felt about Fauxlivia. Then when Peter told Olivia about his "killings", it was all about BELLIVIA for 3 episodes. now really, folks, enough with this "season 3 was all about peter" nonsense. BTW, for a season about PETER, Anna Torv and John noble have been getting all the awards and attention.

LucyLuaua said...

BTW, the biggest problem with Josh/Peter being "sidelined" is that will never notice Josh's acting and how good he is, people will be bragging more about john and anna and how perfect they are.

trent said...

"And btw, after Jacksonville from S2 & the whole S3, it was all about Peter."

About Peter as in Olivia's and Fauxlivia's feelings for him, that is, they were exploring the Olivias not Peter. Peter himself got very little focus and his screentime was greatly reduced as well. If James is right and the reason Joshua Jackson is on the show in spite of their best efforts to get rid of him, I can't tell you how loathsome that would be. Completely unforgivable.

Anonymous said...

@Fringefan & Aifos....are you ignorent or just idiots.
of course after Jacksonville from S2 & the whole S3, it was all about Peter.

but thats not the point. the peter character was only USED as a plot device for especially olivia and walter, but peter and i mean by that, joshua jackson got nothing to do.

after all this discussions, you guys still dont get the point???

its about the actor josh whose character peter has nothing to do , just kept on the background , while used as a plot device so that olivia and walter get to shine.

CAPICHE?

Zepp said...

Back To Where You've Never Been ... This promo has a title well suited to the style and atmosphere of Fringe. Only the title of the episode, already a knot in my brain. As much as I read that title and think, I can not reach a logical context. Why? Why is Fringe!

LucyLuaua said...

Oh and BTW, FringeFan, there was an episode called OLIVIA which had Anna Torv front and center and Peter/Josh was only in it for like 5 minutes tops. So how the hell was Fringe about Peter then?

Let's have a rundown of all the peter-centric episodes shall we

Northwest Passage
Firefly
Reprocity (sp)
The day we died
From what we left behind

So that's 5 episodes of Peter over the 4 year period. Yeah thought so.

Next is Walter
The equation
The entire 2nd season

Next is Olivia
Bad dreams
Ability
the road not taken
Jacksonville
Olivia.in.the.lab.with.the.revolver
Over there Part 1 and 2 (BTW, over a 1 hour and 45 minute timespan (minus commericals), Peter (the show was supposedly about) was only in it for 10 minutes tops
Olivia
The plateau
Amber 1322
The abducted
Entrada
Marionette
concentrate and ask again
6B

etc, etc, etc.

So stop lying about how Fringe is about Peter.

Anonymous said...

TV Guide Ask Matt Nov 7, 2011


http://www.tvguide.com/News/Ask-Matt-Walking-Dead-1039418.aspx
Olivia is and always will be the centerpiece, with the Bishops adding such anguished heart.

Anonymous said...

Wow, I must have missed the place where it says you have to be 13 to post here - or do you just have to behave like you're 13??

BTW; Love Fringe! I din't realize the show was about one person tho'... must have missed that press release.

...
snippy

Anonymous said...

I rest my case

...snippy

Anonymous said...

are you guys serious when you say they wanted Josh out during 13 episodes?

James said...

Yes they wanted Peter out for most of the season so they could "Recontextulize" the world of Fringe. Because basically they argued that they needed to establish a whole new world without Peter since they got rid of everything we knew and the said they needed time to do that. So Peter was not supposed to be around for a long time but low and behold the Where is Peter Bishop fan video popped up and pushed Wyman and Pinkner in a corner that they did not want to be. The press as they did when Chuck fans threatened to boycott the show during season 3 grabbed hold of the headlines (what reporter worth their salt would not?) and basically started asking them way before the season started....where is Peter? When are we going to get him back? Fans love him and want him to have an arc? etc. So now they were fielding questions about Peter non stop and had to change their plans...they knew with this much intensity of fans asking for Peter they could not go 13 episodes without him and had to bring him in earlier and basically keep him in the sidelines as much as possible until they could reset the timelines. I mean does anyone not notice how Peter has not told them all the stuff he knows? his time in the machine and other stuff? does it make any sense that their has been no focus on the mythology since he has been back?

The show is stuck in mediocrity and does not know how to shift the gears up or they know and are just not doing it. We will see one Peter episode in 4.08 and then it is going to be him in the background for most of the season. The cast has been told to tell the fans that this is a Peter season and Anna Torv told us that the producers told them they had to say that...but the lack of conviction in her tone tells us that it was just something they told them to tell fans to calm fans down and stop them leaving...no such luck I suppose.


Once a MacGuffin always a MacGuffin I suppose.

James said...

Plus only Pinkner sort of likes Josh....Wyman and the other guy Akiva...no such luck, they cannot stand him in their show. He was only cast because of JJ Abrahams...once the original creative team left.....they abandoned Josh and his character.

lucyluaua said...

let me say this so people can understand

It isn't about Olivia being the lead or the centerpiece
it isn't about Fringe not being about one person

It's about the fact that Peter's storylines keep getting dropped and we get no resolution, no build up to all of his arcs. Josh rarely gets a chance to shine.

so please, enough with this Olivia is the lead nonsense, its about PETER not getting his DUES and every single storyline of his is being dropped.

Anonymous said...

@lucyluaua and the Peter obsessed -

Are you totally blind? Every storyline has been centered around Peter for at least the past 2 seasons. Each episode this season has been about Peter, but he's more of a conceptual presence than a physical one. You expect the show to tell the story to you, instead of reading in the deep emotional and philisophical undertones. Understandable, since most shows are this way, but Fringe is not your ordinary show. Like so many great movies, you are rewarded for being curious and looking for answers between the lines, much as the characters do. the answer to "Where's Peter Bishop?" in season 4 so far, has CLEARLY been that Peter is EVERYWHERE. Please stop harping on what's wrong with show for not giving Josh screen time, they're doing so much more by making the audience, and even fans like you, care about Peter and miss him dearly, and cheer when he returned. We've all felt his absence and, much like a good friend, missed seeing his face and his day to day interactions. As they say "Longing makes the heart grow fonder". They're clearly gearing up to showcasing Peter this season, likely for the entire rest of the season. Also, please bear in mind the age old saying "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all". Thanks, have a good evening!
-ACJ

trent said...

@James

That settles it then. I started this season and I will finish it, but that's it. Whenever I see the names of these guys on a show, I'll make sure to stay away from it. They are the most disrespectful dishonest showrunners ever.

Lucyluaua said...

"Each episode this season has been about Peter, but he's more of a conceptual presence than a physical one. You expect the show to tell the story to you, instead of reading in the deep emotional and philisophical undertones."

There lies the problem, Peter is a CONCEPTUAL PRESENCE and not a fleshed out character who has feelings, desires and wants.

I love how you have the guts to say that we expect the show to be told to us....THEY HAVE BEEN TELLING THE OLIVIA AND WALTER STORY FOR THE LAST FOR THE LAST 3 DAMN YEARS AND JOHN AND ANNA HAVE BEEN GIVING AWARDS BECAUSE THE WRITERS GIVE THEM MONOLOGUES WHILE PETER DOESN'T AND PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND PETER'S FEELINGS AND CRITICIZE HIM FOR IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Look, people don't look for "deep emotional undertones", all they look for "in your face" stuff. Peter is not appreciated when he doesn't cry like a baby, throw stuff around like a child but when Olivia and walter do it, they act like they are the best actors/characters in the world. People were even criticizing Peter for not being more upset, or cry like a baby after everything he has been through.

So be quiet ACJ.

James said...

Conceptual presence = MacGuffin.

A MacGuffin is the worst thing an actor can be called...it insinuates that they cannot be trusted to carry the load. Considering Josh has the most acting experience this makes it even harder to understand. But if your uncle owns a network like Anna Torv's does then you can get away with it.

James said...

A guy who runs a website called Geekfurious.com did a podcast that a little while ago and laid out some home truths. Now this guy has insiders in like every network and studio..I think he may be in the Biz and his track record speaks for itself...where he gives out spoilers for shows like Chuck...but he said that a major reason for Fringe's existence is syndication but also because Anna Torv's uncle is the owner of Fox. He says that he will put money on it...he also said that is why the worst actor out of the three is the lead.

JM said...

@james
I dont think anna torv is a bad actress, she is actually very good, admittedly her hand movements have started to become annoying, and fauxlivia is lot more exaggerated this season, but she was really good in season 3. In regards to your comments about murdoch, im almost 100% sure that she is completely estranged from that side of her family so has no bearing on the show or the fact she is lead.

Ill take a moment to say how impressed i am by jackson professionalism throughout his time on fringe, he didnt like the polivia romance yet still did an admirable job (this is probably the reason why jackson and torv's friendship broke down in season 3, < thats pure speculation of course) He hasnt had a lot of screentime this season and still promotes the show/ talked up the storyline, last season he didnt get to be in all the episodes and still talked up the show and said he liked "more time off" and in a recent fans ask fringe video he talked up the idea of a astrid centric episode, and really backed jasika nicole up, which i find really refreshing from an actor, and he only came close to complaining about his role at this years comic con when he said his character was a macguffin and that was never gonna change.

Finally @james, i have read all your comments and would like to know if you could provide sources for your points, because no offence but it does sound quite like speculation, so i will take everything you say with a pinch of salt. As the producers stated at the beginning of the season they wouldn't drag the storyline out to the point of frustration i doubt they would have left him out for 13 episodes

trent said...

@JM

I don't think Anna Torv is that good of an actress, but I don't think she's bad either. She did her best work in the first half of S3, but even then she wasn't that consistent. The truth is that there is a stark contrast between her acting choices before S3 and after, which highlights the moment she started doing a good job. Still the praise she got was exaggerated.

I really like that Josh Jackson supported the idea of an Astrid centric episode (the only one besides Jasika), Broyles already had his episode, and AltBroyles was very well developed in S3. It's Astrid's turn and I just love the idea.

itten said...

Anna Torv may be estranged from that side of the family, but it is not like she is working for Cbs.

Anonymous said...

woow damn. okay so can anyone tell me if there is a kind of beef between Anna and Josh?
and when did Anna say that They've been told to say Peter is the main character of this season?

JM said...

@anonymous
What i was saying about anna and josh was pure speculation on my part, its just the impression i get from interviews and BTS videos after comicon 2010, so dont take what i say as fact

trent said...

@anonymous

Torv said that in one of her latest interviews with TV Line.

Anonymous said...

anna torv is a mediocre actress.

i never saw her really cry in fringe, she just puts her hands in her face or whippes her nose if she is trying "to cry", but i never actually saw real tears.

of course , anna did her best work in the first half of season 3, its because she was giving the best material ever on fringe.
if a actor is given a good script to work with, even if you are a bad actor , you will shine because of the material.
its the script/material that makes or breaks an actor.

anna and john have been given the best script on fringe , where they can show their range as actors. therefore their where being praised by critics and been giving awards.

and how is that fair for JOSH??

he has not even given the chance to show his acting ability
if the writers/producers make a peter episode, they give josh such a bad script/material to work with, that as resolt he cant show his range as an actor

and than he get bashed by the viewers and critics

i repaet; how is that fair??

FringeFan said...

@Anonymous..... Cool down man, you sound like a raging bull. I know you're here for Josh, and not Peter.

About Josh not getting enough screen time: Olivia was meant to be the CENTRAL character, not Peter. Same goes for Walter. Agreed Peter doesn't share equal screen time, so what? He's more important to the storyline than the running episode. This is what Fringe is (the beauty of it) and what it will be. If you're here for sake of Josh only, than I'm sorry that you're disappointed. There are reasons people here love Fringe. Josh is one of them, but not the only one. DEAL WITH IT!

@Lucyluaua.... And you're after Peter. But are you saying that the very existence of Peter in the universes, around which the WHOLE plot is based, is not enough for you? And how can you miss out on LSD, Brown Betty, Subject 13, Entrada, etc? Were those not Peter episodes too, in terms of involvement or otherwise? And again, Olivia/Walter are supposed to be the ACTIVE characters for the series, and Peter a PASSIVE (I mean "less active") one. All three of them are EQUALLY IMPORTANT to the story, one way or another.

James said...

@fringefan

If they had new material than maybe it would not be bad to just have Walter and Olivia front and centre all the time. But the fact is this season has been nothing but repeating old material like st claires and cortexaphan and been there done that material which has been conveyed through on the line dialogue that is cringe worthy most of the time and weak motw crap. Fans are leaving in the hundreds of thousands and critics on the whole have abandoned the show. This is no way for a show to treat it's fans and they are paying the price. People do not realise but their reputations are on the line here and they either fix this series quick with new character or mythology material or they are going to go down as a show that was known for only having one luck half season.

Anonymous said...

You know it's bad, when the only source of tension or conflict is done for the P/O shippers, which is the only reason for Lincoln's existence. Now that it's clear that Peter Bishop is nothing more than a concept for other characters to talk about and not a character the writers and the producers care about or want to develop, the only thing left for them to do is to please the fans they have left. Let's see how many of these I get right: the attraction between Olivia and Lincoln will grow, but ultimately will go nowhere. They'll have a kiss at most, just to make the Lincoln/Olivia shippers squee, but ultimately Olivia will realize Peter is her man, so that the P/O shippers don't feel betrayed. But they cannot disregard Anna Torv's lobbying for love scenes with Seth Gabel, so Fauxlivia will at some point declare her love for AltLincoln, just to make those shippers squee. They admitted they're bringing back DRJ, because lots of fans requested it. Fan service is the only thing they can aim at now, apparently.

Anonymous said...

what is DRJ?

JM said...

@anonymous
Lincoln/Olivia is awful. period. They have absoloutely no chemistry whatsoever. Altlinc/Altliv is atleast mediocre chemistry.If thats to create tension for shippers thats great. But its fucking annoying for normal fans, in possibly the last season we take up a whole episode (wallflower) WITH LINCOLN/OLIVIA!!!? glad were not wasting episodes here guys!

JM said...

Yes i did not understand anna torv's constant lobbying for lincoln/olivia, she didnt like polivia whats so much better about this "romance"? I distinctly remember her saying she saw olivia as an independent woman, well apparently she needs to get laid with every partner she has... i simply do not understand her like for this new relationship, and unless the extreme awkwardness in their scenes is intentional, i would say she must know there is no chemistry and therefore should be against it. The mind boggles.

L:ucyluaua said...

You know, Fringefan, its quite clear you are an Olivia and Walter fan and could less about Peter. Peter being the "passive" one is the effin problem or haven't you NOT read any of our complaints about how peter is being treated. Look, Peter gets criticized and bashed all the time because of how passive he is. And for the last damn time, its not about Olivia being the effin central character, its about PETER HAVING HIS OWN DAMN STORYLINE WHERE JOSH CAN SHINE. Josh gets bashed because of his acting all because the writers don't care about his character.

But whatever, Fringefan, you will never understand since you keep lobbying for olivia and walter and telling us Peter fans that his character is "passive", "is not the central character", "is nothing more than a conceptual presence". You have non respect for Josh nor Peter. You don't care about Peter as a character, all you see is a character just there to make Olivia and walter shine.

I am done with you, Peter hater.

Anonymous said...

@Lucyluaua (45, and all the other Patty usernames)

I've tried hard not to reply to you, because you know, TROLL! But I just have to ask, are you aware that if there is anything off-putting about following Joshua's career, it is you and the prospect of finding your insane and inane posts everywhere? I know it's not his fault and that every actor out their has their wacky followers, but that doesn't make it any less annoying.

@JM

I can only think of one reason why she would be opposed to a P/O romance and yet so desperate to have make out sessions with another actor. It's rather tacky, but then Olivia has become a tacky character, as you said, an "office slut". If I were a P/O shipper, I'd ask myself if I'd want Peter with a woman, that only needs to ride in the car with her next working partner a couple of times for her to want to get in his pants. But it's not only that, Olivia has become lazy and incompetent. Lincoln has been doing most of the hard work for her and her only moment of efficiency was when she rescued Lincoln from Gus, but that was only there, because the writers could have another L/O touchy-feely moment, go figure!

Anonymous said...

i hate anna torv is in those romantic scenes.

whether she plays fauxlivia or olivia, its the same, there is nothing.

josh used to have chemistry with ALL his female co-stars, but not anymore . he met ice-queen anna torv.

for example in those bed scenes, its always josh who pulls anna towards him, or caresses her nose,etc.
anna on the other hand just sits/lays there, her hands wrapped tight on her own body, like she is afraid josh will touch her body.

i said it before and i say it again : anna torv is one of those woman who dont like to be touched, who dont like intimacy , so she is basically an ice queen.

if you look to those scenes of chuck and sarah , of the show chuck, you will see that the actrice playing sarah has such warmth to her and she is really in to those scenes.

i must be strange for joshua , to play those romantic scenes with such an actress.
he is used to having chemistry with his co-stars.

laura008 said...

I don't think Anna and Josh have something against Polivia because Josh said beautiful things about Polivia in his Interviews at ComicCon this year and Anna said in his recent interview that Peter and Olivia are destinied for each other that it was set up this way and for me as a fan it is a very beautiful storyline and Peter and Olivia just happend to be played by incredible talented actors who also happend to have incredible chemistry on screen what can a fan want more ?Anna as Olivia and Josh as Peter created something amazing called Polivia and this storyline is as important and beautiful as Father son relationship on Fringe IMO !

James said...

Well it is a little unfair to compare Chuck and Sarah with anything Fringe does. First of all I am pretty sure that 90% of the fans who went an ate subway after season 2 did it due to their addiction to Chuck and Sarah, lol. Also their chemistry was so good it drove not only fans but critics insane. I mean I have never seen a critic attack a show runner like Mo Ryan attacked him mid way through a season 3 interview when she called him out for messing around too much with her favourite Tv couple :)

As you said it all comes down to the actress...the way she looks at him, smiles at him, plays with his tie, always touches him, always hugs him or holds his hand or carresses his face and hair and all round body language screams of love and affection. It is so suttle all the time that fans can not help but notice the phemoninal attraction and chemistry and love. Plus they have said some of the most insane kisses (yes I mean tongue) and bedroom scenes ever on a network show :)

Peter and Olivia fail in all those regards. But as I said the actress on Chuck does put in a lot of effort so it is what it is.

Anonymous said...

im glad you noticed it too

JM said...

Apparently the astrid centric episode is very good according to tweets from ari margolis, the masked scheduler and jasika nicole! :):)

trent said...

I really hope so, she deserves it :)

James said...

@anonymous

Well it was pretty easy not to? I mean have you seen the end of honeymooners? When their bodies are tangled together laying on chucks bed? That is intimacy! I never saw that once between polivia....

Anonymous said...

Is this an I hate Anna Torv blog?

And as for playing lovescnes , watch Anna Torv in any other productions he did, and you know who is to blame that nothing happens here.

And since when is Fringe compared with Chuck

And Olivia Dunham is a CHARACTER that does not easy show her emotions, nothing to do with the actress, again watch her other shows.

Disgusting all these hateful remarks on Anna Torv, shame on the moderator to leave this here.

And I see that we have the usual suspects who post everywhere, on several names.
What a pathetic bunch.

Anonymous said...

oh please, i actually saw anna in other projects just to be sure of my toughts.

and i was right: ICE QUEEN.

Anonymous said...

and by the way : i advice you to see joshua in other projects and then you see who is REALLY to blame here.

anna torv the ice queen aka office slut is ruining all these romantic scenes on fringe.

to anna : losen up girl, you may actually find a boyfriend , or at least keep one.

Anonymous said...

Olivia Dunham started Fringe in the pilot in bed naked with John Scott, so who is the one not playing love scenes or being intimate?

And for those Anna Torv bashers please watch Young Lions, Secret Life of Us, Mistresses, Pacific, see how she does sex amd love scenes you will never get on Fringe, since Fringe is a SciFi show.
Fringe Season 1 and 2 was all about the Bishop Boys, Olivia was the go-between, Anna Torv got the material she should have been getting from Jacksonville on on several episodes, and 3.01 -3.09 and several episodes in the second half.

And the entire Polivia thing was made by Anna Torvs acting, your Josh hated that so much he not only kept complaining in the media , but sabotaged it by bad acting. And I am sure that Fauxlivia seducing Peter in 3.04 was all his doing?

The Pacey/Peter/Jackson fans have all been brainwashed by Jacksons complaining entire season 3, at the expense of Anna Torv.

Anna Torv has NEVER said anything about wanting to have sexscenes or whatever with Gabel, everything she says is on behalf of the showrunners, she teases the storylines and characters, not what she wants to play.

To JM, James, 45 and all those others who do the same at You Tube, Fringebloggers, and everywhere else, you should shame yourself with all the lies you spread on all those blogs.

Anna Torv is a fantastic actress and a wonderful person.
For those interested : Anna Torv was in Cambodia for Oxfam during her time off april/may, little clip is on You Tube.

Anonymous said...

no thank you, we are not interested to see her in other things.
its more than enough to see her annoying face on fringe.
she is looking haggard and old lately, and she is only 33 years old??

i blame her for the bad ratings , because its her show and she is the lead.
it must be getting to her, knowing that her show never really took off compared to the shows of keri russel, jennifer garner and evangeline lilly.

and by the way, you are the one who is brainwashed.

open your eyes; and replay those scenes beween olivia and peter, you can find them on youtube.
and look really careful, you see that peter/josh is the one who always takes initiatief, he is the one pulling her closer, kissing her neck,...

she (fauxlivia/olivia/anna) just stands there, looking all ice queen.

Anonymous said...

yeah and that "wonderful" person that you call anna torv was at the saturn awards 2011 and she said literally:

"that SHIT-SHOW that peter and olivia was.
i know its rude ,but it true."

you can find this clip on youtube by hte way.

how its that not complaining, it looks like she didnt want it either.

so now, YOU stop spreading lies, and try to shove us anna DUMBham down our throats.

Anonymous said...

why do we have to be interested in anna torv in combodia?,

is she trying to be angeline jolie here, or what?

if she is, than she has a long way to go, angie has everything that anna never will have:

looking young ang fresh, check
in an relationship and can keep her man, check
has kids, check
golden globe and an oscar, check

i can go one, but i dont wont to put those anna fans to tears.

45 said...

Oh bother, anto, passing is now on this website. I'm out of here.

Anonymous said...

"And I see that we have the usual suspects who post everywhere, on several names."

You can't be serious, Anto, Torvite, Passing, Observations, Dunham, etc! At least you made 45 go away. Good job!

JM said...

@passing
im frankly amazed. That you include me in your list of accusations. If you had actually read my comments you would see that i infact defended anna torv from someone who was saying the only reason she is lead is because of her uncle i also commented she was a very good actress. You should have noticed that the "office slut" comment was about OLIVIA not the actress herself, i also only stated i did not understand why she wanted the lincoln/olivia romance that is not an insult but a query. Please read comments before you vomit on a conversation.

Anonymous said...

anna is the most perfect person in the world.
i hate that john noble is the one, that gets praised more than anna.
she is th LEAD, john has to take a step back.
and he has to know his place in fringe= shining behind anna and not the other way around.

yeah anna, show those looseres (john and josh) what really acting is.

Anonymous said...

i hope the writers kill of peter ( or reduce his screentime even more) and send walter to the mental institute, so anna can have the screentime for her self.
afterall, SHE is the one making fringe.
whithout her there is no fringe.

James said...

This show is in a rut of mediocrity. Fans, critics and casual viewers have all but abandoned this show. They have written themselves towards cancellation. How can we continue to praise a show or actors that are failing to hold an audience. John and Anna have run this show into the ground...it is them that has been there the whole season and yet we are now seeing Fringe on its knees.

I think the producers know that they needed to do something extrodinary this season to arrest the slide but did not have the guts to do it. They refuse to actually take the risk of expanding this show and are content on having the characters reset to material the writers know and are comfortable with.

People say that Fringe takes risks and dissappearing Peter was a huge risk...no it really was just the Show runners quickly running back to reset the show to the tried and tested Walter crazy and Olivia lonely cortexaphaned. This is such a pile of crap.

If they wanted to actually take a risk they would have started this season with the Observers, Peter and Lincoln at front and center and changed the view of the show and mixed it up as much as they could.

Alas they are wimps and the general audience has gotten frustrated with their ineptness.

trent said...

I don't think the reset was a good idea, because there is no movement forward, it mindlessly destroyed any character development and relationships achieved during the past 3 seasons and there is nothing particularly interesting about it. This orange universe is too dour with duller S1-esque versions of Walter and Olivia and the most we can do now is play "spot the differences" with S1. IMO, they haven't managed to make the differences compelling enough and they have explained very little to nothing about Peter, how they managed to make the machine work without him, the Observers and so on. They could have given a satisfactory resolution to Peter's disappearance and reappearance, but all they've managed to deliver is boredom and frustration.

The clearest sign for me that this is almost certainly the last season, besides the low ratings, is the online activity from fans, which is at an all-time low and it has been for a while. There is too much malcontent and resignation among the fans and I'm sure TPTB are aware of this, but I wouldn't bet on them getting a grip, before everything is lost. It is a shame, because this show had so much potential!

s said...

People who feel the need to attack actors - real people - that they have never met and truly know nothing about aren't having a mature and reasonable conversation. So yes, grow up. It's a TV show, and the people you're raging against aren't making the decisions about storylines. The vitriol against Ms. Torv and Mr. Noble is shameful and petulant.

Also - *it's a TV show*!

If you're going to throw around things link "Peter was supposed to be gone for 13 episodes" cite your source - and that means link to an interview, not just "I heard so and so...". Otherwise it's hysterical, baseless aggrandizing and nothing that can be taken seriously.

Also, it's a TV show!

If you like Fringe, you'd respect all the people involved who have brought you 4 seasons. If you don't like it, rather than spewing hate, you'd stop watching and move along.

Behaviour like this is what gives fandom a bad name.

And finally, it's a TV show. It's not worth getting this worked up about.

James said...

S. Thanks for telling us it is a tv show I did not think we knew that.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dennis said...

OK, that is enough of anonymous trolls hating on Anna Torv and other Fringe stars (who are not Joshua Jackson).

Dennis said...

trent said..."The clearest sign for me that this is almost certainly the last season, besides the low ratings, is the online activity from fans, which is at an all-time low and it has been for a while."

You are completely wrong. I don't know where you are getting your information from, but the traffic here at Fringe Television is at an all time high, and it is 30% higher this season than last season.

45 said...

Sorry dennis but you also might want to delete the posts where a certain person is bashing josh, too.

trent said...

I'm happy for Fringe Television, but I mean sites like Tumblr, where fan activity is usually more frantic. There has been a noticeable drop in activity there and I mean way before the winter hiatus. There haven't been as many posts and very few reblogs about voting on polls (People's Choice Awards, etc...) and very few posts promoting upcoming episodes, when last year the site was teeming with those. People seem more resigned that this will be the last season than combative against that possibility, when last year the freak-out was huge and the campaign "Save Fringe" started early and gathered massive support. I don't mean people want it cancelled, I mean there is more resignation than anything. Anyway, ratings matter more than all of the above, I was just making a comment about something I find worrying, although it might not mean anything.

Zepp said...

Without going into much discussion. But Fringe begins (Pilot), focusing on the foreground, a determined FBI agent, who was called to the airport, to be part of an investigative work about a mysterious landing on automatic, an aircraft with all passengers dead strangely. The name of this agent is Olivia Dunham. Everything starts revolving around this character, and it is how the trio Peter-Olivia-Walter (Fringe Team). Under the initiative herself, went to Baghdad to contact Peter, and then led him to where his father (Walter), to remove him from the mental institution. She is also asked that the old Walter's lab at Harvard, is reopened. And from these actions of the agent Olivia, Broyles defends is that this new Fringe team, with people of higher rank. So, I repeat, that Fringe gets super focus of the character Olivia Dunham. So even though I also find that the three characters (Walter, Olivia and Peter) are the main, I can not refrain from saying that the character Olivia is the main focus of everything that has happened so far in Fringe. I may be wrong, but that's what I think. A merry Christmas to you all!

45 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Kit said...

*Sigh* I use to come here because I was so excited about fringe I just wanted more, I wanted to discuss it, dissect story-lines, gush over how awesome this show is and how different it is from anything else on tv.

I STILL LOVE FRINGE.

This fandom makes me sick though. Between the trolls and the flames and the Anna VS Josh vitriolic diatribe it makes me feel like banging my head against a brick wall. It's christmas so I say this with love:

Get over it. If you don't like fringe stop watching it, please stop posting your unhelpful trolling, you are ruining it for us all.

That is all.

LadyGagaClapClap said...

Well, let's all blame the very thing that started all this hate to begin with, the Peter/Olivia/fauxlivia love triangle. There was never this amount of hate during seasons 1 and 2 cause the show spent more time on the science of fringe while developing the characters instead of spending an entire season of Olivia and how hurt her feelings were ove Peter.

Post a Comment

Formatting Key:
- <b>bold</b> = bold
- <i >italic</i> = italic
- <a href="http://fringetelevision.com/">link</a> = link

Anonymous posting has been turned off.

 

Viral & Official FOX Websites



FTV Members

Meta

Powered by Blogger
Designed by Spot