• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Flash Forward (Braga's new show)

Yeah, I remember grousing about that when series details first emerged. The book's main cast is made up of scientists, but the show seems to dump that in favour of the usual primetime roster of cops and doctors. Bah. I recognize the need to expand the cast as part of retooling it for television, but cutting the scientists out altogether in favour of network stereotypes rubs me the wrong way.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
 
I heard that the seven network here in Australia has the rights to screen it here. Not sure when, but I'll check out the first few episodes to see what it is like.
 
If it was scientists, then they'd just claim that it's just Threshhold all over again and that Brannon is an imaginstionless donkey.
 
Gave it a try and almost fell asleep.
I didn´t think it was possible to make a SciFi show more boring and pointless than Defying Gravity.
 
They changed the time frame-and that will affect the impact of the story greatly. 6 months instead of 21 years. Big diff!
 
Gave it a try and almost fell asleep.
I didn´t think it was possible to make a SciFi show more boring and pointless than Defying Gravity.

Good gort, the mind boggles.

Well if this show flops, we know the marketing wasn't to blame because I can't get away from FLASHFORWARDFLASHFORWARDFLASHFORWARDFLASHFORWARD!!!!
 
From what I've heard, this is not an adaptation of the novel, but a new story based on a variation of the novel's core concept. I think the only connection is that both involve an event that enables everyone in the world to see a certain amount of time into the future. Also there's a character in the show with the same name as the book's main character, but there don't seem to be any other characters in common.
 
Guess the novel might be worth a try.
The problem with the pilot is that it starts out so boring that by the time it actually picks up most people have either fallen asleep or switched to another channel.
 
This is a fun thread. Obstensibly about Flash Forward (which has a great cast and a strong concept with lots of potential), it's quickly devolved into nonsense.

Hilariously easy comparisons for the sake of argument, such as pitting The Twilight Zone against Power Rangers, do make for a good laugh, Christopher. Who knew that a well-budgeted anthology series written by the best writers in the genre would be superior to a cheap and brainless series designed to appeal to children and sell action figures? I don't know where the straw man bit about Death of a Salesman comes from, either. But I'm not as consumate a viewer of television as you, so perhaps I'm confusing the Arthur Miller play for a television episode that I missed.

There is a good argument to be made that serialization is not superior--nor inferior--than episodic television, and you do make it well, Christopher. Television is ultimately a business, and if you can't attract new viewers to your heavily serialized narrative, you won't be able to finish that narrative. A series like The Wire, though incredibly satisfying, was a ratings loser kept afloat by astonishingly good notices. It would have failed outside of the HBO model (and saw its final season reduced in length even within that model).

I do think it's weird that Brannon Braga is earning so much credit for the series while David S. Goyer is going unrecognized. Not only does he share writing and producing credits, but he's the director of the pilot. Normally, television directors are pretty low on the totem poll, but there's a reason the person who directs the pilot continues to earn money as long as the series is on the air.

On the other hand, Goyer's level of credit (or blame, depending on your view) for Batman Begins and The Dark Knight seems about right. He was a producer on neither film, and his involvement in the more recent The Dark Knight was limited to a story credit. Nolan, in addition to serving as the director, has screenplay credit on both films and a producer credit on The Dark Knight.

stj, your declaration that serialization is not successful is well-served when you exclude The Wire, Six Feet Under,and Curb Your Enthusiasm, to name three examples. It also helps your case to presume that Breaking Bad, Mad Men, and Dexter will all eventually fail because of their serialized format. If they do fail, I suspect it will have everything to do with the networks wanting to continue their ratings winners for as long as possible, and nothing to do with serialization. And since episodic television series have so often been extended past their means so often for the same reasons, it's obvious serialization has nothing to do with it!

You continue to be confused about the creative role of the director, too. I suppose if the director was as useless as you claim, Alan Ball wouldn't have wanted to direct his own material on Six Feet Under, True Blood, and the feature Towelhead. But he did. The director decides where to place the camera, and is the person who most influences an actor's performance on set. I just read an interview with Armin Shimerman about his appearance as Latek (the first Ferengi) in The Last Outpost. In the script, the Ferengi were supposed to be threatening, but the director asked for performances that ended up looking silly. What became of the Ferengi since is largely his doing, according to Shimerman.

I do think the statement that a good director can save a bad script deserves review. I think Robert Rodriguez makes Desperado into a far more dynamic and interesting film than it reads on the page, but, then again, he was also the writer there. It's certainly the case, however, that a bad director can destroy a perfectly good script.

Lastly, Dennis' comment about direction not being particularly influential on audiences in television is a fair point. I can think of countless series that have gone on for years (and even been critically lauded) that, visually, are such a bore.

But, hell, this has gotten so out of hand and away from the topic, I'll stop here. Flash Forward shows promise. If the reviews are strong, and the ratings hold, I might even watch. But I already have an irrational commitment to Stargate Universe, so I'll pause before I decide to devote another hour of my week to television.
 
After they got rid of "Kings" I'm not sure I want to open myself up to a new show just yet. The pain is still too fresh...
 
Didn't Kings at least have some sort of resolution to the season's arc? I can't see something like Flash Forward having any sort of satisfying resolution until, well, the end.
 
Nope, the show ended on a cliffhanger with David escaping to Gath and Michelle being banished for a year by the Queen (so she can give birth to her child safely and return without the King knowing).

David's story being pretty much what happened in the Bible (he did stay with former enemies after being driven away by Silas). It's a pretty faithful retelling all things considered.

But no, no resolution.
 
Didn't Kings at least have some sort of resolution to the season's arc? I can't see something like Flash Forward having any sort of satisfying resolution until, well, the end.

The show has shortened the interval of the flashforward from the book's 21 years to a mere six months so that it can be resolved within a single season. Any subsequent seasons would be propelled by new flashforwards.
 
That's clever, actually. It might make later seasons more contrived (more flash forwards!), but it gives the first season a good shot at reaching a resolution, even if cancelled.

Thanks for the info.
 
I saw an advanced screener of the pilot a few weeks ago, and was very impressed.

But then again, Braga has always had great ideas.

The problem is that he usually squanders them. He establishes an awesome premise or situation, only to almost consistently take us to a resolution that is only a fraction as satisfying as the initial set up. So while I enjoyed the pilot, and will certainly give the series a chance, I'm hopeful but very wary.
 
That's clever, actually. It might make later seasons more contrived (more flash forwards!), but it gives the first season a good shot at reaching a resolution, even if cancelled.

Multiple flashforwards are part of the book's premise, in a fashion.
 
The novel was published in 1999, meaning it was probably written no later than 1998. SG-1 premiered in 1997, and though I'm not sure what episode you're referring to, it almost certainly came after the novel.

And of course there have been many works of fiction based on precognition, dating back to ancient mythology.
 
The novel was published in 1999, meaning it was probably written no later than 1998. SG-1 premiered in 1997, and though I'm not sure what episode you're referring to, it almost certainly came after the novel.

And of course there have been many works of fiction based on precognition, dating back to ancient mythology.

Prophecy was the name of that ep. since it was in the sixth season, it did come out after the novel.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top