"Timeless" TV Movie Finale Dec 20 Discussion Thread

[Romulan_spy]

We are just one week away from the TV movie finale of Timeless. I am pretty excited that the show will be getting a proper finale to wrap up the series. The finale will be a Christmas special in 2 parts, called "Miracle of Christmas Part 1 & 2". It will air on Dec 20.

Here is a synopsis:

Spoiler: Synopis

"Time Team is inspired by a visit from their future selves to find a way to try to save Rufus (Malcolm Barrett)." They begin their journey in 1848 California, but are forced to pause their mission and chase Rittenhouse back to the Gold Rush era, "where they encounter one of the era's most dangerous villains."

Then, Logan (Matt Lanter), Lucy (Abigail Spencer) and the crew land in Korea in the winter of 1950 and help rescue a pregnant refugee. "Stuck with no way out, our team faces its toughest challenge yet, and in the process, come to terms with their feelings for each other," the network added.

There are some photos from the finale here:
https://www.tvinsider.com/gallery/timeless-finale-photos-miracle-of-christmas-nbc/

 

[Christopher]

It sounds less like something conceived to be a big finale event and more like they just made what would've been the first two scripts of season 3, presumably with some rewriting to tie everything off.

 

[Romulan_spy]

It sounds less like something conceived to be a big finale event and more like they just made what would've been the first two scripts of season 3, presumably with some rewriting to tie everything off.

That is possible. The plot in the synopsis does sound a lot like the plot of 2 regular episodes. Maybe the synopsis is leaving some key plot points out? Hopefully, the writers still do a good job of wrapping things up though. I am still happy to get one last adventure with the timeless cast even if this finale does end up being just a regular episode with a wrap up at the end.

 

[Scout101]

given the writing for the rest of the series, not holding out hope that they've finally discovered gold (even if they're setting an episode in 1848 California!). Very little of this one was ever very well thought out, planned, or otherwise very clever. It was dress up history porn. What they DID do well was shining a light on some under-served moments, or angles to well known stories that deserved attention, though, so it was fun to watch as long as you ignored the plot logic and the conspiracy nonsense.

 

[Scout101]

Feel like if you're going to make a show about time travel, you ought to spend at least a day spit-balling some internal rules for how it should work, play with it to see if they make some internal sense, and then try to stick to them. It's ok if they are silly (time travel isn't real, make up whatever you want), but needs to be in-universe logic and consistency or it goes off the rails fast.

When Bill and Ted take it more seriously than you, that's not good

 

[Caretaker]

My DVR is listing this finale/movie as Season 3, Episode 1.

given the writing for the rest of the series, not holding out hope that they've finally discovered gold (even if they're setting an episode in 1848 California!). Very little of this one was ever very well thought out, planned, or otherwise very clever. It was dress up history porn. What they DID do well was shining a light on some under-served moments, or angles to well known stories that deserved attention, though, so it was fun to watch as long as you ignored the plot logic and the conspiracy nonsense.

Please, tell us how you really feel.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Ah, great. I can't wait to see this. As long as they bring Rufus back and give us a solid ending, yet leave things open ended for future adventures, I'll be happy. Oh, and a side of fries.

 

[Retrograde Orbit]

There’s always room for fries...

 

[Aragorn]

I was entertained by Timeless but thought the writing was quite scatterbrained.

 

[Christopher]

I was entertained by Timeless but thought the writing was quite scatterbrained.

Yeah... Its heart was in the right place, but its brain wasn't fully engaged. It never really seemed that the writers thought through or bothered to clarify the basic rules of the time-travel system, either the logistics or the physics.

 

[bigdaddy]

Very little of this one was ever very well thought out, planned, or otherwise very clever.

Which is why it was canceled so many times.

It you expect closure or an ending from the show-runners or the show's 'writers' than you will be disappointed... ' “the very, very ending, it’s open-ended. There’s always room for the show to come back,”

Fucking idiots all of them.

 

[Romulan_spy]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Greg Cox]

Nice article on the "NBC finale" (as they're calling it) in USA TODAY this morning.

 

[SG-17]

Which is why it was canceled so many times.

It you expect closure or an ending from the show-runners or the show's 'writers' than you will be disappointed... ' “the very, very ending, it’s open-ended. There’s always room for the show to come back,”

Fucking idiots all of them.

No it was cancelled because non-superhero science fiction is a fucking hard sell on network television anymore. Honestly the show would have fared better on Netflix, or hell even Syfy since they seem to be in the middle of a course correction. Travelers does really well on Netflix.

 

[bigdaddy]

No it was cancelled because non-superhero science fiction is a fucking hard sell on network television anymore. Honestly the show would have fared better on Netflix, or hell even Syfy since they seem to be in the middle of a course correction. Travelers does really well on Netflix.

Keep living in dreamland. It's been canceled twice and neither Syfy or Netflix wanted to pick it up. It's just not very good, just stupid and kind of fun and the ratings weren't good enough either. A show actually has to make some money. And now we get the creators that are so stupid they still won't have closure for the finale episode.

 

[Christopher]

No it was cancelled because non-superhero science fiction is a fucking hard sell on network television anymore.

Science fiction has always, always been a hard sell on the major networks. It's always been more expensive and more niche than other genres, making two strikes against it.

Of the commercial broadcast networks, the most genre-friendly ones have been the younger ones -- FOX, UPN, The WB, The CW. It's more rare to find SF/fantasy programming on NBC, ABC, or especially CBS.

 

[SG-17]

Keep living in dreamland. It's been canceled twice and neither Syfy or Netflix wanted to pick it up. It's just not very good, just stupid and kind of fun and the ratings weren't good enough either. A show actually has to make some money. And now we get the creators that are so stupid they still won't have closure for the finale episode.

I'm not sure why you are so antagonistic over this, in the end its just a TV show. Chill the fuck out.

Yes it was cancelled, twice, but it was also brought back, twice. So there must be something worthwhile behind it.

 

[Romulan_spy]

Timeless was never a great masterpiece. But I enjoyed it quite a bit. I liked the characters and I love history and time travel.

 

[Christopher]

Yes it was cancelled, twice, but it was also brought back, twice. So there must be something worthwhile behind it.

Actually that kind of shows the reverse. The fact that NBC gave it more chances shows that they really wanted to keep it -- and yet despite that desire, it barely survived the first time and didn't get any more than a 2-hour wrapup the second time. What people keep ignoring is that cancellation isn't just about networks' desires, it's about whether enough people watch the show to make it profitable. If a show is losing money, then the network has no choice but to cancel it no matter how much they want it. It's audiences, not networks, that kill shows by not watching them, and ultimately Timeless's ratings just weren't enough to offset its costs. That's something other networks would have to take into account when they consider whether it's worth the risk to invest money in picking up the show. Maybe if NBC had only cancelled it once, someone else might've been willing to give it a second chance. But NBC already gave it a second chance and it still failed. If anything, that makes it more unlikely that anyone would be willing to gamble on it a third time.

 

[Jedi Marso]

This show was charming, but ultimately didn't hold my interest going into S2. What it DID do was remind me of 80's/90's TV, before everything got so gritty and realistic. At least it got some sort of wrap-up, which is more than most shows get once they get the chop.