Fox and JJ Abrams have shifted the trajectory of Fringe, following in the footsteps of Lost and other mystery-meets-drama-meets-science-fiction-meets-alternative-realities. What is this shift? Irrelevancy and, should it continue, this shift will ultimately result in Fringe’s cancellation.
Total Recall
Most television viewers like to be surprised, amazed and even gripped by cliffhanging continuations. But as the layers of complexity become more abstract, barriers to entry for new viewers and return on investment (ROI) for existing viewers are too great. For Fringe viewers, it was one thing for Olivia Dunham (Anna Torv) to learn that reality was not what she thought, throwing back to the first few seasons. The introduction of a second world and the interplay between them was another layer of complexity; that some shows take place in the one world and some in the other is of minor consequence once the idea of competing worlds has been accepted.
But now Fringe is more than that: it is alternative timelines – where the only constant is Peter Bishop (Joshua Jackson) who, having vanished from his own timeline, finds himself trying to help solve the mysteries of shape-shifters in two other worlds: as like to his own but absolutely not. If viewers, myself included, were finding it hard to develop affective connections with the “Liv” (also Anna Torv) of the other world, we are having even more of a difficult time trying to care about yet another “Olive” (again, Anna Torv)–who doesn’t know Peter at all–much less care about him; an Olive who is falling in love with Lincoln, and was adopted by Nina Sharp (Blair Brown). Confused yet?
It gets better. In World One, Dr. Walter Bishop (John Noble) is a half-crazy lobotomy survivor. In World Two, he is the evil Secretary of the DoD. In Alternative World One, he is more eccentric than crazy and has learned the lessons of his scientific meddling; but in Alternative World Two, he is a kind-hearted, not-evil Secretary of the DoD.
Stretching of Loyalties
In each case, the same actor is representing a number (as many as four) personas–some likeable, others not so much–and viewers are being asked to commit loyalties to each. But those traits which originally commended characters like Olivia or Walter or Philip Broyles (Lance Reddick) disappear. It might as well be a completely different actor/actress. The multiplication of personas further risks viewer loyalty by dividing commitment: some like Olivia and some like Liv and some like Olive. In the end, who stays and who … dies?
Excursions from one reality are acceptable, so long as the heart is brought back to the touchstone of the accepted norm. That reality, that first reality, World One, is the concrete world in which this story lives. But J.J. Abrams takes us too long and too far from the familiarity of the accepted reality. What was introduced first will remain, for most viewers, real-reality. The rest is alteration, debased in its relevance.
Revenge Return of the…Predictable
History is replete with examples where storytellers stretched reality to such an extent that all concreteness is lost, swallowed in abstraction. It happened in the X-Files and Lost. Two more examples are the Star Wars series of books (post Return of the Jedi) and Star Trek series.
In the first Star Wars books approved to “follow” Return of the Jedi, the new, Jedi-led Republic was fighting remnant imperial forces, a reborn Emperor, and a rouge clone Sith. But that wasn’t big enough, and eventually the books got weird–where the “evil” that was pressing from another part of the Galaxy was so immense that the remnant Imperial forces gladly joined up with the Republic, along with some random smugglers, etc. etc.
In Star Trek, it was the same: first they had to defend against the Romulans and Klingons. When that wasn’t big enough, they had to defend against them both going back in time to change history. And when that didn’t work, it was the godlike Q, and eventually the Borg, and the Cardassians, and the godlike entity evoked by Sybok–stopped only by the combined forces of the Klingons and the Federation; and then…blah, blah, blah.
JJ Abrams, Pay Attention to This
Nobody questions Abrams’ creativity. His ingenuity in re-writing Star Trek history without dismissing the past was…well, ingenious. But like all writers / directors, the temptation is to always go bigger, more serious, more terrifying, more terrible. To threaten the destruction of the Empire State building is one thing, but it has to be followed up with a threat to the entire city of New York, or another country, and eventually an entire world. And when that doesn’t grip, it’s four worlds in paired symbiosis. Going bigger is easy. Going smarter is the hard thing.
That’s the challenge to Abrams. How can he make his multiverse small enough to maintain loyalties to key characters while at the same time deepen and develop the mystery and suspense of the interactions? Part of the answer is relying upon the ability of the stars–John Noble, Joshua Jackson, Anna Torv, Lance Reddick, Blair Brown, and Kirk Acevedo, to name a few–to continue growing and developing as the people we first began to care about 4 years ago. The improvement of character will always remain more compelling than the situations that produce that improvement. In the words of Francois Fenelon, “We can often do more for other men by trying to correct our own faults than by trying to correct theirs.” Peter, Walter, Olivia and Philip can grow and will– given the opportunity.
As it is, Abrams is taking the easy way out by asking us to care about new characters portrayed by the same people. Frankly, it is not compelling, eliciting a giant yawn. And ultimately, more than the Friday night slot, this will be the demise of Fringe.
Joel Hathaway lives in St. Louis, MO. He holds a BA in English Literature with minor emphases in Art and Creative Writing. He lives online at www.joelhathaway.com.