Technically the plot was well structured and again very well produced. The actors skill once more played a major part and so far thats the show's strongest feature. Characters history and relation had some evolution. The science-fiction aspect was again t
7.0
In "The same old story" the "mistery bureau" is called to investigate an unexplained phenomena of the medical kind, which turns out to be related to the case of a serial killer previously investigated by Olivia and deceased John Scott. Dr. Bishop reveals that both the unexplained phenomena and the serial killer are probably related to one of his past lab experiments. This one indeed had a tint of the X-files. Only it was like a "monster of the week" 10 times trasher.
John Noble acting skills continues to shine, his role as Dr. Walter Bishop is just mesmerizing and memorable, really. Last time i said his character seemed out of place in the series. Well, i think that got better (for the resons i cite just below), but he still seems out of place, and that happens only, and only because, of the bad horrible scientific accuracy of the writing. Dr. Bishop remains as nuts as it gets, same impaired recent memory, same senseless speech to be unraveled in order to mean something. Nevertheless, an important thing has been pointed out in today's episode: Dr. Bishop clearly remembers a lot more about his "Dr. Frankenstein" years than one would assume, and he remembers it in detail. While sometimes he honestly looks out of himself, like in the scene in the car or drawing milk from the cow (i confess i bend to it, it was hilarious), other times i swear i could tell, by the look in his eye, that he is just playing dumb and fooling people into his game, after all he now has a chance to find out what happened to him, so that he can make up to all the years spent inside a mental hospital... Something else of note: we already know from other J.J. Abrams series that his characters are mostly double-sided and use to have a past of secrets to be hidden at any cost, so i'm sure we'll eventually learn how much mad of a mad scientist Dr. Bishop used to be. Sure he was no angel either. Peter himself already stated he was a lousy father. He must have had a pitch black of a dark side. And we have an important proof of that: during a conversation between Walter Bishop and Olivia, he briefly cites Peter's medical record (in a blatant phishing attempt on how much Olivia knew about them), indirectly suggesting that Peter might have been the subject to one of his experiments (unaware to Peter of course). If you watched Alias you must remeber that the main characters in the story also had their children secretly involved in experiments and conspiracies. Similar stuff happens in Lost, with Locke, for instance. With Fringe it must not be different!! I wonder: Was J.J. Abrams a secretly test subject when he was a kid? To experiments conducted by his parents?? Joshua Jackson's is probably the only sane character in the show. He is still the only one to say things that make sense from a scientific viewpoint, yet no one seems to listen to him. He should seriously be promoted to the mad scientist post. He continues to steal the scene whenever he appears, it's impossible to not like Peter Bishop.
Anna Torv's acting is still under assessment, i'm prone to think she'a a good acterss, and Olivia Dunham became a little more plausible of a character in this second episode. From all the things i had pointed in the first episode, she seems a little less gullible and stupid, and many things i objected were explained ( yes, she was aware how ridiculous she would look to everyone if she followed Walter's ideas; apparently being kept to herself and calm is a part of her personality, unlike most cops, so she never vents her spleen on whoever is around - that's why her face is always so bland).
The science aspect again i though was totally lame, and it might keep me from watching. I don't even know exactly where do i start here, but it was all so absurd that i felt seriously insulted by it. Do the writers want us to take this seriously? Keeping my mind open, I'm fine with the flash-pregnancy scenes, and the full of mistakes and trashy C-section scenes, from a "it's just tv" point of view. I'm ok with the eye scene (but beware of the fact that the idea is copied from a Jules Verne book and not originally by J.J. Abrams, not to say it has been used before on TV). Either for fun or creative excuses these shows need this kind of stuff. But that's about all i could stand without ranting. I'm really sorry, but everything else sci-fi related was obnoxious.
Growth and aging are unrelated and aging has nothing to do with growth hormone. There are very well-described, well-known developmental, growth diseases that are related either to growth hormone and/or the pituatary gland or are due to genetics. None of them has nothing to do with what "Fringe" totally made up. Acromegalia, Gigantism, Soto's Syndrome, Progeria, you don't need to be a genius to know this, you just need the Discovery Channel. These diseases even happen to be "famous" because they are so rare, and the people with it look so peculiar that they usually get a lot of media attention due to their characterisctics. There's no need to chopp off one's gland in order to extract the hormones. You just have to go to the drugstore and order the synthethized medicine. They could still have come up with a pretty good, scary story, knowing all the above. Oh and by the way the pituitary surgery is made via a nasal probe, not mouth, and there's no need for face-scalping or anything like that. I know, i know, it's just tv... but my point is: there is no way this can be called science-fiction. Because the current factual knowledge was totally ignored, and the whole thing made up, it was almost like an alternate scientific-reality, or time traveling into sci-fi. This might have been science-fiction 50 years ago, when medicine knew nothing about nothing, but not now. There is no way. I'll put it this way: if you have a stem cell you don't need pituitary ripping. So why not write a scary fiction using stem cell as a startpoint?? I'm sure they can, that's pretty much the writers job, create new unexpected things and let us have some fun!! You have to build science-fiction always from the ultimate knowledge, not the knowledge that was. That way one such writer might even, perhaps, preview in his fiction some of the science's real future, like Jules Verne did. Science evolves, and so does the fiction. So, if they go out and assume that "Fringe" is "investigative horror", or maybe a homage to old horror b-movies, or something like that, fine, i can live with it. But please, don't sell it to me as sci-fi because that would be really insulting, and i might have to stop watching it soon.