I’m enjoying both the show and the ride it takes you on, but I don’t know for how much longer. Yes, yes, I know . . . give it at least six episodes. However, after only three episodes I’m already switching from enjoy-the-ride mode to let-me-look-under-the-hood mode, and what I see is iffy.
First, let me say I have not read the book. If the interview with the author is any indication, we are talking vastly differing stories, so I don’t know if the book suffers from the same issues I’m about to explore. I’m suspecting it does not, but if it does, I’m not likely to read it.
I do like the concept; give everyone a glimpse of their future X-amount of time down the line, and then stand back and enjoy the show. But there is a little problem with the tack the show is taking; most of the main characters saw futures that would not exist were it not for the Flash Forward event. So what did they actually see?
Let me digress a moment and mention the Observer Effect. In very gross terms, the act of observing something can alter what you see. In the case where we deal with people, knowing what is expected of them can alter their behavior.
In Flash Forward I see something along the same lines . . . on steroids. In fact, so far we have not learned of any future which does not have something to do with the Flash Forward itself. Here again, based on the interview Slice of SciFi did with the author, I had the impression that was not the case in the book. I mean, I’m assuming the event becomes an important part of everyone’s lives, but since the flash is 20 years into the future the book might have differing emphasis on how much what people see is tied to the event itself. Not so in the series.
Agent Mark Benford is interested in D. Gibbons, an apparent lead into who/what did this, and possibly why. Except Mark would not know anything about this person were it not for the vision that showed him the name on the board. Obviously, not a future independent of the event.
His wife, Olivia sees a man in her house, and her vision includes feelings of affection for the man. It turns out to be a man she meets because of circumstances related to the event. Obviously not a future independent of the event.
Dr. Varley would not even be alive were it not for the event, so whatever future he saw is definitively not independent of the event.
The futures of the people who died in the event definitively are not independent of the event itself.
And so on.
So really, what did they see? A possible future? An actual future? An alternate future? Or is it the future after the Flash Forward altered the future? Did the people who died have no future, or was theirs taken away from them?
Where the show goes with this will determine my level of interest in it. I say this because the premise has an element of time travel in it. In fact, it may have the same paradox which plagues the Terminator universe . . . John Connors would not exist had the machines not sent someone back to try and kill him, thereby precipitating events leading to his birth.
And so it is here. The future these people have seen, at least so far, relates primarily to events precipitated by the event itself. The visions were, after all, only six months into the future. Of course, a future six months after a world-wide catastrophe would per force be inexorably tied to said catastrophe (remember the months after 9/11? The attack loomed large and either central or peripheral to all of our thoughts).
Still, one can certainly use this show as a vehicle to explore predestination, free will, and the nature of time, but like with time travel, I see the same potential pitfalls. Even more so because here the paradox appears to sit in a position of prominence in the evolving plot.
The big moment for me will be finding out whether the visions are set in stone, but I suspect that is something we will not find out until a possible finale. It’s important to me because it deals with human struggles as it relates to my appreciation for the story.
If we find out the future is set for the show’s characters no matter what, it then denies any meaning to the way they lead their lives, and imparts futility to everything they do (no matter what, they can’t change the future) . . . not a message I’m interested in, and it makes what we watch that less meaningful as well. If the visions are not a certain future, then one wonders what people saw and why, and it makes the premise slightly more interesting.
I have additional worries with where the show might head, and with me investing time watching it . . . if the event was man-made or executed, as implied by Suspect Zero and D. Gibbons, they will have to explain a mechanism by which the visions were triggered, and that in itself has other implications, one of which is a conscious mind independent of the body (something we have no evidence for), and a way to affecting those minds without physical contact. This usually leads into a metaphysical story path (the cheap way out for many recent and past shows). If it was not man-made, or explained by some physical process, then we are still led down the metaphysical path.
“Not important!” you might say. “Just enjoy the exploration of how each protagonist deals with what they saw.” As I said, I would were it not for a strong desire for cohesion. Plus, I tend to think about stuff when I am watching something, reading a book, or even sitting on the cra . . . er . . . I mean, idly passing time.
The sad part is even with the potential paradox looming large, the what/how/why is still more interesting than Mark’s struggles to keep a wife who would obviously be better off with the other guy. That is probably the bigger issue with the show. I’ve yet to see a character I care much about. Demitri comes close, but . . . he’s the guy who had no vision.
Why him? It’s because I don’t know his future. Because he still appears to have options open to him that seem increasingly denied to the other characters. Because not knowing the future makes his actions seem like the result of actual choice as opposed to the result of careening down a narrow, inescapable path. As such, I’m hoping the woman who called him about his imminent death is a lying bit . . . er . . . dishonest person with ulterior motives.
I know, I know . . . at least three more episodes.
Kikstad says
I definitely recommend reading the book by Robert Sawyer on which the show is based. I think the book is much better. Seeing twenty years into the future is such a better sci-fi premise, although I understand why they made the change in the TV show. Too bad they couldn’t do an adaptation closer to the book, because I think the novel really is much more believable with many more thought-provoking ideas — and some great characters too.
Michel Daw says
“If we find out the future is set for the show’s characters no matter what, it then denies any meaning to the way they lead their lives, and imparts futility to everything they do (no matter what, they can’t change the future) . . . not a message I’m interested in, and it makes what we watch that less meaningful as well. ”
I have to take a different stand. What makes a life meaningful is not the way it ends, but the way it is lived, day to day. Future/past events are completely outside of our control anyway, all we can do is live in the present and try to extend our reach (live the breadth of our lives, not just their length). For me, life isn’t about changing the inevitable (which by definition is impossible) but how we deal with it. I suspect that this is where the series is going as well. Knowing that a certain thing is going to happen no matter what you do, how do you live and love today. The series is asking some fundamentally tough questions.
k9 says
The book is great and I am giving the series a chance. There is no present, There is only the future. The present is passing in fleeting moments. The present is passed as soon as you say present. We can regret the past but we live in the future. If our destiny is pre-determined then all we can do is enjoy the ride!!!!
TallGrrl says
Wow.
You’re asking all of these questions…and the show hasn’t even hit the mid-point of the very first season yet!
Sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride!!
Me? I like the way this show is treating the past/present/future nature of time.
The past is gone. The present is already past. There is only the future. And some of these people are having to deal with that. Fun!
I hope the network doesn’t kill this show. It’ll be Strike 3 for ABC, and I’ll probably never watch anything on that network again.
(I won’t “watch”. I’ll fly BT Airlines.)
ejdalise says
@Michael Daw
To say future events are outside our control implies removal of accountability. It also (to me) seem to deny the connectivity, or influence, between people and their respective actions. Or, conversely, it implies absolute connectivity. In either case it precludes “extending our reach” because in doing so we would be affecting the lives of others.
This then gets into a discussion of determinism vs. free will. I agree the series has the potential to explore these concepts, and that may be enough to spark my interest, but I seriously doubt they will tackle such heady subjects in a way that does them justice. Besides, I don’t expect a TV series to resolve concepts that humans have struggled with for thousands of years.
ejdalise says
@TallGrrl
How tall are you? . . . sorry, always wanted to ask.
See? I ask a lot of questions. I can’t help it, and the show provoked it. I did sit back and enjoyed the ride on the first episode, absorbing the impact and presentation of the Flash Forward. But into the second and third episodes they began to lay the groundwork for the tack they are likely to take.
Plus, the three episodes add up to a shade over two hours worth of content . . . I have a hard time going more than a few minutes without thinking, let alone two hours. Besides, we don’t have to limit ourselves to living vicariously through the character eyes; we can do our own exploring, prompting our own brain to flex its figurative (and in my case, weak) muscles.
That stretching prompted the writing of this piece; I see the potential, but I also see the pitfalls. Ultimately I don’t trust a major network to seriously tackle such deep subject. The piece is written to voice the fear that something with great potential will be simplified down to appeal to the woo-woo crowd.
If proven wrong I will be there every week . . . until they cancel it for lack of viewers.
Sista Soul-Jah says
Answer me this. Why was the Head FBI guy sitting on the toilet reading the paper….no way would he have been like OMG we’re like 1 minute to the flash forward ..but first I have to have a BM. Huh?
Michel Daw says
@Michael – And that is why these questions are still important. Thanks for a thought provoking article.