Terra Nova - any takers?

[NewJeffCT]

Could be interesting - humans from the future journey back in time from a polluted & dying earth to start life anew 85 millions years ago. Seems like Lost in Space, only with dinosaurs in the past instead of aliens. Stephen Lang from Avatar gets to chew the scenery in a similar role he had in that movie (and in the recent Conan reboot as well).

My guess is that it will have big ratings in the beginning and then lose enough audience to not justify the high production costs. Hopefully, I'm wrong, though.

[OriginalGeek]

1. Yep, we're gonna watch

Mrs Geek and Geeklette have already told me - too bad they will not see it tonight though. The Cowboys are on.

THat's what DVRs are for.

[Chan790]

2. No interest whatsoever.

This is the first year I can recall when there were no new shows on network TV that interested me even a little. I'm holding out hope that a few of these will do so badly that they'll get canned after week one and they'll start production on things that got canned after a full season last year (like The Chicago Code which was great but never found a huge audience) as mid-season replacements.

[ThatsMyBarack]

3. Sure, why not?

Worth a shot...

[dembotoz]

4. no eureka or warehouse 13 on tonight--ya sure why not

[pokerfan]

5. 85 mya?

Uh, why? Oh yeah, so they can show a bunch of CGI dinos and we can watch the actors perform in front of giant green screens. But 85 mya is something like 15 million years before mammals appeared. Why wouldn't they choose an epoch more compatible with our biology?

[NewJeffCT]

6. I'm hoping they explain that on the show

why they chose 85 million years ago, and not 20 million or 40 million or some other time... Heck, why not a few hundred thousand years back?

[charlie and algernon]

7. I read an article on ESPN of all places about the absurdity of going back 85 million years

For one, having humans start soo far back will change things so much that there may be no need to back in the first place, so the time travellers disappear. Or the time travellers may realize that, so they make it that humanity experiences the same problems, thereby justifying the time travellers' existance.

But the other point was that by giving humans now 85 millions years of evolution, the human race started by the time travellers could be SOOOO advanced and different that they would be unrecognizable to you and me.

[Swede]

8. In the show they explained that they are in an alternate timeline.

It bugged me too,until this nugget was stated.

[NewJeffCT]

11. They did mention some sort of time fracture as well

which was like a one-way tunnel to 85 million years ago.

[SCantiGOP]

20. they did explain that

said they were in "separate time streams" so nothing they did could affect the future they came from. I watched it but probably won't again.

[charlie and algernon]

21. I think I was distracted when that girl was talking about the pillar thing

I didn't catch exactly what she said other than they sent it back to see if they could find it in the present but they didn't.

[NewJeffCT]

33. I think what she said was

that since they couldn't find the pillar, it meant that the fracture/pillar was in a separate time stream, so what they did would not affect the future of their current world.

[Recovered Repug]

10. My guess for the 85 million year mark (not the show's reason).

Earlier than 65 million years would mean no dinosaurs and what fun would that be. Older than 65 million years gives them a chance to introduce new dinosaurs (not found in Jurrasic Park movies). Whether these dinosaurs are real or particular to the "different timeline" is yet to be seen.

[kentauros]

14. Why Not go back less time?

They could have ended up in the Pleistocene era, and been the origins of humanity. Better yet, go back only 50,000 years (starting from the technologically-advanced mid-22nd century) and be the origins of Atlantis! Now that would have been cool! :D

Instead, it's yet another dinosaur shoot em' up :eyes:

[Flaxbee]

9. I was disappointed. Not really sci-fi.

Oh - just read the post - that's why Taylor looked familiar; the bad guy from Avatar.

It lost me even before the first episode, though to be honest I'll probably give it one more try next week.

[graywarrior]

12. Lasted 10 minutes and opted to do algebra homework instead

[warrior1]

13. I couldn't take more than hour

right from the beginning I was counting the similar things from other movies. This is what I got.

Blade Runner
Solent Green
Star Gate
Jurassic Park
Avatar

If the premise of going back and time and trying to correct the mistake they made in the future, the main family is an example of "breaking the rules" by have three kids. So what is going to stop anyone else from doing that and causing the problem all over again. Oh and there is thing of an asteroid wiping out the dinosaurs, thus plunging the new colonies back to where they were, not being able to breath the air.

[graywarrior]

15. The animosity between father and son is so over used.

My guess is that either they resolved it at the end of the first show, or they will soon. Either way, I won't be watching it.

[hedgehog]

17. I thought the animosity came out of nowhere.

Also - if the mother was smart enough and had the cash to break him out of jail, get him into the transport station and smuggle the third child in, why weren't they able to bribe someone to ignore the third child in the first place?

Not to mention -a society with a 2 child policy that doesn't require mandatory vasectomy?

[graywarrior]

19. I didn't watch long enough to catch what was going on

I flipped over to HGTV and when I flipped back, the father was hacking at giant weeds and celebrating his accomplishment while being watched by mystery man/leader/bore. Ashton Kutchner was the highlight of my TV show viewing last night, and even that sucked. I want LOST back.

[Iggo]

25. Yes. Out of nowhere. Exactly.

I was wondering why this guy's family was all cholas except for that kid from Degrassi.

Now I think I see why.

This whole turn smacks of upper management rewrite.

[hedgehog]

26. Clearly the gatgeway affects the brain somehow - he quickly

forgot the girl he left behind and set about impressing the next chick! (although he did use his broken heart to get some pity!)

[NewJeffCT]

30. well, guys at that age

can bounce back quickly.

Plus, she was hot and somewhat the bad girl...

[NewJeffCT]

32. What I was wondering

the woman is beautiful superstar - top of her class in med school at Northwestern, very pretty, obviously caring and a good mom. Yet, she married a hot tempered cop?

And, the smart child/dumb child has been done to death on TV (Alex Keaton and his sister Mallory on Family Ties... the two daughters on Modern Family... and I'm sure there are a ton of other examples, too)

However, being in a mixed marriage myself, it was nice to see an inter-racial couple on TV with their mixed kids.

[Recovered Repug]

34. The animosity came from the father being locked up

for a couple of years - presumably a rough time for the rest of the family. The third child angle struck me as strange, too. I guess nobody noticed that the mother was pregnant for a third time.

[NewJeffCT]

37. I know

It would be very unusual for people to notice a slender & lovely woman like her at all - especially somebody that was a leading doctor/scientist like her.

[Iggo]

39. That kid's just a dick, then.

Before they leave: "Where's Dad? We can't leave without Dad."

After they arrive: "Eff you Dad! Our life sucks because of you!"

I love teenagers.

[charlie and algernon]

16. With the asteroid, it supposedly hit around 65 million years ago

that gives the humans 20 million years before impact. Humans currently STILL haven't reached a million years on this planet. The humans in Terra Nova have plenty of time to fuck up the world again LOOOOONNNG before that asteroid hits.

[hedgehog]

18. I was tickled at a show on the fox network premised on the notion that

we're headed to environment hell in the next 100 years.

[NewJeffCT]

22. That was interesting

of course, the Simpsons has been running on Fox for 20+ years now, and that's pretty clearly a show with a liberal bias.

I'd be a bit concerned if I were one of the settlers that the fences are not all that high - the plant eating dinos in the beginning were able to reach down inside far enough to get some leaves from the little girl.

[hedgehog]

28. They had to trim production costs somewhere!

[WildEyedLiberal]

23. Wasn't that great, but I'll probably watch it next week

It was pretty much Avatar meets Jurassic Park meets Lost, and the teen kid REALLY grated on me, but, meh, it was somewhat entertaining. I'll give it a few more episodes to see if it decides to go somewhere interesting.

[NewJeffCT]

24. True - since it was Spielberg

you knew the boy was going to get in trouble and Dad would somehow rescue him.

[hedgehog]

27. To be fair - lots of good shows have had rough first episodes.

[WildEyedLiberal]

29. Yeah, I'm going to give it a chance to find its legs

I didn't think it was bad enough to write off. It was kind of predictable and cliche, sure, but I don't really ever expect to be wowed by a pilot episode. Most of them (with the notable exception of Battlestar Galactica) suck.

[bigwillq]

31. No interest (nt)

[Recovered Repug]

35. The fact Fox put it up against Monday Night Football

makes me wonder how much confidence they have in the show.

[Auggie]

36. Same old relationship cliches. No, won't be watching.

[Iggo]

38. If they kill the teenage son now...right now....

...they can still save this show.

[Auggie]

40. LOL

Probably right, but they won't, of course. Too much melodrama yet to exploit.

I think they should admit it now -- the Sixers are really the good guys. But I still wouldn't watch -- the mystery TV genre like "Lost" and "X Files" drives me crazy.

[Iggo]

41. Fifteen minutes into the second episode and my niece was out.

"He ain't THAT cute" was her parting comment.

I lasted about another two minutes.