rose_griffes (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
rose_griffes) wrote2011-03-17 10:35 pm
rose_griffes) wrote2011-03-17 10:35 pm
Entry tags:
TV: Fringe: Peter Bishop meta?!
Happy St. Patrick's Day! I totally forgot about it when I was getting dressed this morning.
I'm still talking about Fringe. Gah.I'm seriously tempted to order the DVD's, because now I have questions and I want to rewatch some of the episodes and I'm also curious about the other features available and... talk me out of this?
Never mind. Just ordered them, both seasons one and two.
Anyway! Speaking of useless talking, I'm going to write about a character that almost no one on my f'list truly likes: Peter Bishop. Apparently that "No one likes him, so I will!" defense has been activated.
My own guesses on what motivates some of the Peter Bishop disdain:
1. He looks like Joshua Jackson--who looks like Pacey from that show Dawson's Creek. Apparently the role was fairly iconic, plus Jackson has that young face and it's hard to imagine him as a (former) con artist. TV and movies establish certain visual standards; Peter Bishop is not sharply handsome enough to be the villain we're all supposed to find attractive, yet he's not plain enough on the show to be a low-life criminal. (Again, I'm talking about the visual shorthand used in a lot of cinema and television. Devilishly handsome Evil Dude or plain/unattractive thug.)
Joshua Jackson could manage a thug role, though. Make him a bit less pretty and he can take care of the menacing and creepy, I'd bet.
2. He has two very incongruent key elements: loveable rogue andfather caretaker. It's an unusual mix. Plus we haven't been given many glimpses of the rogue side, other than a few tech-oriented contacts now and then.
3. The character of Peter is ambiguous enough that it's easy to love and defend him (and overdo it), and easy to hate him (and overdo it). Harder to find middle ground about him.
I like Peter. I don't love him. He's interesting. At this point (early season two) I like the balance in what we see. This is Olivia's show; her agency matters the most. So I'm not fuming about how Peter has been left out of the action. Well, not any more than I'm irked about Olivia's sister and niece being ignored, or how Astrid has almost no history, or how we're just now finding out something about Broyles and his family.
Since Peter is not from our 'verse, I'm reasonably certain we'll get more of his backstory anyway, because being kidnapped by your father's duplicate from another world seems to be a guarantee for future plot points, yeah?
Back to the loveable rogue role. Harrison Ford as Han Solo displayed a pattern. (Patterns!) Peter Bishop has some elements of the pattern: he seemed to be conning his way through life, surrounded by debt and problematic acquaintances, when something happened to awaken a sense of moral responsibility. In Han's case it was Luke and Leia and their struggle against the Empire. (Not a clear case of "I'm doing this for the girl," though that was certainly a part of it.) In Peter's case it was his father being taken out of a mental institution and in need of a caretaker. Was Olivia a part of Peter's motivation early on? I tend to think not--at least not in a sexual/romantic way.
I rewatched the first episode and was struck by how willing he was to annoy her ("sweetheart") and yet how emphatic he was that she shouldn't be letting his father push her into (reprehensible) experiments. His strong reaction to Walter Bishop's plan to drug her and link her conscious to John Scott's seemed very motivated by a sense of "This is wrong and a really bad idea" instead of a personal connection to Olivia herself.
(I don't think he ever called her sweetheart again once he realized that she had managed to bluff him. Soon I'll have the season one disks and I'll be able to watch again and see if I'm right.)
And then he couldn't let his father go back to the mental hospital, and he couldn't ignore what else is coming. It's a huge responsibility, and one that he takes a bit begrudgingly, but he still takes it.
At any rate, Peter's 'good' side gets played up more than the rogue side. He's competent at assisting Olivia--even while my logical brain says, "Why is this civilian running around with an FBI agent?" He's also done very well with his father; not only is he capable of taking care of him (and it's not an easy responsibility), he and his father have improved their relationship. Probably a matter of giving up expectations that his dad will ever been sane/normal/act like a father. It's been a bit too easy, Peter's path, and I'm guessing it will stay that way (in the redemption aspects), since the story of his childhood will probably take precedence.
As for Olivia and Peter, the Epic Romance... well. The pilot episode pushed the "I will talk right into your face and stare intently at you" thing* and then it was dropped for a long time. Which is fine. I'm okay with the theoretical aspect of Olivia/Peter, but I'm not in a hurry for it to happen.
*That was partly an alpha dog contest anyway. Olivia won. Obviously.
If the show goes in a Peter/Olivia direction--and there have been hints for a while that this is certainly a possibility--I hope that Olivia Dunham is still the center. She can share the spotlight, but no one else should take it from her. And please let them hit the right notes and keep Olivia in character.
(Side note related to that: some of the Olivia/Peter fic out there doesn't work for me, because the Peter we've seen on the show isn't the dominant male. I would guess that even when he was running cons, he wasn't doing them alone. Smartest guy in the room? Sure, but he wasn't the leader of the pack. So the stories that give him a clearly dominant role to Olivia as a submissive female do nothing for me. She has the gun and the swagger.)
Back to the non-romance aspects... interesting how the show has avoided most of Peter's shady past, instead showing Peter now, trying to do what's right. We didn't get to see much of a struggle there. Walter's past reflects onto the present without giving Walter forgiveness for it. (Or maybe that's just me.) Redemption doesn't appear to be the theme of the show; instead it's all about repercussions of (Bell and Bishop's) past actions.
And now: fun with Joshua Jackson! "Peter is a really dumb smart guy." (very short clip, not spoilery at all)
More: "Peter is a shallow, venal, hedonistic, nihilistic man." (Heee! Oh, Joshua Jackson. Vaguely spoilery for mid-season one.)
I'm still talking about Fringe. Gah.
Never mind. Just ordered them, both seasons one and two.
Anyway! Speaking of useless talking, I'm going to write about a character that almost no one on my f'list truly likes: Peter Bishop. Apparently that "No one likes him, so I will!" defense has been activated.
My own guesses on what motivates some of the Peter Bishop disdain:
1. He looks like Joshua Jackson--who looks like Pacey from that show Dawson's Creek. Apparently the role was fairly iconic, plus Jackson has that young face and it's hard to imagine him as a (former) con artist. TV and movies establish certain visual standards; Peter Bishop is not sharply handsome enough to be the villain we're all supposed to find attractive, yet he's not plain enough on the show to be a low-life criminal. (Again, I'm talking about the visual shorthand used in a lot of cinema and television. Devilishly handsome Evil Dude or plain/unattractive thug.)
Joshua Jackson could manage a thug role, though. Make him a bit less pretty and he can take care of the menacing and creepy, I'd bet.
2. He has two very incongruent key elements: loveable rogue and
3. The character of Peter is ambiguous enough that it's easy to love and defend him (and overdo it), and easy to hate him (and overdo it). Harder to find middle ground about him.
I like Peter. I don't love him. He's interesting. At this point (early season two) I like the balance in what we see. This is Olivia's show; her agency matters the most. So I'm not fuming about how Peter has been left out of the action. Well, not any more than I'm irked about Olivia's sister and niece being ignored, or how Astrid has almost no history, or how we're just now finding out something about Broyles and his family.
Since Peter is not from our 'verse, I'm reasonably certain we'll get more of his backstory anyway, because being kidnapped by your father's duplicate from another world seems to be a guarantee for future plot points, yeah?
Back to the loveable rogue role. Harrison Ford as Han Solo displayed a pattern. (Patterns!) Peter Bishop has some elements of the pattern: he seemed to be conning his way through life, surrounded by debt and problematic acquaintances, when something happened to awaken a sense of moral responsibility. In Han's case it was Luke and Leia and their struggle against the Empire. (Not a clear case of "I'm doing this for the girl," though that was certainly a part of it.) In Peter's case it was his father being taken out of a mental institution and in need of a caretaker. Was Olivia a part of Peter's motivation early on? I tend to think not--at least not in a sexual/romantic way.
I rewatched the first episode and was struck by how willing he was to annoy her ("sweetheart") and yet how emphatic he was that she shouldn't be letting his father push her into (reprehensible) experiments. His strong reaction to Walter Bishop's plan to drug her and link her conscious to John Scott's seemed very motivated by a sense of "This is wrong and a really bad idea" instead of a personal connection to Olivia herself.
(I don't think he ever called her sweetheart again once he realized that she had managed to bluff him. Soon I'll have the season one disks and I'll be able to watch again and see if I'm right.)
And then he couldn't let his father go back to the mental hospital, and he couldn't ignore what else is coming. It's a huge responsibility, and one that he takes a bit begrudgingly, but he still takes it.
At any rate, Peter's 'good' side gets played up more than the rogue side. He's competent at assisting Olivia--even while my logical brain says, "Why is this civilian running around with an FBI agent?" He's also done very well with his father; not only is he capable of taking care of him (and it's not an easy responsibility), he and his father have improved their relationship. Probably a matter of giving up expectations that his dad will ever been sane/normal/act like a father. It's been a bit too easy, Peter's path, and I'm guessing it will stay that way (in the redemption aspects), since the story of his childhood will probably take precedence.
As for Olivia and Peter, the Epic Romance... well. The pilot episode pushed the "I will talk right into your face and stare intently at you" thing* and then it was dropped for a long time. Which is fine. I'm okay with the theoretical aspect of Olivia/Peter, but I'm not in a hurry for it to happen.
*That was partly an alpha dog contest anyway. Olivia won. Obviously.
If the show goes in a Peter/Olivia direction--and there have been hints for a while that this is certainly a possibility--I hope that Olivia Dunham is still the center. She can share the spotlight, but no one else should take it from her. And please let them hit the right notes and keep Olivia in character.
(Side note related to that: some of the Olivia/Peter fic out there doesn't work for me, because the Peter we've seen on the show isn't the dominant male. I would guess that even when he was running cons, he wasn't doing them alone. Smartest guy in the room? Sure, but he wasn't the leader of the pack. So the stories that give him a clearly dominant role to Olivia as a submissive female do nothing for me. She has the gun and the swagger.)
Back to the non-romance aspects... interesting how the show has avoided most of Peter's shady past, instead showing Peter now, trying to do what's right. We didn't get to see much of a struggle there. Walter's past reflects onto the present without giving Walter forgiveness for it. (Or maybe that's just me.) Redemption doesn't appear to be the theme of the show; instead it's all about repercussions of (Bell and Bishop's) past actions.
And now: fun with Joshua Jackson! "Peter is a really dumb smart guy." (very short clip, not spoilery at all)
More: "Peter is a shallow, venal, hedonistic, nihilistic man." (Heee! Oh, Joshua Jackson. Vaguely spoilery for mid-season one.)
no subject
I loved Pacey. Maybe my favorite male TV character ever. Def. my fave TV boyfriend evah.
Peter Bishop...is no Pacey. And I actually think Josh Jackson has been pretty miscast in the role. He can so easily play a smoove con artist (George Clooney in Oceans 11 Jr.) and yet...the show seldom portrays him as one, despite telling us he is. They never SHOW us he is one. I'd like to see a little more confidence (artist) in him to be honest.
I think his current arc is the most interesting one he's gotten to play. It's a shame this show squandered so much time before it actually got intriguing on a regular basis.
no subject
THIS, yes. It's so frustrating, trying to appreciate his character when all they do is talk about him being a con artist and never make us believe it could have been that way. (Miscast? I do agree that he could do a great Clooney-style role, but it's hard to decide if he's been miscast or if the writing just isn't giving Jackson enough to show us Peter's character.)
It's a shame this show squandered so much time before it actually got intriguing on a regular basis.
I'm actually really liking early season two, and thought that season one had some great stuff as well. Though I'm curious to see what comes next...
no subject
I didn't really think it picked up until late S2, but by then I'd already been falling asleep/not paying attention a lot when it was on. And now I'm too lazy to go back. Lol.
no subject
The writing on Fringe is a bit weird. The dialogue isn't that great, for example, but so far the story arcs and mythology really work for me.
no subject
Since I'm one of those flisters with confirmed Peter and Peter/Olivia wariness, I should really mark this to come back to and think about when I'm not about to get some sleep. :)
no subject
He's quite, quite pretty, yes.
Since I'm one of those flisters with confirmed Peter and Peter/Olivia wariness, I should really mark this to come back to and think about when I'm not about to get some sleep. :)
Heh. I guess part of it goes along with my own sense (confirmed a bit by some of the spoilers I know) that Peter is going to become more important to the storyline, because of his father. And if they do the romance thing right, I could go along with it.
I get the wariness. I'm curious to see how this is going to work out. So far the show has done reasonably well with these characters; we'll see. (Though have you noticed that sometimes the dialogue is just... not that great? Kudos to the cast for making it work in spite of that.)
no subject
Like DB, I think it's most a writing issue for me. I still don't know Peter and I'm not sure I like him enough to really want more either, except for how it affects the characters I do like? Which, harsh, but I think it's mostly that I just ran out of patience. Nothing on Joshua Jackson's portrayal.
When you lay out everything about him, it seems like he should be such an interesting character, but it's bizarre how little awareness the show seems to have on what to do with him. IDK. I've been mostly amused, except for my fears that they won't be able to give him things to do without taking storylines from Olivia. The show walks a fine line and has a terrible sense of balance.
ETA:Though have you noticed that sometimes the dialogue is just... not that great?
Er, yes. <3's the cast.
no subject
That has a lot to do with why I'm feeling comfortable buying DVDs and trying to catch up--it's obvious that the show makers think Olivia is fantastic. (I do worry about pressures from the network. And I haven't heard anything yet about whether there will be a fourth season.)
As for Peter and not knowing him (and the qualities that should make him interesting), I think it's part of the reason I finally started reading fanfic for the show. I like fanfic, but I tend to go on binges when there are lots of blanks to fill in. So... hooray for fanfic writers who do that? Heh. It is a shame that the show hasn't given us more to grasp with a character who should be vital in what's going to happen, however.
It would appear that I have a weakness for sci fi TV with lots of, um,
lots of room for improvementspace to play around in, in terms of creative works.This probably means I'm doomed to write fanfic. Oh dear. Not that I have any ideas right now, but this is how it all starts.
no subject
But now? There are things you don't know yet about Peter but now I figure a lot of my issues with him are about the writing, not necessarily him or Jackson's portrayal of him.
They toned the smugness down and I actually like the Walter-Peter relationship quite a bit. He loves Walter. He's angry at him, and rightly so, but he loves Walter and that saves me from totally hating Peter.
I don't feel I know Peter that well which is odd. All three of them are vitally important to the show's narrative but the writers decide to be agonizingly slow about showing things about the characters. Why? I have no clue.
But I agree with you. This is Olivia's show and I want her to remain fully at its center. So although I don't like Peter I'm okay with the fact that I don't know him well. I don't care enough about him. I'm want to know Olivia and it's taken me 50 episodes to get to know her so I'm sticking with her at this point.
Walter is still my favorite. :-) I think the actors portraying Walter, Nina, and Philip are the best actors on the show. And good acting will get me every time. :-)
no subject
I get the dislike for smugness. (Although I didn't really see it in the clip you chose. Heh.) Usually it's not something I like either, but 1) he has to show off the (former?) con artist somehow, and that's all the writers are giving him and 2) my love for caretaker characters outweighs the smugness issue, apparently.
Walter is still not my favorite, though I'm okay with that. As long as the show doesn't make him a hero for being completely unethical, I can deal with Walter.
(This show has some amazing actors. Also some amazing voices--if you just sit and listen to the tones, it's beautiful. I miss Charlie's voice...)
no subject
One of the things I love about Fringe is that they've done something I've personally only seen before on BSG and Firefly- they've taken a male/female relationship and swapped the conventional roles, pulled it off amazingly, and made it WORK. Peter is the more emotional, more people-oriented one, where as Olivia is the logical work-a-holic. It's the same sort of thing they did with Zoe/Wash, with Kara/Lee and Kara/Sam, and even Bill/Laura.
I don't want to spoil you, but I will say that so far, there might have been some more Peter-centric episodes, but Olivia is still very much the center of the show as of what's been shown. That just hasn't changed from the beginning, which I love. (Although I'd really like Astrid getting an episode or two.)
edemption doesn't appear to be the theme of the show; instead it's all about repercussions of (Bell and Bishop's) past actions.
YES. I love that :)
no subject
And since Olivia is my favorite by far, I appreciate that she gets to be damaged, yet not broken. She gets to have a good relationship with her sister and niece. Her instincts are generally right, and have helped change things for the better. She's hurt by how things went with Agent Scott, but she hasn't declared "no more romance" because of it.
I don't want to spoil you, but I will say that so far, there might have been some more Peter-centric episodes, but Olivia is still very much the center of the show as of what's been shown. That just hasn't changed from the beginning, which I love. (Although I'd really like Astrid getting an episode or two.)
Yay! And I agree that I'd like to see Astrid get more to do than be Walter's other caretaker/Girl Friday.
no subject
So much WORD. High-fiving a thousand YOUs!
no subject
Not to say it never happens based solely on gender lines, but there's usually a lot more going on than just that. (This includes the often repeated experience that female characters are frequently swallowed up in the wake of the Great Destiny of the male characters.)
no subject
Unfortunately, Fringe consistently ignores my preferences.
no subject
Though I really don't mind if Peter has some of the narrative. I don't want his part to outweigh Olivia's, but in terms of the story, it would make sense that Peter would have a large role to play. (I'm thinking of how Walter Bishop has done so much to alter the universe. So of course this is going to rebound on his family. Although so far all we know has Peter as a pawn rather than a character with agency, though I'm guessing this will change.)
no subject
Heh. Yeah, I'm sure he's appreciated somewhere! Just... not much around here, from what I've seen posted. (Though apparently more than I thought.)
And I get the worry about the narrative. It's fairly obvious to me (and I do know a few spoilers, but probably not as many as I think) that Walter Bishop's son is going to play a big role as we advance the storyline. It's a natural consequence of what Walter has done in the past.
I'm okay with that, as long as Peter doesn't become the center in place of Olivia.
Re: This Peter hate is REALLY getting tiresome
It's unsurprising that in a show with a female lead, fans of that female character are going to feel defensive and unsure about how an attractive male character is going to affect the parts of the show they like best... which would be the female lead and her role in the show.
Please read what I actually wrote, though. You'll see that I'm not criticizing Peter, just trying to explain why I think his character doesn't work for a lot of the fans I interact with. Which is okay. Not everyone has to like the characters you like or I like.
Also, I call troll. You have a brand new journal and two comments posted so far. If you're not a troll, this is an inauspicious beginning. One more comment declaring dislike of all Olivia fans (or dislike of ANY character's fans), and you're banned.
I'm not certain why you feel the need to comment on a show you profess to hate so much.
Re: This Peter hate is REALLY getting tiresome