We conference with Bad Robot's J.J. Abrams and star Joshua Jackson from Fox's sci-fi thriller series "Fringe" which had its premiere on September 9th.

"Fringe"

Is a fantastical thriller about an unlikely trio who uncover a deadly mystery involving a series of unbelievable events and realize they may be a part of a larger, more disturbing pattern that blurs the line between the possible and the impossible.

The cast:

Anna Torv (OliviDunham)
Joshua Jackson (Peter Bishop)
John Noble (Walter Bishop)
Lance Reddick (Phillip Broyles)
Kirk Acevedo (Charlie Francis)
Mark Valley (John Scott)
Blair Brown (Nina Sharp)
Jasika Nicole (Astrid Farnsworth)


Question:

With reference to the U.S. elections - if it really makes any difference to “Fringe” which party takes over in January. 

J.J. Abrams:

I really think that Josh should answer this because, first of all, because the show, I’ll try to
answer quickly in a non-political mode, which is, the show is obviously coming out at a time when every week we read or hear or see about some kind of potentially horrifying scientific breakthrough.  The reality is that we are in a time, whatever party is leading the country, where science is out of control.  Having said that, maybe everything is out of control and maybe the show should be called ….  The political aspect of it is obviously—it wasn’t created to mirror the election, all I’ll say is hope is a good thing. 

Question:

What made Joshua Jackson come back to TV

Joshua Jackson:

It was this project specifically that drew me back to TV.  Frankly, first it was the quality of the script, which is now our pilot and the density of it.  And the fact that even while it was a totally satisfying story unto itself, you can see that it was laid in there, the potential for a whole world, a whole universe of other stories. 

And the other J.J. on the line and his ability with the group of people that he keeps around him to tell these stories well over a long period of time.  Because that was my hope, if I ever came back to television, to be part of a group of people who had the track record of being able to keep shows at a high level of quality over a long period of time.  J.J., cover your ears.  I think he’s the best on TV at that right now.

Question:

On how far they can push sci-fi before it comes unbelievable.

J.J. Abrams:
              
The truth is that when we did the pilot for Lost, we had the monster appear at the end of the first act.  We did that very consciously because we wanted to say to the audience, “We’re jumping the shark now,” like we’re doing crazy stuff from the beginning.

We’re not going to wait.  On Fringe, we very consciously did what is in many ways a
preposterous out there, far-fetched scientific story point in order to say to the audience, “This is what you’re going to be getting on the show.”  Now it may be more extreme in some cases, less so in others. 

Some shows, I think, as we’re writing scripts will deal with science very much as it exists.  But I think for the most part the fun about it for me with movies and TV shows, especially in the genre of either horror of sci-fi is that pushing of the envelope and going further than you might otherwise.  I think the show will definitely be pushing the edge of the envelope, but I don’t think it’s going to be about that.  I don’t think we’re going to be trying to top ourselves every week because then we’ll just be in a race against ourselves and then there’s no way to win that one. 

So I feel like the key is to tell stories that are as compelling, as emotional, as funny and certainly as weird and out there as possible, but not to try and have it be exploiting that aspect of the show.  I would rather be delving into who these people are and what makes them tick than doing something just for shock value. 

Question for both Abrams and Jackson:

Joshua about working with John Noble and Anna Torv and what interests you about “Peter’s” relationships with their characters.

Joshua Jackson:

Actually, the answer to both ultimately becomes the same because while there’s a lot of stuff going on with “Peter Bishop,” what I’m finding is a lot of the fun of playing him is exactly what you described, the relationship basically which boils down to being a translator more often than not between “Walter,” who is brilliant, but sort of half cracked, and then “Olivia,” who is an intensely no-nonsense type person.  She’s not the type of character that you would sit down and have a lyrical, philosophical conversation with.  She’s very much a “Just the facts, ma’am” type of person. 

And you bring this other character, this “Peter” character, into that world who has to try and be the go-between, and initially the extremely reluctant go-between who’s really only brought in by happenstance and then can’t get himself out.  That’s an interesting dynamic because ultimately what that boils down to in my mind, and J.J., feel free to correct me, is a very typical dysfunctional family.  And you put that dynamic, something that’s relatable and understandable to everybody, and you put it in this fantastically outrageous world of Fringe and it makes for an interesting day’s work.

J.J. Abrams:             

To answer your question, I’ve known Josh a little bit for a long time back in the days of
Dawson’s Creek.  I was doing Felicity, so we were sort of in that same universe—

Joshua Jackson:

Actually, not to make this too romantic, but I remember the first time we met. 

J.J Abrams:

At Disney.

Joshua Jackson:

Yes, exactly, at the screening for Felicity. 

J.J Abrams:

That’s right.  I’ve always been a fan and loved his sense of humor and also the gravity that I thought that he could bring to something, even something as soap operatic as the stuff you were doing on the WB.  I felt that same way about when I was working with Keri Russell.  It’s like you find, there are actors, you go, “Okay, they are really good, they elevate the material.  They make it better.”  As a director/writer/producer, all you ever want is to work with actors who make you look better, who make the work you do seem as good as it can be and even better than it is.  I always felt that Josh had that ability.  I’m thrilled to finally get a chance to work with him.

Question:

So with the Anna and Josh chemistry we have going on, will there be love in their future? 

J.J. Abrams:

The odds are so much better.  There’s no doubt going to be a sort of slow burn relationship that develops between the two of them.  I don’t think it will happen exactly as you might think.  But there obviously will be a dynamic there that we will play up, but like Josh said, it needs to be burned and it needs to be done right.  There’s a lot going on their lives on the show that are more urgent issues, but there’s definitely going to be over time a relationship between the “Peter” and “Olivia” characters. 

Question:

If there is any point that Abrams is wanting to make about corporations:

J.J. Abrams:

The show doesn’t quite hit on the corporate conspiracy aspect, as the pilot might suggest, but there definitely is an ambiguous role that is played by Blair Brown.  She works for a company that it’s much more important, the relationship between her boss, who we have yet to meet, and “Walter,” John Noble’s character.  Their back story, how they ended up where they are, these are things that are much more about the characters than about a sort of cliché, cynical look at corporate culture.  Having said that, I don’t trust corporate culture at all. 

Question:

Who is playing her boss?

J.J. Abrams:

I can’t tell you that yet, but I can tell you that you will definitely meet him, he’ll definitely be a featured part of the show.  We want to make sure that when you meet him it’s something you’re hungry for, as opposed to something that you’re just experiencing.  So the way it’s going to happen, which will happen over time, but by the end of the first season you’ll meet “William Bell.” 

Question:

How J.J. Abrams feels “Fringe” compares to “Alias” and “Lost” as far as the longevity of the program goes:

 J.J. Abrams:

My expectations are sort of irrelevant because I never really know what to expect.  You can never guess or assume what anyone is going to think.  I can say that it’s one of those shows that if I had nothing to do with it and saw it coming out, I’d want to kill myself.  I’d be so miserable because it is so the show that I’d want to watch.  That doesn’t mean that anyone else will.  That doesn’t mean that it’s good or bad.  It just means it is so the kind of the show that I am excited to see. 

In terms of the other series, I don’t know how to compare.  Fringe is a very different show, but I would say that one of the experiments that we’re doing on Fringe is writing the show so that it is not as overtly serialized as certainly Alias and Lost are or were.  So how that translates, I don’t know.  What it will mean, I’m not sure, but because I’m so drawn to overarching and sort of long-term stories, there will still be the mythology, the evolution of characters, the revelations of their story and what “The Pattern” means and what they’re doing and how they connect to that.

So there’s all the stuff that’s happening.  But we’re doing it in a way that is much less week to week installments of that story, which then requires you to reset things every time you do an episode that is a mythology episode, which makes it, I hope, something you can watch without feeling like you’re not in the club if you’ve missed an episode.

Question:

What advice would you give to a young writer that aspires to have the kind of show runner clout that you have to get stuff on the air?

J.J. Abrams:

I feel like it is at least 51% luck that I’ve been able to view any of what I’ve done.  I would say the great news about writing and being a show runner is that it’s free to write.  You don’t need equipment.  You don’t need permission.  For anyone who wants to run a show, it literally is just about exercising that muscle.  Because writing as much as you can, it’s been said that if you write a great a script and you throw it off the Brooklyn Bridge, someone will find it and make it because people are desperate for good material.

Having said that, I’ve read a lot of stuff that is far better than what I write that has not gotten on the air.  We’ve all seen stuff that is generally perceived as garbage that gets on all the time.  So there are no rules, but I think really the key is writing as much as you can.  And then when you write it, you’ve got your leverage.  You’ve basically created your own momentum.  At that point if you want to get a show, if someone wants to make that script that you’ve written and you want to be a show runner, you need to say, “This is what my involvement is going to be.” 

But really, the only real answer, the practical one is, if you want to be a show runner, the key is write the pilot that is something you want to make, which is literally—that just goes back to: what is it you want to see?  Don’t write what you think they want to see or what you believe or what you’re told is selling.  Write the show that you desperately want to see and that is the closest you can get to certainty that will appeal to a lot of people. 

Conference Interview Attended By: Peter Dimako, Editor in Chief.

September 4th, 2008 1:00PM ET.