MovieChat Forums > Fringe (2008) Discussion > Which was better: Fringe or Lost

Which was better: Fringe or Lost


Assuming you watch both wonderful shows, which did you prefer Fringe or Lost?

reply

both are good. both started strong but then derailed somewhat. while i liked the direction Lost took(except last season) probably lot of people where less pleased. in the case of Fringe it was good until time jumped to future. after that it was impossible to watch

overall i prefer Lost because it had more interesting themes and characters and just more stuff was going on but Fringe also had very best plot and atmosphere in its first seasons

reply

I think Lost was probably more original but...and not to be funny here...it did end up getting lost along the way. The storylines were all over the place and the final outcome was pretty much as anticipated by fans early on.

What I liked about Fringe was the acting - some great performances, especially from John Noble. Also, aside from a few blips, the plot did seem to be more coherent.

reply

Fringe. Could not get into Lost at all - which was a pity as it had so many series!

reply

Fringe by far for me. I can count the episodes I didn't really care for on less than one hand and wasn't confused when it was all over. Fringe was just more interesting all around to me. I don't think I'd go through all of Lost again while I've watched Fringe all the way through at least three times.

reply

LOST is just too complex for some people judging by the general confusion that some posters allude to about how the show supposedly lost focus and that supposedly the story wasn't going in a logical place which is sheer stupidity on it's own.

reply

Sorry but Lost had no exit strategy from the start. They did not believe it would be that big or last that long and they literally had no plan to conclude it. When it became clear it was not going to just die they wandered almost aimlessly, killing time as long as ratings held up. And they were creative. But there was no payoff because they never had one in mind. Claiming lost ever had a logical place to go is the actual stupidity, since it flies in the face of known facts.

reply

[deleted]

Fringe without a doubt. Both shows have equally high quality first seasons. But after that is a different story. Fringe consistently got better and better and went from being very good to one of the very best television shows of all time. The series demonstrated stronger character depth and far more creativity, humor, and much more consistent, compelling, and cohesive story arcs.

After a very solid first season, Lost took a pretty big step backwards in its second season, made a slight rebound in its 3rd and 4th seasons, but got too convoluted in its last two seasons. The cast had a tendency to overact, with Matthew Fox and Evangeline Lilly seemingly crying in every other episode.

reply

Lost.

I LOVED Fringe but the cast was terrible. It's probably my favorite FOX show ever...even over The X-Files.

But Lost has more re-watch value to me anyway.

reply

I thought Fringe had the overall superior cast. John Noble and Anna Torv were easily better than anyone on Lost. Torv was a little flat in the beginning, but it turned out that had more to do with the writing and direction and she was amazing in later seasons, especially as Bolivia.

reply

John Noble and Anna Torv were good. But they never had a backstory. They were cardboard cutout two-dimensional characters.

This is a show where the actors definitely took a backstop to the writers who were leaping through each uneven possible renewal.

The show was better for that.

It's hard to even compare the main actor, Peter Bishop then say Hugo a 3rd rate character in LOST.

reply