António Lopes

Weblog‎ > ‎

Flashforward - TV Show vs. the book

posted Jan 3, 2010 9:28 AM by António Lopes   [ updated Jan 6, 2010 6:48 AM ]
The new hit TV show, Flashforward, has raised some hype but even though I liked the episodes aired so far (it's still on its first season), somehow I wasn't that excited about the whole thing. I find the idea of people having a glimpse of their own future very appealing, but the approach taken on the TV show is typical "story-stretching". What do I mean by that? Well, I could just point you to a great example like Prison Break, but I'll explain it anyway.

Basically, like every hit show that's based on a good and appealing story (likely to have good ratings) they tend to stretch it to an endless parade of boring episodes, in a hope of making it profitable for the longest time possible. And a TV show that should have been produced as a mini-series of 4 or 5  episodes or a one-season only of 10 really good episodes, is bound to be filled with  a lot of boring stories that do not contribute in anyway to the central plot line. Good thing I decided to read the book in which the TV show is based upon.

Robert J. Sawyer's FlashForward tells the story of a phenomenon that occurred in 2009, caused by the deployment of the LHC particle accelerator at CERN, that "transports" the entire world's population's consciousness into the future, more particularly 21 years, during more or less 2 minutes. The first interesting aspect of the book is that it was in fact written 10 years ago and it's amazing how the author was able to predict at that time, that in 2009, the launch of the LHC (whose goal was to reproduce part of the behavior of the Big Bang) was going somehow to have an impact on the society. Well, we don't know exactly if its launch is going to allow us to see the future, because they've been having some problems down at CERN. But I doubt it :)

Another interesting aspect is the fact that in the book the flashforward is of 21 years instead of the 6 months on the TV show. I think the 21 years are more appropriate because it reveals real change in people. Most people don't go through significant changes in their lives in 6 months, which is actually a weak point of the TV show in which most of the characters have completely different lives in the future.

But what I really loved about the book is the fact that it's not meant to be a thriller or mystery-related book and it's not pretentious in that way. Instead, it uses simple human stories to encourage the discussion of what would it be like if we actually went through an experience like that, in which we could witness our very own future for 2 minutes, 21 years in advance.

In the TV show, the story is centered on the FBI agents responsible to investigate the causes behind the phenomenon while having also to face their own futures (which were obviously not very friendly). The show even goes as far as touching the possibility that there's some sort of conspiracy behind it or that the whole thing is a well-planned terrorist attack from a few people with an unknown agenda.

In the book, the story is centered on the physicists that are responsible for the phenomenon, which is caused by the LHC. So, there's no mystery, the causes are known and there's no need to build up a conspiracy behind it. Instead, the focus of the book is on the people, their futures and how they'll deal with what they saw. And that's why it's so good. It makes us think about the whole thing: is this really the future? Can it be changed? Or the fact that we know it, will actually embark us on a path that will inevitably leads us to the seen future?

And most of all how would society as a whole deal with this? This leads to an endless stream of interesting questions:
  • Should the stock market be shutdown? Companies that were still here in 2030 could have a massive boost in their stocks, because of that simple knowledge that their business would endure two decades into the future.
  • Should patents be banned? Because of what people see in their flashforwards, they could file for patents of futuristic devices and become very rich once these were "invented".
  • What about the fact that you now know that in that specific point in time you'll be having a flashforward which could reveal information to a past you? Wouldn't you try to spend those 2 minutes revealing important information to yourself in the past that would lead to a better life (like divulging lottery numbers and to avoid pointless relationships/jobs, etc...)? But wouldn't that mean that the "past you" would use that information to produce a different version of you in the future?
  • And would the society want more of these visions, thus forcing CERN to deploy the LHC again? Would they become addicted to them?
The book does raise a lot of these questions and dwells into them with magnificent speculation, just enough to make you think. But the main focus of the book are on the stories of the main characters:
  • Lloyd Simcoe (coincidently the same character as in the TV show but with a completely different story), the main character of the book and the main person in charge of the LHC experiment, is engaged to be married to a woman he deeply loves but in his flashforward he sees himself married with another woman, with which he seems to be very much in love. Being a firm believer in the inevitability of the space-time continuum (no parallel-universes) he's in a dilemma: should he marry this woman and "risk" a few years of happiness, knowing in advance they will not be together in the future (which hurts him a lot because of his own painful experience of having to face his parents' very disturbing divorce) or should he simply cancel the wedding facing the obvious difficulty of having to let go of the woman he loves now but knowing that in the future he'll be happy with another woman?
  • His colleague, Theo, had no flashforward at all. He didn't experience 2 minutes of absolute darkness, which could indicate that in the future he would be sleeping. Instead, he simply experienced a total absence of time as if the 2 minutes had passed instantly. This could only have one explanation: he will be dead some time in the next 21 years. Being puzzled with this fact (since he is only 27 years old on 2009, he wouldn't be too old to die of natural causes in 2030) he decides to broadcast on the Internet (which ultimately leads to the creation of the Mosaic website - as in the TV show) a request for any information regarding his death. To his surprise, a lot of people reply to him with the information that he will be murdered just 2 days before the actual day to which the flashforward "transported" all the world's population consciousness. This leads him in a quest to find out why and who will kill him in the future, while at the same time he ponders the doubts lingering in his head: will he be able to stop it now that he knows he'll be murdered or will this quest actually lead him to the exact point in time in which he's murdered?
  • Theo's brother is a writer-wannabe, but in his flashforward he's not a famous writer. Instead, he's still a waiter at a restaurant in 2030. This will shatter his dreams of being a famous writer to a point that he'll consider committing suicide. But consider this catch 22: if he kills himself, doesn't that mean he can change the future? But if he doesn't, how will he know that he can actually change the future and work harder to try and be a famous writer? He could simply cut his arm, since in his flashforward he had his two arms. That could also be a sign that he could change the future. But who's to say that in 21 years time, technology won't be evolved enough to replicate lost limbs? If that'd be so, then cutting an arm or making an extreme action like that, would have no effect and he could end up being a waiter after all. So death seems to be the only solution. But won't he lose it all if he does it?
The book eventually reaches the infamous point in time and everything is revealed. But did it all occurred as it was witnessed in the flashforwards in spite of people having knowledge of their future or were there any changes? Well, you need to read the book for that :) But let me say again, the good about the book is the thinking that it leads you to do, the speculation, the possibilities, the eternal discussion of if there's an actual destiny to all things in the Universe or instead free-will really exists?

As to the TV show, well... it's good Holywood fun, but don't expect it to ever be half as good as the book is.