Should the Fringe finale have answered all our questions?

Feature Juliette Harrisson 22 Jan 2013 - 07:10

The Fringe finale left plenty of questions unanswered, but did it really need to tie up every last detail for its fans?

Spoiler warning: for obvious reasons, don't read this until you've seen the Fringe finale. 

Fringe brought its five seasons to a close last Friday, and we’ve had a few days now to let it all sink in. We’ve mourned the passing of the show while celebrating its delightfully unexpected swansong, we’ve had a commemorative meal of root beer float and Red Vines, we’ve tried to alleviate our withdrawal by deciding to watch all of Alias from the beginning. But when all’s said and done, do we feel satisfied, as if swamping after a good roast dinner? 

Fringe’s series finale and the episodes leading up to it answered a lot of our questions. Donald was September. The Child Observer was September’s son, Michael. Sam Weiss (MIA since the re-setting of the timeline at the end of season three) was still poking his nose in and got himself killed helping our heroes. Walter never forgave William Bell for what he did to Olivia and left him in amber. Fauxlivia and Clark Kent-Lincoln Lee were happily married and had a son. Walter, as we’d always suspected, really did know Astrid’s name. 

But there were plenty of questions left unanswered as well. The biggie: if the Observers have been wiped from existence, why is Peter still in our universe? Walternate should have been able to cure him Over There (because he wasn’t distracted by September) and none of the series should have happened. And other questions: does it ever bother Peter that his son winked out of existence when he did? What happened to the shady characters chasing Peter in season one, Agent Amy Jessup from the beginning of season two, Rachel and Ella or Scarlie? What was going on with September and December, and did all the original twelve Observers end up going soft? Why does September confirm that he meant Michael when he said "the boy must live", when it’s very clear from watching Peter that he does mean Peter? Did Michael know exactly how everything was going to go down and, therefore, did he knowingly let his father die? If so, why? And what on earth was up with Nina and Broyles snogging way back in the season two premiere? 

Some of these questions may yield reasonable answers with just a bit of fan-tweaking. Peter was an anomaly anyway, having popped back into existence for no reason at all early in season four, so presumably anything relating to him and his presence Over Here – and the creation of the door that Walter wouldn’t have otherwise needed to create, sparking off the whole series – is just a bit, for want of a better phrase, wibbly-wobbly-timey-wimey. Amy Jessup obviously found better things to do and there were brief handwaves in season four to get rid of Rachel and Ella and Scarlie. The mysterious criminals who were after Peter disappeared so long ago everyone’s probably forgotten about them, and as of season four Peter never existed for them anyway. But some things will remain eternally a mystery – there’s just no explanation for Nina and Broyles. 

Perhaps the real question is, should the finale have answered all our questions? Is it the job of a series finale to wrap everything up in a neat little bow? As io9 has pointed out, Fringe was always more about family, and parent/child relationships in particular, than it was about weird science (this had been obvious from at least season two – just count how many season two episodes are about parents going to extreme lengths for their children. Or, in one case, performing dangerous scientific experiments on their children). If we didn’t already know that emotional truth was more important to the show than scientific accuracy, Peter’s utterly nonsensical existence in season two, and Olivia’s equally nonsensical recovery of her memories of him, was a dead giveaway. So why might we expect more from the series finale? 

Perhaps Fringe’s problem is that, when it comes to long-term storytelling and payoff, it set the bar too high too early on. Season two’s Peter is one of the most satisfying revelation-episodes in a long term story arc that you’re ever likely to see. At that point in the series (before season three’s Subject 13, which is one big continuity hole), Peter offers an explanation for slow-burning plots that ties in to the tiniest hints dropped throughout seasons one and two (Peter thought GI Joe’s scar was on the other side of his face, he’s always hated custard even though Walter insists he enjoyed it as a child) as well as explaining most of the bigger mysteries that the show had been pursuing up to that point – not only why Peter has a gravestone and Walter remembers his death and a partial explanation for why September saved them from drowning in Reiden Lake, but also an explanation for the Pattern and for why Fringe events have been happening at all. And the explanation itself is a doozy: Walter caused all these Fringe events, causing thousands of deaths in our universe and probably millions Over There, because he was desperate to save a single life, that of his son. It’s a beautiful and yet chilling metaphor for the abuse of science, but more importantly for the lengths to which a parent will go to save their child. In Peter, the logic of the science fiction and emotion come together to create an almost perfect arc-based episode. 

So maybe that’s why we might have expected more from the Fringe finale. We’d all like to recreate the experience of watching Peter for the first time and being impressed by a story arc that had been so carefully thought out and that came together so beautifully. But TV writers and producers can only do so much intricate long-term planning and after five years, it’s probably not possible to tie all the loose ends up so neatly (not to mention the host of anomalies created by season four). 

But that one, big unanswered question – why did the timeline snap back into place in 2015 when the Observers had had such a huge impact on events before that date? – will still bother some viewers. Ultimately, it comes down to how far you are willing to suspend disbelief in terms of science fiction for the sake of emotional truth. Because (Nina and Broyles’ alternate timeline hijinks aside) Fringe’s emotional stories were wrapped up perfectly in this finale. Olivia gets the chance to be a mother, Walter shows Astrid how much she means to him, Broyles kicks ass and a few episodes earlier, Nina proved her true mettle when she killed herself to protect our heroes. And the most important of all, those last words Peter mouthed to Walter as he stepped through the portal – "I love you, Dad." From their frosty reunion in the pilot, through the shattering revelations of the end of season two, to putting Peter on the opposite foot in season four when suddenly he had to pursue Walter’s love instead of vice versa, Fringe’s five-year story has been about Walter’s love for his son and, eventually, his son’s for him. For some, that won’t be enough, for a story that doesn’t make logical sense will remain forever naggingly unsatisfying. For others, that swell of emotion renders all logical inconsistencies null and void. Both points of view are equally valid: both will be as strongly felt. 

So, what do you think? Should the Fringe finale have answered all our questions? 

With thanks to io9 and all the thoughtful commenters over at Doux Reviews.

Read our review of the Fringe finale, here.

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

I think, With the pressure from FOX who wanted rid of the show but were nice enough to give us the final season, it meant that they simply couldn't tie up every single plot from seasons past due to time constraints and probably having less money to spend on production, but I don't think they had to answer all questions. I took all the seasons and the finale as it was presented to me, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Yes it had some plot holes, but what TV show doesn't these days?
Although I do agree with the whole Nina/Broyles moment in season 2? I mean what the hell, Right?

No, I don't think you need an explanation for everything, but Fringe couldn't have explained everything either. It was ending seasons 4 and 5, not the whole show (the first part of which had ended with "The Day we Died"). Seasons 4 and 5 exist in their own shallower, darker, grimmer time line, season 4 struggling on because the writers never did come up with a good way out of non-existance for Peter at the climax of season 3 and just made it up as they went along, season 5 woven out of threads snatched from a single anomalous episode (4.19) in the fourth season. I wish they hadn't gone back to the show's earlier seasons and pretended that they had always planned this end-game - it is obvious they hadn't. The Boy who was Important back then was Peter. Now, it's Michael, and it is his story we see brought to a conclusion in 5.13. They had a wonderful explosion of creativity to start with, and then simply ran out of good ideas. Season 4 tried to build itself an arc by turning Walter Bell into the villain. Season 5 tried to do it by turning the Observers into Nazis. Neither really convinced. So - that's how I am going to see the show. Three gloriously inventive and captivating seasons, capped by two using the same characters in different circumstances. At least the characters, more or less, stayed the same, and at least they engineered an ending that brought happiness to Olivia and Peter, and a sense of redemption for Walter. I'll take that.

With so many universes and time lines you can explain away everything if you like. I gave up fully understanding and remembering everything long ago, knowing the writers did so too, but could still enjoy the show for its characters. As long as Peter and Olivia got together with their kid. And Walter and Peter fully reconciled all would be good for me.
and offcourse the moment between Walter and ASTRID was the cherry on the cake.

I was overall pretty content with the finale. Compared to the Lost finale it practically tied everything up in a neat little bow.

By the way that should say 'Peter's utterly nonsensical existence in season four,' obviously, not two!

In the eighth episode of season 4, September tells Olivia in the Opera house that he has seen all possible futures and that she dies in every one. Forget these other unanswered questions, THIS is bothering me most about the finale (or maybe I forgot and it has been answered before).

And she did...sort of. She was shot in the head and was dead...but the cortexaphan revived her. So September knew that there was no way for her to avoid getting shot and dying. Granted he should have seen her revival, but maybe there was something keeping him from considering that outcome...not sure..

The way I've been trying to resolve the question of Walter being erased is that Time Itself has rearranged to cope with the paradox the same way as when Peter was erased at the end of season 3, so everything sort-of-resembles how it was before and events happened differently but to a similar resolution. I know there's still a few holes in there but it works well enough for me until there's a better explanation. Ultimately though I'm still going to miss Fringe. Whatever the next high concept sci-fi show is, it has a big laboratory to fill.

I remember that now. I forgot about it because it just seemed too convenient. "Yes she must die, but there's always the cortexiphan, so we'll just revive her using that as the excuse."

When the producers of Lost justified their ending by saying the show was always about the characters it just came out as bullshit from those who weren't sure how to wrap things up (even though I quite enjoyed the finale too much was left open). To me Fringe really was about the characters more so than the plot. Not only did the characters all receive moments of closure (and truly heartbreaking they were) but I can honestly say I was not left wanting from the story the way I was with Lost.

On a side note one thing I do wonder about is the fact that with the reset timeline William Bell is still on the loose in a world without Walter to stop him

we never found out who sent Olivia the menacing birthday cards every year either . Or what Nina was going to do in Massive Dynamic's basement with the body of Olivia's duplicitous partner..

I think the finale was pretty damn awesome. It tied up the emotional threads and that's what you need- the rest can be solved by fans!

RE: Nina/Broyles- why so hung up on that? I just thought it meant they'd had a fling once, which makes fair sense.

I've just seen the end of fringe and it's another black mark against Abrams. Seriously, how is this guy still getting work? He ruins everything he touches.
Back in the days of Lost I would scan over the forums, seeing all the theories as to what certain symbolisms might mean, the possible reasons behind particular random events etc. It turns out that none of it meant anything and when that's the case, what's the point?
It seems a similar thing happened with fringe (I was a casual viewer so didn't bother checking forums etc), there were re-occurring symbols etc that amounted to nothing.
This guy infuriates me, you have a concept, an arc and and ending, you see that concept through to the end and let the audience form their opinions on your story. You DON'T leave everything open to interpretation 'yeah but that could have meant this' 'maybe she thought xyz' no, you tell people the answers and stand by your convictions.
To say he is a lazy writer is a massive understatement. At best he's a concept man, he has good initial ideas but lacks the skills or intellect to realize them. He isn't a writer he's a tour guide 'and if you look out the window you'll see a dinosaur...'
"Wait, what? A dinosaur? But why is....."
'and here's a pyramid'
"Yeah but why is a dinosaur....."
'and the grand finale, a spaceship!'
"oh f*^k off"
He writes himself into corners where the only solution is to 'reboot' and start again or go for the whole 'it was only a dream' angle. Absolutely disgraceful.
Ridley Scott did his job on prometheus, it looked amazing and epic. The rest was so weak it was laughable, inconsistent characters, moments of "WTF? He/she wouldn't say/do that!" and another lacklustre childlike ending.
Prometheus - Dying old man spends billions of dollars chasing potential creators, the sentient being takes one look at him and kills him. The end. No other explanation given. Abrams in a nutshell.
"But hey! They'll be itching to see the next one to get some answers!" No JJ, that just means you haven't done your job, it pissed people off and that's the last thing I would want to do if it were me.

The ending to Fringe was saccharin and laughable, in fact I was laughing every time they stepped up the cringe factor. As with everything Abrams gets his grubby little hands on - it could have been so much more.

JJ, you suck, go find some pseudo intellectuals and physiologically arouse each other. I suggest a job in an art gallery.

I was being flippant, in an arson, murder and jaywalking sort of way.


I was pretty happy with the Finale, so well wrapped up emotionally I'm willing to forgive them the reset date (should have been earlier, with Peter and Walternate) because had they done that then the past 5 YEARS would have meant NOTHING! Not good! Besides... they did establish in season 4 that this Peter was an anomaly.. So all in all beautiful finale. ;o)

Who is to say that the "new" observers haven't intervened in exactly the same way as the old observers. The difference being they haven't left their emotions behind and so stop at the events prior to the end of season 4?
After all, Walter will have had some explaining to do when he suddenly appears in the future and perhaps Walter ensures the timeline is protected up to the observer invasion?

I absolutely loved the finale. I agree, there's plot-holes galore with the idea of the original 12 Observers never having to exist once Micheal is brought to the scientists in the future, but I can suspend my disbelief and chalk that up to time travel being a convoluted mess to begin with.

To me, as the author said, the story was about love/family and Fringe's finale absolutely had a great ending in terms of emotionally closing all the doors. For me, that's all I needed. The biggest mysteries all got answered throughout the series, so I wasn't particularly worried I wouldn't get closure on that. Some of the mysteries the author of this article brought up, I didn't even remember, so they obviously weren't that important for me personally.

It's easy to compare and contrast this to the much maligned LOST ending, as both shows were from Abrams originally and both were heavy into their own mythos. Lost's biggest issue for me was that they created so many questions, but gave out so few answers throughout the course of the show. Therefore, by the time the final season rolled around, I had a small novel of questions for them to answer that only a handful of them ever did. What was worse, they even added more questions very very late into the final season that never got close to being answered. My other big issue with LOST, especially the ending five minutes or so, is that the writers and JJ did an interview way back in like season 2 during Comic-Con or something, where they said they knew the end of the show and it would not be that they're all in purgatory or hell. Well..... that was obviously crap, or at the very least, they might have got scared that fans had figured the show out so quickly, then had to re-write it to where they weren't in purgatory or hell *on the island*.

Anyway, Fringe learned from the lesson that Lost taught, that's not to screw around with keeping answers from the audience for too long. They answered big questions along the way. And the emotional payoffs for Fringe didn't feel like cheap like they eventually ended up doing for LOST.

I consider it a very successful series finale. The final season certainly wasn't perfect. There were some short-cuts taken within the overall plot, but in the end, the characters that we came to care about all got satisfying closure. That was in no small part due to the great acting by all, but especially John Nobel. A lesser actor could have never pulled the emotional chords that he did in those final episodes.

Yeah, I guess that's probably one of the biggest questions I can think of that never got a great answer. What happened to Bell in the end of season 4 after he disappeared? They stopped Bell's plans from season 4 before Walter will go away in 2015, but he obviously is around in 2015 since he was in amber in the Observer future. Was he still being evil?

JJ Abrams had nothing to do with Prometheus. I believe you are thinking of Damon Lindelof, one of the writers on Lost. Check yo'self before you reck yo'self.

First--NO--it didnt need to give me all the answers. As for all the other q's raised--without going all geek fan to give my various theories/answers--I will give 2. (1) Walter & the gang were at the "eye of the Paradox", and as we know from the Doctor--that makes a difference for THEM & is always a good "out" for the writers. (2)You already said it--it's Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey stuff----so lets just be glad that such an awesome show got to go out on it's own terms & I , for one, was very happy with the ending.

Exactly--the newer "Michaelish" Observers would HAVE to make sure certain events--like Walternate being distracted & then Walter & Peter being saved from the lake, etc to insure THEIR existence----easily done with their new abilities that would make them more intellectually advanced than the old Observers & more emotionally/empathically advanced than us

I'll considered myself wrecked ;)
I could have sworn he was, ah well no matter. It doesn't change the train wreck that was Lost and the meandering 'we making it up as we go along, can you tell?' nature of fringe and anything else he's involved in.
The show was always about Peter's destiny, Olivia's powers and her integrity and Walter's neurotic genius. There was so much scope in that.

The whole switcheroo at the end where the 'boy must live' wasn't Peter all along didn't sit well with me. I didn't get a nice sense of destiny fulfilled and closure I was looking for, I got a sickly sweet 'slow motion smiles' music playing in the background ending and suddenly all the fighting just stopped. I would have thought the observers would be zapping in all over the place but there was only a few. Where were the resistance? Was that it, just them?
It could have been massive, it could have been epic but it wasn't and it need not have cost loads to shoot.
The whole thing fell flat for me which made what should have been beauty at the end seem insincere and naively contrived.

They were on to a good thing at the start of fringe and slowly tore it apart, another pattern of mr abrams. T'is a shame.

So... does that reset the timelines as well? Does Walter tell them they need Peter, therefore they have to save them from the lake, therefore we're back in the Red and Blue universes we knew but a few years down the line (and Peter ends up with 2 children, Etta and Henry?) I really like that idea...

Haha, fair. I loved it when that happened and no-one talked about it, because I like it when shows act like there's some stuff that doesn't need to be said.

Dan, that guy is just another another anonymous idiot that needs everything spelled out for either sheer lack of self motivated creative thinking. He doesnt know the difference between two real world human being(lindelof and abrams) and just is spouting standard idiotic "i don't get it" rhetoric. They'll never enjoy anything other than Predator. Lee, youre a tourist and have no identity or writing credits and have to write small articles in comments sections to voice your stupidity.

Dan, Lee is just another another anonymous idiot that needs everything spelled out for either sheer lack of self motivated creative thinking or overall stupidity. He doesnt know the difference between two real world human beings (lindelof and abrams) and just is spouting standard idiotic "i don't get it" rhetoric which has been tossed at both even when answers are given(often missed because most of what's happening is over this person's head, hence why he labels people as psuedo-intellectuals. We're just intellectuals, people smarter than you than understand science and fantasy are two different things). They'll never enjoy anything other than Predator, explosions, Mel Gibson Movies. Lee, youre a tourist and have no identity or writing credits and have to write small articles in comments sections to voice your stupidity and show your hatred for another persons skillset that you, by reading your comment, obviously lack.

Lindleof/Abrams confusion aside, all my points are valid. It is my opinion and I'm entitled to it. I don't know who you think you are to try and belittle my thoughts on the writing abilities of the Lost writers because at the end of the day you're doing the same, spouting your opinion in the comments section but you're trying to demean me to make yourself feel superior.
It is a concern that people are so easily pleased these days when shows and films are so poorly executed.

I'm not saying things should be spelt out for people I'm saying there should be an underlying intention from the writers, they should KNOW what they want the audience to figure out. Leaving everything open to interpretation is the height of laziness and poor writing.
Fringe has been inconsistent and sloppy for a long time and only a blind fanboy would defend that position.
You can rain all the hate you like, whatever it takes to make yourself feel better and get you through the day man.
Best of luck to you.

I can't answer everything, but I'm pretty certain Peter's acknowledgement of his lost son Henry, is shown through his daughter HENRIETTA Bishop. I'm assuming that he eventually got over it, seeing as his son simply never existed rather than fell to some tragic fate - and decided to start a family with HIS Olivia.

As for Peter not disappearing, I think it's due to his being from a different reality where he was saved. He was never saved in this timeline anyway, the same thing can't not happen twice, if that makes any sense (this is just by my logic). Anyway, loved the finale, a truly fitting end for a wonderful show.

I rewatched those episodes and it's Olivia's evil stepfather who sent the birthday cards.

I really enjoyed the finale. It did leave some paradoxes as in how did Michael come into existence if his father (September/Donald) didn't exist but as Sean Michael Quintanilla explained over on FB, there is no paradox about Peter not being saved by either Walternate finding the cure or September pulling him out of the lake because those two things happened in the original timeline not in the rebooted timeline from Season 4 where the child Peters on both sides died. Then our Peter from the original timeline "moved in". So his story was the same as in Season One but he is now living in the timeline of Season 4. When Michael touched Walter, he made him "remember things that had never happened", i.e. things from the original timeline, but he didn't make that timeline come back.That's also why Olivia in the end could be friends with Fauxlivia since although she remembers what happened the original timeline, this Fauxlivia never slept with Peter or had a a baby with him since Peter didn't exist there until our Peter showed up.

what about the guy in the blimp!?! the one Olivia said was going to kil her!?! who was he?

The characters in Lost were all dead. That is the only explanation. There are not plot holes.

My only unanswered question is that a few seasons back in the animated episode there is a mysterious man who at the end Olivia confesses is the man who is going to kill her, is that ever explored?

1. Lost did not just end with them in purgatory; that was a "side" ending or whatever. 2. Considering the end of the show was Jack dying where he first woke up and his eye closing, I do believe they probably knew that's what they wanted to do. I didn't love the afterlife/sideways thing, but as a sort of curtain call for the characters, it was fine. 3. The "small novel" of questions always strikes me weird, because, as pointed out many times on the Internet, a majority - probably a *vast* majority - of questions raised were answered -- just maybe not spelled out by awkwardly having a character take an exposition dump. Both Fringe and LOST had issues with their finales; both went into metaphysics and "unreal" stuff; I never understand why Lost's is so insanely maligned on the Internet and so far Fringe's has been praised. (I, personally, loved both finales.)

I think we were supposed to handwave it as being Walter or something, since Walter "killed" her later on and he was technically "someone unpleasant from her past." I remember reading that online, I believe; maybe one of the show's writers said it. I was never quite satisfied with that, really.

I think that a Peter does exist in our dimension because Walter was able to formulate a cure. If you remember, Walter thought he was nowhere near the cure just because an Observer (September) popped in his lab. His arrival prevented Walter from seeing that his formulation at that time was correct.

Removing the need for the observers to go back into time removed that from the equation, thus healing the Peter from this world.

I thought that the observers did not interfere bar September, and when Peter blipped out of existence at the end of season three all of his interfering was wiped out of the timeline. In other words all that mattered was what happened in the season four timeline. Peter only existed because of Olivia's love for him and that wouldn't change.
Or not............I don't know

It answered a bit, but added some major questions. "Observers will never exist". And that would solve all problems. I'm just thinking, if they never existed, september would never interrupt when waldernate created the cure, and Peter would be cured. Which means that Peter never would have crossed over and would never meet Olivia in that universe. Therefore the ending would be that peter died, Walter never got out of prison and no child was ever born.

Happy ending, but the time thing sucks!

I am not really satisfied with finale. As it is said in the post, there is to many unanswered questions. And most of the things dose not add up. After the last episode I just thought WTF is that it ....!! :)

I think that the Peter we saw at the end was this universe's Peter. Had the Observers not been around, Walter would have found the cure and saved him. I don't know what that means for Olivia and Link in the other universe, but I think that both Peters lived without the Observers. September had the best of intentions but he royally screwed up and he knew it.

Without the Observers, he died of cancer.

I'm sorry... Do you not like to think? Some of us like to have to actually think when we finish a story. It is infuriating, but also invigorating. You really need to chill.

That's a great explanation for that. Cheers

No one mentioned plot holes. U sir have missed the point

-also they were not all dead in Lost that was only the part about the alternate universe in the final season, everything else actually happened

It could be like doctor who maybe september never watched the futures
But just did what olivia told him to prevent a paradox

The only one that really still bugs me is the guy from the L.S.D. episode who is trying to kill Olivia. The fact that she says at the end something about him being the man who will kill her seemed like a huge plot point only to be forgotten about.

In the episode where the people get infected by the nanobots, the nanobots have the same "X" symbol on them as the guy had on his shirt. Since the nanobots were created by William Bell maybe it was just a convoluted way of saying Bell was going to be responsible for her death (without giving it away)? That's the best I can come up with.

The Reason peters still there is because the observers still existed until 2015 in their timeline

Or the plotline was going to be resolved in one of the minor epsiodes of season 5 that was never made, Warner Bros did say that the fifth season ditched some filler episodes in order to just show the plot moving episodes.

That doesn't make any sense, the Observers didn't cause the prime universe's peter's death all September did was distracting Walternate from seeing he's cure working. So if anything without The Observers, Peter is still dead and Walter is a crazed alcoholic watching another version of himself who is still living with Peter.

Heck now that I think about it that might be enough for Walter to kill himself.

From the ending, I assumed that the observers like september and august did intervene (distracting Walter and later rescuing Peter), they were simply more like Michael with an emotional response coupled with their heightened intelligence. The science mission of the first 12 observers still took place, just not the subsequent invasion due to their empathy.

This was my thought too- the observers (namely September), still distracted Walter during their science mission. The subsequent invasion never occurred due to their newfound sense of empathy.

I think that some questions don't have to be answered. That we just have to let things be sometimes. Not try to explain anything. And Fringe has always been about having more questions than before. An answer leads to more questions. That's why the ending is kinda confusing, because, that's Fringe. Confusing, and you're always left with more questions.

Sorry, but you sir have absolutely NO taste nor the brain capacity to appreciate the great RIDE these shows give!!

Abrams was just executive producer of Fringe I believe, meaning the bank account.

The ending is wrong. If they reset the time. That means that observers stops existing. Therefore they will never be there to disturb walter in the second universe from discorvering the cure for Peter. Therefore walter would never had crossed over. And so Peter and olivia would never end up together after the time reset. As they do in the end.

The article discusses all of that explicitly. The show chose the "emotionally satisfying" ending instead of the logical ending.

And technically even your ending is wrong. The 2167 scientists can only be reasoned with in any given timeline if Walter/Michael are both present, and have motivation to travel in time to stop them. In the timeline of the last scenes of the last episode, there is no Walter/Michael, thus the scientists will create the Observers and the invasion still occurs. The show tried to claim that Walter is stuck in that future and thus the paradox is eliminated, but that doesn't make sense either, since the future Walter is in is now part of a separate timeline.

Summary: the Observers cannot be stopped unless they invade. It's an unsolvable paradox.

There was no satisfying *and* sensical ending to be was an either/or scenario, so they just did a satisfying one. The alternative was some version of 2015 rolls around...regardless of how Peter/Olivia turn out...and everything goes to hell despite the sacrifices.

I also had questions related to Olivia and Scott.
1. After they shared consciousness, why was Scott handed over to Massive Dynamic?
2. With Scott's memories inside Olivia, when she tried to get into the tank to access and thereby delete those memories, she got an email from Scott saying "I saw you at the restaurant".
- How could he see her?
- How was the email sent?
- How did the laptop turn itself on?

Though Scott was taken in, they couldn't retrieve any information as to why he was an accomplice in whatever happened. Olivia was the one to find it out.

That was Walternate not This Universe

The problem is always getting "tripped up" in time travel. I really, really liked Fringe and am sorry it is gone, but the finale was a piece of crap. They should have paid more attention to thier own story. If the Observers never happen nobody pulls Walter and Peter out of Rieden Lake. They both die then and there and everything that happens afterwards never happened. How could they have missed that little bit?

This review/article gave me some sort of closure. I know it's weird but it did. It summarized my thoughts perfectly.

Sponsored Links