# The Tomorrow People 10/9/2013 (S01E01) "Pilot"



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

The CW knows how to do a superhero show.

Marvel should be ashamed.

The Tomorrow People was great. Kinda neat that we've got two actors out of the same extended family playing the lead roles on two different shows on the same network.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

dswallow said:


> The CW knows how to do a superhero show.
> 
> Marvel should be ashamed.


To be fair, this is a completely different show than SHIELD. Which is, among other things, kind of the opposite of a superhero show (i.e., a show without superheroes set in a superhero world).

But you're right in that so far, TP does what it does far better than SHIELD does what it does.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

dswallow said:


> The Tomorrow People was great. Kinda neat that we've got two actors out of the same extended family playing the lead roles on two different shows on the same network.


Not even "extended" family -- Zooey Deschanel on "New Girl" and Emily Deschanel of "Bones".

(Tangent -- Richard Anderson playing Oscar Goldman on ABC (The Six Million Dollar Man) and NBC (The Bionic Woman) at the same time.)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

mattack said:


> (Tangent -- Richard Anderson playing Oscar Goldman on ABC (The Six Million Dollar Man) and NBC (The Bionic Woman) at the same time.)


Or in that vein, Richard Belzer playing John Munch on, well, virtually every cop show ever made.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

dswallow said:


> The CW knows how to do a superhero show.
> 
> Marvel should be ashamed.
> 
> The Tomorrow People was great. Kinda neat that we've got two actors out of the same extended family playing the lead roles on two different shows on the same network.


I didn't even know this show existed until now. But I liked it.

It's really odd how standard and formulatic the setup was - and how well it worked. Sure, it's another coming-of-age superhero show, one of many. But if it's good and entertaining, who the hell cares...


----------



## Flop (Dec 2, 2005)

I liked it. A bit formulaic in setup, but the execution was good. Although not extravagant, the special effects were done well too.


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

A bit heavy on the _Dawson Casting_.

And they audio cut "wet dream?" Interesting.

--Carlos V.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

Unbeliever said:


> A bit heavy on the _Dawson Casting_.


So generically Dawsony were the first two male characters, that I initially thought they were the same person. And when they first met and we saw the subway/underground for the second time, I thought maybe the premise of the show was going to be one person, with their 'tomorrow' actions overlapping the current days actions.



Unbeliever said:


> And they audio cut "wet dream?" Interesting.


Not only did they cut it, but they cut it so badly that they took out the background noise out with it. The brief moment of silence for the exact right amount of time practically screamed "WET".


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I had heard of the British series that this is based on but had never seen it.

I was originally going to give this a pass, afraid that this would be another CW teenage angst fest but it doesn't seem to have gone there yet.

Seeing that Greg Berlanti was involved and Mark Pellegrino was a regular changed my mind and I found the pilot interesting and want to see more.

I did smile a bit when Robbie Amell was wearing red and green hoodies.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

> I had heard of the British series that this is based on but had never seen it.


Well, it was on in the early 80s on Nickelodeon so it's not surprising that you missed it. I have to admit, as least in part, there were similarities between this pilot episode and the pilot episode of the original series--well as much as I remember it anyway.  I think the computer had a different name. I also recall that they could teleport short distances by themselves, but for longer distance teleportation, they needed some computerized assist for navigation. I seem to remember that they would get easily lost after a certain teleport "length".


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Pretty good. I'm in.

A bit too CWish for me, but since that's the network, I'll forgive it. 

That mole beneath the guy's lip is distracting. In a bad way.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I liked it enough that I'll keep watching. His decision at the end took it from "meh" to "okay, I'm in, for now," for me. I was glad to see Mark Pelligrino involved. Can Mark Sheppard be far behind?

It took me a few minutes to recall why I recognized his mom - Nina Myers, from 24.

I had an audio miss-sync that persisted through the episode, just on this one channel, that was just far enough off that it made it seem like everything was dubbed into English.

I was surprised at how bad some of the fight choreography was - on a large number of occasions it was very easy to see that the stage punches were nowhere near connecting. Normally shows are better at using camera angles that obfuscate more and make it appear that the hits are landing.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

danterner said:


> I was surprised at how bad some of the fight choreography was - on a large number of occasions it was very easy to see that the stage punches were nowhere near connecting. Normally shows are better at using camera angles that obfuscate more and make it appear that the hits are landing.


Probably complicated by the fact that in a lot of the shots the actors aren't on the same set (i.e., when they're teleporting in and out, and often throwing punches at the same time)...

Hopefully they'll work out the challenges of combining extensive CGI with fight scenes.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Had same audio problem here. I couldn't look at their faces when they were talking.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

fortunately audio was fine here. THAT would have driven me insane.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

danterner said:


> I had an audio miss-sync that persisted through the episode, just on this one channel, that was just far enough off that it made it seem like everything was dubbed into English.


There was also a closed-caption miss-sync. The words often appeared a couple seconds after the audio, which is really, really disconcerting for us faithful CC viewers. Wonder if it's related?


----------



## sean67854 (Jul 11, 2001)

I hope I don't start another which really came first argument, but did anyone else feel like it was a mashup of X-Men and the Matrix?

I group of mutants looking for "the one"?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

sean67854 said:


> I hope I don't start another which really came first argument, but did anyone else feel like it was a mashup of X-Men and the Matrix? I group of mutants looking for "the one"?


The whole way though, I kept thinking "poor-man's X-Men."


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

Church AV Guy said:


> Well, it was on in the early 80s on Nickelodeon so it's not surprising that you missed it.


Plenty of vintage Tomorrow People stuff out there on the internet...

But if you enjoyed watching Tomorrow People in the 80s, don't go searching out the old footage, since you'll probably be appalled by the bad acting and 1970s production values.


----------



## nyc13 (May 31, 2013)

kaszeta said:


> Plenty of vintage Tomorrow People stuff out there on the internet...
> 
> But if you enjoyed watching Tomorrow People in the 80s, don't go searching out the old footage, since you'll probably be appalled by the bad acting and 1970s production values.


I enjoyed watching it on Nickelodeon as a a kid and still managed to enjoy rewatching it a year or so ago. But I knew it was cheesy when I first watched it.


----------



## Marc (Jun 26, 1999)

Church AV Guy said:


> I think the computer had a different name. I also recall that they could teleport short distances by themselves, but for longer distance teleportation, they needed some computerized assist for navigation. I seem to remember that they would get easily lost after a certain teleport "length".


I'm pretty sure that the computer in the original series was also called Tim, but I think that it was an acronym then.

I seem to recall that the original series called their teleportation "jaunting", and I think they wore some computerized assistive device, like a belt or wristband, that helped them "jaunt".


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

I thought Mark Pellegrino was really over the top. It was almost like he forgot he was on a different show and was still playing Lucifer on Supernatural.

And what is it with Hollywood that they don't get that telekinesis is moving things with your mind? Apparently, TK doesn't work on screen without being accompanied by dramatic hand gestures.

Oh, and the Tomorrow People are genetically incapable of killing? How convenient ...


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Shakhari said:


> Oh, and the Tomorrow People are genetically incapable of killing? How convenient ...


I hope that the show explores that with different scenarios. Take, for example, the first Spider-Man movie, where the thug that kills Uncle Ben, having been cornered by Spider-Man, trips over a pipe and falls out the factory window to his death. If Peter Parker were a Tomorrow Person, what would have happened?

If Walter White were a Tomorrow Person, would the outcome for



Spoiler



Jane


 have been any different?

How about for


Spoiler



Gus


?

How directly do you have to be trying to kill the person? Can you intentionally, with malice aforethought, set up a Rube Goldberg device that results in their death, inevitably but indirectly?


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I've known about this show for a while and could have sworn I set my DVR to record it. Just checked and I'm not seeing it recorded. Off to usenet when I get home.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

danterner said:


> How directly do you have to be trying to kill the person? Can you intentionally, with malice aforethought, set up a Rube Goldberg device that results in their death, inevitably but indirectly?


Or inversely, if a Tomorrow Person sees a person that's about to die, does their genetics compel them to save that person? Ala the three laws of robotics?



Spoiler



(I guess that's the Jane scenario you mention in BB)



EDIT: Upon reflection, I don't think so. They're able to beat up and hurl people across the room. That could lead to a mortal injury. Intent must matter.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

What if you know the gun is loaded with blanks, and you're firing at a distance you know the person you're firing at won't be harmed in any way by anything ejected by the firing of the blank... but someone, completely unbeknownst to you, and when you thought there's no possible way anyone could have gotten access to the gun to do so, has replaced the blanks with real bullets...


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Hoffer said:


> I've known about this show for a while and could have sworn I set my DVR to record it. Just checked and I'm not seeing it recorded. Off to usenet when I get home.


repeats tomorrow


----------



## Flop (Dec 2, 2005)

Shakhari said:


> And what is it with Hollywood that they don't get that telekinesis is moving things with your mind? Apparently, TK doesn't work on screen without being accompanied by dramatic hand gestures.


I just roll with it and assume the hand gestures help them with their focus so they can do whatever it is they are trying to do.


----------



## Allanon (Nov 2, 2005)

sean67854 said:


> I hope I don't start another which really came first argument, but did anyone else feel like it was a mashup of X-Men and the Matrix?
> 
> I group of mutants looking for "the one"?


Felt more like Jumper or Push.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Allanon said:


> Felt more like Jumper or Push.


I think it's clearly drawing from certain common precepts in the genre, if not outright from several of the shows that have been mentioned. But then, it's certainly better that it draws from several in different ways than it being just a remake with no though about stories, characters or plot arcs, which is what too many new series are guilty of being.

Keep it interesting to the viewer. Develop the characters. Move the story along intelligently. Maintain some level of consistency within the Universe as its laid out for the show. Don't dumb it down, but simply allow some things to go over the heads of some viewers. And it'll do well.

And frankly Jumper, Push, X-Men and Matrix are certainly among some of the enjoyable top 10-20% of movies I've seen, too. So all in all, that's a pretty good pedigree.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

kaszeta said:


> Plenty of vintage Tomorrow People stuff out there on the internet...
> 
> But if you enjoyed watching Tomorrow People in the 80s, don't go searching out the old footage, since you'll probably be appalled by the bad acting and 1970s production values.


I was fully aware when I first watched it that the acting was abysmal and effects were laughable. It WAS a children's show after all, made without a budget to speak of, and it seemed that the child actors wrote it themselves.  I don't want to see the original again, but I definitely liked the pilot.


> I seem to recall that the original series called their teleportation "jaunting", and I think they wore some computerized assistive device, like a belt or wristband, that helped them "jaunt".


When I said computer assist, I MEANT assistive device. Thanks for the clarification. I recall it being a belt "pack" device. I seem to recall that they


Spoiler



had to put it on the Prime Minister when they kidnapped him (via teleportation). They needed to get some of their number released from custody which is why they kidnapped him.


 Wow! That's stretching the memory a bit.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

danterner said:


> The whole way though, I kept thinking "poor-man's X-Men."


That was Mutant X.



Flop said:


> I just roll with it and assume the hand gestures help them with their focus so they can do whatever it is they are trying to do.


Or they played a lot of Street Fighter.


----------



## whitson77 (Nov 10, 2002)

I thought this was a really good start to the series. Wife and I both in.


----------



## justen_m (Jan 15, 2004)

I was surprised. I loved it.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Just watched it. Great start.


----------



## ufo4sale (Apr 21, 2001)

If only this was real I might be slightly interested but either case great show?


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I enjoyed it enough to start a SP for it.


----------



## Marc (Jun 26, 1999)

Church AV Guy said:


> When I said computer assist, I MEANT assistive device.


Actually, I think we're both right. For some reason, I think that the device they wore somehow interfaced with TIM to help enable them to teleport better/further. Of course, that doesn't make much sense, but we're talking about a ~40 year old series.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

Marc said:


> Actually, I think we're both right. For some reason, I think that the device they wore somehow interfaced with TIM to help enable them to teleport better/further. Of course, that doesn't make much sense, but we're talking about a ~40 year old series.


Worse yet, I'm dealing with a memory that goes back to the early to mid 80s at best, so if I'm wrong, it's merely time and age.  I haven't seen those episodes since they were originally shown in the US. I do have fond memories for a show like that, with no budget, trying to tell a coherent story.


Spoiler



And it had aliens and space ships too!  .


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I liked it a lot more than I expected. I definitely didn't expect him to go to work for the "bad guys".

I had originally only set TiVo to record the pilot. SP set.

I think I watch more CW shows than the average 16 year old girl.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I watched the first episode yesterday and really enjoyed it. :up:


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I think I may have been a victim of increased expectations; after the reviews here I was looking for something much better than what it was. On the other hand, with only two tuners and this show on at 9pm Wed. and not repeating anymore after the first week, it doesn't look like I'll be watching anyway so I guess it's not a bad thing that it was "meh" for me .

I really can't stand all the "beautiful people in crisis" shows on CW and although this was better than some, it was too close for me.


----------



## Sromkie (Aug 15, 2002)

I really enjoyed it. Sure, it's a CW show full of beautiful young people, and we have a ton of those, but this is way more entertaining than the majority of the others.

As a couple of others have mentioned, I wasn't expecting the kid to go work for his uncle at the end. I'm really curious to see where that goes. What's his goal working for his uncle? Will he be actively trying to disrupt the operation, or is he mostly going to play along because at least he's not the one being hunted? I imagine that, if it's the latter, he'll be conflicted rather quickly. 

I'm also curious about that "DNA therapy" they were going to inject him with. Is it real, or would it kill him? I sincerely doubt they are just safely removing powers from people and then setting them free afterward.


----------



## Marc (Jun 26, 1999)

Sromkie said:


> I'm also curious about that "DNA therapy" they were going to inject him with. Is it real, or would it kill him? I sincerely doubt they are just safely removing powers from people and then setting them free afterward.


I think it was a real treatment. Jedikiah described himself as a biologist, right? Plus, if he'd wanted to kill Stephen, he probably would have just shot him like he did the other guy earlier in the episode.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

Huh, different tastes I suppose. I only managed to get a bit over half-way through the episode before getting bored and checking out. Maybe I should go back and try watching again, but I really wasn't grabbed by what I'd see so far...


----------



## brettatk (Oct 11, 2002)

dswallow said:


> The Tomorrow People was great. Kinda neat that we've got two actors out of the same extended family playing the lead roles on two different shows on the same network.


Ok, I give up. Who are the two actors and what is the other show?


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

I watched the Pilot and deleted my SP.

Not my thing...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

brettatk said:


> Ok, I give up. Who are the two actors and what is the other show?


The lead guy here is the cousin of Arrow/Ollie Queen.


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

I can't get CW here, and after the pilot, not sure it's worth the effort to watch until someone has Season 1 Blu-rays....


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Anyone still watching this show??

I only watched the first episode and the rest have built up. Just wondering if people are enjoying it. If it stinks, I might just delete it off my DVR.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I've seen all but the most recent episode. I'd say the quality level has remained pretty consistent. It's an okay show. Not my favorite of the new shows this season, but it's watchable.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I'm still watching. It's OK. I'm still in on a week-to-week basis. I figure it will get better or worse, and either way make my decision easier.


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

I gave up before last week's episode. Definitely peaked in the pilot.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

I've been enjoying it.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

Have not watched the latest (or maybe I don't remember if I did). In either case, that's not a good sign.


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

I watch it, except it isn't in HD here. That is annoying. I like it though.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

I like it too. It tends to be one of the shows that doesn't sit long.


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

I've kept up, and I'm still liking it.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

After binge-watching a number of episodes, I'm enjoying this show.

Cara's eyes are mesmerizing ... had to look up where I'd seen her before (she's Roger Sterling's young trophy wife on Mad Men).


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I'm 50-50 on dropping this show. I had four episodes backed up and binge watched over the Thanksgiving holiday weekend. I'll probably not make a decision until after the barren Christmas tv period. No big spoiler but I'll spoilerize it anyway:


Spoiler



The inevitable love triangle plot was a turn off. I knew it was coming. They've been telegraphing it since the show began.



This is another in a long line of tv shows that probably would work much better as a mini-series or limited run series.


----------



## whitson77 (Nov 10, 2002)

I still like it. I agree the love triangle where the girl has to choose between the two guys is so cliche and such a beatdown.


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

Since this post-pilot info has already been spoiled, I won't bother using spoiler tags.

I still like it too, but the triangle doesn't bother me. It's cliche only because it happens a lot in real life. One member of a couple feels a deep connection to someone else, and they have to decide what to do about it.

Of course it was telegraphed. The characters themselves explained why - they felt the connection form the very start.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

I believe the two guys should simply agree to co-date (tri-date?) with her.


----------



## sean67854 (Jul 11, 2001)

I'm still liking this show. It definitely has its "CW" moments but for the most part I think the story and acting are good. 

I continue to be really impressed by the teleporting effect but I can't exactly say why.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Why do these people let Russell do anything? He's a total screwup.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> Why do these people let Russell do anything? He's a total screwup.


He's great at what he does.

The problem is, they keep having him do stuff that he _doesn't_ do.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

I'm 3-4 episodes behind.

But reading this thread, I'm shocked, *shocked* I tell you! To discover this news of a love triangle between the two male and one female lead character in a CW show!


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

kdmorse said:


> But reading this thread, I'm shocked, *shocked* I tell you! To discover this news of a love triangle between the two male and one female lead character in a CW show!


Yep. 
That move drove it squarely into the "teenage angst" fest that the CW loooovvveesss soooooo muuuuuuccccchhhhhhh.

So are we going to have Team John and Team Steven factions?

That said, it hasn't killed the show for me.
Yet.


----------

