This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"I don't dance."
11945 members | you are not logged in | 22 October 2014




Tweet







February 16 2006

Drew Goddard signs two-year deal for Lost. Mutant Enemy's tallest writer will join the Lost staff as supervising producer this summer. And J.J. Abrams says Lost will be a better show with Drew on board. "Drew is a rare breed: a genre writer who crafts truly inspired characters and lyrical, emotional scenes".

Well J.J. I most certainly agree with you.
Lost is lucky to get him. That show needs all the help it can get.
Word. And here I was just about to give up on our survivors.
Why the Lost negativity?

That show is brilliant.
I been playing City of Heroes every weeknight I can, and have had the TV off for months. I really don't wanna have to start watching Lost again. Damn you, Goddard. What day is that series on again? And when does his writing start affecting the series again?

Maybe I'll just wait for the DVDs.
I think most people (including myself) are simply reacting to how SLOOOOOOOOWWW this show is moving. That was originally something I cherished about it, but patience has its limits. And I probably just didn't mind the slowness of the first season because I watched it on DVD. Getting only 42 minutes a week now of 15-page-long scripts is making me antsy.
Still, yes, brilliant.
I agree, UnpluggedCrazy. I don't understand all the naysaying that's turned up about this show in recent months. I don't think it's lost (pardon the pun) a step since it's premier... it's just in it's sophomore year, which means the shiny newness is wearing off and people have to start watching it because they love it, rather than because it's new and different.

Drew Goddard is probably the best writer ME had (outside of Joss himself, and even that is up for debate). Any show would be lucky to have him, and I'm grateful that it's Lost, which is already great and which I already watch obsessively, rather than some new show that I would have to shoehorn into my already crammed TV schedule.

[ edited by Haunt on 2006-02-16 18:14 ]
I thought it originated with a smart concept. Then it fell in love with its own cleverness, and decided it could do no wrong. Then came the disrespect to the viewers, then the convoluted mess, then the scrambling to recapture the original feel.

It is all subjective, but my opinion stands. Just tried to give it another go last night, didn't make it through ten minutes. I think "brilliant" is stretching it quite a bit. I also think it's a shame. In more competent hands, this show could've been legendary.
What "disrespect" is it that offends you? I can't think of any personal affronts the writers/producers/actors have made to the fans. Maybe I'm just more mild-mannered than some fans (and anyone who knows me would laugh in my face at that suggestion), but there's been nothing I can think of that has seemed to me to be disrespectful of the viewers.

I agree that there has been some convolution here and there, but can you really tell me you understand what stories are being told (and how well or poorly they are executed) by watching the first ten minutes of an episode and then turning it off?

Has being a Whedon fan taught us nothing, folks? First impressions are not always accurate.

But whatever, opinions are opinions. I can't change yours and you likely won't change mine. I, too, stand by my assertion that the show is just as good today as it was on Day One. This series is the same as any other in that it has good and bad eps, up and down periods (anything with Anna-Lucia is a down period for example). But I've yet to get impatient with Lost. I'm willing to let the story unfold as it will. I've yet to see any evidence that things are moving "too slowly". *shrug*
I know this. Last night's Sayid-centric episode was fantastic.

I don't have any problems with the pace. "Lost" is a show that's going to run for a while. They can't give you all the answers in the first season and a half, no matter how much you may want them.
"Why the Lost negativity?"

I love The Prisoner. To this day. Love it. It's maddening. It's frustrating. I love it. I love to hate it. Especially because the writers wrote themselves into a corner and towards the end of the british series just took way too many drugs and seemed to run low on resources. The sets looked like they were bought at garage sales and duct taped together. They apparently couldn't do many on location shots anymore. It started strong and then just petered out.

It appears to me as they move further inland, that LOST stated strong with beautiful landscapes of tropical islands but as the series progresses the sets are growing more and more indoors and "cost effective plotting" is setting in. And it's plainly obvious to me that although they have a direction - a point B that they're going to, everything leading up to it is a red herring. It's like the tv series The Fugitive. The only way to resolve that show was to find The One Armed Man. The only way to resolve the TV series Star Trek Voyager was to have them make it home. The only way to resolve LOST is to have the leads found. So you know the destination. Everything leading up to that is journey.

Comparatively, FIREFLY was not and IS not as cut and dried. There's no concrete point B to the series' point A. There's a lot more up in the air and more variables to explore. Actually, in essence Captain Reynolds is already at his destination. He already has what he wants. The goal of the series was watching him KEEP it. Keep Flying. Somehow that is just so much more interesting.

And it gets cancelled and LOST is still there.
I don't agree with the LOST hate, I still love it. Glad Drew is on board, hopefully he'll write a few eps as well, because his writing is brilliant.
ZachsMind made some excellent points, however one could argue that Simon and the crew's attempts to find out what happened to River and subsequently cure her (arguably "Firefly"'s primary dramatic thread) were a point-A-to-point-B-style storyline that you wouldn't want to wrap up too soon. (That is, unless your show was cancelled, and you had to cram it all into a two-hour spinoff movie.)
But the River thread was something that was going to be wrapped up at the end of Season 2, and Joss said he had wanted the show to run for a very long time after two seasons, so that mystery isn't the driving force of the series, and never was.

And I know they say Lost is "about the characters," but for all my other quibbles, you know, I just don't care about the Lost people. I never connected with them, and I felt manipulated with every flashback as it seemed the writers were trying to force me to care, instead of just letting it happen naturally.

And I watched the whole first season.
More than a year ago, I actually wrote a piece about "Lost" and the troubles it could eventually have trying to sustain all these mysteries without going the way of "The X-Files." I even commented on how Joss and company found the perfect way around any such problems. If anyone's interested...

[ edited by bobtaylor on 2006-02-16 19:04 ]
Add me to the list of people who still love Lost (though I watch Veronica Mars first and then watch taped Lost). I think it's actually better this season than last (though it does lack the David Fury touch - "Numbers" is still my favorite episode), and adding Drew as a regular writer means that the show could potentially get even better.
I'm lost with Lost, if you'll excuse the expression.

Occasionally it's great. There's some fantastic episodes in there. It looks very pretty.

However: it does unnerve me when I see the occasional producer quote going 'We know exactly where we're going with this!@'. Not so much.

And yes, Lost does have some production difficulities: for example, they've just significantly raised the main casts pay, without increasing the budget (as far as I know) - so yes, you'll see some cheap locations and such.

That said, it's not exactly bad TV. It's good drama, I'd say, for the most part. The problem I have with it, really, is that half the time I find myself just not bothering to watch it. I've never quite figured out the cause of that.
I managed to go from vague interest to verging-on-serious-dislike to becoming completely hooked during the first season. However, I think I do get the points that Willowy made earlier on in this thread and there is a very valid argument for becoming disillusioned with the show. Even after I had become hooked there were still some major aspects of it that I struggled with - and I often found it incredibly annoying.

I have noticed that I feel in no particular rush to see the second season. I believe it arrives over here in Britain sometime in the Spring but I feel no sense of anticipation. I haven't really thought about it at all. In the meantime, I've found a couple of other shows I enjoy watching just as much. Probably more so, in fact. Having said that, I know it has a huge fanbase and I hope it goes on and people continue to like it.

The nearest thing I can get to a feeling of anticipation on TV at the moment is the prospect of the next season of 'Dr Who'. I tend to get more excited about forthcoming films than TV shows, to be honest.
Lost is a brilliant, brilliant show.
Haunt, I watched the entire first season and a few eps into the second. I still may tune in from time to time if nothing else is on, but that's rare. My point is, it wasn't 'first impressions' that made me tune out. It was disappointment and annoyance.

I felt disrespected as a viewer as soon as they started with all the red herrings that wouldn't stop. Then the cutesy posts from the writers over on the Fuselage, telling us that 'everything' meant something! Then taking that back later on. The myriad pre-emptions, long gaps in between episodes, re-hash of old eps (saying they were "giving us another chance to catch it all!" when all they were doing was saving money), etc...etc...etc.... I know different factions are responsible for each of these complaints I listed, but all I know is, I felt manipulated and it irked me. I don't like to be irritated by entertainment.

Some viewers like being jerked around like that, I guess. My best friend calls it a ''challenge'' to be a Lost fan, and she's not giving in, but I'd rather have what Joss brought to my tv (and to my mind and heart), any day of the week.

His shows are nothing like Lost.
I still watch Lost but I feel as Willowy does. The red herrings, the long long long wait for answers that may never come is getting seriously annoying. And I'm losing interest in the characters - never a good sign.
But the Prisoner! Even at it's worse, it was fascinating TV. I'd love to see it again. It's been probably 20 years or more.
Hmmm. Patrick McGoohan.
Still, Drew Goddard! Good news!
Just to add, it was the Lost S1 finale that did me in. The second part. This extended finale where nothing happened. The guy you knew was going to die, died, Hurley made a funny, and the rest was carefully carrying back sticks of dynamite to the hatch, that could dramatically blow up at any wrong move, except you knew, none of those four characters was going to die. So there was no tension whatsoever.

And the Walt kidnapping/baby diversion happened all in like, the last five minutes.

I wasn't mad that they didn't show the inside of the hatch, I was mad that they made me sit through a bloated episode packed with cheap filler and only a handful of actual story development.

[ edited by pat32082 on 2006-02-16 20:33 ]
I hope Drew spoke with David Fury before accepting the contract. He left the show for a reason and those reasons tie into some of the complaints being voiced about the show.
I second the missing David Fury this season on Lost -- so adding Drew Goddard, on whom I have a major crush? Shoot. Now I have to totally care about this show again.

In other words: yay.
I never really watched Lost for it's major island story, which often feels directionless with periodic periods of interest. To me the show was always about how these people reacted to each other in their situation, and how it corresponds to their own tortured pasts.

With that said, Lost is sometimes a very lazy show. It's formula (flashback, island mystery, how island mystery/character development ties into past) is becoming more and more tired with the writers unwilling to make major changes in most of their main characters (the only character I think who has drasticly changed is Charlie, and that was because of plot machinations rather tahn any real character growth.)

With that said, it's still at times a fairly solid show, a good half of the episodes this season have been great to excellent, with the other half feeling a bit tired and drawn out. The island mystery isn't going to be answered any time soon, but they have given far more information this year than last. Sometimes the shows really work, sometimes they don't. Is Lost the great show it sometimes promised to be?... no... but it is far better than most stuff on television.

Only Veronica Mars and Battlestar Galactica are better right now imo.
Killinj, how do you know David Fury's reasons for leaving? I've never seen him comment on them. Do you have a link?

[ edited by rabid on 2006-02-16 19:54 ]
I could've written what you just did, pat32082, (except I didn't). Still, I watch that darn show for some inexplicable reason. Looking forward to what Drew will bring to the mix.
Have to smile. It’s turning a little bit into the IMDb user comments section around here. ‘This is the bestest film ever made’, ‘This is the worst movie I have ever seen’.

Just like being at home. My husband loves Lost, I can’t stand it. It just bores the socks off me. I have tried and tried to watch it (well, I mostly have no choice in the matter) but 10 minutes into an episode I have to start reading something I get so fidgety. It’s a great concept but the execution is predictable, repetitive and I couldn’t care less about any of the characters. I also totally agree with pat32082 about feeling the show is trying to manipulate me into liking these people. There is something weird about this show that I just can’t put my finger on in the sense that I feel it just skips around on the surface in a really annoyingly shallow way.

Well, we all have different tastes, so if you like it, good for you and good for Drew obviously, as it is very successful.
Willowy seems to be confusing the Network (ABC) with the producer/writers. The producers and writers are trying to tell a story about these characters. But the network is "disrespecting" the audience by showing re-runs and re-caps and creating long gaps between new episodes. The creators of the show have no say about when a re-run or re-cap is done vs. the episodes they want to produce. Personally, I am very attached to and interested in all the characters (except Ana Lucia) and very much enjoy the unfolding of their stories. I also love the metaphors abounding in the events or discoveries about the island, and have used them to describe things that happen in every day life - such as "Tell me again why I have to push this button?" (those of you who have seen season 2 episodes 1 and 2 know what I am referring to). I am therefore very glad Drew will be on board.
Say what you like about Lost. They produced the best fan video ever (and if you haven't season 2 yet stay away).
I still watch Lost but I feel as Willowy does. The red herrings, the long long long wait for answers that may never come is getting seriously annoying. And I'm losing interest in the characters - never a good sign.


Yep, the same for me.


But the Prisoner! Even at it's worse, it was fascinating TV. I'd love to see it again. It's been probably 20 years or more.


I'm beginning to see comparisons between Lost and The Prisoner; there are reasons to (both shows have a "something's hidden, something's incomprehensible" feel). However, there's one HUGE difference between them: The Prisoner only had 16 or so episodes; they understood that the series ambiance was a hit but only could stay so by being really short. I've heard that at least 5 seasons of Lost are scheduled... 5 seasons of "something's hidden, something's incomprehensible" is NOT a good idea...
angel fan, I did mention that I realized that different factions were responsible for each of the annoyances that I listed. So I'm not confused, just irritated by the whole thing.
Here's the thing about LOST. I find I'm amused at the notion that all this stuff ties together and that J.J. Abrams has some kind of master plan and has it all figured out. So it turns out I don't take it all that seriously. I take a mental step back, watch it with a grin on my face, and wonder how and if they're going to pull it together.

So even if it doesn't come together the premise and the "stuff" are intriguing enough to keep me watching. Also I like the characters and the actors, especially Sayid/Naveen Andrews.

However I don't think it can sustain more than 5 seasons. I think by then if it has made much progress, even I will be annoyed by it.

Bottom line: while I like ALIAS and LOST, J.J. Abrams is no Joss Whedon.

But that's just my opinion.
Oh yeah, and way to go Drew! I wish you much success.
I thought it originated with a smart concept. Then it fell in love with its own cleverness, and decided it could do no wrong. Then came the disrespect to the viewers, then the convoluted mess


Bingo. It's like an 80s teen movie where the quirky, geeky kid suddenly becomes popular, then turns into a boring, self-obsessed d*ck.

What bothers me even more than Kate's painfully stupid backstory, the rampant overacting, the terrible dialogue, the fact that the writers seem to be making it up as they go along, and a second season in which A)nothing ever happens and B)the worst hour of TV that I've watched in years appears ('The Other 48 Days'), is the fact that I don't care a drop for any of the characters. They are nothing but props used to move the plot (and I do mean plot, not story) forward. I used to at least find Locke, Sayid, and Hurley interesting, but they've all just become charicatures of themselves, and I loathe Sawyer even though I'm apparently supposed to love him. And that's all the emotion I can muster about the cast. You could insert paper dolls in their place to recite their lines in monotone and get the same effect. I just don't care, and clever or not, if it's not there on the character level, it's not worth watching to me.
Little known fact about Drew Goddard. He gave Mark Millar some Buffy DVDs to watch.
Simon, that's my favourite Whedonesque link for 2006 so far.
"...however one could argue that Simon and the crew's attempts to find out what happened to River and subsequently cure her..."

Goodness gracious no! Absolutely not! You know what Simon and River were? Afterthoughts. If you listen to Whedon's commentary and interviews it's pretty clear that originally the series was to have four or five main characters and then as he progressed he realized "Millenium Falcon? Good. Stagecoach? Better" and that's what led to a cast increase from four to nine.

Originally he had as his core the required roles for the series: captain, pilot, engineer, and then the captain's right hand man would be necessary. Whether that was an early incarnation of Jayne or Zoe is perhaps one of Whedon's little secrets (George Lucas has said Luke's family name wasn't always Skywalker. I think it was orignally something even dumber like Starkiller or whatever. Some secrets are best left that way).

I imagine that the characters like Shepherd Book and Inara Sera were originally conceived more as semi-regular characters that our core would interract with. They didn't inhabit the ship every episode but our core characters would interact with them on a semi-regular basis. As Whedon expanded the scope of his regulars due to requisite story telling capacity, Book and Sera became more integral core components.

Simon and River though. That's more complicated. In a tv western like Bonanza several decades ago, characters such as these would be a one shot. They'd be introduced into the lives of our regulars for one episode, upset the apple cart as it were, and then by episode's end they'd go on their way either by death or just ride off into the sunset never to be seen again. Whedon took Simon & River, who could have just been the plot complication for the series opener, and rather than resolve their story by death or sunset, he had his core characters (particularly MAL himself) choose to keep them on board. That turned them into a potential season one plot arc that would be resolved when River and Simon's own internal arcs were resolved. With the end of the movie, they could have been expendable if not for two things: Simon is their medic and over the course of the first season has built by character action (not by initial design) a niche making him indispensable, and with Wash's abscence River has become the pilot. NOW they're both integral. They belong. That's not how they started out. Again, Whedon takes predictable plot elements used in television since before the days of the Dick Van Dyke Show, and Whedon turns them on their head, creating something entirely new.

However, don't for a minute think that the resolution of the TAM storyline resolves the series. It only resolves the first season or two. The REAL resolution of the series would have been MAL facing the fact that he doesn't have to literally keep flying in order to 'continue.' In other words, he would have eventually settled down. THAT would have ended the series. Just as Buffy not being alone with her burden anymore as THE vampire slayer, or Angel finding true (human) immortality in his son, ended those series plot arcs.

We would have watched Mal face his greatest fear of staying in one place and getting old. Mal's greatest fear is Living Happily Ever After. That's your series arc. Mal runs from safe. He has no trust in safe. Safe leads to stagnation which leads to immobility which leads to frailty and weakness and he can't abide any of that. He runs when he oughtta fight. Fights when he oughtta deal. He swings from his shoulder because it feels stronger. Why is that? It's because he runs from safe.

It would have taken at least seven seasons to watch him get to a point where he didn't have to keep running and fighting, and it woulda been a hell of a ride.
Okay....much better than what I said. lol.
Killinj, how do you know David Fury's reasons for leaving? I've never seen him comment on them. Do you have a link?

He said something about it in an interview or online posting - pretty sure I read it from a link on Whedonesque. I don't have the actual link handy.
I thought Lost was hitting a lull for a while, but I think the past couple of weeks it's picking back up. The Sawyer episode was excellent. As was the Ecko one. But lately Jack and Locke are blah. Kate is super blah. I always love Hurley, but he really is just the funny fat guy lately. And I don't care what anyone says about Ana Lucia, I'll watch Michelle Rodriguez anytime she's on the screen, though I like her better in Girlfight than in Lost. I definitely love Veronica Mars more (though it's been losing steam, too). So my priorities in that time slot are (1) VM, (2) Lost, (3) Bones.
Back to LOST, I agree with what pat32082 said earlier. It was the season two opener that did me in. The question of the summer was what's in the hatch, and the producers led us by a carrot stick and didn't deliver, and THEN when the DID deliver it was for suck. Like biting into a chocolate candy and getting a crunchy frog. Bleargh.

I'll tell you what I really hate about LOST though: the Kung-Fu exposition approach to storytelling. You got present time and then you got flashbacks. Two plots going simultaneously in the mind of the viewer. This is OKAY once in awhile, but you do it every episode it becomes formulaic and emotionally predictable. It's being done to pull on the heartstrings of the viewer. It's deliberate manipulation of the audience and it makes my stomach churn.

Compare that to the usage of flashbacks in Firefly and Serenity (Out of Gas, Safe, The Message). Flashbacks are best used as spices to accentuate how the meal is prepared and served -- not the main course! Not EVERY week! You do that, you're doing Kung Fu, a TV series that cannot be outdone, so don't try. Okay, time's not been good to Kung Fu but for its time it was awesome, and it utilized the present/past plot device to death. It did it successfully. Anyone trying to do that since sucks. Incl. Lost.

It's tracing Disney to draw Thumper. You know what I mean, Vern?
I'm glad to hear that Drew is moving into yet another excellent job. From Buffy to Angel to Alias to Lost, that is one incredibly impressive record, and one he richly deserves. Good luck Drew!

I have only seen as far as the first couple of episodes of season two Lost (I'm getting so tired of having to point out where I am because we are so far behind the US, unfortunately) but I didn't feel the first season moved too slowly. Definitely certain storylines were developed at different paces but the show itself wasn't too slow, there was always some new development in the plot or characters whether in the Lost present or in flashback.

In fact I think the show's ability to withhold its secrets is one of its strengths and something that will keep the audience watching. I have seen the first five or so episodes of Invasion, and it moves very slowly, but I have really enjoyed it so far. There's so much more suspense and ambiguity than simply having the first episode confirm that aliens have landed and point out who has become one, and then basing the rest of the series around shooting aliens.

I think a lot of shows lack this kind of patient storytelling. In one of my posts the other day about Tim Minear's show Drive I expressed concern at how long some of these new shows can potentially survive.

I have been unlucky enough to have seen The OC way too many times, and I don't understand how much longer it can go on. The first season had an unimaginable amount of revelations, betrayals, fights, secret affairs, then the second season had to up the ante by introducing unconvincing lesbianism, marital strife between two of the lead characters, alcoholism, a major death and a shooting, and frankly I don't see how the show can sustain itself much longer.

The first few episodes I ever saw were actually quite promising, and luckily it isn't entirely trashy and disposable, but the number of plots dealt with in such short spaces of time mean it will probably burn out very soon, or be forced to reuse plots with different characters. Already every episode seems to have some sort of formal party and one of the main characters threatening (usually unsuccessfully) to leave.
I f'ing LOVE Goddard. Seriously. This is really good news.
Simon, you're absolutely right about that video. I've got it on my iPod and watch it at least twice a day.
I don't enjoy the show nearly as much as I enojoyed it the first season. This season has had a few episodes that made me excited again but most of them, last night's included make me want to change the channel.

It's starting to feel similar to the X-Files, (A show I stopped watching I should add) too much tease without any payoff. The problem becomes that if you are going to tease us for 5 seasons than the reward better be worth 5 seasons with of tease... and quite frankly I don't think there's any thing that can be.

I mean after waiting that damn long to see what was in the hatch I was rather underwhelmed.
ZachsMind, I find your concern with Lost's "formulaic" use of flashbacks intriguing. To borrow your comparison, if Firefly used flashbacks the way Lost does, that would be tiresome because that's not the kind of show Firefly was. It was the kind of show that used the "formula" of a hardscrabble band of outcasts and outlaws flitting about on a spaceship. Think about it... every episode there was that ol' "formula" of goodguys on a ship, they get into some kind of trouble, get OUT of some kind of trouble, fly away on that darned ship. That's not formulaic because that's the show you originally tuned in to see.

Lost has used flashbacks since it's first episode to gradually fill in the blanks and lead us to understand who these people are and how/why they came to be... wherever it is that they actually are right now. There were flashbacks in basically every episode... because that's what the show does. That's it's "formula". Seems odd to me to expect anything different at this point in the game.

But I'm done talking about it. Somehow I've managed to reconcile my LOVE of Joss Whedon (even with all of his many flaws) with my LOVE of Lost (even with all of IT'S many flaws)... and that's all the matters to me.
I'm one of those who is hanging on with Lost but really trying to figure out why. I have watched every episode so far, but if I missed a couple now, I wouldn't regret it. I'm bored to tears with episodes that focus upon Kate or Jack, and if they killed off Ana Lucia, I would cheer. Locke isn't even Locke anymore. But all the red herrings just grate now. And when JJ said they never plan to offer an explanation for the numbers, I really felt manipulated as a viewer.

killinj is correct. There was a link from Whedonesque some time back to an interview with Fury in which he indicated, if my memory is correct, some disagreement with the pacing of the mystery resolutions or with the idea that some of them were deliberately dropped. I don't remember enough about the interview otherwise to be able to call up the link again.

But I must say that Drew Goddard is bound to help, and I wish him well.
This is excellent news! I now have a reason to watch Lost again. I've hardly been able to justify watchin the show since Fury left. It just hasn't been the same. It needs that ME blood in there. But Drew's ep, "Outlaws", still stands as one of the few great episodes of the second half last year. I can't wait to see what he'll get to do with the show now. A two year contract. And a lovely little article all to himself. I so happy for him! Now, maybe he can help give Lost some purpose...
Most shows follow some kind of formula..

Lost: Relating previous life experiences to how the characters react on the island. Going into the past and looking into the island experience to see who these characters really are.

Firefly: Going to different worlds, putting characters in challenging situations to find out who these people really are. Plus, space ships and space hookers.

Yada. I think the real problem is that there's an awful lot of people on Lost - but I don't really care about any of them. With such a large cast, they could really afford to kill a few off.

[ edited by gossi on 2006-02-16 21:32 ]
The formula of Firefly fit the premise. The premise of Lost is that of a bunch of plane crash survivors trying to live on an island -- what do all these flashbacks have to do with that premise? Nothing.
The problem isn't the forumula, it's when you notice that the formula is there. Another way to soften the blow of a noticable formula is to poke fun at it. Joss' (is his name like Moses or Jesus?) shows do that, and I'm thankful because it helps us laugh at the plot devices while still allowing us to care about the people.

I remember a thread on this site about cliffhangers, and at the time I said that I liked how Buffy & Angel didn't use them as much as shows like Alias. However upon more careful inspection, I found that cliffhangers were more prevalent on Buffy & Angel than I had thought, the only difference was that on Buffy & Angel, the damn things actually worked on me! I would plead to the television to give me more. With Alias, for example, I would see the cliffhanger and recognize the device for what it was.

[ edited by Caleb on 2006-02-16 21:46 ]
Caleb, the poking fun at it is I think what Fury brought to Lost. So Drewness? Bound to help.
"...The premise of Lost is that of a bunch of plane crash survivors trying to live on an island -- what do all these flashbacks have to do with that premise? Nothing.

That's no more the premise of Lost than "Fugitives try to earn money while avoiding the authorities" is the REAL premise of Firefly.

Subtext.

Metaphor.

Beneath the surface.

Between the lines.
I think the characters in LOST all had there share of skeleton's in their respective closets. The island acts of a catalyst to bring their problems forward. Also, it seems like the only place a bunch of people who don't belong in their own societies finally have a place. Plane crash survivors trying to live on an island doesn't begin to scratch the surface of what this show it about.
yay thats good for Drew!
The words that I used after "The Long Con"(known as, not only the worst episode of Lost ever, but one of my least episdoes of television that has ever been in front of my eyes)...where was I...oh right...the words that I used were:

DIRESPECTFUL TO FANS

Everyone I talked to about the show didn't really understand what I meant. Yes, Lost is absolutely disrespectful to its fans.

HERE'S WHY!

Lost is going to be successful no matter what they do. NO MATTER WHAT. It is the biggest cult show since X-Files (publicly big, commercially big) but has more of an ensemble so it is easier to get into. The dudes over at Lost know that they have struck gold. Abrams has said that he wants the show to run for five years....cuz I mean...how long can we keep people on an island?

The response...as long as we fucking want. This season started out intriguing and has gotten AWFUL. "The Long Con" was so bad that I was laughing. I felt so sad for that next week because I was mourning the death of Lost.

It WAS a great show. I used to LOVE these characters. Jack got annoying. Locke got...nothing. Ana Lucia SUCKS. Sawyer was okay...but now I hate him too...not because of the specific things he has done but because of his usage of the phrases "Tokyo Rose" and "Cowboys and Indians" in the same sentence. Sawyer is the whacky guy who talks in awkward, AWKWARD references. I've always disliked Kate. They made us hate Charlie...Michael.nothing special. Hurley's episode this year was utterly pointless and Sayid has been M.I.A. The only character I truly love is Mr. Fucking Eko. That guy is epic. EPIC.

They are disrepectful to fans because they are not giving us quality entertainment. They are being unloyal to the their characters and I no longer get the chills that I used to get from the first season.

Alias peaked mid second season and got awful after that. I think that Abrams has proved a second time around that he cannot sustain a good show for more than 1 season. Maybe he should stick to movies...except his dialogue isn't that good. Actually I hate his dialogue. He has a cool mind tho. Like George Lucas. Can't put words in peoples mouths tho.

I HOPE THAT I AM PROVEN WRONG!

p.s. last night's sayid episode was pretty good. Not great. But pretty good. It gave me a shred of hope but I was waiting for the moment when they cheated us of the excitement that has been in the previews...and I wasn't at all surprised when they did cheat us.

DISRESPECTFUL
Hmm... well at least you've got a "rational" explanation for your hatred of the show.

Whatever.
Wow. What a fabulous show to drive so much passion from its fans.

I thought The Long Con was by far the best episode this season.
After the episode "One of Them", I'm convinced they have no clue what to do with the McGuffin corner they've painted themselves in and can't even write a decent story around the characters they have. All they are doing is stalling for time, hoping to God that a bright idea unties the show from the tracks before the audience train comes around.

1. Ana Lucia gives Sayid the infodump. Haven't we been waiting for these two to ante up? Character development through conflict resolution: Zero.

2. The French Lady hands Sayid a torture victim. Anybody here been waiting for "Delenn" to reappear and throw us a crumb since last season? Information gained from 16 year veteran of the island: None.

3. Balloon Boy gets shot to enable Hatch location. What were we all watching for if not the chance to watch an expert get an "Other" to finally talk? Plot gained by moving torture encounter to the Hatch: Zip.

4. Sawyer gets deprotagonized using the noisy frog gag. Don't you love it when a character dumps previous history to turn heel for ratings, followed up by the goofball sucker punch? Plot gained from negation of continuity: None.

5. An encounter devoted entirely to Hurley being fat. Because lord knows that is the singularly defining thing about him, not his adult qualities of compassion, sharing or humility. Character development between a guy everybody likes and a guy nobody likes (premise? premise anyone??): Zilch.

6. A big budget recreation of the first Gulf War for a flashback. Anybody really need a retcon showing how Sayid was *not* at fault for becoming a torturer? Character development through the absolution of responsibility for loathsome past: None.

7. Extended torture scene intended to work out Sayid's anger over Shannon's death. I repeat: What were we all watching for if not the chance to watch an expert get an "Other" to finally talk? Character development through moral conflict resolution (should I? shouldn't I?): Nope.

8. Flogging the old Locke-Jack philosophical horse. How many people are bored-beyond-belief waiting for a fight to the death? Character development through conflict resolution: Forget it.

9. The timer counts down past zero to hieroglyphs while the warp drive nearly fires. Anybody here wishing they would stop counting down by fractions and get on with it? Information on one of the Island McGuffins revealed: Not even light can escape.

10. Post-coital rumination on the semantics of the phrase "the Others". What is this, the reinactment of a He-Man platitude? Plot development served by having everyone mumble a writer infodump intended to cover their backsides if they decide to make "the Others" a bunch of ordinary rubes: Zilch.

11. Sawyer crushes a frog to show how "mean" he is. A "complicated guy" who can't kill a boar when it stands for something he hates and gives a pregnant girl her wallet back for no reward crushes a frog with his bare hands out of the blue. Character development through the random application of cruelty: None.

To summarize, nothing happened this episode.

No new knowledge was gained, no consequences were endured, and nobody experienced any kind of development.

That's because the writers are terrified.

They have run out of room to do anything but tell the truth: They have NOTHING.
Sawyer was okay...but now I hate him too...not because of the specific things he has done but because of his usage of the phrases "Tokyo Rose" and "Cowboys and Indians" in the same sentence.

Okay, hang on, you hate a character for one or two whacky saying? River is doomed!

Truth is, I think some people are coming down on Lost too hard. I don't think the writers are completely clueless - I do think, however, they face an uphill struggle. Lost is - to steal a phrase from a Buffistas poster - a train wreck heading into a mountain, I suspect. After about 4 series of The X-Files, most of the fanatical fandom people disappeared - they lost interest. 'Lost' very much has this problem. A show with a very, very distinct formula is limited, and so risks becoming boring. Something like 'Angel' reinvented itself pretty much every year - but Lost literally can't do that. Trainwreck. Mountain. It's not entirely the staff writers fault - or problem - though.

Two years on Lost will be a very good thing for Drew, and for the Lost fandom.

[ edited by gossi on 2006-02-16 22:22 ]
Well, you've convinced me. I know I said that opinions are opinions and that none of us is ever going to be able to change anyone else's like/dislike opinions just by debating it here... but I was wrong. I've seen the light. Lost truly is a pathetic, simpering, desperate, utterly-not-as-cool-as-the-kleenex-in-Joss'-garbage waste of a show. How could I have been so naive? There are so many hours of my life that I'll never get back... hours when I THOUGHT I was being entertained by watching complicated and metaphor-riddled character interactions... hours when I THOUGHT I was actually enjoying myself. But now, thanks to the passionate debate here I have learned that really I've just been "used" and "disrespected".

I weep for all the wasted time of my life I'll never get back. There were so many other things, more important, life-affirming things I could have done with that hour a week I've pissed away on this horrible, poorly written, poorly executed, lying, teasing, pointless series. I could have been waxing my back... or chewing tin foil... or making cottage cheese sculptures... or researching the mating habits of the banana slug...

But instead, I've been watching (and only THINKING I've been enjoying) that horribly overrated tripe Lost.

Damn.

Now I need to watch hours and hours of meaningful, enlightening reality television to counterbalance all those braincells I wasted on such a low-brow show.



(Or what gossi said up above... I like that better.)

[ edited by Haunt on 2006-02-16 22:26 ]
Mmm.. Drew Goddard.

He's tall.

Lucky LOST folk. Getting such a towering example of dreamy god-like writerly genius onboard their little show.

(Bet that two year deal includes a "do-not-stand-too-close-to-the-hobbit" clause, though..)
Haunt YIS,

The difference in Lost to Firefly in terms of 'formulaic' is that what you call formula for Firefly is the description of the series itself. What I call formula for Lost is the MECHANICS of how the story is presented.

Out Of Gas is an example of mechanics. That wasn't one flashback but several slotted through THREE different temporal zones: distant past, 24 hours ago, and "now." This is not formulaic. This is creative storytelling.

Now, if Mutant Enemy did this same thing EVERY week, telling a story in three parts through flashbacks, THAT would be formulaic.

Lost does the same thing every week. You got one plotline going in the now, and another plotline, focusing on a single character of the main cast, running in the past tense. This is the predictable mechanics of storytelling. It's like starting a fairytale with "Once Upon A Time" and ending it with "Happily Ever After." It's formula.
Finally someone else calls her Delenn!

I want Rosseau's death to involve having and awkward chunk of bone imbedded in her middle skull region.

I like the way you think, sir. Splendid review.


And to the person who said the Long Con was the best episode of the season....Please back that up with your thoughts. I want to know what is on your mind. What was on my mind was Hurley's simple lime in the coconut joke. Ick. Sawyer telling the woman he loved her...and the moment where he said "You were the Long Con!" was the biggest bag of cheetos ever ever ever EVER!!!! Dangerously cheesy. And Sawyer's flipping over the picture: unforgivable. Also his calling the girl "dimples". (stick index finger in just past lips with tongue sticking out in a downward position and makes over yucky puke noise).


I agree inzombia. The writers are shaking in their NOT stylish and NOT affordable boots.

Things that will be explained shittily if at all:

-The Numbers
-The Others
-The Dharma Iniative
-The Connection of all the passengers
-Why nobody ever asks any questions when they have the chance to
-Why the show is getting so boring and bad

Remeber in "Underneath" when Lindsey explained everything but it wasn't that much....and I personally felt kinda cheated but not TOO cheated because it made a good amount of sense with the plot. Lost won't do that.

And we aren't trolls cuz this is a Joss site. BOOYA.

And I feel like trolls don't know what or why they are saying things...I know this show...I used to love this show...I have earned the right to share sadness.
Fair enough, ZachsMind. I do, in fact, understand all of that... I just didn't express myself very well. Point goes to you this round.

But I maintain that what you refer to as Lost's "formula" is less annoying than you suggest because it has been present since the very first episode. To the best of my recollection, not a single episode has done anything other than follow the flashback formula you reference, meaning that at the very least it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone tuning in to the show at this point.

Furthermore, it is a storytelling style deliberately chosen to fit the format of the story being told... meaning the show (despite some fans' misconceptions) is about the past lives of these various characters and how those lives may have lead them to be WHEREVER it is that they are now. You can't really tell a story about the past lives of some 30-odd characters without falling back on the "formula" of flashback.

Since it's proven by this point that Lost has every intention of sticking with it's "formula", shouldn't those confused or annoyed by said formula just stop watching?

Just a thought...
"And we aren't trolls cuz this is a Joss site. BOOYA."

Very mature, to be certain. But did someone actually CALL you a troll and I just missed it? Or are you simply so used to getting that response that you decided to head it off at the pass?

(To quote someone famous... "Your logic is insane and happenstance, like that of a troll.")

[ edited by Haunt on 2006-02-16 22:43 ]
Dear Haunt,

I'm sorry if I have personally offended you on some level. This was not my intent. No one said anything about trolling but I felt like it was possibly going to be mentioned at some point because there was negativity towards something. I don't know if I deserve this somewhat direct negativity that seems to be sent in my direction. However, I shant just sit by and not share my thoughts about a show that gave me some comfort the year that Angel was first absent from my life when it starts to get what I will call starting now "The Grrrrr Factor". The thing that makes one go...goddammit, again nothing occurred.

And having words said to me that were once said to my belovedest Anya (who i just got a letter printed about in buffy magazine!teehee).....I take it as a compliment.


and dear gossi, Sawyer ain't River. He isn't technically crazy and whacky of the brain thing. Unless he actually is....it explains everything.
Wow, the amount of responses here, Joss is totally going to view this topic. Hi, Joss. I stole your underwear, and watched Lost in it. Oh, take the keyboard away and lock me in the cupboard, master.

Seriously, though: I think there's a good few years left in Lost which will no doubt have some fantastic episodes and twists. And if people are bored of the actual formula of the show: it probably is time to stop watching. That won't change. Me? I'll dip in and out. I'm not in love with this show, it's just not the kind of execution I find appealing.

I don't think the writers are going out of their way to be disrepectful to the viewers. I do think they have longer term issues, but hey: enjoy the ride whilst it lasts, both for uber fans and for the staff. Nothing lasts forever. Except Homer.
Passion about stuff is great. Passionate discussion is great.

This:

we aren't trolls cuz this is a Joss site. BOOYA


is not great. It's baiting, not discussion. This thread mostly has been conducted in a reasonable, albeit passionate, way. But if members find the whole subject too upsetting to discuss respectfully, I'd recommend disengaging for a while. Thanks.
I'd still rather watch Lost than... all together now... Most of the other crap that's on t.v. these days.

[ edited by Fitz on 2006-02-16 23:51 ]
yo, sorry. didn't mean to upset. it was all in the light of heart. i mean the word "booya" was used. i thought that implied my jokeyness.
Hey Dolphin Tamer (curious about that name, by the way), you haven't personally offended me. Not exactly. I responded to what I thought was your out-of-the-gate WILDLY passionate negativity. Again, unless I missed something, it seemed to me your very first post on the subject came off sounding like you'd been having a back-and-forth debate for hours with me/us. And your baiting remarks about trolls and such seemed to invite a personal response.

It's odd that everyone here shares at least ONE passion (presumably Joss Whedon... although that passion brings with it a myriad of individual sub-passions, all of which stir up equally passionate debate), and yet still manage to watch the same show and see so many completely and utterly DIFFERENT things.

Joss would be proud, I'm sure.
The first season of Lost was so good that it was clear it would be difficult to top that, but they could at least have continued on a high level. The show has everything: stories to tell, a good budget and a great cast. I do like the formula of Lost, but the writing has been going downhill all season. While the violence level has become equal to that of 24 these days the writing on 24 has much improved and certainly Mr. Fury had something to do with that.
TV is something I'm passionate about cuz...well...it's where I wanna go eventually. Workwise. I mean I am still a youngen...well sorta. When Angel was cancelled I was all, "Fuck!" for many reasons as I am sure we all were. The main being that I lost hope that TV could tell good stories and by the time that I try to get my brain on the train that they won't tell stories that I'd be passionate enough to tell.

When Lost came out...I felt like I had been given some kind of gift. I was like...."Yes..." I even wrote a paper on it! (ooooooooo) For weeks upon weeks I have been trying to defend Lost to my friends who have been like..."Dude, it's bad now. That Charilie ep sucked." And I'm like, "No, it didn't! It was good episode within itself...just nothing happened. If we watched the season on DVD it would feel natural!" But part of me felt like I was doing a bit of fibbin' (lyin' but classier).

A person I know said something about "The cheesy dialogue of Lost" and I was like "Hey! No! Don't be doin that!" But after Sawyer's the Long Con...I felt like Lost itself was becoming...ahem....a Long Con. Something that started tasty and delicious and then turned out to not be so solidly a good thing in my living life. Plus I think some other shit was happening that week.

Aaaaaalssssoooooo. Lost takes viewers from Veronica. Viewers that I think Veronica deserves more.

I hope that it will all come together. Cuz I like how the first season of Lost is paced very much. Very original I felt. I don't know...I'm out of breath for now.
Hmm. I don't want to get too heavily into the Lost debate, because I have only seen the first few episodes from season two so I can't really speak for season two at all, really. But I have really enjoyed it so far. I do think there are elements which could be improved. Some of the characters can be a little too simplistic, and their secrets too deliberately set up to be realistic or shocking, like the Shannon/Boone relationship. Occasionally there is some weak writing, and some things are definitely very obscure.

But I think if you can't accept by now that the writers aren't going to immediately reveal every single mystery one after the other. Wouldn't that be more formulaic than anything else? I like the way the mysteries are revealed. Often there are tiny hints sprinkled throughout every episode. Sometimes there are red herrings or things which may be insignificant. Occasionally, and unexpectedly, a big revelation comes from nowhere.

Basically I can accept that people don't like it, but why persist in watching it? And whilst it had its weaknesses, it's a lot better than many of the TV programs out there at the moment, like Charmed (although it may hopefully have been cancelled by now). Isn't the success of a unique genre show good news for all of us because networks are more interested in slightly different shows and more in favour of serialisation rather than the neat resolution and "Tabula Rasa" factor that accompanies each episode where the status quo is completely restored?

Dolphin Tamer, I and many other Alias fans thought season two as a whole was fantastic, not just the first half. Yes, it is a pretty common belief that season three was disappointing, but so many people said that about Buffy season six which is now one of my personal favourites.

If you actually watch season three of Alias, the quality of the acting, direction, stunts and such is still as high as ever, but it's just... different. Things aren't always happy and fun, and they don't stay the same. I think season three was pretty compelling even if it wasn't the most light hearted romp. It felt a bit like a transitional season that explored other areas and changed the characters to make future seasons more interesting, and from what I have seen of season four it is still a good show.
I've thought the season so far has been absolutely fantastic, especially "The Other 48 Days." The show consistently amazes me, and I cannot wait for the episode helmed by Darren Aronofsky.
First of all: yay for Ultimate Drew! Two seasons of gainful employement, and a seven-figure paycheck. Now THAT deserves a BOOYA!

However, much as I hate to say it, I might not see his episode. I've completely lost interest in Lost, and I completely agree with posters who think the series has caught a premature case of JJ Abrams Disease: great premise, shocking twists, but no logical consistency or follow-through.

I don't mind the lack of answers about the island, and I don't necessarily mind the flashback structure. It's just that nothing I've seen in the series (especially in S2) makes me care for the castaways. I'm not involved with their characters. Even though there's incredible danger all around, nobody seems to be digging too hard for information. Plotlines (where is Michael?) seem to be dropped for weeks at a time, even though resolution of that plotline should be a top priority for the survivors. It's all rather flat.

And although I'm not as bitter as Dolphin Tamer, I, too, sense that the writing staff is killing time. I think they DO have an ultimate resolution in mind, but they're inefficient in crafting how events lead up to that resolution. Since this is a Joss Whedon website, it reminds me very much of Buffy Season 6, and how character arcs either dragged on forever without substantial change (Buffy, Xander) or seemed completely disconnected from the events of the first five seasons (Giles, Willow).

So I'm keeping one eye on Lost in case something absolutely incredible pops up, and watching Veronica Mars. (When UPN decides to show new episodes, that is.) Ever since they dumped Duncan Kane, VM has snapped back to S1 form and I don't want to miss a minute of it.
and I completely agree with posters who think the series has caught a premature case of JJ Abrams Disease: great premise, shocking twists, but no logical consistency or follow-through.


Hey, they should get him to write and direct MI:III, and get Joss to script doctor the final act to punch it up and make it cheaper..
"Point goes to you this round."

We're keeping points? Score!

"But I maintain that what you refer to as Lost's "formula" is less annoying than you suggest because it has been present since the very first episode."

How does that make it LESS annoying?

Pete and Repete were on a bridge. Pete fell off. Who's left?

"To the best of my recollection, not a single episode has done anything other than follow the flashback formula you reference.."

How does that make it LESS annoying?

Pete and Repete were on a bridge. Pete fell off. Who's left?

"...meaning that at the very least it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone tuning in to the show at this point."

How does that make it LESS annoying?

Pete and Repete were on a bridge. Pete fell off. Who's left?

"You can't really tell a story about the past lives of some 30-odd characters without falling back on the "formula" of flashback."

Well. You COULD if you started the story a little further back. OR you could tell the events forward and allow a character's motives to reveal naturally what drives them and makes them tick. We never saw a flashback telling us why Alice's White Rabbit was always in such a hurry. Did that lessen our appreciation of the character?

"Since it's proven by this point that Lost has every intention of sticking with it's "formula", shouldn't those confused or annoyed by said formula just stop watching?"

Precisely, which is why (until this thread) I've been happily avoiding the series this season. Curse you Goddard. Now I have to reconsider catching it during prime time.
Well Repete, since you asked, what makes it LESS annoying is that it's an established and integral part of the series format. It's like watching a space opera sci-fi series and complaining that there's too much space in it. It's part of what makes the show the show. By this point, assuming you're still watching, you have to know what the format and/or formula are and if you're still watching, presumably that implies you find it LESS annoying than those that, say, AREN'T watching anymore.

But seriously, so the flashback format annoys you. It doesn't annoy me. Neither one of us is right or wrong (...more righter? ...less wrong?) I like it, you don't. *shrug*

Yet oddly we both seem to like Joss. How is that possible? Does it mean one of us really "gets" Joss and the other doesn't? Probably not. For me, I can enjoy Angel and Firefly and (to a lesser extent) Buffy, and yet STILL enjoy "formulaic" television like Lost.
I really don't know what to make of Lost. Sometimes everything that happens on the show seems so pointless, and sometimes it seems meaningful. The Charlie episode, for example, initially seemed incredibly pointless, but when Charlie took an even darker turn in the following episode, I saw a point to everything that had previously happened to Charlie.

One of my biggest dissapointments about this season so far is that the button storyline hasn't been explored enough. I personally thought the idea of a button that either is really saving the world (which Locke believes) or is just part of a psychological experiment (which Jack believes) was a very original and intriguing concept that tied up the hatch mystery very nicely. I really wanted the season to focus on the conflict between Jack and Locke, one a man of science and the other a man of faith. But that storyline really hasn't been explored as much as should have been- instead Jack and Locke have both become somewhat inconsistent, less interesting characters.

I don't want to criticize Lost too harshly, because I think the writers deserve more of a chance to show us where the storyline is headed than many fans have been giving them. The characters are not quite as easy to get attached to as Joss's, but they are overall still interesting people that I would like to know more about. There's been a couple pretty bad episodes this season, but most episodes have been good to excellent. I'm not planning on giving up on the show anytime soon.
"Joss is totally going to view this topic."

That's no Shepherd.
Outside the usual suspects (i.e. Buffy, Angel, Firefly) at Whedonesque, I suspect Lost is the most debated show here. More so than Smallville, Veronica Mars or Joey. I haven't seen any of the second season but I enjoyed the first season. Sawyer is the new Spike, Locke is either insane or a zealot or both and Kate is gorgeous.
Simon, I don't want to spoil you here (so won't), but I loved Locke's character in season one. He was bordering between insane and/or zealot, as you say. It was great drama - what do we do with an insane zealot? Make him president?

But... Then we got to season two. And that arc disappears. Completely. Gone. @~! As least as far as I saw, anyway. It annoyed me a little, as it was one of the great character things Lost had going for it.
Well I agree that with the addition of so many NEW characters, many of the original lostaways have gotten short shrift. Locke was far and away my favorite character from Season One, and while I'm still interested in him, I'm deeply saddened to say that he has been somewhat ignored and/or underplayed so far this year.

That doesn't ruin the show for me... or at least it hasn't yet. I hold on to hope that he'll be brought back to form before the end of the season.

Also, I don't LOATHE Kate with nearly the vitriolic, animalistic hatred that most "fans" do. She hovers between annoying and boring for me usually. But that said, she IS easy on the eyes.

And Jack? Something positive needs to be done with this character ASAFP or I WILL start hating him the way everyone else seems to hate Kate. He needs a lot more depth than what has been given so far. I don't hate him YET... but it's getting there.

Sun and Jin are great.

Ecko is great.

Bernard is great.

Sayid is great.

Hurley is great.

Anna-Lucia needs a bullet in the brain.

Claire is annoying and shallow.
Oh, Simon, don't say that! Sawyer is not, not, not the new Spike. Ewwwww. Though I do like evil Sawyer better than good Sawyer--he's much more interesting that way. And though they both live outside of the rules the others do, Spike is still way better. Ok, he is better looking by far. But aside from that, Spike is just plain funnier and more interesting to watch.
Simon, I'm sooo tempted to watch that fan vid, but I've only seen the first 3 eps of S2. Although, I've got to be honest, reading everyones comments on here, I don't know whether I'll be sticking with it.

Gossi, Locke was one of my favourite characters too. That's pretty dissappointing. Thank God they have Drew now!
Kill them all! In a plane crashing into island, on top of them! Avoiding all references to Lockerbie!
nixygirl: well if you don't want to be spoiled, then watch this instead.
Well for my part on the "Lost" debate...

I like the show, and I've got no problem with waiting a few years for the big payoff. And the lower quality episodes of this season don't nessacerily bother me. Why?

Because as a show it doesnt even compare to the Whedonverse. I cared immensely for every single character, but with Lost I dont care that much and am not anyway as much emotionally involved with any of the characters. The only character I care about is Shannon. . I like Sun as well.

But because it doesnt emotionally invest me in the way Joss's show's do, I dont really get annoyed with it, its more just letting myself get caught up in the ride, and if they crap it up, then they crap it up. If it pays off, it pays off.

Very incoherant post, but hopefully the general idea got through.

Thats just my opinion.
I thought Shannon's arc has been incredibly unlikely. They changed her character just to fit the plot and I didn't buy it.
Sloppy writing. But I like Sun too.
I think the character backstory flashback formula worked well in season 1, but has become redundant in season 2. I loved the first few episodes of this season because it was a completely different formula, but they went back to the formula of season 1 and now I'm bored. I don't care about the characters that much anymore. I'm more interested in the plot, which is moving along very slowly. I even taped last week's episode to watch later and then completely forgot about it. I'm just not invested in this show.

I agree with Apocalypse. I will watch every episode but I won't expect much. I'm not bitter. If the show turns into something amazing I'll be delighted, but I won't be disappointed if it doesn't. For now it's a just a fun escape. And I have other wonderful shows to give more of my attention to, like Veronica Mars and Battlestar Galactica.

It'll be interesting to see what Drew will bring to Lost. I'm not surprised he's staying in J.J. Abrams camp but I was hoping he might join VM because I think he's more suited for that kind of show.
For all those that are a) bored/frustrated/disgusted by the "formula" of character flashbacks and yet still b) excited that Drew is joining the production, I'm curious...

Have you considered what exactly it is that Drew will likely be bringing to the table in terms of writing? Drew is pretty much the God-King of continuity. He is the one that comes in and writes a story that deals with the finer points of character histories and backgrounds. He often manages to remind viewers of details ignored or forgotten. So how do you suppose that particular writing niche might fit in with a show so focused on flashback "formula"?

Just sayin's all...
Simon
I just watched that Lost fan video
That was fuuunnnny
Yea Simon that was amusing. People puppets, always funny.
Thanx for the link.
Oh my, what a busy thread. Just wanted to say how awesome this news is. I love Lost, but I love Drew even more. Yay!
"I think the character backstory flashback formula worked well in season 1, but has become redundant in season 2."

Lemme put it this way. I enjoyed the first season of LOST. Maybe if I continued watching I'd find something to appreciate. I didn't mind the flashback formula at first because they threw us in the middle of the action. We started the series with a bunch of strangers in a plane wreck. Of course they'd have to do SOME exposition to ramp up the audience. That's totally understandable. I gave them the benefit of the doubt.

But it's a year later. We know all their names. We know where they've come from. We don't need to constantly keep getting reintroduced to who these people were before they were lost. We don't need the metaphor repeated that these people were all essentially lost, each in their own way, before the wreck. We get it. Let's move FORWARD.

At this point it's just beating a dead horse. The writers and producers need to mix it up and use more variety in their storytelling. Now it's just cookie cutter and some episodes it's forced. They need to ask themselves "do we really need to tell this story that happened before the crash or do we get the point across without it?" And right now they plug in the flashbacks whether they are necessary or not.

If Drew can lend credence to the formula, and tell stories that require it rather than just fit the peg in the hole, I'll be there with bells on. Better than that though? If he can tell a LOST story without the annoying flashbacks I'd buy him a beer.

[ edited by ZachsMind on 2006-02-17 03:37 ]
I have to poke in my own nose of dissent here too, re: Lost. Yeah, it's *still* better than most of what's on TV (Miss Mars, excepted), but this season is frustrating me muchly. I find myself getting pissed about the same things that bugged me about Alias from s3 onward. Namely, the dumbing-it-down and overly-connecting-the-dots. THAT is how I read the above comment of "disrespecting the viewer," actually -- not just in the way of re-runs, but in the way of talking down to the audience. Why not talk up to the audience? The slow kids in the back will struggle to keep up, but they'll be the better for it. (And I'd include myself as one of those slow kids, before anyone gets their undies tangled about political correctness, okay?)

Part of what made Alias (and Lost) so great in the beginning was the mystery and the subtext. The way my brain had to work to make connections. Order out of chaos, you know? Much of Lost S1 was like that for me, too. But now, everything is "falling into place" (I'm supposed to think), the red herrings are transparent, the characterization has really thinned for "dramatic effect" and honestly, the focus is fragmented.

There are still some fascinating characters and interactions, so I keep watching. Plus, like I said: nothing better on basic cable TV. (And I tape VM in the other room kthx, Mr. "Stealing Viewers" guy. Everyone I know that watches one, watches the other, later.) But my patience with SOMEONE (unclear if it's ABC's orders to "dumb it down" or JJ's willingness to do so) is wearing way thin, so I hope Goddard can give the show something to sing about.

(My apologies. That last line was hellsa cheese.)
Alias lost its charm a bit after season 2, I feel.

Lost rules! Glad to see some of our buffy writers on board with it. Although I haven't noticed David Fury writing any eps this season...
Season 2 of Lost is better than the first; they're finally pulling out all the stops! No more saving plot for later.
babycheeses - David Fury left Lost after the first season. He is now writing for 24. (And between those two shows, he worked on the last six episodes of The Inside, although only the first one of those episodes he worked on aired on TV in the US.)
I've watched Lost from the beginning and although I can see and agree with some (at times much) of the criticisms leveled above, I still find it entertaining. It isn't a Joss show, so admittedly my standards are lower.

It's also on ABC, which I think is a horrible handicap for its development beyond the comfort zone that's already been established. It's hugely successful for a genre show (with reality show trappings), and people I know who mock me tirelessly for my Whedonism hold Wednesday Lost nights as sacredly as I used to for Angel. Its popularity is good in the sense that many non-genre fans are being introduced to a storytelling format they may have before now totally avoided or have been completely unaware of. What's bad is that it is, I suspect, being cramped by ABC's Disney-driven paranoia of anything that might offend their core "family" audience. Throwing money at the stars can be seen as a thank you for their hard work, but it could also, if you're suspicious-minded, be seen as a covert sort of payoff/incentive for putting up with some of the less appealing story changes being dictated.

Apparently increasing violence on the show is okay; it's the porn of the masses, after all. But notice how little sex these people get? On an island with so many sweaty hot bodies around, there's remarkably little skin being shown. (They tease it, though -- S1, they had Sawyer swimming in his pants, for god's sake, while Kate stripped to bra and panties. Puh-leeze.) I understand Mickey doesn't approve, even at 9 p.m., but I find it hard to believe that on a beautiful (if occasionally freakishly disturbing) island with no TV, no recreational drugs (that aren't locked up, of course) and loads of time to kill, actual lostaways wouldn't be getting busy with one another like fuzzy little Anya-bunnies.

Fury was such a great influence on the writing, and yes, Locke has lost some of his luster this season. "Walkabout" kicked all kinds of ass, and so far I haven't seen anything this season that really equals it. I do tape Lost while I'm watching VM and even with the slow progression, which I don't mind, I'll be sticking with it. There's little competition across the slate and Drew G. can't help but strengthen what's already working there. It's ABC that I worry about. The show's success has to be making them nervous, because it's such a critical ratings linchpin in their schedule and they don't quite know how to control it.

We all know from unfortunate experience that if anything can kill creativity, it's suits who stop trusting that the talented people they've hired can actually do their jobs. They should step back, let the island be as weird and "occult" or whatever as it wants to be (it's a character, much like L.A. was supposed to be for AtS) and give the writers free rein to make it great, including Drew G. Strangling the goose with caveats against freaking out Joe-Normal-Viewer is one way the network can ensure Lost will end up laying an egg less golden than just plain stinky.

[ edited by Wiseblood on 2006-02-17 10:14 ]
Lioness, I'm a spoiler fiend so I saw the Shannon arc mishap coming months before it happened. I resolved to stop watching the show after I saw the episode in which she died. I called it months prior, but I still had a little bit of hope that the writers wouldn't be so predictable as to kill her in her only flashback.

At that point, I had started losing interest in the show. I really enjoyed Lost during the first season. The show had/has its flaws, yes, but a show's first season is not usually its best. Shannon was my favorite character, despite the fact that she went from Queen C to Queen C minus the fun snarkiness once her character got more than a few seconds of screentime. I guess her death was just a good excuse for me to declare my near-contempt for the show. I loved the show in the beginning, but then found myself scoffing throughout episodes. I disliked most of the characters, felt that the writers had no idea where they were going with characters (i.e. Why kill off the characters with the most potential for character development? One, sure, but no more than that), the dialogue was flat, etc. The general consensus was, IMO, that Hurley was supposed to be the "comic relief." I didn't find Hurley all that humorous. I literally couldn't stand some of the characters, and those were the characters who got the most screentime.

In addition, I agree with Willowy 100%.

I refuse to watch Lost. Will my Ultimate Drew Minionship be revoked? I mean, unless Drew can rectify the whole Shannon sitch for me, I won't watch. It was there, I feel, that it all went down hill (If you haven't caught that by now :) ).
Jeez, I'm still not believing all the negativity. I've even begun to compare Lost to Joss shows. It's pretty much almost better than Angel (though not quite), which was always on the bottom rung for me as far as Joss shows go, and as great as Veronica Mars is, Lost kicks its ass.

Most of the complaints seem to be about drifting storylines and underused characters...have you noticed how this season has only accumulated seven days from the islanders' viewpoints? Things take much longer than a week in their time to resolve, and that's one of the things that I love the most about the show. As for the underused characters, I really haven't noticed.

Locke is still the strange "man of faith," who always seems creepy just as he appears to be doing the right thing, and his motives are increasingly more and more questionable; Jack is still the "man of science," though his logical thinking in an increasingly illogical environment is starting to make him snap; Kate is still the one who needs something to run to and from, but now that her anchor, Jack, is slowly sailing away, she's trapped and she doesn't know what to do; Sayid is still the dark question mark with untapped reservoirs of brutality just bubbling beneath the surface (as witnessed in this week's great episode, "One of Them"); Sawyer is still the con man (as evidenced greatly in "The Long Con"), only what with his conflicting feelings for Kate and the rest of the survivors (chiefly Jin and Michael), not even he can tell anymore whether he's conning or not; Charlie is still the addict who needs something to shackle himself to, because he's lived his life too long that way for him to get out from under it; Hurley is still the "nice guy" who needs to be liked and needs people to believe them, though he has lapses in stability (and we still haven't found out why he was in a mental hospital); Jin and Sun have taken an interesting turn, being now that Sun is the one who wants to have control over Jin (though for good reason); Claire is still the unsure girl who will basically buy into whatever someone's pushing as the comfort flavor of the week; and Michael is still the insane dad who has obviously suffered the most devastating mental breakdown of any of the survivors...I'm interested in seeing how his and Walt's stories turn out.

As for Ana Lucia, I don't see why she's hated so...we really haven't even seen her enough to know what to think (though I loved her rapport with Sawyer). Mr. Eko is just incredibly awesome, sort of like the Tailies' variation on Locke. And, as for Libby, well...I sorta think she's an Other. Maybe there's no substantial evidence, but does there have to be? Something seems so...off...about her.

And Shannon? Yeah...um...good riddance. By far the least interesting character on the show, save for her brother Boone, whom I was actually glad to see die.

Also, though I may be crucified for saying this...yes, Sawyer is the new Spike. That was the very first impression I had of him, and it's remained the same.
Ummm, seeing as how S2 of Lost hasn't started everywhere in the world at once, perhaps certain plot points should be invisotexted as spoilers, no?
Well that was refreshingly positive, UnpluggedCrazy. Thank you for that.

Now, because controversy and conflict are always fun, there's something I have to say about "formula". Mostly because this particular thing has been bugging me for years (and has only gotten worse since Serenity), but also because there's a chance that Joss himself might read this thread and I REALLY want him to hear this.

With all the complaints about the formula of Lost, someone please tell me why that is any less annoying that JOSS' own formula? Maybe "formula" isn't exactly the right word, but Joss most definitely has a "gimmick" or a "schtick" that he repeats over and over and over and over, ad nauseum. And what's worse, everybody KNOWS about it, talks about it, and not only accepts it but often seems to applaud it. Fans of Joss inexplicably hold up this particular Jossism as something to be proud of.

I'm referring of course to his need to kill, maim and torture any happy couple. Now I've recognized this trend of his since the very beginning, and at first I was just as strangely attracted to it as everyone else. It was unique (at the time) among storytellers, and it made Joss' stories unpredictable.

But now let's focus on that word... UNPREDICTABLE. Nowadays, not so much. It has become Joss' "formula". If it was every once in awhile, if you never knew if love would last or if a couple had a chance or not at "happily ever after", well then THAT would be unpredictable, AND interesting. But that's not the case, is it? It is a GIVEN now that any and every single happy couple, every single example of requited love, will ultimately be severely punished. The last straw was of course Wash and Zoe. That couple had been critically praised, there were academic papers and essays written about how unique that relationship was, and what a shining star in the Jossverse it was BECAUSE it seemed to avoid the Joss curse.

Oops. Guess he was just a little slower with that one, huh?

Now I still LOVE Joss (occasionally love to HATE him). My dissatisfaction and disgust with this element of his stories does NOT make me less of a Joss fan. It makes me less sycophantic, perhaps, but still a fan. I'm just wondering why THAT little "formula", which to my way of thinking is VASTLY more annoying than flashbacks, gets a free ride while Lost gets lambasted.

This is not meant to stir up a bunch of rabid Joss defenders. Please. I'm just genuinely confused about why one formula is derided for BEING "formulaic" while another is praised for being "unique".
Tuning it late to this disussion...
Just wanted to say that I'm another who, though I still watch Lost, see multiple problems with it and consider it a mediocre show that occasionally has great moments. I didn't just start getting down on it this season, and my criticisms aren't mostly around how slowly they're revealing the mysteries: my issues with it began almost from the beginning (though I did think both the pilot and the Walkabout episode were brilliant).
They are:

– Consistently clichéd plot points. Almost every episode revolves around some too-neat, predictable metaphor or parallel between the character's past lives and present. A case in point would be the Moth episode early. I hated the easy contrivance of the moth as a symbol for Charlie's dependence. Similarly, it drives me nuts that we always see just enough of a character's backstory that say "ooh, are you clever enough to see the parallels with our present episode, even though they're incredibly obvious?" but not enough to actually have real character development or nuance.

– Lack of believable motivation, character inconsistency. If they want to reveal things slowly, that's fine. But at least have your characters show basic human traits, like curiosity. I can't believe how many times, when they come across new people on the island - the recent confrontation with the others, the first meeting with the tailies, etc – they fail to ask the most basic questions. I also feel like characters like Locke and Jack change, constantly, to suit the story.

– doing things for the sake of being "clever," or having hidden puzzles, without a real reason. I've already heard Damon Lindelof (sp?) say that there's no explanation for the numbers, since they're couldn't possibly be. That sort of "aren't we clever" thing can drive me nuts. And i'm sure it'll turn out to be the case with numerous other mysteries.

– too much focus on the backstories, when the real drama is in the present. I'd much rather see them forego the whole backstory device altogether, or only use it when it really serves a purpose, rather than force every episode around it. Especially when very few are particularly revealing.

My most basic problem is that I feel the show is all about plot over character - which is ironic, since the creators have been quoted numerous times about the supremacy of character. The characters serve the plot, and not the other way around. i don't feel like there's consistenc or growth, and - more important - i don't *care* about any of these characters. Certainly not the way I cared about any one of the characters in Buffy or Angel, who felt like family, or in Gilmore Girls, The Wire, Deadwood, etc etc.

So why do i keep watching? Because it has occasional moments of brilliance, and really is a great premise. Because I, like many others, are hooked enough on the mysteries that I want to see what keeps happening. Because it's still a very fun hour of TV. But I long ago gave up expecting too much from it, and i still don't understand the professions of the show's brilliance. To each his own, though, and I'm thrilled Drew Goddard is coming on. Hopefully he'll add some great writing and get away from the clichés.....
Lost ultimately just makes me ache for a Joss Whedon television series again. Now HERE'S a man who knows how to make an ensemble work.

While Lost does have vision and scope, it's sluggish in revealing secrets that matter, and the characters are all over the place plot-wise. Boone's sacrifice seemed more an executive decision than a plot-driven one, like when Roddenberry killed off Denise Crosby's character in STNG.

Lost seems to pride itself on keeping its viewers lost, and as someone above conveyed, that's disrespectful to your audience. There's a reason why there's not much of a call for off broadway shows that consist of ten people on stage throwing cream pies at the audience and laughing hysterically at the results. Admittedly, Gallagher kinda made a living doing things like that for awhile, but it's a very small niche market -- almost fetishist.

How Lost is still popular is beyond me. It's basically a magic trick. The writers have a point B. I know on the surface it looks like they don't but they do. They know where they're going and they know they can take the scenic route to get there. They manufactured it that way. So they can throw all these red herrings into the mix that they want. The numbers, the animals that show up randomly, the signal, the hatch, the countdown inside the hatch, the 'others' and then the OTHER 'others'... Ugh. Those aren't the clues to the endgame. They're the distractions.

Smoke and mirrors. That's all Lost is and after the season two opener I got tired of being a dupe for the producers. When it comes to presenting a shady magic trick to an audience, I prefer Penn and Teller. THEY know how to throw cream pies, metaphorically speaking (well, USUALLY metaphorically speaking).

Lost needs Drew Goddard. It also needs David Fury. And Tim Minear. And Jane Espenson. AND Joss Whedon... and it needs a few miracles to write itself out of its very big but meaningless corner. It needs to walk across the paint on the floor and show us the rest of the room. It needs to GET TO THE POINT.

When it does that, let me know. Maybe then I'll tune in again.
You know, Haunt, much as I love Joss (and oh boy, am I obsessed), that has bugged me. His killing off of happy couples is not in the least bit unpredictable...though, in the end, it's still shocking. I guess that speaks for his writing skill, that he can pull off the same predictable trick again and again and still have it work each time.
"It needs to GET TO THE POINT."

I just don't understand the impatience that so many fans express. I mean you can't possibly have thought that there were any big answers coming after only a season and a half. Granted this ISN'T a Joss show, and therefore none of us (myself included) are nearly as "invested" in it as we could be. I'm not rabidly defending this show, because frankly I'm not RABIDLY in love with it. I think it's great, better than 99.9% of the other garbage on TV. But y'know, even if Joss did still have something on air I'd be watching Lost. It's possible to enjoy a show without feeling like it's the Second Coming.

But it just surprises me that there's so little patience when it comes to the big secrets being revealed. If everyone had gotten the answers that they clearly believed they were owed by the S1 finale then they would be bitching that the show blew its wad too early. As it is everyone is bitching that they haven't been spoonfed the answers after only 36 episodes.

*sigh* All things being equal I suppose none of this matters. I (and a few others apparently) enjoy it. Many others here don't. I don't know why that bugs me... but I'm always confused, and perhaps a little annoyed, when fellow Whedon fans don't enjoy other genre shows or stories that I do. For some reason I always expect that if I enjoy the elements of Joss' work that I do, AND I also enjoy this other piece of genre work over here, then ergo other Whedon fans would like it too.

Obviously that's not the case, and intellectually I get that. It's just... bothersome sometimes.
haunt, I don't expect the producers to reveal the mysteries of the island after a mere 36 episodes. That would be moronic, and as you say, prematurely blowing their metaphorical wad. But as ZachsMind put it so aptly, Lost is a magic trick (the fact that JJ Abrams is an amateur magician is NO coincidence), and the staff simply has to do a better job keeping its fans entertained by sleight-of-hand and misdirection while building up to those resolutions.

Right now, the bitter-istas are being driven nuts by the dropped plotlines, the stuck-in-the-mud (or erratic) characterizations, the baffling lack of curiousity on the part of the castaways, and the redundancy of the flashbacks in S2. Abrams and Co. need to engage their cast and viewers in an exciting, gripping, nail-biting plotline on the island (like the raft expedition), something that will send these nagging questions and flaws to the back of the audience's mind. A bit of sleight-of-hand and misdirection to better sell the illusion.

Got me?

[ edited by cjl on 2006-02-17 19:20 ]
Gah...the negativity towards anything and everything non-Joss created on these boards really gives me a migraine sometimes. I'm with Haunt on this one...I just don't get this need to tear down everything that Joss is not associated with.

Anyway...this is great news. Love Drew, love Lost, love JJ Abrams. He'll fit in wonderfully with the series.

[ edited by MindPieces on 2006-02-17 21:15 ]
Wow MindPieces, that was kind of a sweeping statement. "Anything and everything..."? What about all the Veronica Mars love? My own (and others) passion for Deadwood? Battlestar? I could go on but my point is that Joss has nothing to do with those shows and we praise them to the heavens.

We just love Joss bestest. :)
I try to remember that there is a time scale difference here...
Season/year and a half to the viewers is a couple of months to the people on the island.

After two months with strangers:

- I would not be ready to give up on the relationships back home quite yet - i.e. not ready to start boinking every one in sight no matter how "cute"

- If I was the type of woman who cared about makeup/shaving etc - I'd still be holding onto those things

- I'd still be working on getting to know people. Phase 1: all stressed and panicky. Phase 2: the masks we all wear in public go back on (sort of). Phase 3: stuff starts to slip. Phase etc: and so on

Think about the fun SF writers have had with Time Dilation and its impact on relationships. In this case, the Time Dilation affect is between us (the viewers) and them (the Lost ones).

ETA: fixing wretched spelink

[ edited by redfern on 2006-02-17 21:34 ]
Gah...the negativity towards anything and everything non-Joss created on these boards really gives me a migraine sometimes.

Really?? I don't see that here at all, MindPieces. As Willowy said, there's huge love toward Veronica Mars, for Deadwood, Battlestar Gallactica, and many others. I know of people's obsessions with Gilmore Girls, The Wire, and several others. Just look over on Whedonesque.org. Contrary to the sentiment you expressed, I find that people on this board are incredibly open and wanting to love different shows, and certainly don't have a "Joss only" attitude toward what can be excellent.
There are also many people on this board who love Lost, or who at least like it (I'd put myself in that latter category, despite the myriad frustrations with it I expressed above), and their opinions are hardly unwelcome. My guess is that Lost inspires more-than-usual criticism here because it's the sort of show so many Joss-fans wanted to adore, and then felt a bit let down by. As I said earlier, I don't think that disappointment is at all just about wanting the answers now (as you seem to read it, haunt), but has to do with wanting a more sophisticated show, with stronger characters, that doesn't hit us over the head with obviousness, isn't formulaic, and respects the veiwers' intelligence. Lost sometimes does those things, but many times falls short, and people's criticism has to do with those hopes and disappointments. Obviously most of TV is far, far worse. That's why I don't even waste my time criticizing it (or watching it). In that way, the criticism is - in at least some sense - a sign of respect.
Well said, acp. Bravo!
Great, great, great.
Lost is my favourite show right now (yes, it's brilliant).
I miss David Fury (please, come back to write words for Locke!), but now I'll have Drew: excellent!
"...I don't think that disappointment is at all just about wanting the answers now (as you seem to read it, haunt)..."

That's PART of what I read, acp. I recognize (and agree) that there are many valid complaints with the show. Hell, I myself have several problems. However I don't dismiss the entire show for those problems... either because I have a tolerance for an as yet undefined set number of problems with a work of fiction, or the work of fiction itself as a whole so far is greater than the sum of it (admittedly flawed) parts, take your pick. But when push comes to shove it seems to me that most (not all, but MOST) fans that criticize the show state it's slow crawl towards answers as the main issue.

Now maybe that's not their ONLY complaint, and maybe it's not even their BIGGEST complaint. But when pressed I see a lot of folks using that as their example of a (the?) flaw with Lost. And frankly it's been the biggest gripe from former-/non-fans since the end of S1... hence my earlier comment about people feeling they were owed a set number of answers by the end of episode 22. When that didn't happen, there was a perhaps small but certainly vocal group of people that claimed the show was a failure.

Of the problems with the show, it's pace has never been one that bothered me personally. My patience has yet to be tested. If yours have, well I'm not sure there's any point in debating it. Either you'll ignore it and hope it ignores you in return, or maybe you'll listen to the grapevine and try to jump back aboard once a credible source tells you the "problem" has been fixed. *shrug*
Either you'll ignore it and hope it ignores you in return, or maybe you'll listen to the grapevine and try to jump back aboard once a credible source tells you the "problem" has been fixed.

Nope, I'll keep watching. As I said, despite all my problems (not so much with the pace, though that is a part of it) with the show, i still like it. It's one of only 4 shows I like enough to keep watching (the others being Veronica Mars, Gilmore Girls, and 24, though that will change when Deadwood and the Wire come back). I wouldn't call myself bitter, or angry, or a Lost hater, just.... disappointed. I wish the show could live up to its potential. I'll keep hoping - and maybe Drew on board will help - and I'll keep watching, albeit with much diminished expectations. And as to the differences between those who adore the show and those of us who find it pretty imperfect, hopefully we can just agree to disagree... I love the fact that these boards provide a forum for such civil debate. :-)
This has been civil?!? Just kidding. ;)
First and foremost: Yay for Ultimate Drew (poor 616 version gets no love).

Arrested Development is gone, so Lost is my current favorite show. It's not perfect, but it's still young and I'm patient. Watched the first year on DVD, so these eps do seems slower, but I think a lot of it is just finding the rhythm. Have problems with some episodes, but I can find at least something to like in each one of them. Like last week, Sawyer flashback was weak, Sawyer on the island actually showing that he's extremely intelligent and getting the better of everyone that underestimates him was pretty cool in my book.

I really don't it's J.J.'s show anymore. Seems like Damon is wearing the daddy pants and for someone so new to the whole thing, I think he's doing a pretty good job.
M'Cookies, Lost just started 3 weeks ago in Oz. I'm trying to avoid spoilers, so I'm not reading everyones posts on here. Although, they do seem to be quite passionate, for what I have read.
Haven't had time to read through this entire thread but i got the main theme very early on. All i'm going to say is what i've said before about Lost many times. Give it a break!

It is currently suffering from what is known in the music biz as the "difficult second album" problem. A new band releases a top selling first cd and then comes back with a new record that doesn't quite live up to the expectations the first one built of them. Brilliant bands have been known to crumble and fall just because fan expectation was too much and they weren't willing to give the band a little benefit of the doubt.

Same goes for Lost. An excellent first series has made expectations for season two almost too high to possibly live up to for the writers, especially as it seems to me that they actually intended to change the pace a little with season two. Give them the benefit of the doubt they deserved after season one and go with the flow a little. Just because early season two isn't exactly to your personal tastes and hopes and just because they are making it blatently obvious where they are going with the show doesn't mean that it isn't going to turn out well in the end.

We are only in the second year of a show that will hopefully have a good long run. Personally i'm glad that things aren't becoming obvious and predictable quite so soon and that the writers aren't looking to answer any of the big questions just yet. That really would worry me. I'm really enjoying what i've seen of Lost so far and looking forward to seeing the episodes that i've read about. Hopefully everyone will stick by the show because i'd hate for the potential the series has in the long run to be lost simply because people gave up too soon.
Personally? I find it useful to read the whole thread before weighing in. More people are disturbed over the uneven plots, the contradictory characterizations, the fact that some questions are set up as "Big Questions" only to be dropped or ignored in a very unlikely fashion.
That the true BIG questions have not been answered? There wouldn't be a show if they were. That isn't the problem most of us are having with Lost.
"the staff simply has to do a better job keeping its fans entertained by sleight-of-hand and misdirection while building up to those resolutions."

Hi! I'm George Stephanopoulis for THIS WEEK with George Stephanopoulis and we know you've tuned in to listen to us talk about events of this week. And so, without further ado -- HERE'S POLLYWOG THE DANCING BEAR!
Lioness, personally i also prefer to read the entire thread before giving my opinion but on occasion (say when i've got only a short amount of time to spare and the thread already contains over one hundreds comments, for example) a quick skim through to get the general idea has to suffice.

As i said above, my point was more of a general one than a specific reply to any of the individual opinions already given and as such it still stands. Whatever you may or may not like about the first half of the second season of Lost (be that the points raised by myself or anyone else in the thread) the show is still head and shoulders above the majority of the others series on television right now, with only a very few exceptions. Personally, i think the writers have more than earned the benefit of the doubt and i intend to stick with the show and see if the "uneven plots" and "contradictory characterizations" are just a minor, short term problem or, as i suspect, the result of the writers looking at the show in a much broader scope than we might imagine.

It's just a gut feeling but i believe that Lost will be one of those shows that needs to be viewed as a whole series rather then individual seasons in order to really appreciate what the writers are doing. Hopefully people are not going to start jumping off the Lost bandwagon simply because they are too impatient to wait for the big picture to reveal itself.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home