Is anyone here watching "Lost" on ABC? My wife and I caught last week's episode and are now hooked. I downloaded the first 4 episodes via bittorrent, and we're just now finished up ep. 4 and are anxiously awaiting the arrival of the remaining episodes.
Thoughts? Opinions about the show?
Comments
The biggest thing with them is you can't miss a single episode... my roommate and I are huge Alias fans, and we started to watch Lost. I've watched most of the episodes, but he missed several at the beginning, so he gave up on watching it.
If you haven't watched Alias before, you should try an episode sometime. But, if you get hooked on that - it'll take quite a while to catch up since it's on the fourth season already
Originally posted by hardeeharhar
The problem with shows like that is because they need to be watched every week. Does anyone recall earth 2?
I used to watch Earth 2! It would've been good if it hadn't sucked so badly!
Anyway...WHAT THE HELL IS THAT SOUND IN THE JUNGLE?!?!
Originally posted by hardeeharhar
The problem with shows like that is because they need to be watched every week. Does anyone recall earth 2?
OMG!!!!! MASSIVE 70s FLASHBACK!!!!!
First and foremost. They ALL know their is some kind of tree crashing HUGE beast within the jungle. Yet, they continue to take strolls through the jungle... Pea-brained writing to say the least.
The two best actors (IMHO) are Terry O'Quinn as John Locke and Naveen Andrews as Sayid. Everyone else is generic TV level, including the two main "stars"...
I tried to give it a chance, I really did want to like the show.
Ehh, just my opinion.
Yeah, Alias ROCKS!
For instance, in a Whedon show, the fact that people seem oddly incurious about some of the weirder doings on their island would eventually be dealt with in a dramatically satisfying way. Here, I suspect that it's just a mechanism for delaying dealing with "secrets" that will be parceled out v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y.
Still, It's got me hooked. I just hope that it doesn't stay stuck too long on "Backstory Island", since without the ooga booga there really isn't a great deal of reason to care all that much about these folks.
I guess the real test of the show will be how the scripts manage successive plateaus of revelation, allowing some aspect of the mystery to be "revealed" while it simultaneously exposes deeper questions. (I'm assuming that such a structure is the only way a show like this could operate for more than a season, since you can only delay solid revelation for so long and something definitive-- they're all dead, it's a military experiment with clones, etc.-- would pretty much kill ones reason for watching.)
I have a mild fear that the "Lost" of the title has something to do with spiritual orientation, since a lot of the back stories seem to have to do with "lost" people who apparently need a good dose of island living to teach them about life and lovin' and shit.
Hey has anyone seen the new Battlestar Galactica? Is is just me or are those some of the best Sci Fi space battle effects?
Originally posted by LiquidR
Read Watership Down. It'll give you naysayers of the show a little more insight. Lost has been awesome in my esteem.
Hey has anyone seen the new Battlestar Galactica? Is is just me or are those some of the best Sci Fi space battle effects?
I think it's the same outfit that did the work for "Firefly". With the programmed in "handheld camera shake, zoom, rack focus, etc.", right?
Originally posted by addabox
I have a mild fear that the "Lost" of the title has something to do with spiritual orientation, since a lot of the back stories seem to have to do with "lost" people who apparently need a good dose of island living to teach them about life and lovin' and shit.
Indeed. My wife and I finally managed to get caught up last night (4 episodes in a row!), and it occurred to me that this is a show largely about people's relationships with their fathers, it seems. Perhaps only with "parents," but there is a tremendous emphasis placed on the father, which would tie in well with the idea that they are all dead or in limbo or the figment of someone's imagination and the show is really about things spiritual.
I'd actually like for the show to avoid revealing anything definite. I don't want to know what the monster is. I don't want to know why all the weird stuff is going on. I don't want to know why the one guy doesn't appear on the passenger manifest.
I want it to be like the golden glow from the briefcase in Pulp Fiction.
Originally posted by midwinter
Indeed. My wife and I finally managed to get caught up last night (4 episodes in a row!), and it occurred to me that this is a show largely about people's relationships with their fathers, it seems. Perhaps only with "parents," but there is a tremendous emphasis placed on the father, which would tie in well with the idea that they are all dead or in limbo or the figment of someone's imagination and the show is really about things spiritual.
I'd actually like for the show to avoid revealing anything definite. I don't want to know what the monster is. I don't want to know why all the weird stuff is going on. I don't want to know why the one guy doesn't appear on the passenger manifest.
I want it to be like the golden glow from the briefcase in Pulp Fiction.
I know what you mean, but then there's the "Twin Peaks Effect"-- the point at which you start to suspect that the artfully revealed bits and pieces don't limn an aesthetically coherent hinterland, but rather that your ignorance is being taken advantage of-- that whoever is in charge is just kind of winging it.
It's a really interesting artistic strategy, the idea of selling the feeling of an integrated cosmology while actually withholding most of the particulars. In my experience it obliges the artist to do an enormous amount of work in developing the rules and interrelationships of the world being made.
It's also very interesting that one can sense the difference-- a completely imagined world allows one to relax into its stories, even if you don't know much about what's going on. You can just sense that things are "connecting" at some level.
More typically, one experiences a growing sense of frustration and wavering attention as the accrual of details seem merely expdiant, to simply pile up without any feeling of integrity. As in the later seasons of Twin Peaks, in my opinion, Lynch fan tho I may be.
It remains to be seen how "Lost" handles all this. You have to assume there are some pretty specific notions in play, but did Abrams work out his story arcs across multiple seasons? That's another thing Joss Whedon excels at-- bits of business from, like, 3 years back will reemerge in a new context with devastating resonance.
It's something only television can do-- extremely long form narrative that allows gradual emergence of meaning. It's a pity so few of its practitioners even try.
Originally posted by addabox
I know what you mean, but then there's the "Twin Peaks Effect"-- the point at which you start to suspect that the artfully revealed bits and pieces don't limn an aesthetically coherent hinterland, but rather that your ignorance is being taken advantage of-- that whoever is in charge is just kind of winging it.
It's a really interesting artistic strategy, the idea of selling the feeling of an integrated cosmology while actually withholding most of the particulars. In my experience it obliges the artist to do an enormous amount of work in developing the rules and interrelationships of the world being made.
It's also very interesting that one can sense the difference-- a completely imagined world allows one to relax into its stories, even if you don't know much about what's going on. You can just sense that things are "connecting" at some level.
More typically, one experiences a growing sense of frustration and wavering attention as the accrual of details seem merely expdiant, to simply pile up without any feeling of integrity. As in the later seasons of Twin Peaks, in my opinion, Lynch fan tho I may be.
It remains to be seen how "Lost" handles all this. You have to assume there are some pretty specific notions in play, but did Abrams work out his story arcs across multiple seasons? That's another thing Joss Whedon excels at-- bits of business from, like, 3 years back will reemerge in a new context with devastating resonance.
It's something only television can do-- extremely long form narrative that allows gradual emergence of meaning. It's a pity so few of its practitioners even try.
Yes. To everything. I was/am a huge Buffy fan, and you're exactly right about the importance of mapping out the arcs and iconography across multiple seasons. As I read through your post, I was reminded of my initial reaction to Donnie Darko, where I felt as if I were being taken advantage of.
Anyway.
I hope that all of this can be maintained. Apparently, season one will cover the first 40 days of their time on the island.
I LURVE IT. My only problem is that it is excruciatingly slow in giving up plot points