Scots Taffer on 6/11/2006 at 04:49
Quote Posted by Gingerbread Man
because the first season and 80% of the second season was simply some of the best television on the air.
You only say that because you weren't watching Deadwood. It was by far the best television on the air in the last year or so.
Thirith on 6/11/2006 at 10:27
I'd agree with the Taffer. Now, I enjoy Lost, but it's mainly *fun* TV. It isn't always *good* TV, by which I mean that much of the writing isn't actually very skilled. It's always watchable, but it's very much a case of "Just ignore the man behind the curtain", as far as I'm concerned.
Shug on 6/11/2006 at 12:18
I only follow it because it's the first TV show I've ever really watched consistently, and I've come THIS FAR ALREADY
SD on 6/11/2006 at 13:03
Quote Posted by Gingerbread Man
Seems to me that this show is 90% "What people who watch it speculate and talk about" and 10% "what the writers actually put forward"
This much was evident after the first TTLG
Lost thread reached about a a million pages in length, no?
never seen an episode kru :cool:
seriously got better things in my life than to waste an hour a week on sub-Lynchian sub X-Files drama
Thirith on 6/11/2006 at 13:08
I'm just rewatching X-Files, and I'm currently in season 3 - and I'm coming to the conclusion that while the show was new and needed at the time it came out (and while the chemistry between the main characters is cool and some of the other regulars are interesting), it wasn't as brilliant as people thought it was. I would hardly call Lost sub-X-Files. And at its best it's quite a bit better than the mediocre or bad episodes of Twin Peaks. (Yes, season 2, I'm looking at you.) (Not that I think the comparison to Lynch holds much water. Lynch's work is confusing because it works on a non-literal/subconscious/metaphorical level. Figuring it out involves interpretation, meaning that it takes place on a very different level from figuring out the mysteries in Lost.)
Scots Taffer on 6/11/2006 at 13:17
Non-apologetic complete Twin Peaks fan posting itt.
I've been waiting for season 2 since Nov 2001 when I bought the season 1 boxset. I love absolutely all of it, even the bewildering resolution. It is probably still my favourite television series ever, given that it's dramatic breadth crosses the absurb, the comedic, the surreal, the terrifying, the dark, the mysterious, the intriguing, the frustrating, and the confusing; but if it is the favourite, hot on its heels are Six Feet Under and Deadwood.
Thirith on 6/11/2006 at 13:26
Oh, don't get me wrong. I liked Twin Peaks a lot. However, there are a number of episodes and plotlines in the second season that are crap, as far as I'm concerned. James Hurley and the blonde femme fatale trying to frame him? Nadine believing she's a teenager? Eugh. Bad writing, bad acting, bad directing. I like the last episode, though - that song you hear when Dale enters the Black Lodge ("Under the Sycamore Trees", if memory serves) still gives me goosebumps. And both Deadwood and Six Feet Under are in a different league than Lost.
However, in terms of sheer popcorn entertainment, I do think that Lost does quite well. The writers can still screw it up, though - in the end it'll depend on how well they handle the resolution to all the huge questions. Chances are they'll drop the ball completely, because they're trying to do way too many things.
Renault on 6/11/2006 at 13:56
Quote Posted by Gingerbread Man
But I'm currently assuming it'll be cancelled after this year, and the only people who will be surprised are the writers.
Incredibly doubtful. I agree with a lot of the recent critcism, and the show has lost some viewership, but overall it still has a huge fan base. No way this show gets cancelled after only 3 seasons, just 2 years past winning the best drama Emmy.
Thirith on 6/11/2006 at 14:05
So far the makers of Lost seem to have been very good at having a fairly strong season beginning that brings up lots of new questions to keep viewers hooked, then move into a somewhat boring middle part, and get riveting again for the last 5-6 episodes of a season. Seems to work out okay for them, although I feel that Lost might be better served by having shorter but better planned seasons. (Okay, it would be better served by having writers who know a bit more where they're going, and by having a cast that doesn't get drunk and insults cops, resulting in the characters being killed off...)
belboz on 8/11/2006 at 15:02
The writers only wrote 3 seasons worth of lost, its abc that want it to run for 7 seasons, but the writers have said that they could stretch it to 4 seasons, but they would then quit, and abc would then have to find writers to finish the story off.
this was mentioned by the hobbit guy on a late night uk program (johnathan ross' show)
