I got suckered into it at first since it was the in thing to do until I wised up after it finished and recognized its pretentiousness and nonsensical story-telling. Sue me.
LOST: Season Six - Wano Edition
-
-
Sorry, phelous is the worst.
I love Phelous, but I heavily disagree with him on the MIB thing.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@Thousand:
Also the "it's magic" answer is always a cop-out.
So in a series where the source of all life and eventual death in the universe is located in the middle of an Island, magic is a cop out?
Explain to me how this make sense.
And besides it's obviously not "magic" it's "the island" or more specifically "the source" or from another perspective it's "God."
So, let's clear some things up, you're not aggravated with the answers, or plot holes/ inconsistencies that don't exist, your simply unhappy that the took the story into a direction that you didn't like.
So what would have made you like this series?
How would you have done it. -
Oh look. A link from TGWTG.
But whatever. It's one thing to criticize a series, but those that enjoy it? Get the hell out of here dude.
No one is going to give a shit TLC -
@Nex:
I love Phelous, but I heavily disagree with him on the MIB thing.
not my cup of tea I guess :x
-
@Nex:
So in a series where the source of all life and eventual death in the universe is located in the middle of an Island, magic is a cop out?
Explain to me how this make sense.
And besides it's obviously not "magic" it's "the island" or more specifically "the source" or from another perspective it's "God."
The "it's magic" is a cop-out because it hand waves all the complex questions that are given cheapening the whole thing. It doesn't matter what you call it, if you don't explore "the source", if you don't give some sort of explanation of the mechanics of this magical entity, if you just say it's magic, it's the very definition of lazy writing.
@Nex:
So, let's clear some things up, you're not aggravated with the answers, or plot holes/ inconsistencies that don't exist, your simply unhappy that the took the story into a direction that you didn't like.
So what would have made you like this series?
How would you have done it.I would have wrote it so that things actually made sense and plot-twists didn't contradict themselves every few episodes. I would have also toned down the pretentious bullshit so that the show didn't act smarter than it actually was. I would also have actually planned some of my mysteries so they would have a satisfactory pay-off instead of make shit up and then pull any answer out of my ass so we don't get embarrassing answers like the evil amorphous smoke thing that was supposed to be a security system was actually a man turned into a smoke thing because it can somehow do that and that it killed Eko for no reason after making him build a church again for no reason.
Oh look. A link from TGWTG.
But whatever. It's one thing to criticize a series, but those that enjoy it? Get the hell out of here dude.
No one is going to give a shit TLCSomeone needs to off-set all this positivity like Lost is the greatest show in existence that can do no wrong. When it's really not. Also where the hell did I criticize anyone for liking the show? I just said I hated it and that it's terrible. I never said it was bad to like it or that it's not good to other people. Don't be putting words in my mouth.
But whatever, you can enjoy your shallow psychobabble of a show while I enjoy legitimately deep and complex shows. Like The Wire.
-
Lost's writing is the exact opposite of pretentious.
-
@Thousand:
Also where the hell did I criticize anyone for liking the show?
Lol @ people who tinks tis show iz deep
Lol @ dem for not thinking itz deep
Lol @ dem all
lol -
Always acting smarter than it is, piling one mystery after another like it has some great plan in mind when it really has no clue what it's doing, bringing up complex issues of existentialism and never doing anything with them, creating interesting and complex characetrs only to kill them off in the most unsatisfying of manners? it was the very defintion of pretentious.
-
This is the only thing I'm going to respond to because I can tell arguing with you is like slamming my head into a brick wall.
@Thousand:
that it killed Eko for no reason after making him build a church again for no reason.
It killed him, because the actor didn't want to do the show anymore.
Sometimes you get unlucky that way.
Just like you get unlucky when your actors are getting a DUI every other week so you have to kill them off the show.
I won't spoil who that is, as Kitsune is in this thread, but you know who I'm talking about.
-
Lol @ people who tinks tis show iz deep
Lol @ dem for not thinking itz deep
Lol @ dem all
lolI laugh at the notion that this show it's deep because it's not. See above reason why it's not. I don't laugh at you for liking it. Again. Words. Mouth. Do not put.
-
@Thousand:
Always acting smarter than it is, piling one mystery after another like it has some great plan in mind when it really has no clue what it's doing, bringing up complex issues of existentialism and never doing anything with them, creating interesting and complex characetrs only to kill them off in the most unsatisfying of manners? it was the very defintion of pretentious.
One last thing, I can't help myself.
Watch the series again, and you'll see that they did actually have everything planned out.
It might not have been as obvious as you wanted it, but where's the fun in hand holding?
Also, the whole show was doused in existentialism. And the premise is very strongly rooted between Faith vs Science, with Faith ending up being the winner.
-
@Nex:
This is the only thing I'm going to respond to because I can tell arguing with you is like slamming my head into a brick wall.
It killed him, because the actor didn't want to do the show anymore.
Sometimes you get unlucky that way.
Just like you get unlucky when your actors are getting a DUI every other week so you have to kill them off the show.
I won't spoil who that is, as Kitsune is in this thread, but you know who I'm talking about.
I know that. Still bad story-telling.
-
-
@Thousand:
Always acting smarter than it is, piling one mystery after another like it has some great plan in mind when it really has no clue what it's doing, bringing up complex issues of existentialism and never doing anything with them, creating interesting and complex characetrs only to kill them off in the most unsatisfying of manners? it was the very defintion of pretentious.
I don't think you have a clue what writing means.
Nor do I think you have a clue what pretentious means.
-
@Thousand:
I know that. Still bad story-telling.
How is something they have no control over bad story telling?
-
Just writting a post in page 108.
-
Ah, darn DUIs and not liking Hawaii…
-
@Nex:
One last thing, I can't help myself.
Watch the series again, and you'll see that they did actually have everything planned out.
It might not have been as obvious as you wanted it, but where's the fun in hand holding?
Also, the whole show was doused in existentialism. And the premise is very strongly rooted between Faith vs Science, with Faith ending up being the winner.
No they didn't. It was blatant they didn't have a clue what they were doing. The entire penultimate episode "Across the Sea" was a blatant example of not knowing what they were doing.
Also I'm sick of Lost fans blaming the audience for not being smart enough to "get" it like we're total retards. DUR WHAT IS SUBTEXT? I have absolutely no problem with subtlety in story-telling. I relish it. I've read countless manga, watched tons of movies and TV shows. I watch Breaking Bad, I watch the Wire, I've read Lone Wolf and Cub and Nausicaa, I've watched Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Letters from Iwo Jima. I got those well enough and enjoyed them immensely.
I got the show enough to recognize the theme of Science vs Faith thank you very much. I also recognized it enough to see it was done poorly. I liked it better when it was done in Secret of Nimh.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@Nex:
How is something they have no control over bad story telling?
Because in the context of the story, it's still an interesting character with a ton of build up being randomly killed off.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
I don't think you have a clue what writing means.
Nor do I think you have a clue what pretentious means.
Well I've watched the whole show so I know all about the disappointing pay-offs you don't.
-
@Thousand:
Because in the context of the story, it's still an interesting character with a ton of build up being randomly killed off.
Yeah, shame on them for making a character so interesting and writing them off the show for things outside the showrunner's control!
The logical solution is to just make the characters uninteresting and never do anything with them ever.
-
Yeah, shame on them for making a character so interesting and writing them off the show for things outside the showrunner's control!
The logical solution is to just make the characters uninteresting and never do anything with them ever.
Hey you want a list of characters they randomly killed off that don't have that excuse?
No wait, I can't. Spoilers lol
-
@Thousand:
Hey you want a list of characters they randomly killed off that don't have that excuse?
No wait, I can't. Spoilers lol
Every character they killed off had a reason.
They're not George RR Martin.
-
@Thousand:
Well I've watched the whole show so I know all about the disappointing pay-offs you don't.
1. You underestimate how much I've been spoiled.
2. I don't have to watch the whole show to know that your entire contrarian argument is vague, and dare I say… pretentious. If your going to argue how terrible it is, at least have the decency to argue specifics, and not use the word "pretentious" like it's some magic end-all counterpoint to anything ever.Don't worry about not spoiling me. I don't have to read the spoiler tags.
-
The show answered all its questions. You make not like the answers, but it answered all of them.
It developed all the characters. Showed their entire lifetimes. Some of them had sudden unexpected departures, some planned and some not… but that's life.
Random death raises the stakes. Once anybody can die, at any time... suddenly you feel for, and worry about the characters... EVERY time. Any random episode could harm or change the status quo or make you go "Oh shit, what now?"
When they're immortal and nothing can happen to them because their names are in the opening credits, you run into One Piece's problem.
The show did everything it set out to do and holds together pretty well. Some weaker points here and there, a couple terrible episodes along the way, and a few amazing ones, but they obviously DID have a master plan at the start. Maybe not all the answers initially (they didn't even have all the questions initially) but they dealt with whatever they introduced.
"I hate the Battlestar ending because even though they set it up explicitly from the first episode and it was the main running theme throughout the entire series, I don't like the approach they took! I didn't know they MEANT it the entire time!"
-
Again, don't care about the answers. I gave up caring about the answers half-way through when it became clear the writers weren't gonna give us the answers. I care about the writing and the execution. I thought season 1 was great. There are still many moments that I adore like
! Charlie's death or anything to do with Desmond. There were some really strong moments throughout the show. it's just there was a ton of bullshit you had to wade through to get to it.
Edit: Hey Kitsune, you were the one who said not to worry about spoilers.
-
Wow, thanks for the spoiler tags, jackass.
-
@Thousand:
Again, don't care about the answers. I gave up caring about the answers half-way through when it became clear the writers weren't gonna give us the answers. I care about the writing and the execution. I thought season 1 was great. There are still many moments that I adore like Charlie's death or anything to do with Desmond. There were some really strong moments throughout the show. it's just there was a ton of bullshit you had to wade through to get to it.
Skypeia was important in the long run, however much of a needless aside it might feel like at the time. So was the Davy Back fight, most likely.
-
@Thousand:
Again, don't care about the answers. I gave up caring about the answers half-way through when it became clear the writers weren't gonna give us the answers.
You keep saying, this, but we keep pointing out that they did give us all the answers.
Then you say this again.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@RobbyBevard:
Skypeia was important in the long run, however much of a needless aside it might feel like at the time. So was the Davy Back fight, most likely.
In my thought, the Davy Back fight was important as it set the stage for Enies Lobby.
The crew had never seen the end of one of Luffy's fights before, and they never really knew just what he would go through for them. At the end of the DB fight Luffy is beat to hell by Foxy, but he keeps getting up, and then he declares he'd die for his crew. We see that mirrored on a much larger scale when they set out to save Robin. And then the same exact situation essentially happens near the end of the fight with Lucci.
That's what I think the purpose of the Davy Back Fight arc was anyway. Who knows, it may have more implications later down the road.
-
I don't like x because of inaccurate statement with no evidence
Inaccurate statement is challenged with evidence to the contrary.
I don't even care about evidence to the contrary because inaccurate statement with no evidence
You are kind of extraordinary.
-
@Nex:
Every character they killed off had a reason.
They're not George RR Martin.
I'll take offense on this.
-
@Sniper:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/108-answers-to-losts-supposedly-unanswered-questions/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=fanpage&utm_campaign=new+article&wa_ibsrc=fanpage
Brilliant!
Don't click if you haven't finished the series, though that should be obvious.Saying simple questions can't be answered because it's a TV show? Comparing that to movies? Star Wars?
I don't know why this is being praised, that's just fucking stupid. It's a serial television show, there's all the goddamn time in the world to answer simple side details.
-
I don't like x because of inaccurate statement with no evidence
Inaccurate statement is challenged with evidence to the contrary.
I don't even care about evidence to the contrary because inaccurate statement with no evidence
You are kind of extraordinary.
I read the "**" parts as more tedious bullshit
-
I'll take offense on this.
Yeah, it was a bad example, but I needed one to make. I guess I should have said, they kill of characters with a reason, just like Martin.
After all, while he may kill of characters quite often, for all the major/ semi-major ones who die, it's because they've completely fulfilled their role in the story, and we, the readers can see it.
(Book 1,3,&5 spoilers)
! That's why it was okay for Ned to die in book 1, and for the events of the Red Wedding.
! It's also why Jon isn't dead… -
@Monkey:
Saying simple questions can't be answered because it's a TV show? Comparing that to movies? Star Wars?
I don't know why this is being praised, that's just fucking stupid. It's a serial television show, there's all the goddamn time in the world to answer simple side details.
Ah, I probably shouldn't have said "brilliant" so readily, as I don't completely like the "it's magic" explanation for some of them- though I'm content with it.
Also, I never even thought of his "Jack the Smoke Monster" theory, and I think it makes total sense. -
@Sniper:
Ah, I probably shouldn't have said "brilliant" so readily, as I don't completely like the "it's magic" explanation for some of them- though I'm content with it.
Also, I never even thought of his "Jack the Smoke Monster" theory, and I think it makes total sense.Speaking of, the author of that article just posted a really in depth explanation of Jack becoming Smokey on his blog: http://lostanswers.tumblr.com/post/25732406479/the-jack-monster-and-the-smoke-mother
-
@Nex:
Speaking of, the author of that article just posted a really in depth explanation of Jack becoming Smokey on his blog: http://lostanswers.tumblr.com/post/25732406479/the-jack-monster-and-the-smoke-mother
Thank you very much!
-
LOST came up in the spoilers thread for the most recent OP chapter. Not related to ANYTHING about the chapter's content, just that its a long middle and if the ending is going to payoff.
So bumping this to make it easier to find if anyone wants to continue that discussion, and I might cut and paste some of the posts later but that's a bit of a pain.
Look I love One Piece and I dont think its getting too bad…for now. But still I think this article has all the concerns that the anti hindsight side has with the "Wait till its done" way of thinking.
https://io9.gizmodo.com/we-are-in-a-golden-age-of-awful-television-5735228
Like so many things, it's all Lost's fault. The show's unlikely popular and critical success - can you really believe this show actually won an Emmy for best drama? - created a whole new kind of mainstream network show. These were shows with massive ongoing arcs, complex mythologies, baffling mysteries that took seasons to unravel, and lots and lots of characters. This was a type of show far more ambitious than another police procedural, and with that comes a far greater capacity for failure. Of course, because imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and blatantly ripping off something successful is a network executive's idea of originality, the hunt was on for the next Lost.
Now, whatever you might think about Lost, it was fundamentally a well-crafted, competently made show. The cast was generally strong, it had consistently solid direction (with the possible exception of some shaky special effects sequences), and the writers seemed to have some idea where they were headed more often than not. And yet for all the talent involved and all the success the show had, it remains an incredibly divisive show that has pissed off even once fervent fans, thanks in part to its frustrating finale. A show like Lost can reach heights that would be impossible for just a standard police procedural, and yet the capacity for failure is much, much greater.
So if that's the track record for a good example of this kind of show, how bad could things get with weaker examples of the form? Just look at shows like FlashForward, The Event, and to some extent V, which are all clearly indebted to Lost in their tone and approach. In their way, these shows are also the spiritual successors of Seinfeld, because they're all essentially shows about nothing. These are all shows without real characters, without real action, without…well, without pretty much anything. It's almost heroic how committed these shows are to never doing anything that might be considered interesting.
Take V, which had a decent but flawed pilot and obvious directions for the show to go, if only because they could always just copy what the original miniseries did. The show also had a reasonably clear premise: "Seemingly benevolent aliens arrive with the promise of making our lives better, except they're actually evil and want to…" That's where the premise trails off, as we're still not really any closer than we were at the start of the show as to figuring out just what the hell the Visitors are up to.
The show's arc has more or less completely disintegrated, leaving behind the wimpiest terrorist group ever, endless smirking from Morena Baccarin, and some pointless drivel about the human soul. Whatever its flaws, at least the original series realized the aliens actually have to invade at some point, or else there really isn't much point making a show about an alien invasion. The show even abandoned its one moderately interesting (if infuriating) suggestion that this new show was going to be a mildly conservative, sci-fi critique of the Obama administration. But sadly, when faced with a choice between stupid and boring, V always chooses boring.At least V started off with a clear premise, even if it quickly evaporated. FlashForward, on the other hand, was little more than a vague idea that the show's creators promised was going to turn into something amazing. Which, to their credit, it sort of did, but only if you are a devotee of Joseph Fiennes's deliciously bad acting. Consider his infamous "BECAUSE I WAS LOADED" moment, which is a masterclass of bad acting, bad writing, and bad directing in just one line and fifteen glorious seconds:
By the end of its single season, FlashForward seemed less like the new Lost and more like a latter-day Heroes, constantly vomiting up pointless new plotlines and immediately discarding them when the creative team realized they had no idea what to do with them. Although you can't really argue the show deserved a second season, it has to be celebrated for the kind of lunacy that it reached in just twenty-two episodes. Heroes took at least two seasons to reach that level of insanity - FlashForward was pretty much there by episode eight.
The Event has now taken this creeping pointlessness to its apex. That show doesn't even have a premise or an idea - it just has a two-word phrase. The Event. What is The Event? Are there many events? Have we seen the event yet? How will we know the event when it comes? Why is the event important? None of these are questions The Event has any apparent interest in answering. You know how, if you repeat a word for long enough, the word starts sounding strange and meaningless? Yeah, The Event is basically that in television show form.Now, there have obviously been lots of terrible shows throughout television history, particularly terrible science fiction shows. What makes this new breed different? Part of it is the rise of serialized storytelling, something that didn't really exist on television before the last decade. When you watch a crappy eighties science fiction show like, say, Knight Rider, it only takes an episode to realize what you're watching isn't all that good. (Goofily enjoyable in a Hasselhoff-y type of way, maybe. But actually good? Not a chance.)
With shows like V or The Event, it's different. The serialized storytelling means the awfulness creeps up on you. The first and second episodes might not seem completely satisfying, but maybe that's just because the mythology is still kicking in. The expectation that a show needs multiple episodes to tell a single story means viewers are far more likely to suspend judgment than if it was just a string of self-contained episodes.
Eventually, when you're eight episodes in and you're nowhere close to a resolution, and any answers you have been given just sort of suck, the terribleness of the show finally sets in. But now it's a cumulative effect, with all eight hours of terrible TV washing over you all at once. If you realize you've wasted an hour or two of your life watching an awful TV show, you might be mildly ticked off. But what about when it takes half a season before you fully realize how mind-boggingly terrible the show really is? That's a level of rage no self-contained, 80s-style science fiction show could ever hope to provoke.What's worse, the serialized storytelling actually starts to erode the basics of storytelling. In an awful scifi show from the eighties, at least you were guaranteed the story would have a bad beginning, a terrible middle, and an awful ending. But now? Serialized shows can use the "Previously on" recap as their beginning and the "Next time on" teaser as their end, leaving nothing but a listless, amorphous middle.
At that point, you're lost in an unstructured wilderness, where there's no sense of forward movement or clear storytelling, and all you're left with is a bunch of stuff happening for no real reason while the sixty minutes tick agonizingly away. This is a trap both Lost and Battlestar Galactica fell into more than once, and those were both legitimately great shows.I stopped reading when they said LOST had a bad finale.
It ended great.
@Zik:
Its more like Lost had a bad final season that didn't do what they said it would and it's clear the ending wasn't the end they always had in mind. An entire season of some weird afterlife purgatory flashes were a waste.
What happened on the island was good but the damage was done with half the story being about dead ppl not remembering their actual lives doing meaningless shit until they remember and move on.
The side flashes were an extended finale where they all got their happy ending and second chances… it wasn't at all meaningless. The benefit of doing it in the format they did was the finale epilogue could be six hours long and be a stronger WTF mystery before you figured out what was happening. It worked just fine.
@Zik:
They were already dead. There was no happy ending. Writers just spent time going against character expectations by playing with the fact it was as if they all met for the first time again. It meant nothing to the overall story they had led up to for 5 seasons.
Spoilers for a show that ended 11 years ago
! They got to live entire second lifetimes, that were somewhat happier and more adjusted, and it was all being gifted to them by the island guardians as repayment for what they'd been through. It was established that while some of them died on the island, the rest of them did in fact live their full lives and died of old age. They didn't all get horrific tragedies. And then at the end of of it all, they get to run SECOND chances and do it better. They got reunited with the most important people in their lives, get all those memories back, and were able to fix their old baggage before moving on to what's next, together. That is ABSOLUTELY a happy ending.
! "They were all dead" doesn't diminish it when that world definitively has something after and their minds and experiences and lengths of time were real and they're officially moving onto something bettere .
! And I get that its easy to miss the hints along the way, especially the first time through on a weekly basis with multi-month hiatuses, but they were building towards that side universe ending since at least the third season. I rewatched the series recently with my wife who was seeing it for the first time and I caught a ton of early setup for it, mostly with Desmond.I get why that didn't work for some people, especially casual viewers, but the entire series was about living with and moving past your emotional baggage and being with the people that make you your best. It worked well emotionally and thematically, and the actual plot stuff wrapped itself up and answered all the mystery questions and dealt with all the villains.
The ending was fine, people just didn't want an emotional or religious answer to a sci-fi show, they wanted a checklist of answers with science explanations, (nevermind that most of the mystery box was covered by season 3) same with Battlestar Galactica, which ALSO had a solid ending despite being savaged as "one of the worst of all time.".. but was mostly only bad if you'd ignored the blatant blatant clues all along, going back to like the second episode, that was where it was going.
Now, How I Met Your Mother, THAT was a garbage ending that actively ruined the whole thing.
I can guarantee you they had this ending in mind the moment they knew how many seasons they were making, meaning: at the end of season 2. Before that, their network wanted LOST to follow the typical TV series path: make seasons until people stop watching. Lindelof and Abrams were not having it.
The eight season 3 episode "Flashes before your eyes", featuring Desmond seemingly reliving moments of his past, is actually set in this "bardo", the afterlife where the souls can reunite and move on. The main proof of this is the presence of Hawkins, Daniel's mother, and her ambiguous advice to Desmond.
LOST had flaws along the way, but considering all the pressure from producers, the network, and the unexpected actor departures, I find it impressive that they managed to carry a coherent and beautiful vision to fruition.
So the thread has become about Lost finale.
I did not at all enjoy the island side since the villain felt more victim/prisoner a cult then an ultimate evil making it hard to root against him and the length it went throught.
I liked some of the flash sideways like the ones with Ben while others I found very odd like Jack. Some of the scenarios were weird and the cast was very island incestual But I put that on who they they waiting for. I did enjoy the last reunion tho and felt pleased by the last image we got.
Also in my head limbo is for all the dead people not just those that go to the island.
Everybody focused on the Lost stuff and didnt focus on the important part. But that's on me, I should have deleted and only shown the important parts.
So…
1.) You haven't even watched the show. Why are you trying to comment on having watched just the second season?
2.) The characters were never dead or stuck in a limbo. Everything that happened on the island...actually happened. It wasn't in their "head" or some afterlife shit.
3.) By the time the final episode finished, it answered most if not all mysteries. People just didn't like the answers or paid attention to the blatantly obvious character-beats and drama and were pissed off that the last episode didn't become a checklist PowerPoint presentation.
I watched the show without being exposed to the fanbase or the reception or anything and I never came to the conclusion of them being dead, a garbage theory that sadly has become a meme that even people who haven't watched the show repeat and spread around, and understanding the blatantly obvious character-driven nature of the show.
The LOST part wasnt really that important you guys.
It's too late, the swarm is now upon you. Trying to struggle will only lead to longer rebuttals
I mean the points were shit regardless of whether it was about Lost or not lol.
EDIT: Do people here even watch something until it had its chance to tell the story before being super critical? Sounds like everyone is too busy being pretentiously critical than actually reading the story.
Lost stuff.
[hide]
1. It WASN'T a limbo or purgatory. Everything on the island was real and happened. That wasn't the explanation for any of it.
The ending had a limbo thing, for after the bulk of the series, but that wasn't related to the polar bears or the whispers or the flashbacks or paths crossing or the timetravel or the mysterious countdown or the numbers or any of the mysteries. It was a answer to a plot thread, not all of them. "They were just in hell all along" was not in fact the answer to any of it.
2. It's a writer/actor/showrunner's job to lie to the audience if they flat out wild guess the ending. That's standard for any medium for any story. You just can't change the ending and muck with the foreshadowing if people guess right.
If you're playing fair the audience should be able to figure out the end in advance… but when you had millions of people literally just guessing the answer before the clue even started dropping, of course you have to finesse it a bit. People guessed a lot of things, they couldn't just deny all the wrong answers and then wiggle around the correct ones, that's a dead give away. Showrunners have to lie ALL THE TIME.
The actual show itself was filled with red herrings that along the way make you go "is that the answer?" but which on repeat fall flat because those 1 sentence diversions carry zero weight and its just the characters wildly guessing, just like the viewers..
Just look at how Marvel has fakes us out TWICE now on parallel universes being a thing, and might be doing it again..
3. "People expected scientific explanations because the authors told them it wasn't a religious/spiritual thing."
They did provide scientific explanations. Those answers happened to also lean into the stuff that makes religion happen but they explained all of it.
"Badguys found a powerful energy source and tapped into it and shenanigan's followed" is the gist of it. Where's the dividing line? It it good and proper sci fi if aliens did it? If they call it "cyrohideaki particles" does that make it sci-fi? If evil govenment scientists make it, does that make it sci-fi? If the source is a meteor that fell from outer space, or a source of energy from the ground, what's the difference?
There were religious aspects ultimately because it was a story about life and death, but they didn't just cheat and say "angels did it." or "the prophecy said so." Everything had an explanation and they played fair. It was sci-fi with a bit of spirituality, because thats how humans work.
We know EXACTLY who is responsible for the post-series limbo, how, AND why, it isn't just let as ambiguous "uh, God I guess."
[/hide]i quite like the final season, i know it’s hit or miss to someone, but them being in purgatory either having the chance/second chance to live a life they wanted or fix their mistakes, then move on…is kind of beautiful. I do think ppl wanted answers to everything and that’s on the writers/show runners to not explain it all.
LOST stuff
[hide]Outside of a few very minor nitpicky details you have to be super obsessive to even know in the first place, they did answer everything. Like 98% of all questions were answered.Granted, its much harder to track stuff one week at a time over years than in a binge marathon, so watching the whole thing over a month definitely benefits it all.
It was a show you had to pay attention to, they didn't just give out a checklist villain monologue, but they DID answer basically all the questions.
Then the one dvd bonus feature they DID do a monologue checklist to work off a few random leftovers and it was really awkward and forced, but they did in fact adress the weird bird and where the food crates came from and what happened with Walt.[/hide]
I THINK I managed to edit out anything that was OP spoilery in there and just keep the LOST stuff but it's a lot. Someone let me know if I missed anything, appologies if I did..
-
Though my post isn't quoted here, thanks for the answer Robby.
I guess back then I heard more voices from the side that didn't like the ending and really was under the impression it was a much simpler, or dumber, affair.As for the Author should "just lie" part, well I guess it's harder than ever to avoid problematic questions like fans that guess the ending correctly, but a good story is always a good story.
I loved the Sixth Sense the first time I saw it, and altough I haven't rewatched it in years I think it still holds up, because it's a movie. There is a quick pay off to the switcharoo, it's done in one hour and a half. When working in a series you shouldn't try to hold those misteries for so long because you alienate part of your audience. You're just hiding for the sake of hiding.
If they guessed it that's alright as long as the delivery is still good. I spoiled myself when first watching OP and knew Luffy would declare war on the WG at Ennies Lobby, I was still at the edge of my seat because the delivery is more important than the mistery. If you go and watch some movie that adapts a story you already know, let's say Robin Hood, you're not judging if it surprises you, you're judging how well it was made. Or a movie based on real life events, you already know the ending, you may even have read newspaper articles about it and know all the facts, but you care about how well and engaging they are presented.I'd say Death Note's early arcs are good examples of keeping the audience engaged with the misteries, smaller affairs that get resolved quickly and then substituted with new ones while keeping only a big one looming over people's heads, in this case "How is Light gonna find out L's name and kill him?"
In Lost, from what I remember there where more of the smaller misteries that took longer to resolve, or they simply resolved into a new mistery without much closer. I remember them finding the hatch and spending all that time trying to open it and when they open it it brought only more small misteries, like what's the countdown for, it's also built by dharma but we still don't know who dharma is or why did they built it, instead of some more concrete answers like The hatch was built for this XYZ purpose. And after that, the characters could find out some object/info/thingy inside the hatch that brought a new mistery to the table. -
Bascially every single quetion that came up in the first season of LOST was answered by the third season. We knew all about Dharma and the polar bears and who the other people were, really the only thing not adressed by early in year 3 was the smoke monster… who was the big thread of the final season.
It brought up more questions along the way about timetravel and how to get back to the island and a new badguy and everything Desmond... but it answered those in time too.
I don't think they were particularly bad about leaving any one thing hanging for the entire length of the show... but it was probably a lot worse as a weekly.
-
I don't visit the spoiler thread, so thanks for putting that discussion here. Lost is awesome and still one of my favorite shows ever. I think it's an unpopular opinion, but I actually think the Flashsideways are the best part about Season 6. I mean, I like a lot of stuff going on on the island, especially everything surrounding Locke the smoke monster, but there a few very meandering, fillerish plotlines that don't really go anywhere, like Sun losing her ability to speak English after she hit her head. Everything in the flashsideways is really, really well done and it actually gets more emotionally poignant after you learn what it is in the finale.
The most frustrating thing about the series finale is that people still, to this day, get it all wrong and think every character was dead from the very first episode and the island was purgatory.
-
The most frustrating thing about the series finale is that people still, to this day, get it all wrong and think every character was dead from the very first episode and the island was purgatory.
This is what frustrates me as well, and a lot of that confusion seems to stem from people not understanding the flash sideways of season 6, and the post credit sequence at the end of the series that has a couple of still shots of the plane wreckage on the island, with no one in sight.
The creators went on record to state it was meant to be like a nostalgic callback to the beginning, but I can see why that would lead a lot of people to that "dead" interpretation, especially if the viewer isn't going out of their way to look at outside material for understanding.
-
I remember first watching a random episode of Lost, kind of on a whim, and got instantly hooked on it. It ended up being some of the most fun I've ever had watching a TV show.
That said, I'm still not totally sure how I feel about the ending, but it's been 10 years since I've seen the show and I'm not really in a position to debate on it. I may have to give it a rewatch some time.
-
I will forever applaud Lost for using the same character's dead body as season finale cliff hanger for two seasons in a row (4 and 5).
-
I don't visit the spoiler thread, so thanks for putting that discussion here. Lost is awesome and still one of my favorite shows ever. I think it's an unpopular opinion, but I actually think the Flashsideways are the best part about Season 6. I mean, I like a lot of stuff going on on the island, especially everything surrounding Locke the smoke monster, but there a few very meandering, fillerish plotlines that don't really go anywhere, like Sun losing her ability to speak English after she hit her head. Everything in the flashsideways is really, really well done and it actually gets more emotionally poignant after you learn what it is in the finale.
I thought the island part sucked and was very uncompelling.
The flashsideways thing. I remember being really touched by Hurley and Ben's goodbye at the church and his choice to learn about humility in his sidelife. I have no idea what t Jack's life was about with divorce and a kid that hates him.
The most frustrating thing about the series finale is that people still, to this day, get it all wrong and think every character was dead from the very first episode and the island was purgatory.
Does anyone that actually watched it think that or is it just a meme? I think I remember Christian explaining its just where you go once you have lived your life and are dead. Or was that a scene assed later?
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
I dont think Lost makes a coherent or good whole. Every season to me felt like "what if we tried that?". It does have strong parts tho.
I remember season 5's Daniel spending so much time on we cant change time lets just accept it and have a nice season out of living in the past. Then last 2 episodes happen and need a cliffhanger we can totally try to change time and we have to hurry.
-
Does anyone that actually watched it think that or is it just a meme? I think I remember Christian explaining its just where you go once you have lived your life and are dead. Or was that a scene assed later?
.There's a lot of people that dropped out of the series part way through and turned in ONLY for the final episode. Which, with zero context from the earlier episodes, is a confusing mess.
So yes, a lot of people, a LOT, completely misunderstand the ending because they only half watched it and were playing catch up and it wasn't a giant checklist.
Except the way they structured the last episode, there were 6 hours of epilogue before it throughout the season.
The finale on its own, not great and easy to misunderstand. The finale as part of the entire season? Immensely satisfying.
Battlestar Galactica gets hit with basically the same criticisms, because "religion in my sci-fi, boo" even though the religious aspect was there the entire time… and basically every action of the president is insane without it, and all the prophecies and things don't work without it. It was strong emotionally and did the chaacter stuff well, it was a solid ending. Not a great final season, (everything was downhill after they revealed the final five) but they nailed the landing.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
That said, I'm still not totally sure how I feel about the ending, but it's been 10 years since I've seen the show and I'm not really in a position to debate on it. I may have to give it a rewatch some time.
I rewatched ti last year with my wife, who had never seen it. It's a mixed bag on rewatch.
On the one hand, its a lot easier to see foreshadowing and clues and follow the overall thing and anticipate the character moments… but it loses a lot once the surprise twists are no longer surprises and you just brush off the red herring questions as red herrings instead of actually thinking about them. And some parts, like how long they hunkered around that button in season 2, or how long the main trio were captured in season 3, really feel dragged out.
And of course, knowing that basically the entire season 2 cast is going to leave due to actor problems really throws that off.
But the strong moments? The flashbacks? The character stuff? Watching the growth knowing where characters are going, if they're a character that's going the stay the whole time? The good stuff is still REALLY good, but like any series that hinges around mysteries or ongoing cliffhangers it loses a little bit the second time around.
Overall it holds up, and its probably worth a rewatch if its been a decade, but it's probably going to be a long time before I take a third crack at it.
I do kind of wish I'd watched the show as it was running though, I missed out on the speculation and watercooler part of the experience.
-
The character-stuff alone is worth the re-watch and holds up far better than any other American show I have ever watched.
It's funny that Lost is remembered for the mystery and the shitty ending and yet the character-stuff is easily the highlight and one of the finest achievements in Western media as far as I'm concerned. It's nice to see emotional complexities of a character being portrayed and explored rather than the emotionally-brain-dead approach that many many Western writers tend to take when writing their characters. It has more in-common with Eastern-storytelling style than the typical Western approach.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Everything in the flashsideways is really, really well done and it actually gets more emotionally poignant after you learn what it is in the finale.
.My favorite part about that was seeing Ben, in a different situation, being presented with similar choices as season 4 but him choosing Alex over his lust for power was just brilliant. Though the writers changing the father-daughter dynamic into a teacher-student was just….creepy. Alex definitely didn't need to be Ben's student in that reality.
But other than that, the flashsideways has some of the most amazing character payoffs and moments that otherwise wouldn't work if not for what the writers already did in the beginning/throughout the series.
-
It's funny that Lost is remembered for the mystery and the shitty ending and yet the character-stuff is easily the highlight and one of the finest achievements in Western media as far as I'm concerned. It's nice to see emotional complexities of a character being portrayed and explored rather than the emotionally-brain-dead approach that many many Western writers tend to take when writing their characters. It has more in-common with Eastern-storytelling style than the typical Western approach.
It also went really freaking long because of the constant mysteries and scifi/mysticism mumbo jumbo so Im not surprised its remembered for that.
My favorite part about that was seeing Ben, in a different situation, being presented with similar choices as season 4 but him choosing Alex over his lust for power was just brilliant. Though the writers changing the father-daughter dynamic into a teacher-student was just….creepy. Alex definitely didn't need to be Ben's student in that reality.
Ben easily had the best flash sideways for me. I dont think the teacher student was creepy. Student finding a mentor in a teacher is fine. And I think it matched well with the theme of Ben sidelife being about letting go of his ego and selfishness which included taking Alex by force from Rousseau. He gets to be there for her and help her go forward in her life without having to make himself the most important figure in her life as a parent. He learns to stand back. I like it.
And I think there's an implication its the real Rousseau as her mom and she gets to live a life with her daughter unlike on the island.
Him and Locke are the flashforwards I really liked.
-
@Zik:
Its more like Lost had a bad final season that didn't do what they said it would and it's clear the ending wasn't the end they always had in mind. An entire season of some weird afterlife purgatory flashes were a waste.
What happened on the island was good but the damage was done with half the story being about dead ppl not remembering their actual lives doing meaningless shit until they remember and move on.
Totally agree.
If the flashsideaways had been to an alternate universe i would have liked them better.In fact, i had asimilar problem with How I met your mother:
! The last season about the wedding, and then they get divorce in one episode…
-
@Mr.:
has a couple of still shots of the plane wreckage on the island, with no one in sight.
I don't have the source right now but Damon Lindeloff talked about this and said that it wasn't their decision to include the plane wreckage, it was the Network and the higher ups that made the decision.
Starts at 17:02 with the wreckage part.
I recommend the entire video though. It's pretty awesome.
-
The flashsideways thing. I remember being really touched by Hurley and Ben's goodbye at the church and his choice to learn about humility in his sidelife. I have no idea what t Jack's life was about with divorce and a kid that hates him.
Jack's flashsideways were constructed in a way that he could deal with his biggest issues in life, i. e. his relationship with his wife and especially his Dad (and also Locke, of course, who he fixes in the end, resolving his own guilt over treating him like shit over the course of the series). So he is still divorced, but he is on really good terms with his ex-wife (Juliet in this world). He isn't completely consumed by obsession like he was with his real ex-wife. As for his son, it's a pretty clever way of resolving his relationship problems with his father. Now he is basically in his father's shoes, sees things from his point of view, but actually manages to bond with his son in the end - something him and his Dad never managed to do while they were still alive.
-
Jack's flashsideways were constructed in a way that he could deal with his biggest issues in life, i. e. his relationship with his wife and especially his Dad (and also Locke, of course, who he fixes in the end, resolving his own guilt over treating him like shit over the course of the series). So he is still divorced, but he is on really good terms with his ex-wife (Juliet in this world). He isn't completely consumed by obsession like he was with his real ex-wife. As for his son, it's a pretty clever way of resolving his relationship problems with his father. Now he is basically in his father's shoes, sees things from his point of view, but actually manages to bond with his son in the end - something him and his Dad never managed to do while they were still alive.
I feel the marriage thing is still very weird as I remember was more being bad at connecting with his wife and worrying more about ficing everything then having a real life with her then it was being a stalker ex-husband. Its not even his real wife just Juliet.
But I like your interpretation of the son part.