Thursday, January 22, 2009

Lost Thursdays: Season 5, Eps. 1 and 2, "Because You Left" and "The Lie"

By Todd VanDerWerff

I suspect when all is said and done that the history of Lost will cleave it pretty neatly into two different shows.

There’s already been plenty written about how Lost’s two-hour fifth season premiere (which is really two episodes that probably could have been stitched together more neatly but most likely weren’t for syndication reasons) more overtly tugs the show into science fiction territory, while the stuff off the island with the Oceanic Six delves into the character-based side of the show that has kept it from having ratings so low it was canceled midway through its first season. But this divide between genre show and character drama is not specifically where the great divide falls for Lost. The great divide falls between the first half of the show’s third season and the last half of that season (which roughly matches up with when executive producers Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse convinced ABC to let them set a hard end date for the series). Before season three’s 13th episode, “The Man from Tallahassee,” the series was much more meandering and much more prone to fits of stupidity. But it was also a show with more time—time for things like visual poetry or narrative tangents that occasionally seemed like dead ends (fans hated season three’s “Tricia Tanaka Is Dead,” but it was really a fine little piece of television—it just didn’t advance the master narrative in any way). This series also was slowly shrugging off some of the pitfalls from first season, mostly set there via the original series conception by J.J. Abrams and Lindelof (Abrams has since left the series as an active creative force for the most part, enmeshing himself in Fringe, which actually is starting to feel a lot like Lost in some ways), and that could lead to some really ridiculous things like long flashbacks where we learned why Jack got a tattoo.

But after the network set a firm end date for the show, it became something ever-so-slightly different. Gone were the long, meander-y episodes where we found out why Kate liked horses (and/or killed her dad) for the most part (there was one where we found out why Desmond says “brother” to everyone, but that was the last of an old era). The show became something much more purposeful, taking great strides forward in its narrative and starting to tie seemingly disconnected elements into a larger framework. In addition, the characters started behaving more like real people, no longer forced to do things they wouldn’t do in real life in a similar situation by the constraints of a plot that said they couldn’t because the show might run 10 seasons, and what would you do then? Most of the series’ fans are deeply agnostic that Cuse and Lindelof really had a plan for how the series would run, but the episodes since that back half of season three seem to speak well for the two at least having SOME idea of how this was all going to play out. Plus, while there have been a few clunkers since the back half of season three (most notably season four’s “Something Nice Back Home”), the series by and large has reinvigorated itself as one of the best hours of action-packed TV out there, flitting easily between genres, depending on who’s got the episode focus that week.

And yet there are times when I find myself pining for the series that was. I actually think the series Lost has become is better in just about every quantifiable way when compared to its old self (for one thing, we’re never going to get something as loosely plotted and maddening as that huge midsection of season two, where plot points were raised and then just seemingly forgotten about). The scripts are better, the direction is tighter (even when the scripts are not), the acting is more focused, and the production values are second to none (look at how convincingly the series makes its Hawaiian locations look like every other city in the world BUT Honolulu). The series still carries a few nagging bugs—when pressed for time, it will often just skip over ANY subtext whatsoever, and the two leads (Matthew Fox’s Jack and Evangeline Lilly’s Kate) are terminally stuck in a will-they/won’t-they pairing that regularly drags down the show—but by and large, this is the best drama on basic network TV, the kind of show that just dives right into the crazy stuff and expects the audience to catch up, as in season four’s “The Constant,” the best episode the series has ever done. But I really wish, sometimes, that we could get some very simple moments of visual beauty (like that season one shot of Sun bathing in the ocean) or some plot digressions that DON’T have to be tied into the master plot (season two’s “Dave” remains a series highlight for me). But this is the show Lost has become, and, as stated, it’s a very good show. So those moments of pining are few. But they’re there.

Now, that being said (and I hope to return to the series as a whole more over the course of the season, as the site’s resident apologist for even some of the clumsier stuff), tonight’s premiere, while a thrilling piece of very good television, occasionally tries to wear too many hats at once. The best episodes of Lost tend to have one strong throughline and do the minimum of audience hand-holding, and there were points when the premiere felt SLIGHTLY too scattered and a couple of scenes where our hands were squeezed a little too tightly. Still, the premiere was a testament to the fact that the show’s writers and sprawling cast (comprised of 14 regulars, almost as many dead regulars and an enormous company of regular guest players) have managed to create a mass-market cult show: one that can dabble in theories of time travel driven by quantum physics that manages to hang on to people who have no idea of what’s going on because of how ably that cast has fleshed out characters that were essentially types when the show began.

The two hours focus on Josh Holloway’s Sawyer (in the first hour) and Jorge Garcia’s Hurley (in the second hour). Sawyer has always been the show’s most straightforward character. Where other characters might dither in the face of being told by Faraday (the excellently twitchy Jeremy Davies) that crazy stuff was going on and he’d explain it all later, Sawyer just slaps him in the face and demands an answer (something many Lost fans have surely wanted to do with many an answer-withholding character in the past). He’s also the best character to exemplify the show’s niftiest metaphor in quite a while—the idea of the island and its inhabitants becoming unmoored in time standing in for the idea that when you’re in grief (as Sawyer is, over believing his lover and friends have all perished), you rarely know where or when you are. His presence also allows the writers to get away with offering up a fairly accomplished explanation of the rather complicated time travel conceit the show has apparently seized on as its driving force for this season, having Faraday use an analogy with a record player to get over enough of the concept to satisfy the casual fans while also providing just enough grist for the hardcore fans to go nuts over at DarkUFO.

Hurley’s a different matter altogether. The end of the second episode (when he turns himself in to the cops instead of going off with Ben—the always superb Michael Emerson) offers up what seems to be a pretty clear plot stall. Ben needs all of those who escaped the island to be back together to return to the island, but Hurley doesn’t trust Ben (with good reason), so he turns himself into the authorities, who want him in investigation of multiple murders (the evidence against Hurley is pretty damning, though he didn’t commit a single murder). We know that Hurley wants to go back to the island, and though we also know he doesn’t trust Ben, Ben offers a pretty sweetheart deal, all things considered. In addition, Hurley spends most of the episode feeling conflicted over the lies he told to serve the Oceanic Six story, and it feels a bit forced as a story point. It’s come up before, but at this point, it feels like he should have larger concerns. Surprisingly, though, Garcia, who has always been the show’s soul, even in its most chaotic moments, almost pulls it off. He makes his distrust of Ben so palpable that you don’t really question him until the episode is over, and he plays the moment when he tells his mother everything that REALLY happened (including many of the show’s most implausible elements) so perfectly that your heart breaks for him even as you haven’t really found this plotline all that believable before. The episode also featured great moments for Emerson, Terry O’Quinn as Locke, Yunjin Kim as Sun and even Michelle Rodriguez as Ana-Lucia (turning up in a cameo seemingly designed to try to make fans forgive the actress and character for much of season two’s aimlessness). Lost’s cast is probably its best asset, and I’ll certainly have more to say about how these actors have pushed the writers on the show to places they might not have gone under the show’s original conceit (and vice versa, to give the writers credit) in the weeks to come.

The best stuff in both episodes occurs on the island, which is skipping through time. (Or are the people on it skipping instead? The final scene of the second hour seems to definitively show the island itself is traveling and taking the people with it.) The terrific disorientation of these early sequences, where only Faraday seems able to grasp what’s happening, makes for enthralling television, and examining the history of the island seems like the best way for the show to turn while still delaying most of the series’ big reveals for its sixth and final season. The moment where Faraday convinces Desmond (Henry Ian Cusick), who’s ALREADY found himself traveling through time in prior seasons, that he needs to go see Faraday’s mother in Oxford, quickly rewiring the future to his own benefit, is one of those moments that makes you grin with the swoon-y possibility of it all that the best science fiction delivers in spades. The scene following, where Desmond awakens from a dream he then correctly identifies as a memory, just makes it all even better, but just as much of that lies in the edit, which jumps from Faraday confronting an on-island Desmond to a point three years (or more?) in the future and from the South Pacific to the Mediterranean. It’s a little cheap to enjoy Lost solely for the scope it employs, but there are few better reminders of just how much the series has opened itself up over the years than in this edit.

In addition, the action sequences in the episode are nearly perfect. Think of that towering crane shot as Sawyer and the other island folk race from the flaming arrows hissing down at them (taking out what appears to be most of the longtime background extras in the process) and then the mad scramble into the trees away from them, or the nicely paced and choreographed kitchen fight between Sayid (Naveen Andrews, who makes for an enjoyably comic prop in the second hour) and one of Widmore’s goons. The kitchen fight is the sort of thing we’ve seen in dozens of films and TV shows over the last decade, but Lost finds an efficient brutality all its own, and the way Sayid (accidentally) dispatches of the goon is a great moment for a sick laugh.

It all culminated in one of those moments Lost fans are sure to freeze frame endlessly and dissect on message boards, as a cloaked Mrs. Hawking (Fionnula Flanagan, playing one of my favorite bit characters on the show), who might just be Desmond’s mother, of all things, did a little math, then confronted Ben about how badly things would go if he couldn’t break Hurley out of jail. Because of the sheer ambition of the time travel narrative, neither episode had the HUGE CLIFFHANGERS the show is known for, but this final moment was a nicely creepy one, set as it was in a candle-lit church and featuring two actors who can handle the show’s cryptic dialogue, biting into it with relish. It was the kind of thing Lost does best—all shadows, pulp plotting and fine acting—and, even without a huge nailbiter to end on, damned if it didn’t make me excited for next week.

***

Some thoughts:

  • I plan to largely dissect the episodes’ scripts, performances, direction and technical aspects in these reviews, rather than offer speculation-filled recaps, which are a dime-a-dozen. My Lost speculation tends to be really poorly thought out anyway, though I certainly invite you to share your theories below. If there’s a great clamor to offer more of my thoughts in this regard, I’ll certainly reconsider. I’ll also cut down on the lengthy ruminations on the series’ history if y’all want.

  • I take over this feature from the more than capable Andrew Dignan and Justine Elias, who both did some great writing on the series (Dignan, in particular, really forced me to sharpen my arguments in favor of the show when he was writing about it). I hope to follow in their footsteps well enough.

  • So everybody has a 70 hour window in which to get back to the island? How many episodes will that work out to? My money’s on four or so, which would place the return to the island sometime in February sweeps.

  • I haven’t seen it yet, but most everyone who saw next week’s episode, “Jughead,” at TCA says it’s one of the series’ better outings. I’m hoping for good things!

  • See, and I didn’t even talk about Locke, whose journey through time probably had the most import for the series twisty mythology. Feel free to dissect what he was up to in comments, and I’ll try to chime in. The short version: O’Quinn, as always, is terrific (most of his sequences are just him reacting to things by himself), and Nestor Carbonell makes a good foil for him. As always, Locke’s storyline ties the most into the heart of the show’s mythos, and I like hearing lines like “The next time we see each other, I won’t recognize you.”

  • And I ALSO didn’t talk at all about that terrific opening sequence, which was full of sly nods to the fans, head-spinning plot implications and one of the series’ finer needle-drops (on Willie Nelson’s “Shotgun Willie”).

  • I usually try to work this stuff organically into the review itself, but the two-hour/two-episode nature of the premiere means it was too clumsy to get in there. "Because You Left" was written by Lindelof and Cuse and directed by Stephen Williams. "The Lie" was penned by Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz and directed by series head director Jack Bender.

  • Petty, copy editing thing: capitalize Island or leave it lower-case? I’m thinking capitalization is the way to go, since it’s decidedly a specific place in the show’s mythos, but I went with lower-case in this piece because … I don’t know why. I realize exactly three people who might read this will care, but what do you think?
______________________________________________

House contributor Todd VanDerWerff is the publisher of the pop culture blog South Dakota Dark.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

I can't say I agree with your criticisms of the show. I've watched the series many times over (doing this, one would be surprised how far in advanced things are planned and how the smallest detail is accounted for – I predict the planning will only become apparent when everything is solved), and in the end, I'm convinced the show is as flawless as it could be for its running time and more genuinely ambitious than any story I've seen (also, than people give it credit for). For instance, you see "Stranger in a Strange Land" as one simple thing, but I find much more in it, albeit maybe only fully relevant retrospectively. And I see the show's "sloppiness" or even the "split" as intended positives.

For me, the most affecting part of the first Lost episodes of season five was when Ben told Jack to get a suitcase and pack everything it in that he'll want to keep from this life (notice the diction matches Desmond's famous line). In the end, Lost will be transcendent because of the incredible metaphors it draws on of our own perceived reality, which is a reality that is more unknown than known. However, it's also about the individual, as there is a story in Lost that's so broad, and yet so precise, that everyone can relate to, somehow expressing the significance of each person's path. ("Path" also layers to explain the scientific conjecture of the story, that in space time, humans distinctly have paths.) I'll continue on the scene, when Ben says ". . . because you're never coming back to it [this life]." Jack does not hesitate. He will die on the island. He accepts it, right there. Destiny in Lost is not a controlling force as much as it's realizing the potential of what one is meant to do, and in the end, wants to do. Every person in the world has a chance to get to their island if they make the sacrifices. This is what Jack has learned, and that's why he has to go back. What his destiny is, or what any of our destinies are, is not the core matter at this level of the story.

Maybe I'll come back around to see what you have to say on other episodes. I thought these two, taken as a whole as they feel like they should be, were relatively great compared to other Lost episodes, but they will only be topped based on what they're setting up.

Wax Banks said...

one would be surprised how far in advanced things are planned and how the smallest detail is accounted for – I predict the planning will only become apparent when everything is solved

Bet you a thousand dollars you're absolutely, utterly wrong about the planning, Anonymous. But then you're supposed to be.

If you go back and rewatch the Buffy episode 'Restless' (4x22) after watching the Season Six goof-off 'Tabula Rasa' (6x08), you'll see what looks like clever foreshadowing all over the place: Giles's 'He's like a son to me' line, Spike's stupid brown suit, the garden gnomes, Olivia with the stroller, etc.

But you'd have the timing backwards: it's not foreshadowing, it's callbacks. The writers 'laid in' material in the earlier episodes, knowing they could pick things up later on and retroactively construct a more complex story than they'd started out with. The showrunner did have material worked out in advance, but all the scene-to-scene stuff, even the episode-to-episode mini-arcs, got worked out only a few weeks or months in advance.

TV writers tend not to be able to plan specific plots years in advance, because they don't know who'll be around when, how much money they'll have, what locations will be available, whether they'll even have jobs next season. Lost was created this way, obviously; hell, the writers didn't even know Locke had been in a wheelchair when they set out to write the episode in which this central character detail was revealed.

If you believe that there's a coherent story being told here then the writers have done (some version of) their jobs, i.e. they've laid in enough stuff to work with later, and have picked it up relatively seamlessly. Alas, the writers have said a number of times there wasn't any real plan for the first couple of seasons.

(I didn't watch the episodes. I think I might hop off the bus at this point; Todd's very smartly described the split in the show, but I was so disgusted by the second and third seasons of the series - and the hollowness and faux-complexity of the story - that even the comparatively brisk, unabashedly pulpy fourth season can't make it worthwhile. The spectacle of the writers trying to stitch together a plot would be a lot more engaging if I thought they were going to use that plot to tell a meaningful story.)

Benjamin Birdie said...

I think you mean "Faraday's mother" not Desmond's. Fantastic review.

Anonymous said...

Uh, bet you I'm not wrong. That's why Lost is different. "TV writers" handbook do not apply. If you watch the episodes closely, you'll see specific topics brought up over a season in advance. And the fact that they've said the show was outlined from the start – the essentials (and they will, when it ends, explain this further... the process). And it was meant to run roughly six seasons, from the start. Etc., etc. Of course they don't know every episode or season exactly from the start. Good you got off the boat. It's not for you; that's why it's distinct.

Joel E said...

Not to belabor this point, but I think you'll be disappointed Anonymous to find out Wax is probably (mostly) right. Abrams is an amazing showman and an incredibly savvy manipulator of the press. He implied a lot that simply wasn't true and careful reading of interviews given in the last 18 months bear out the point that much was not planned early on, that much has been changed or simply ignored since season one, and that seasons two and three were a huge test for the writing staff because no end date existed.

That said, even though I have tremendous frustrations with this show's second and third seasons, it's regained my interest. I found last night's time travel mumbo jumbo inherently frustrating (Farrady's "explanation" seemed to directly conflict with the narrative of the two episodes), but this show is just pulpy enough to keep me engaged.

I've long since given up on all this making sense and I have to chuckle at anyone expecting this to all be neatly sewn up, but it is one of the most impressive runs by a network series in a long time. Even if Lost goes right off the rails in these final seasons, it's incredible that it's managed to stay afloat this long considering all the places it's gone. Hurley's rambling confession to his mother exemplified this, as it deftly satirized the ridiculous narrative the series has embraced.

Kudos to the writers. They continue to throw curves like Hall-of-Famers.

Anonymous said...

I have other sources. J.J. was involved early on, but there was always an outline. The lack of an end date just stretches the outline. When the finale airs, I'll compile the analysis of how the show is constructed. Damon, and then Carlton, have had their core ideas from very early on and have gradually made them more specific as they've had to deliver episodes. I don't think of J.J. as any more of an instigator, not one who had a passion to think about the end game of the story from the start (Damon). Other people than J.J., those more directly involved, give interviews too. The show WILL be sewn up to the extent that it's necessary for the purpose of the show. Count on it. (I figured out the flash-forward coming from "Stranger in a Strange Land" and "Flashes Before Your Eyes"... one funny one, only about a little less than a season in advance is Richard's joke to Juliet about her six months on the island and how "time flies there."). Really, wait until it actually ends. 'The show is one big long con' on ya. The viewing Jacks will turn to Lockes. That's all there is to say. ;)

Todd said...

Anon: Day-to-day TV production schedules and the vagaries of actors and other elements mean that no TV show can be planned out to the degree that fans have assumed Abrams, et al., had Lost planned out to. The writers have always said they knew where things were going, but all that may mean is that they knew what the Island was, which is the sort of thing you can know without really knowing how you're going to reveal it. If this all were really planned out to the level of detail you seem to assume, the show would play much more coherently (and I rewatched the whole thing in preparation for this series), and I say that as someone who, in general, REALLY LIKES THE SHOW. I'm pleased Lindelof and Cuse have admitted, as much, that in the early going, the show was not as planned out as they blusteringly said it was (remember that clash over the David Fury interview in late season one?). I mean, Ron Moore has said that he was making most of Battlestar Galactica up as he went along (until about mid-season three when he realized the end was nigh), and I don't begrudge that series for that.

Wax: You know you'll never give up on this show! To that end, though, I'm not sure the kind of coherent narrative you've always seemed to desire out of this show is even POSSIBLE in television. The Wire had a coherent narrative, but it also didn't really have an over-arching one, just five different narratives that were thematically linked. This strikes me as the best way to tell a cohesive story in television, but it's also not going to work on Lost, where the producers couldn't have exactly done six different stories about being stuck on an Island (I think that's a Wallace Stevens poem). I agree that much of the plotting in season two, especially, is incredibly frustrating (especially in retrospect, even as the season paradoxically plays better on DVD than it did first-run), but I actually have some things to say about this in the future, especially vis a vis the internal battle for the show (even if none of the writers were conscious of it) between it being what Abrams and Lindelof created it as and what Lindelof and Cuse wanted it to be, which was a much more interesting series but took a confused while to get to.

Joel E said...

I look forward to these pieces, Todd, especially if you can shed light on the backstage drama that lead to Walt being written off the show and now returned. My girlfriend assumed that the Oceanic 6 were given a 3-year gap back in the real world so that his character could be reintroduced this season (explaining his sudden maturation).

Sounded plausible to me, but I haven't kept up on all the show-related gossip since season 2. That cat might have been out of the bag long ago.

Todd said...

Joel, so far as I know, Walt's disappearance was primarily written because the kid was aging so rapidly. You'll notice that late in season one, Lindelof starts saying that there's "a plan" to deal with his aging, and I can only assume this was the kidnapping.

Todd said...

Anon: I WILL say that the moment when Ben tells Jack to pack a bag with the things he needs was one of my favorite moments of both episodes. The relief that washes across Fox's face is one of his better acting moments in the series, I think, and the whole concept of it has that traditional, goofy Lost charm.

Rogorn said...

Here’s a question I propose you all to return to every now and then: how good is this series going to end up being? After the ‘hard end date’ there can’t be any more excuses that they’re trying to spread material too thin or that they have to be playing the audience artificially to get extra seasons. Surely now they will write what they want to write, so then: how good is it going to be?

My favourite bit of these episodes was Hugo encapsulating the previous 4 seasons for his mum. And for the newcomers. And the fans. And the lostie geeks. And even screenwriting students (you know you’re supposed to recap somehow for the benefit of new or ‘lost’ viewers (lame pun intended), but it’s never one of the sexy parts of the job). It came out as accomplishing the job, and at the same time making fun of how difficult it must have been to put that sentence together. And it went for the right key, too: humour. Hearing it from the guy in the series everybody loves to love, any newcomers might even feel that they must have been missing something really fun (“Hmmm, how can I borrow those dvds without sounding like I’m recanting?”).

Still on Hugo, I differ from Todd’s impression that “Hurley spends most of the episode feeling conflicted over the lies he told to serve the Oceanic Six story, and it feels a bit forced as a story point.” I don’t feel that Hugo is completely devoid of guile (his trick in this episode to get himself arrested proves it), but I have always felt that his inherent ‘dude-ness’ will always make him feel that telling lies is not for him, but not out of any saintliness, but out of the knowledge that it’s too much work to keep them undiscovered. In particular the kind of snowballing craziness that he’s been forced to put up with as a one sixth of the Oceanic Six. "What am I going to say next that will reveal our official story’s fake?" It’s not so much ‘conflicted’ by the lies as ‘brain-fried’, and I find it one hundred per cent believable. Also, his distrust of Ben surely stems from the fact that it is a guy that makes a conversation with him a series of insoluble puzzles. “Is he duping me again? Did I miss something I should have not? Is he triple-crossing me, or is it only a double this time? Oh, go away”.

And one more thing: will these answer threads continue after the next episode, or the window for answers closes after each new installment? Because many people will read these entries weeks or month later. I know I have with a couple of other TV series you all have recapped.

Cheers.

Anonymous said...

You ought to rewatch "Something Nice Back Home." When I watched it live last year, I also thought it was weak. It was tough to figure out where the rapid acceleration of Jack and Kate's relationship fit into the larger flash-forward timeline.

But if you have the season 4 DVD set, FIRST watch the bonus feature that runs highlights from the flash-forwards in chronological order; and then re-watch "Something Nice Back Home." A lot of previously inexplicable stuff makes more sense, and you can concentrate more on the craft and tone of the episode, which is top notch.

It's got some great work by Fox, particularly in the scene where he visits Hurley at Santa Rosa and the one where he sees his father in the hospital lobby.

The whole flash-forward has a dark, noir feel and a sense of dread that harkens back to the first season. Back on the island, Jack's emergency appendectomy is also exciting and harkens back to the perpetual crises of the first season.

Todd said...

Rogorn: I intend to review all 17 episodes this season, though trying to keep the many spinning plates on this, BSG and Big Love all straight may eventually drive me insane.

Anon: As stated, I actually DID watch all of the show before beginning work on this series, including a lot of episodes I just had never looked at again since first-run. I actually didn't find Something Nice ... all that confusing on the first go-round, having made a lot of assumptions about where various plot points would fit in the master narrative that mostly proved to be correct. I think Matthew Fox is a capable actor, but my interest in Jack fluctuates based on whom he's playing off of. If he's playing off of Kate, it's usually snooze-worthy. If he's playing off of Locke, it's hit and miss. If he's playing off of Ben (Emerson tends to elevate everyone who shares a scene with him), I'm almost always riveted.

bee- said...

As for the issue to how much of the show is going according to a master plan:

Any writer worth their salt can tell that:

- Walt (and by extension) Michael were supposed to be major characters throughout the series

- Anna Lucia and Eko were also meant to be major characters.

It seemed pretty obvious to me that the show's creators f*cked up pretty badly by not making allowances for the growth of the actor playing Walt - and had to come up with a messy 'out' in season one.

The plans seemed to have been for Michael to have a romance with Sun, but this changed when the show creators came to like Daniel Dae Kim so much they changed that plan, hanging unfortunate Harold Perrineau out to dry in the process.

It also seems pretty clear to me that personality issues with the actors playing Anna Lucia and Eko caused them to be written off. The fact that the show runners have continued to claim that Anna was intended to to be a temporary character all along to ME calls just about anything else they say about the show into credibility.

As clumsily as I feel the deletion of these characters were handled (I felt particularly pissed about Eko's ousting from the show for some time), the show has done an ingenious job at introducing fascinating new characters to take the sting out of it.

My major point though, is that while there may or may not have been a master plan from the outset, a lot of the specifics (such as characters) have been subject to an extremely fluid process, although this flexibility HAS to change as the show is confronted with a fixed 'end date'.

Whatever my criticisms may be, I would add that I think Lost has been one of THE great series in the history of television

Ali Arikan said...

Todd - This was one of the finest pieces of writing I have ever read about Lost.

Also, you should definitely capitalise Island.

Matthew said...

I completely agree with the "two divisions" concept, but I would place the split in a (slightly) earlier episode -- "Enter 77", the episode where the characters find The Flame. After the meandering Hydra episodes and the the 1-2 punch of "Stranger" and "Tanaka" left me reeling, it tasted like fresh air to a drowning man.

Not only did the episode reveal a new station and a big piece of Island mythology (the Others were NOT part of DHARMA, but predated them), but it featured Sayid simply asking Mikhail questions, and receiving answers in return. No Ben-style dodges, no Desmond-style cluelessness, but actual information about the Island -- a device used for perhaps the first time in the show.

rcocean said...

I think the last two episodes were great. My only regret is that Ben seems to be turning into a friend/ally/good guy. It was much better when he was a complete bastard. Meanwhile the Jack/Sawyer conflict has gone away, and Jack has gone from trying to kill Locke to weeping tears over him.

"Lost" seems to be following the typical pattern of TV dramas whereby the conflicts between characters lessen, everyone becomes a friend, and a certain sharpness and unpredictability is lost.

I miss that dread of the "others" and Ben.

Todd said...

Matthew, I thought about going with Enter 77, but from there, you go straight into the stall-tactic episode Par Avion. Really, the narrative hits the rails and stays there (even through that weird "Desmond was a monk!" episode) from Man From Tallahassee on.

This is not to say that I didn't like quite a few episodes from before Man from Tallahassee, even in season three. Hell, Flashes Before Your Eyes is one of my top ten Losts, I would wager. I've never sat down and done such a thing, but maybe I should.

Anonymous said...

bee- I think it's been established that Mr. Eko was not ousted. He was written off because the actor playing him (Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje) requested it and wanted to return to England. (see http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2006-11-01-eko-lost_x.htm ) Oddly many of the actors & actresses on this show have echoed (no pun intended) this same attitude including Fox & Lilly - at least expressing relief of when they can "get off the island". I'd like to be able to loathe Hawaii!
Cheers

Katherine said...

The writers have always said they knew where things were going, but all that may mean is that they knew what the Island was, which is the sort of thing you can know without really knowing how you're going to reveal it.

I think that may even be a generous statement. Looking back at season 1, when we had strangers lost on an island, I can't imagine the writers imagined that the island moved in time, or the people on it moved in time.

Thoughts?

Anonymous said...

So far I've watched the first 4 episodes, online, only because I'm too distracted by other things to follow it on tv, but I see this season so far as the best written yet. They've mostly done away with a lot of soap-opera stuff that made the first 3 seasons drag on and frankly made me hate the show for that reason. I love the sci-fi stuff and I think they made a great choice in focusing on that aspect rather than meandering plot lines on some will/will-not-happen love affairs. That aspect won't ever go away completely, but it does serve a purpose for character arcs so it's not all bad. I feel it's being used in a much better way now. Season 4 was where all of these changes started to happen, and I see season 5 as the season where they finally figure out how to employ these things properly.

The writing is just much better overall. Season 1 was all good and fun with a lot of cliff hangers, which was a good introduction to the show, but season 5 feels like lost has finally figured itself out.