Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Television

Lost Ends 955

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the talk-amongst-yourselves dept.
Unless you live in a hatch somewhere, you are probably aware that Lost has ended. If you want a simple, clear explanation of exactly how the series resolved, Lost Untangled will do nothing to clarify things for you. For everyone else, I provide this discussion thread for you to complain/revel in the most spoiler-laden manner you desire.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lost Ends

Comments Filter:
  • Written by Wiki (Score:2, Interesting)

    by linzeal (197905) on Monday May 24 2010, @09:52AM (#32322656) Homepage Journal
    From what I understand they had their own internal Wiki which became where they hashed out a lot of the mythos. That is no way to write a narrative that you can tie together into coherent story arc.
  • Re:Mumbo Jumbo (Score:2, Interesting)

    by gmurray (927668) on Monday May 24 2010, @09:53AM (#32322664)
    The writing in the earlier seasons seemed to have much more intellectual integrity. Not sure what changed. Did someone leave the show or something? Some auditor or other writer?
  • by L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) on Monday May 24 2010, @09:56AM (#32322704)
    What the hell was that black smoke thing in the first series? You didn't see it at all through two or three, and I got so bored by then that I gave up.

    So, black smoke monster; What was it?
  • by bunratty (545641) on Monday May 24 2010, @10:03AM (#32322790)

    I don't understand why other Lost fans haven't liked the last season of the show. The big questions were answered, but they seem not to like the answers provided. I've been a fan since the beginning, and I thought the end was beautiful.

    The one part that left me wondering was the shot of the fuselage in the credits. The best explanation I read was that it's the final remains of the 815 crash after all the Losties died. It's the mystery that other people brought to the island in the future will wonder about, like we wondered about the hatch, the statue, Henry Gale's balloon, and so on.

  • Re:No. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nelsonal (549144) on Monday May 24 2010, @10:18AM (#32322984) Journal
    Breaking Bad.
  • by rubycodez (864176) on Monday May 24 2010, @10:18AM (#32322988)

    I've only seen half of one Lost episode in my life, and I thank you for confirming my determination that it would have been an utter waste of life to watch.

    had to laugh at "unless you live in a hatch somewhere" phrase in the article, seems to me that would describe the viewing audience. well ok, I'm just as bad, I love anime, waiting for Black Lagoon OVAs, 8th episode of Hellsing Ultimate, Shana third season, etc.etc.

  • by Tei (520358) on Monday May 24 2010, @10:21AM (#32323038) Journal

    For some reason USA is soo obsesed with religion, that has to add a (final) religion layer to everything. What could look fun in politics (with a president thanking Cron or Thor or Kratos or other god ), is really out-of-character in science-fiction.

    My particular pet theory is that a good % of the USA residents have supernatural feelings. Since is something that is shared by a soo big group of people, summining a supernatural concept in a vague way, can get you credits. Something like fanservice, but for a broad number of people. Of course, It also excluse these withouth supernatural feelings, but that seems a minor-minority even on science-fiction (?) and fantasy.

    I make me angry to have supernatural entities like ESPers in Star Trek, or in Silverberg books, but I have learned to live with it. If you want to read the production from USA, you have to tolerate some intense level of supernatural feelings. At least is somewhat vague... is not like Iran, that probably have a urgency real about how you must think and what you have to wear.

  • Re:Fucking FINALLY (Score:2, Interesting)

    by MacGyver2210 (1053110) on Monday May 24 2010, @10:29AM (#32323132)

    The show was plenty entertaining, and the plot at times interesting, but using the "Everyone's Dead" ending is a very very immature and feeble way to 'wrap things up' if you can even call it that. It is NEVER ok to use this ending, despite what M Night Shyamalan thinks. It's a total cop-out and makes people not watch your shit anymore. Why do I refuse to see the new Star Trek, despite loving all things Star Trek? Because I don't want to see how JJ Abrams fucked up the canon.

    It's like they stuck two more episodes in for the finale and were like "Oh, we forgot we have to make this the last one..." so they tagged half an hour of more flashbacks(from the island to their weird alternate death verse) to try and guide you back to terra firma. It didn't work. I still have no idea what the fuck I just watched, and I wish I could say, like you, I only watched two seasons. At least then I'd still have the suspense of "It might go somewhere".

  • by penguin_dance (536599) on Monday May 24 2010, @11:00AM (#32323556)

    One of the biggest mysteries last night was where did they suddenly find a roll of duct tape to fix the plane?

  • by jollyreaper (513215) on Monday May 24 2010, @11:14AM (#32323750)

    It seems to me that a series is *so* much better when the writers KNOW what the ending will be BEFORE the series airs. This way, the entire series can work towards the ending, with the result being much more satisfying.

    The best part about B5 is how JMS could set up things that would pay off years later. One of my favorite bits was Vir's answer to Morden about what he wanted. Then years later, looking up at that head on the pike and waving. Classic!

    A good example of crappy syndication writing that I don't really blame on JMS was what happened with Garibaldi and Bester. We had a perfect ending in season 4 with Bester talking to Sheridan and realizing he was up shit creek. Of course, with Season 5 greenlit, JMS had to retract that resolution and make it all according to Bester's plan. Understandable, JMS didn't know he'd get a 5th season. But that's a rare, rare shortcoming in B5 and utterly common in every other form of long-running fiction.

    In a mystery it is absolutely essential for the writer to know who did it, how, and why. The trick is laying out the clues in such a way that the reader could have worked it out on his own the whole time, doesn't figure it out until the revelation, and then kicks himself in retrospect because he realizes he had every clue he needed in those earlier chapters. And you're exactly right, you have to work backwards from that conclusion to lay the groundwork. There's always room for new ideas and improvisation but there's absolutely no room for crap like the BSG Final Five wankery.

  • by Hotawa Hawk-eye (976755) on Monday May 24 2010, @11:53AM (#32324246)
    In the toolbox that I would imagine (hope) would be standard issue for ALL planes for fixing minor issues in-flight -- cushion gets torn? Tape it and let the maintenance guys fix or replace it when the plane's back on the ground. Sign on the bathroom falls down? Tape it. Some button or knob (ideally not inside the cockpit) that shouldn't move does? Tape it.

    Even if it wasn't part of some standard issue toolbox, I imagine Lapidus would have stashed some extra tools on the plane before taking off -- after all, he knows (hopes) they're going to get to the island and that it might not be the best of landings.

    I don't know where the quote "If it shouldn't move but does, duct tape. If it doesn't move but should, WD-40." but it seems appropriate here. [After watching the MythBusters, I think that phrase should have a third sentence -- "If it shouldn't exist but does, C4."]
  • by Omestes (471991) <omestes AT gmail DOT com> on Monday May 24 2010, @12:09PM (#32324470) Homepage Journal

    I kind of like that kind of story, but then again I think Twin Peaks was the best show that was ever on T.V. I like stories that don't wrap up neatly in the end, and give you a precise answer to all the mysteries. I feel that the more surreal things are, the more they mirror life. There is no definite answers in life, there is mostly mystery, ad hoc explanations, and various flavors of hypothesis that exist to be endlessly mulled.

    That is how Hollywood killed every movie based on a Philip Dick story; by wrapping it all up, and telling the viewer the proper interpretation of events, where in the story your generally left pondering what exactly was real, and what exactly was in the protagonists head.

    The mystery keeps it interesting long after the show or book ends. It makes it a bit more engaging.

    I view lost like a television version of the book House of Leaves. Except with more religious overtones.

    Though to be honest, I feared it devolving into a religious allegory early in the first season.

  • by Late Adopter (1492849) on Monday May 24 2010, @12:24PM (#32324708)

    It seems to me that a series is *so* much better when the writers KNOW what the ending will be BEFORE the series airs.

    Absolutely, but you can't do that on television. You have no idea how many seasons you'll get to run for, so the best thing to do is create some short term arcs, some longer ones, and weave what you can. If you get popular, make up more stuff to tie in with the longer-term arcs.

    What we really need is a return to the miniseries. Even a 1-season television show, that knew in advance it was only 20 eps (or however many) long, would be able to plan out a complete and interesting story.

  • by snowwrestler (896305) on Monday May 24 2010, @12:57PM (#32325218)

    The shots of the fuselage camp on the beach were simply nice reminders from the producers and/or ABC of where the story began. In nerd-speak, they're not "canon." The story of Lost ended when Jack's eye closed.

    The best explanation I read was that it's the final remains of the 815 crash after all the Losties died. It's the mystery that other people brought to the island in the future will wonder about, like we wondered about the hatch, the statue, Henry Gale's balloon, and so on.

    If you watched the show from the beginning you'll remember that in the story, most of the fuselage camp washed away from an unusually high tide a few weeks after the crash. So it won't be around for future island inhabitants to wonder about.

  • by lennier (44736) on Monday May 24 2010, @09:23PM (#32331022) Homepage

    Indeed. It's interesting that that was pretty much Russell T Davies' approach to Doctor Who plots, especially in the final season: just crank the sturm und drang into overdrive without too much care for logical sense.

    The Master isn't a big enough villain? Bring on the Timelords! The End of Time ITSELF! only it isn't but never mind. Louder! Bigger! Faster! More! Then reset it all and move on.

    So: one drop of Red Matter kills a planet? Great, that's intense! But for the finale we need MORE intensity! So use the whole lot! Don't care about the size of the explosion or logical sense. Just more, more, more of everything but the heroes escape because they're heroes.

    It's a consistent artistic philosophy, in the sense of not caring about consistency at all, but a little goes a very long way. I'm intrigued though why two major 2000s pop-culture writers both adopted the same stance at the same time. Something about our cultural zeitgeist? A sort of deliberate postmodern/'slipstream' aesthetic, deliberately discarding reason in favour of bigness?

And furthermore, my bowling average is unimpeachable!!!

Working...