So I decided to rewatch the first season of lost now that a small portion of whatever was going on was revealed and one question kept popping up. How does Mathew Fox keep finding work?! It is really confusing and I hope someone can clear it up.
Lost: Still just as confusing in retrospect
- Thread starter Souplex
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I never understood why anyone liked that show period. I always thought it was ridiculous.
It had the potential to be a modern Lord of the Flies (But with adults), but oh no. They were too cool for that. It had to be this big convoluted story that was about as entertaining as removing my kneecap with a spork.
It had the potential to be a modern Lord of the Flies (But with adults), but oh no. They were too cool for that. It had to be this big convoluted story that was about as entertaining as removing my kneecap with a spork.
I wouldn't say he's that bad - the entire show is quite confusing though. I'm looking forward to the next season or next half of the season or whatever it is to start again - they have A LOT of questions to start trying to wrap up to even get it somewhat coherent.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Lost has a lot it could learn from Babylon 5. A pre-mapped plot arc that answered as many questions as it asked (and strung those answers out well) and that never left the viewer in doubt; a good male lead while still an ensemble; an understanding in every episode that new viewers don't come to the show with a good knowledge of the lore.
In the end, most of Lost's complexity isn't so much in the story itself as in its failure to understand TV viewing habits or care for the average viewer - oh, and tangents. Lots and lots of freaking useless tangents. Babylon 5 had a plot of similar complexity, but a new viewer could always pick up the important stuff; J M Straczinsky always made sure to have short summaries of important points inside the narratives, whereas Lost groans under the weight, only getting by thanks to "Previously on..." (a crutch for the over-indulgent).
I suspect that the answer is yes. Have you watched it all the way through? Did you watch the DVDs or the TV presentation (or both)? Lost can be cracked fairly well if you can sit down with the DVD and watch several episodes at a time; the same is not true for a weekly show with season breaks - especially for new viewers, or viewers who just don't want to have to remember minute details from 5 episodes back without being given a quick revision of the important stuff.Lvl 64 Klutz said:
In the end, most of Lost's complexity isn't so much in the story itself as in its failure to understand TV viewing habits or care for the average viewer - oh, and tangents. Lots and lots of freaking useless tangents. Babylon 5 had a plot of similar complexity, but a new viewer could always pick up the important stuff; J M Straczinsky always made sure to have short summaries of important points inside the narratives, whereas Lost groans under the weight, only getting by thanks to "Previously on..." (a crutch for the over-indulgent).
Good points (Though I've never watched Babylon 5, thanks for the indirect recommendation) I just keep hearing "At least Heroes isn't as convoluted as Lost," and all I can think is that it's a bunch of BS. I mean, at least when Lost explains something, it actually explains it instead of telling us "A explains B, don't question it."Saskwach post=18.76682.914649 said:
I won't go off on a tangent, though (hehe). Admittedly I watched the first two seasons on DVD, but I didn't find it hard to follow the other 2 seasons either.
Oh, I'd agree that Heroes is about as convoluted as Lost (no clue about the comparison, though). My only defences for disliking Lost and preferring Heroes are: it's more fun to watch any single episode (for me); kewl powerz; I've kept track of the storyline; it seems (again, to me) to be resolving itself, though exactly how and when is getting murkier even as it gets clearer; questions are often answered; and, most importantly, superheroes.Lvl 64 Klutz said:
I understand the plot of Lost just fine. Sure there are unanswered questions, but why is that a problem? That and the incredibly deep characters are what keep me watching.
As for Heroes, as much as I like the show, I think the plot has more holes than Swiss cheese.
As for Heroes, as much as I like the show, I think the plot has more holes than Swiss cheese.
Lost isn't that hard to understand if you just watch it all the way through. Yes, there are still a bunch of unanswered question, but they already have a plan for that- they KNOW when and how it's going to end. Heroes, on the other hand, as much as I love the show it's just getting so rediculous and they're trying to live off of the first season's legacy. It's working to an extent, and this season is entertaing, but they need to stop it with all the "OMG TWISTS" and get to some real conflict and action that lasts more than five minutes.
I love Lost, always did, and still do, and I can't wait until the next season starts next year.
I love Lost, always did, and still do, and I can't wait until the next season starts next year.
I don't know either, and yet, I've been watching that show since it began. The really sad thing is that I totally hate the show, and yet, I've invested so much time into it that I feel somewhat compelled to watch it, just so I don't feel like I've given up...perhaps in the hope that it'll get better (doubt it).Souplex said: