Does ‘Lost’ Get Better?

November 23rd, 2006

Filed under:
Sports, Television

Does ‘Lost’ Get Better?

Thanks to the miracle of DVD-rentals-by-mail I have watched the first six episodes of season 1 of Lost. I gotta say…I’m a little underwhelmed. On the upside, the show clearly has a big budget, the acting is generally pretty good (though Matthew Fox is pretty one-dimensional) and the cast and scenery are nice to look at.

On the downside, after the initial intensity of the first episode, the plot development has gotten positively turgid. The six episodes I’ve seen have been rife with flashbacks, which doesn’t help matters.

The dialogue is okay, but what the characters choose to talk about puzzles me. I’d expect more discussion of the two most pressing issues: the crazy shit on the island and the pressing need for food, water and shelter. In particular, I found it odd that, in the subsequent four episodes, nobody even mentions the polar bear that gets shot in episode two. You’d think a polar bear on a tropical island might arouse more conversation, but apparently not.

At the moment I feel like I could take or leave the show. It’s not awful, but nor is it particularly gripping.

Without revealing any spoilers, do you think the show gets better? Does the plot speed up?

If not, what other show should I watch from the past three to five years? Assume I haven’t been watching anything but The West Wing and (again on DVD) Veronica Mars.

UPDATE: I was kicking around IMDB looking at the Lost cast, and discovered that Lost star Evangeline Lilly hails from the metropolis of Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta. This town of just under 15,000 has also produced four NHL regulars–Mike Commodore, Ray Whitney, Richard Matvichuk and Joffrey Lupul. They must have a pretty good hockey program at Fort Saskatchewan Senior High School.

Comments: 29 Responses so far

Ryan
November 23rd, 2006
11:25 pm

By itself the show is pretty full of holes, and they get much bigger than the ones that you’ve identified; however, the show becomes completely addictive once you start reading some of the online forums and get caught up in trying to find and explanation for what’s going on.

There’s a depth and richness to the show that’s hidden in the details, and it’s pretty much for any one person to see the clues and connect the dots.

Ultimately that’s what might kill this show. I’m pretty sure that they’ve lost all the off-line viewers (off-line… unwired… web 0.0… what’s the latest cool term for “not connected”?).

gillian
November 23rd, 2006
11:52 pm

From what I know of small towns, hockey is usually taught outside of school at the local rink(s). That may not be the case here, but it’s what I’ve seen and heard from others.

Chris
November 24th, 2006
5:59 am

Ryan: If you’re looking for the term that describes the group of people who don’t go online obsessively reading through forums to try to figure out what’s going on in a show, I believe the word is “majority” :)

qwerqwer Reply:
January 6th, 2011 at 9:32 pm

shut up you stupid idiot. go die you nig

Michael Buckbee
November 24th, 2006
6:20 am

Darren,

I’m kind of take it or leave it on Lost, but you asked for what other shows you should check out:

Battlestar Galactica should definitely be on top of your list. The creators have a fresh take on not just the series, but the Sci-Fi genre as a whole. Bonus: since it’s filmed in Vancouver you might recognize some of their locations (Opera House and New Caprica seems to be located in a decidious rain forest).

Heroes is the other new “geek” series. Like Lost it’s serialized into episodes that need to be seen in order (a rarity on TV as it’s generally considered that people are morons by TV executives and the conventional wisdom is that serializing makes a program less valuable in syndication deals). I like the characters and they seem to actually be nibbling away at aspects of the mysteries they present; unlike Lost where every episode just seems to spawn 10 new questions.

Heroes is available on iTunes if you’d like to catch up.

Cheers.

Norlinda
November 24th, 2006
6:39 am

Battlestar Galactica — ditto what Michael Buckbee said. Another show that pushes the scifi genre envelope is Farscape—puppets and human actors engaged in extremely witty dialogue.

Heroes — watched one episode after reading the rave reviews. Was disappointed, the story was not engaging me, I stopped watching mid-way.

chris
November 24th, 2006
6:54 am

Darren: lost is rubbish

do you actually like it?

brem
November 24th, 2006
7:28 am

Don’t waste your time on Lost. I was lost after 2 episodes, and it only gets worse. The problem with lost is that the show can only go so far before revealing part of what the “enigma” is (i.e. why they are on the island). The thing is that the longest they try to make the show last, the stronger the disapointment will be. Because in all honesty, it will all end up with Aliens, and we know it. A la Steven Spielberg in A.I. (what a horrible movie… I feel ashamed for Kubrick).

Time well waster:

Battlestar Galactica: 3 seasons worth almost

Dexter: new show, excellent. truly.

Heroes, I haven’t really got into it yet. So.

brem
November 24th, 2006
7:28 am

wasteD

darren
November 24th, 2006
7:38 am

Thanks for all those BG suggestions. I have, indeed, watch a bunch of episodes of that show, though I lost track of it about 6 months ago. I’ve been meaning to pick up the thread again.

Chad
November 24th, 2006
7:39 am

I would recommend Six Feet Under.

darren
November 24th, 2006
7:51 am

Chad: Lots of people and critics dug Six Feet Under, but it wasn’t quite my bag. I can’t say why, exactly.

col
November 24th, 2006
8:05 am

i used to like lost, but i think i’m just watching it now because i’ve invested so much time! don’t make my mistake :)

like michael, i’d have to recommend BSG and Heroes. the latter is one that i am completely hooked on. i also like veronica mars, nip/tuck (though i must admit that this season is starting to lose me) and the office (the US version is surprisingly good).

-j.
November 24th, 2006
8:15 am

I also watch “Heroes”. It’s hardly perfect, but I’ve found it extremely engrossing.

I also recommend “House”, which I don’t see any other references to here. The characters are generally well-drawn, the dialogue has genuine wit, and some of the plot twists have been legitimately surprising. HOWEVER, it is also quite formulaic, so even as a big fan I don’t know that I could rent a DVD of it and watch numerous episodes in a row. One a week is perfect.

Metro
November 24th, 2006
8:32 am

Mme Metro is fond of CSI (Vegas, with William Petersen, only please).

We both groove on Heroes

And I especially enjoy the award-winning and CBC co-produced Doctor Who.

Battlestar Galactica is apparently terrific, but I mus see the DVD first, since I hate joining shows late.

brem
November 24th, 2006
8:40 am

House is fun, but it’s CSIesque… formulaic, can become a bit boring. At least the main character is VERY intersting.

brem
November 24th, 2006
8:40 am

Sopranos is down the drain unfortunatly.

brem
November 24th, 2006
8:42 am

And if you haven’t yet watched Joss Whedon’s ill fated Firefly, you must.

Nathan Weinberg
November 24th, 2006
9:46 am

Gotta warn you Darren: The flashbacks weren’t because they were the first episodes; the flashbacks are a major part of the show. They tend to take up a large portion of every episode parallel the main plot, and sometimes reveal something about the main plot.

Lost is one of those shows were most of the appeal is what you don’t know, and tries its best not to give you any answers. It’s only real appeal is the characters and continuous suspense, with the occasional minor payoff. If you’ve watched shows like that before, and enjoyed them, you should be fine, but if you find them annoying, forget about it.

James
November 24th, 2006
10:40 am

Re: Evangeline.

Evangeline Lilly is not her real name. It’s something much more pedestrian that I can’t recall at the moment but could find out in one phone call to the good folks at Livelinks, where she got her first big break, not selling phone sex, oh no, but selling anonymous phone conversations that could be about anything. Oh, and she grew up in some sort of strict religious household. Baptist, perhaps? They lurves the god.

Travis Allison
November 24th, 2006
11:36 am

We just watched all of the Entourage DVDs (its been a week of sick-at-home). They were really quite compelling. A little of the machismo a bit like sopranos (sopranos-frat boy).
Ok bad description. Good show. It shines quite a light on Hollywood.

DB: what are you using for DVD by Mail? Zip.ca is KILLING me. I love the number and kind of disks they say are available… but the disks I prioritize are never available.

Thanks!

darren
November 24th, 2006
12:14 pm

Travis: I’m using Zip.ca. I do agree that we don’t seem to get the high priority DVDs, but I guess I’m more ambivalent about the order in which I receive them. I need to write a post on Zip.ca sometime soon.

Travis Allison
November 24th, 2006
2:40 pm

I’m less fussy about the order than my wife. She doesn’t pick movies/shows very often and so I put her stuff at the top. We just don’t get stuff from the top of the list enough. I think we’re done (which sucks ’cause the Blockbuster in Huntsville, ON is terrible).

Scott
November 24th, 2006
6:05 pm

Darren, I would give it a couple of more episodes. I was sucked in after about 5. Without giving anything away, wait for the Hurley ep. Worth the wait in my opinion.

Just like others have said you really have to pay attention to the flashbacks. Even more so if you continue watching season 2 & 3 it seems to all really come together.

Back to season 1 though, The season finale is really good as well. It makes you want to run out the door and rent season 2 which answers some of the questions of season 1 but asks a bunch more at the same time.

Great TV!

Les
November 26th, 2006
7:43 pm

Dude, there is only one TV show that you should be watching and that is DEADWOOD. A gritty (think Sapranos) foul mouthed western that is so smart, so well written that it’s damn near Shakespearean. (In scope and use of language.) It’s the only thing I turn the TV on for anymore.

You’re a playwright … you’ll love this .

Les
November 26th, 2006
7:52 pm

Oh yeah, on Lost — don’t bother, it doesn’t get better — it only gets worse. I gave up after the first season …

darren
November 26th, 2006
9:52 pm

Les: And it has the lovely and amazingly talented Molly Parker.

I’ve heard good things about ‘Deadwood’. I’m not a huge fan of westerns, but I may give it a shot.

Michael Kwan
November 28th, 2006
12:36 am

I’m lost on Lost. I was somewhat interested in the first season, but then it just didn’t captivate me anymore. Currently, I’d recommend:

Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip
Sopranos
Sports Night (on DVD)
Entourage

Trouble
December 7th, 2006
2:38 pm

I don’t know what most of you are talking about… Lost is one of the best shows on tv!!! I understand how you feel about the first season. It is a little slow, however the 2nd and 3rd seasons definitely make for it. Holy &*$@#!!!!! The show just keeps getting better the longer you watch it! I’ve had a lot of fun re-watching the first two seasons on dvd, I’ve found that I’m picking up on several new hidden clues that I hadn’t noticed before. Trust me, season three is worth the wait! I agree with Scott on the Hurley episode, too… wow, holy mind-blowing!!!

« Busybody, Tattletale or Mellow Fellow?

An Index of Bond Trends and Villain Types »

DarrenBarefoot.com

November 23rd, 2006

Does ‘Lost’ Get Better?

Comments: 29 Responses so far

Add a comment