The Interview That Will Restore Your Faith in Lost!

With a post title of "The Interview That Will Restore Your Faith in Lost", you might think that I've actually lost my faith in this show. I have not. But I have to admit, six episodes into the third season, it's definitely slipped a bit farther down my list of "Greatest TV Shows of All Time". Sure, some if it can be attributed to the fact that it's been off the air for the past four months. Out of sight, out of mind.

But it also seems like Lost has lost (pun!) some of its luster recently. More and more people are questioning where the show is going, when we're going to finally start getting some answers, and if there really is an end game in mind, or if we're all just getting sucked deeper and deeper into a storyline that has no conclusion. The frustration is understandable - I've felt it too.

More importantly, I think the show's creators have felt it. All the sudden, they are a lot more talkative about planning the ending to Lost, publicly letting people know, and revealing more in interviews than ever before. It's like they know all of our complaints, and are directly addressing them!

In an effort to help get people jacked up (but not in an annoying Monday Night Countdown sort of way) for the upcoming second half of the third season of Lost, I thought I would post this recent interview with show-mastermind Damon Lindelof I recently stumbled across. It's too chock full of tantalizing tidbits for me to resist commenting on it, so I'll throw my comments in italics after each section. While I don't always agree with what Damon says, it does make me feel that we're in good hands after all. If this doesn't restore your faith in Lost, nothing will.



Q: Is Paulo supposed to be unlikable?

Lindelof: Yes. But hopefully, like any other character on the show, after you learn a little bit more about [Paulo and Nikki], your opinion changes. Or maybe when you learn a little bit more about them, you hate them more. We tell the story about Josh all the time, and it's dead true - ABC and Touchstone did testing on Sawyer around episode 4 of the show, and he was the lowest testing character on the show. People hated him. They thought he was belligerent and obnoxious. Then his flashback story episode aired, and suddenly he's a little kid hiding under a bed, whose mommy and daddy… And suddenly Sawyer shot to the top of the charts. Lost is, as frustrating as this may be, it requires patience, and I think in a society where people don't have a lot of patience, the fact that the show demands that of them… We feel blessed to have the viewership we still have. I would have left the show long ago; I'm too ADD!

Brian: I don't think Paulo is really "unlikeable". I think more than anything, viewers are frustrated with the way that he and Nikki were introduced. It just felt forced, and the characters felt out of place. I'm hopeful that they'll end up serving some purpose, they are more distracting than anything else.


Q: When do you think Lost should end?

Lindelof: Personally speaking, from the word go, it always felt to me like somewhere in the neighborhood between 90 and a 100 episodes was going to be a version of Lost where we never had to do the bad scenes or the stall scenes and back off of the story we wanted to tell. We knew season one was going to be introductions, season two was going to be into the hatch, season three was going to be The Others. I don't want to tell you what season four is going to be, and then there was a wrap up season; a shortened version that would put you somewhere in the neighborhood of a 100 episodes. At the end of season four, we will have produced 93 hours of the show, and I imagine that would be very close to where it would end, I would think.

Brian: This both excites and saddens me. Four and a half seasons really isn't that long, especially when you consider that if this is true, we're at the halfway point right now. Think of all the questions that remain unanswered! Arg!

But the exciting thing is that this also means the show won't drag and truly is sticking to an overall series story arc. Again, if this is true, we're at the apex of that arc, and are about to start the rapid descent to conclusion. To me, this means that if season one was about introduction, season two was about the Hatch and Dharma, and season three is about the Others, then the fourth season must be about "conquering" the Island / the Others / Dharma and finding rescue. There's a lot of options on how this could be achieved (Penny, the Others, Michael and Walt), but the overall theme is going to be discovering how to save themselves - and doing it. That leaves a shortened "wrap up" season to see the characters re-enter the outside world to neatly tie up their storylines.


Q: Have casting and scheduling issues ever dictated stories?

Lindelof: We've been able to realize a version of every story that we've ever cooked, but sometimes when it comes to casting, there are limitations. Like in the case of Adewale [Akinnuoye-Agbaje, who played Mr. Eko], for example, his character was a character that when we first sat down with him, he said, 'I only want to work on the show for a season.' And then we said, 'Well, let's not contractually mandate that, because maybe you'll change your mind.'

After he worked on the show for a season, he said, 'I'm not happy. I don't want to do this job anymore. I don't want to live in Hawaii. My life in is in the U.K. I want to be a film actor. That's what we all agreed on.' And we said, 'You're absolutely right. We did agree on that. Will you give us six more episodes, so that we don't come back for the season and say Mr. Eko just died in the hatch explosion, which everybody would hate. He's a beloved character. We hoped that we could convince him otherwise. But there's a case where an actor's desire to continue to be on the show severely inhibits storytelling.

To be honest with you, Carlton and I would have loved to have told more Mr. Eko stories. But that's a case where real life obviously affects the show. If one of our actors gets sick -- it happens all the time -- you have to write them down [in screen time] in an episode. If one of our actors is coming to do publicity, you have to write them down in an episode. If one of your actors is unhappy with their screen time, legitimately, then you go, 'Oh my god, they haven't been in the show for six episodes in a row.' You say, 'It's time to do their story now.' So that is the ebb and flow of TV writing.

Brian: Here lies the difficulty in doing a TV show. We all wish the writers had unconditional control over all characters and storylines on Lost, but it's a business dealing with real people, and they don't always have it. You have to roll with the punches, adapt storylines on the fly, and make the best of what's around.

In my opinion, having Eko die in the Hatch explosion would have been far more fulfilling from a storytelling perspective than putting him through the lame Polar Bear capture only to have him die at the (literal) hand of Smokey. That is... unless his death somehow brings Smokey back to the forefront, and leads us to an explanation of what he actually is. But if Smokey disappears for the next 15 episodes, Eko's death loses a lot of its emotional impact.


Q: So you still feel 100 episodes is about right for the show?

Lindelof: It feels to me like we're about half way there now, to the end of the show. You guys have seen about 50 episodes. It feels like now that The Others are becoming characters on the show… That has always felt like you're no longer going up the hill, you're starting to go down it.

Brian: We've already touched on this, but it certainly sounds like the Others are here to stay for the duration of the series... either as antagonists, or as people who will eventually merge with our Survivors (just like Survivor!).


Q: What do you say to people who found the first 6 episodes this season to be extremely "punishing," as far as the physical abuse the characters went through?

Lindelof: I think it's a measure of the fact that The Others are an antagonistic force on the island. If they had been nice, and kind, and docile, and sweet with Jack and Sawyer, it would not have told the story that we wanted to do. I think those people that think it was too punishing have a legitimate gripe, but all I can say is the punishment has come to an end, in terms of that story, in terms of the physical battering of it all. The show's always been a violent show. Sayid was torturing Sawyer in season one. Boone gets violently killed. It's just I think that our characters are suffering at the hand of other characters that makes it very, very hard to watch.

Brian: Wow. If I was making a list of the five most violent shows on network TV, Lost wouldn't even cross my mind. Are people really concerned about this???


Q: How can The Others' prison be on another island, when Jack, Sawyer and Kate were seemingly walked there?

Lindelof: They didn't get walked. They got hooded at the end of the dock. Then they woke up this season, having been drugged.

Brian: Precisely. Thus, all of them rubbing their arms when they woke up in the season three premiere. It's been established that there is some sort of "sub" the Others use to get around.


Q: Are you worried about losing some younger viewers now that the show is moving to 10:00?

Lindelof: That was the big downside to the 10:00 period. First off, it's a time switch that we're generally pleased with, because we lose almost 30% of our audience every year once we're programmed against American Idol. To be completely honest, the family audience is that 30%. A lot of younger kids watch Idol with their parents. They TiVo Lost; they get it on their iPods. I do think we're going to take a hit, but the hit will probably be comparable or even a little better than the hit that we always take going up against a show that 27 million people are watching every week.

Brian: To be honest with you, Lost should have never been a popular show. It flies in the face of what the average American viewer wants in a TV show. But don't worry, there is more to life than TV ratings (see: demographics and DVD sales), so there's really no risk of Lost being cancelled. I'm opposed to the move to 10:00 pm because I don't watch American Idol, and I like to Blog about each night's episode before bedtime. It's going to be really tough when the episode isn't over until 11:00. But hey, at least now they can stop worrying about kids seeing all the "violence" on Lost!


Q: Bernard is the only tailie left. Do you wish you hadn't spent so much time on the Tailies stories last season?

Lindelof: No. Because I think all of those stories were incredibly important to tell in terms of how they affected our core cast. Had Michael not been the one to kill Ana Lucia and Libby, that would not have set into motion the series of events that had him and Walt leaving the island. And Michael and Walt leaving the island is the most significant event, secondary to the button not getting pushed and the big purple light. That affected that, so you needed Ana Lucia and Libby to tell that story. So sometimes, unfortunately… Like Boone was a character in service to another character. Boone was in service to Locke. We told Boone stories, but at the same time he was Isaac to Locke's Abraham. So some characters die to serve the greater story.

Brian: Agree to disagree (when in Rome). Killing Ana-Lucia and Libby had nothing to do with getting Michael and Walt off the Island. Saving Ben from the Hatch armory had everything to do with getting Michael and Walt off the Island. Deaths that have made sense from a story-telling perspective:

Boone = sacrifice for Locke
Shannon = created rift between Survivors and Tailers

In a way, killing Ana-Lucia, Libby, and Eko almost cheapens the experience of the Tailers as a whole. Here was a group of people who were savagely picked apart right after the crash, yet these were the "survivors" who beat the odds and made it through to unite with the rest of the Flight 815 Survivors. Then, ironically, they're the next three to die. While Boone and Shannon truly affected the other characters on the show, aside from some fleeting romance with Jack and Hurley, Ana-Lucia and Libby never really did.


Q: Can you say a bit more about feeling the show should go 100 episodes?

Lindelof: When you guys were asking at the very beginning; you'd seen the pilot and said, 'Seriously, how long is this going to go on for? How long can it sustain?' I'd say, 'I can't answer in terms of seasons,' but I have been consistent in terms of saying it's always felt to me like the story is going to last about 100 episodes. In our case, the end of season four is 93 [episodes]. So does that mean it's five seasons or what not. I would not want to go back now and say, 'Oh, now that we're in season three, I think it could go much longer,' because I think that would be duplicitous. I can only answer that question -- how long do I think it could last -- the way that I felt at the very beginning. Because to say now, 'Oh, I've changed my mind about it…' You could go, 'Yeah, but you said back then…! So now suddenly, you think that's there's 140 episodes there?!' And I'd be going, 'Oh, but so many more story avenues have opened up!' No. That's how I felt at the time. That's how I still feel.

Brian: I'm sure ABC had pressured the creators to push the show. I'm glad to the writers are sticking by their guns and their original vision.


Q: Would this be the first time network heads would let such a successful show end?

Lindelof: I guess they would. And the good news about a guy like [ABC President Steve McPherson] or a guy like [Touchstone Television President] Mark Pedowitz, is we all looked at each other at the beginning and said, 'By the grace of God will this show even survive for 13 episodes.' So Carlton and I are now able to sit down with them and say, 'Remember at the beginning when you were having us sit down and convince you that this thing could go on for years and years and years?' And we all agreed it couldn't? Well now, just because it's successful, doesn't mean that's changed. The reality is, they can produce a sixth, or a seventh or an eighth season, but would anybody be watching it? Because the show would be so miserable by that time.

Was it really The X-Files anymore when Duchovny and Gillian Anderson weren't on the show? For me, The X-Files wasn't about 'Have aliens invaded?' It was about Mulder and Scully; a skeptic and a believer. And once that element of the show was gone, the show was over. We don't want to produce those episodes of Lost. In fact, we're not going to produce those episodes of Lost.

Brian: I love Damon's willingness to call out other TV shows that have failed in the past. I think there are a lot of people out there afraid that Lost would end up like X-Files, too caught up in its own mythology and storylines to ever give a resolution. This seems to prove the exact opposite is true. Yes!


Q: Since you said what you felt X-Files was really about, what is Lost about?

Lindelof: This show is about people who are metaphorically lost in their lives, who get on an airplane, and crash on an island, and become physically lost on the planet Earth. And once they are able to metaphorically find themselves in their lives again, they will be able to physically find themselves in the world again. When you look at the entire show, that's what it will look like. That's what it's always been about.

Brian: It's so beautifully simple and heavily symbolic! I love it. Throw out all the theories about purgatory or the world ending, the who point of Lost is simply its title. Characters who are symbolically lost get physically lost - and the show is about them getting found. Crashing on the Island gave each of them the opportunity to escape and conquer the demons in their lives. Sure, there's this mythological Island that serves as the backdrop for the story - but that's exactly what it is - a backdrop, not the star.

For me, this really puts a lot of things in perspective. As much as some of us want to focus on Dharma or Smokey, that's really not what the show is about. Maybe we all need to accept this fact, and enjoy Lost for what it is, not for what we want it to be.

There's also something strangely sweet in the thought that while getting over these demons doesn't actually lead to your death, from a storytelling point of view, the writers have given each character this "release" before their death, helping to soften the blow and make the audience happy that at least they've found their peace. Their bodies die, but now their souls can live on, free from the chains of their prior lives.

Love it.


Q: Should we then assume that Michael and Walt found themselves, and that's why they were allowed to leave?

Lindelof: The interesting thing about Michael is that he was one of the only characters on Flight 815 who had not committed some horrible atrocity. In fact, he did something good, which was his wife basically took his son away from him, and then the son's adoptive father stuck Michael holding the bag. Michael uprooted his entire life, flew to Australia, to collect Walt, but then ended up crashing on the island. Now he's done something terrible. So his redemption story actually began with the shooting of Ana Lucia and Libby, and will resolve by the end of the series.

Brian: This is a great point - Michael (and to some degree Locke) didn't have any horrible demons from his pre-Island life. Coming to the Island is what caused him to do something terrible. While everyone else has been working on their redemption since they arrived on the Island, Michael is ironically starting his by leaving the Island.

If there was any doubt about Michael and Walt coming in to save the day (with a calvary), I think that's put to rest. That's really the only way for Michael to justify his actions - by saving everyone else.


Q: Will we be seeing more of Bernard and Rose?

Lindelof: We will be seeing Bernard and Rose again. We want to do Bernard and Rose stories, or have Bernard and Rose appear in other stories. But because Sam Anderson and L. Scott Caldwell are working actors -- she's been doing a play, he's been doing TV guest spots -- you have to find that serendipitous moment where both actors are available for the same episode, and then basically say, 'Alright. Now we're gonna do Bernard and Rose again.' At the same time, I felt like if we'd done Bernard and Rose in the first six [episodes of season three], people would cry foul, because it would be like, 'Why are we seeing Bernard and Rose, when we're not seeing Sun and Jin and Charlie and Claire or Sayid; the characters that we're really invested in?' So it's finding that balance of seeing Bernard and Rose, without seeing them at the expense of seeing the characters that the audience really wants to see.

Brian: I'll be honest - I'm cool without Bernard and Rose for a while. With the introduction of the Others, there are a ton of characters on the show I would rather see flashbacks for before round two of Bernie and Rosie. I think I have a good feel for their stories at this point, and am okay picturing them living in the background... that is until they are faced with the decision of whether to leave the Island or not - then it would be quite interesting to see how Rose (and Locke) would handle it.


Q: You used to say ABC could bring in new producers to run the show, even if you and J.J. said you felt the story was over and you wanted end things. That's changed?

Lindelof: I feel we were surprised when we went to ABC and started to have that conversation. Instead of saying, 'Fine, we'll bring in new people,' they said, "When do you think it should end?' And then the conversations began. Obviously they want the show to go for as long as possible. And all we can say is, 'There's a show with us running it and there's a show without us running it. If you want the show with us running it, this is when we think it should end.' And like any negotiation, therein lies the rub. But I think you'll find, if you talk to Steve, that he's become to embrace the idea that the show needs to end. And now the question becomes when.

Brian: Part of me refuses to believe that a network could be this cool about the whole thing. Do I need to change my view of TV executives all being money grubbing evil men with no concern for the story?


Q: When can we expect an announcement on when the series will end?

Lindelof: It all depends. I would anticipate that announcement would be sooner rather than later. Again, you don't want to make it in a way that it seems reactionary. The O.C. saying, "We're going to end The O.C.!" It's like, no, you got cancelled. "We're going to end Alias…' after struggling in the ratings. So the whole point of it is, to say that we're gonna end the show when the show is still thriving… I think that will, A, bring a lot of the audience who left back, to say, like, 'I was wrong! They are gonna give it to me! Whether I like it or not is yet to be determined.' But I don't think the questions the audience is asking are, 'Will the answers they give us be satisfying?', it's 'Will they give us the answers at all?!' And that's a very good question to be asking, because they haven't been promised a seventh book, you know? I'd be asking the same questions.

Brian: More great points. Maybe not so much with the O.C. (has any show went from totally awesome to terrible faster than the OC did?), but I think if the writers could have planned the ending of Alias farther in advance, we would have gotten a much more satisfactory conclusion to the series (more Rambaldi, more Irina, less new characters in the final season!). Planning Lost out might not bring more viewers to the show, but it will let everyone watching it know that there is a method to the storytelling, and they're not "spinning their wheels" or dragging the series on for monetary purposes.


Q: Will we see the characters reassemble and the end of the prison story soon?

Lindelof: I think it's safe to say we will see the last of Alcatraz Island around the ninth episode of season three and then we'll be shaking things up big.

Brian: For those of you keeping track at home, that gives us three episodes to wrap up the Alcatraz storyline. Based on the "Lost Moments", that gives us one episode to see Kate and Sawyer escape, one episode to have Jack remain as the sole captive, and one episode to have all the Others "merge" with the Survivors in some fashion. One way or another, we're going to see all the major characters in one big group by the time the episode ten rolls around. It's pretty clear the writers are done with the split time between the Others and the Survivors.


Q: Since Michael Emerson and Elizabeth Mitchell are here at the TCAs, should we assume that just because the prison story is over, their characters are not?

Lindelof: I will remind you that Maggie Grace showed up at many press events after we killed her character. She was a mensch. But I love Ben and Juliet. They are the face of The Others right now. They are fascinating characters that we still have many stories to tell, so I would not fear their death anytime soon… Although a lot of people hate them and want them to die!

Brian: A lot of people think Ben is a goner in the next episode. I'm not one of them. More on this in my episode preview coming soon...


Q: Will you do a cliffhanger like 'What's in the hatch?' this year?

Lindelof: I don't know if we will ever have a cliffhanger like 'What's in the hatch?' And, you know, the irony of that cliffhanger was, although people were ultimately satisfied with what was in the hatch, all we heard over the course of that summer was how angry everybody was. So that makes us say we never, ever want to have a cliffhanger like that again. Because all we were hearing was how pissed off and unsatisfied, and, 'You shouldn't have ended the season with them looking down in the hatch, they should have gone in there and you should have shown us something, anything.' So that tells us as storytellers we will never, ever do anything like that again, even though…

Joss Whedon said something very funny, when he and I were talking. He basically said "The critics and the fans always hate the season that you're in and wish that it was like the season that preceded it." And it's true! The reality is that when we were in season two, everybody hated it. They hated Michelle Rodriguez, hated the tail section stories, wished it was more like season one. Now we find ourselves in season three and everybody's hating that and they wish it was more like season two! And I was like, 'You hated season two!' But that is sort of the nature of things; to sort of reminisce about what it was, on any serialized show.

Unlike 24, which can get progressively better and better season after season, because they don't carry any baggage from the season before. Yes, you need to know that Wayne Palmer was David Palmer's brother and he's the new president. But my wife started to watch 24 last season, and when David Palmer got assassinated, she just thought it was cool. I was heartbroken, because I'd been following this guy for four seasons. But the story owed nothing to it, you know? You have a new threat every year.

Brian: First, it's great to see that Joss and Damon are apparently buddies and talk from time to time. There was a saying back in the heydey of Buffy that said "In Joss We Trust". No matter how weird or how far we thought the plot strayed from what we wanted, it always turned out great in the end (well, most of the time - coughcoughSeason6coughcough). But people also always looked back fondly on the season before, even though they were complaining about it at the time. Lost is no different. One year from now, we'll all be remembering how great Season Three was.

As for cliffhangers, I think the writers have learned their lesson. There's a big difference between a cliffhanger just beginning as the season ends (Season One) and being in the middle of a cliffhanger when the season ends (Season Two). Being in the middle gives you some degree of satisfaction while still letting you wonder what is to come. Ending right at the start is just a tease, and frustrates the viewer as much as it gives them things to ponder.

The writers sem to have learned the lesson. Look for Season Three to end mid-cliffhanger, with the early favorite being the arrival of Penny Widmore and Co.


Q: Is it hard to keep track of the fact that for the characters, so little time has passed, while we've been watching it for years?

Lindelof: No, in fact it's going to become a huge part of the storytelling in season three; that sort of disconnect. We felt the need to remind the audience that was in fact the case with the Red Sox game, and just basically say, 'Here on the island it's just November of 2004.' You know, we just sort of passed Thanksgiving. Here in the world we're actually three years beyond that, so this is something that we're not only keeping track of, but writing towards for sort of a very major shake up coming soon.

Brian: I'm sure some will read into this comment something about the Island being a time warp, where time moves slower / faster than the rest of the world, but I think that's a huge leap that would be very tricky to explain using "pseudo-science", as we have been promised everything on Lost would follow. In my eyes, this more suggests that these characters have only been gone months, not years - and if rescuers were looking for them, they wouldn't be to the point of giving up hope. To me, it suggests that there is hope for a happy ending after all.


Q: Have you thought about doing a Battlestar Galactica type one-year-later leap forward in the story?

Lindelof: First off, that's an amazing show. And if we did it, people would think we were ripping them off, and they'd be absolutely right. It's a very slippery slope, and you have to execute it well, because when Alias did it, it was a complete and utter disaster of unmitigated proportions. When you skip forward in time, suddenly, you have a paradigm on the show -- like The Nine for example -- where all of the characters are keeping a secret from the audience. At least you guys are on in the same boat with Jack and Kate and Sawyer; We're keeping a secret from everybody, together. But the fact that these people were in this bank robbery, that they know about, that they won't tell you about, frustrates people. And when you do a time jump, that's what happens, is everybody on Battlestar knew what happened in that intervening year, but you as an audience are like, 'Wait a minute… F**kin' Baltar is president? When did that happen?' So it can be exciting, but then you have to figure out how to back fill in a satisfying way. I think when Alias did it as an amnesia story, bonding Sydney up with the audience, then the show became a slave to what had happened, as opposed to what is happening.

Brian: Damon makes a great point about the Nine. The best part about that show were the flashbacks in the first ten minutes of each episode. As a viewer, I didn't really care what was going on with each character in the present, only in the past - and that's a problem. Lost succeeds by making us care about both. There's a compelling backstory to each character, but there's also a lot of action going on in the present.


Q: Do you feel battered by different fans wanting different things?

Lindelof: We feel battered, but it's a battering we enjoy. Because, you know, if I only was talking to two reporters right now, as opposed to nine, it would mean that you weren't interested in the show anymore. And I think what's cool about the show is it is polarizing. We're not afraid to anger people. And the thing is, we acknowledge that we have always been writing what should be a cult show, and the fact that it has sort of crossed over to the mainstream… If we basically said, 'Let's start writing something for the mainstream,' then we're doing something different then we were doing in the first place. So all we can do is the show that we know how to do, and what's cool for us. We, all the time, are aware of, 'Wow, this is episode is going to make the sort of die hard geek crowd angry,' because we are die hard geeks. But at the same time, if it's time to do a Hurley story that's sort of slower and funnier and doesn't advance any mythology, and my mom will love that episode…

But if we actually sat down and said, 'It's time to appease my mom,' then you're in a… Well, that's pretty much the story of my life. You put your best foot forward and tell the best story that you know how. At the end of the day, the series, in its totality, is all that really matters. What's really sad to me about a show like The X-Files is how great it was for six years. But we don't look back on that show and go, 'It was great!' We go, 'It was great, but…' And that 'but' is a very, very depressing thing. A show like the original Fugitive ended. It was a massive phenomenon. It went off the air with a 44 share, but they had the balls to let Richard Kimball catch the one armed man and end it! If you can make a case for that then, then why not now?

Brian: It's true. The best indication of good writing and storytelling is when the audience gets mad about what happens on the show. It shows they care, that they are invested, and that they think about your show enough to have a preconceieved notion of where they want to see it go.


Q: You said 24 is your favorite show. Why is that?

Lindelof: What I think is so amazing about that show is, not unlike Lost, it shouldn't work. When you first hear the premise, you're like, 'A show in real time, told over the course of an entire season? It's gonna be redundant. How do you maintain suspense?' Yes, there are things about 24 that drive me crazy. As much as I love the President Logan and his wife story last year, there were times when I was like, 'Get on with it.' But then you get to the end, and it all pays off. So my impression of last season was that it was amazing. But there are certain episodes, where you're like, "Ugh…" I know people have that same experience with Lost. It's because they are devout watchers of the show and it requires that you watch it every week, which means that you hold it to a higher standard. You don't hold a show like CSI to such a high standard, because you can watch it six, seven times a year and get exactly what you paid for. For our show, because we demand utmost commitment, you have to suffer the blows of when people are like, 'I gave you my hour tonight, and I don't feel like you deserved it.'

Brian: My only knock on "24", for all the praise Damon lumped upon it during this interview, is that it is disappointing to hear that the writers don't have an overall story mapped out for each season - they are literally making it up four to five episodes at a time as they go. This results in some pretty huge plot holes that could easily be avoided by a little planning.


Q: What shows or creators influenced you?

Lindelof: I'm a huge David Milch fan. Hill Street Blues was the first pilot that I watched and thought, 'Oh my god, I don't feel like I'm watching TV.' It was so confusing and exciting to me, and I love big ensembles with lots of characters, where the procedural elements of the story were second to who the people were. I remember how exciting it was to get to the end of the episode and realize that Furillo was sleeping with the DA, and that was a twist. And my brain goes, 'Oh my god, the idea that you can do this in a TV show was really, really exciting to me.' Bochco and Milch… David Kelly, another huge inspiration. Those seasons of The Practice, and I think you guys know what I'm talking about, my level of excitement, approaching those shows on a Sunday night at 10:00 and sitting down, not knowing whether the psycho was psycho or not, and the ethics of the storytelling; it was amazing. So those are guys that I really, really look up to.

Brian: Current shows where I don't feel like I'm watching TV include: 24, Lost, The Office.


Q: Will we be seeing more of the plot thread from the Season 2 finale, with the people in the arctic who seem to know about the island?

Lindelof: Not in these first batch of episodes [after we return], but by the end of the season we will be paying off that reveal in a very significant way. I think the idea that Penny is looking for Desmond seemingly, is something that comes into play very significantly in the eighth episode of the show -- our second episode back -- but is a story strand that doesn't pay off on the island until the episodes approaching the finale.

Brian: Bingo. As I said before, if you're going to be in Vegas, bet on Penny arriving for the season finale. They've hinted at how important that scene, as well as the sky going purple are to the overall series which to me mean that the purple sky broke the magnetic barrier around the Island, allowing it to be seen and found - and Penny searching for Desmond is going to be key to the escape of everyone on the Island. For surprise sake, I hope I'm 100% wrong - but from a storytelling perspective, this would be very satisfying for me (that's what she said).


So there you have it. Is your faith in Lost restored? Are you feeling more upbeat about the upcoming spring season, or are you as cynical as ever? Maybe I'm too easily swayed by a few mentions of avoiding the errors of TV shows in the past and the sense of confidence in the storyline that I got from reading this interview (or the Joss Whedon name drop), but I'm mega-excited for the upcoming episodes.

Two weeks from today!

Lost - Moment 10

Okay, time to come down from the melodic high of the Scrubs Musical and get caught up with the latest Lost Moment. Once again, we're with Hurley and Charlie, but this time a much loved cast member makes their long-awaited return...



A couple of thoughts here.

• Vincent! Now this has been the topic of much debate ever since the Season Two DVDs came out. You see, in the Season Two Finale, we saw Walt and Michael get on their boat and sail into the sunset, sans-dog. However, in the "Making of" featurette on the DVD, it showed a scene where Vincent was on the boat with them. Since Vincent hadn't yet appeared in Season Three, it was anyone's guess what really happened. It looks like the show's writers decided to go the logical route and keep Vincent on the Island (because seriously, how would he have gotten from one side of the Island to the other to get onto that boat? I mean, I've seen Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey and all, but that was two dogs and a cat - much more realistic.)
• Disgusting! A decaying arm? That's pretty nasty. The question becomes "whose arm is that?" One of the Adam / Eve corpses from the caves? Boone? Radzinski? Desmond? I'm betting on "none of the above" for one reason:
• Key! Initially, I thought the key might have been the failsafe key from the Hatch, but upon closer examination it looks more like a traditional car / house key tied to a rabbit foot keychain (continuing the "white rabbit" theme we've seen a few times on Lost). Which means, we're due to find a new decomposing body on the Island. Sounds like a fresh storyline to me!

Two and a half weeks until Lost returns!

The Scrubs Musical Aftermath

I'm not really sure how this snuck up on me, but the long-awaited Scrubs Musical is tonight!



With Arrested Development now gone, and The Office getting better and better ratings (did you know it's the most watched show by people aged 18-49 who make more than $100,000? Watch The Office and you'll get rich!), Scrubs officially claims the title as "The Funniest Show on TV That No One Appreciates".

While it does my heart good to see how many new fans the show is gaining due to its reruns on Comedy Central (which are pretty much mandatory viewing every night from 7:00 - 8:00), and its ratings have been on the rise since it moved to Thursday nights at 9:00, Scrubs still seems to flirt with cancellation each season due to ratings.

Tonight is your chance to give Scrubs the love it deserves. Sure, Grey's Anatomy is on - but we all know that the action will go down in the second half hour, after Scrubs is over. Also, will the doctors be singing and dancing during Grey's? I think not. Advantage: Scrubs.

While I'm sure there are doubters out there, anyone who has seen the Buffy Musical can attest that when a great TV show does a musical right, it's pretty much the best thing ever... and judging by the reviews I read in this morning's New York Times and New York Daily News, this is going to be the balls.


http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/ent_radio/story/489255p-412044c.html


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/arts/television/17scru.html?_r=2&ref=arts&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

9:00 pm. NBC.

Eagle!

BONUS! The "music video" version of "Guy Love". It's even funnier than the original!

Lost - Moment 9

Pretty strange Lost Moment this week...



Upon first viewing, you think "Whoa - what are Charlie and Hurley up to? Something dangerous where they could be killed? What does Hurley mean by "If you don't die, then we win"? Have they found some way go get off the Island?!"

And then logic sets in. Listen to the tone of Hurley's talking. It's weird, as if he's doing an impersonation of someone who is giving a serious speech, when in reality they're probably talking about something trivial.

So what could it be? Well, based on the other Lost Moments, and the centricity of the episodes coming up, I'd be willing to bet this has something to do with Desmond and his powers. Perhaps they are planning a trip to the Imploded Swan Hatch to see what remains? Perhaps the "winning" they are talking about is "beating" Desmond by actually finding out what happened to him, since he won't tell them himself.

That's my best guess anyways. Comment away!

Lost - Moment 8

Thoughts:

• Jack flashback! This looks to be our long-promised Jack flashback to Thailand, where we learn more about his (Matthew Fox's real life) tattoo on his arm with the funky 5.
• Unlike most of the other Lost Moments, which seem to be from the first episode back, this one is clearly from the third episode back, Episode 9 - which is scheduled to be Jack-centric. (In case you were curious, Episode 7 is supposed to be Juliet-centric, Episode 8 is supposed to Desmond-centric. It's pretty easy to figure out which Lost Moments are from which episode based on that, isn't it?)
• Our first glimpse of Bai Ling, scheduled to guest star on Lost for three episodes this spring. Here's what she said about her stint in a recent interview with Kristin from E... (warning! this is slightly spoilerific - silly guest stars, when will they learn to keep their mouths shut?)

We've got to talk about all things Lost! Work was a joy. Everyone in the production was so generous, humble and kind. I felt like I was very welcomed by them! Mostly, I worked with Matthew Fox. The three episodes I have, it's very deep. My character says, "I can see who people are."

What can you tell us about your relationship with Jack? What exactly are you going to be doing? You never know, I might come back. They say on the show they bring people back even when they're dead. I am a very important character in his life; like, his tattoos have something to do with me.

I know you said he was a great kisser. It was funny, when we were shooting the scene, we didn't know each other. He is very handsome and very kind—very much a gentleman. It's kind of nervous doing those love scenes, but it was really fun, [even though] I was kind of embarrassed. We both had a mutual understanding to just go for it. Sometimes I'm on top of him, sometimes he's on top of me. I asked him, "Can I do what I want?" and he said, "Sure, you can do whatever you want." I didn't want to offend him, but after he said that I went with what I felt.

Can you give us a character name? Achara, a-c-h—I don't know how to spell it. It's a name I had never heard; it was hard for me to pronounce. But, you know, what is funny about my part...she seduces him, and she's really forward, and she behaves the way she wants, which is really beautiful. It's very healthy and honest and very powerful, in a way.

So, what's the backstory? We're lovers, but I am kind of a mystery to him. He doesn't really know me. I don't allow him to visit me, I don't allow him to know what I really do—we're together, we sleep together, we hang out together, we're lovers. And there is a mystery, he never knows what I do. There is also a psychological twist and betrayal.

Are you contracted to do any episodes outside of the three? No, they haven't now, but they are going to see. Hopefully, I come back. I want to, because Lost is a really fun project. I think it is a lot better than the movies I have done. The writing is beautiful, and you really get to know the characters, and not just on the surface, which I really appreciate.

Sounds pretty good to me!

Lost - Moment 7

Thoughts:

• Juliet is noticeably absent from the Operating Room. She sure got out of there quick... is she off helping Kate and Sawyer, as hinted at in the previous Lost Moment?
• There seems to be some existing tension between Juliet and Tom, much like there seemed to be tension between Juliet and Ben.
• Jack continues to be pretty sweet and badass.

Lost - Moment 6

Wow - two good "Lost Moments" in a row! Maybe this spring season is going to be way more kickasserific than we thought!



Thoughts:

• Unlike some of the other "Lost Moments", this one is clearly from the first episode back after the break, still showing Jack in the Operating Room with Ben.
• It doesn't look like Sawyer and Kate's escape is going to be as easy as some thought... and it doesn't look like they hijack the alleged submarine to get back to the mainland - at least not right away.
• Juliet seems to be missing from the Operating Room. Could she be the one who knocks out Picket at the end to save Sawyer and Kate? Or could it be Alex? Either way, it looks like that'll be the key to Kate and Sawyer finding freedom, leaving Jack behind to hang out in a cage.

(Thanks to Dru for reminding me to update the Blog. You'll have to forgive me, as I'm still in a state of mourning after the Bengals debacle on Christmas Eve.)

Lost - Moment 5

Ummmm - this "Lost Moment" is actually insanely good!

• Cindy and Jack reunite!
• Jack apparently gets out of the Operating Room, but ends up in a cage like Sawyer and Kate - so clearly he doesn't escape with them.
• Cindy seems totally cool with "The Others" - is she brainwashed into their hippie cult? Was she part of it all along, before Flight 815 crashed? Was she "a mole" on the outside?
• Apparently The Others are "here to watch". Does this mean that their wacky science experiments are continuing? Or are they just all just watching our Survivors to see who proves themselves "worthy" of joining The Others' wacky cult? Or is she just literally referring to all those people there just to watch Jack, to make sure he doesn't escape?

I'm officially excited about the Lost spring season.

Marvin's Reindeer

Wow. Once again Ryan Parker proves to be the greatest (only?) Bengals singer-songwriter of the modern era. It's hilarious. It's topical. It's kinda sad.





WHO DEY!

TV Mid-Term Report Cards

(Quick, hide them before your parents see them and ground you!)

Now that most TV shows are on their annual Winter Hiatus, it’s a good time to look back at the body of work that each show delivered during the fall. To be completely honest, I’ve been underwhelmed by most of the shows that I considered “must see” going into the fall. There have been a few noticeable standouts, but for the most part, I would say that the shows I watch were better last year than they have been so far this year. So let’s dish out the marks of each show that I hyped up back in September (http://lost-and-gone-forever.blogspot.com/2006/09/2006-fall-tv-guide.html) to see where I was right and where I led you astray…



MONDAYS

Prison Break

Grade: B

What Brian Predicted: "While it may not achieve the same level of excitement as its first season, there is little doubt it will be an entertaining ride. Prison Break has become a modern-day “The Fugitive”, which isn’t a bad thing.”

What Happened: I was pretty much dead on with my prediction of this one. The season started by killing off a number of “main characters” from Season One, and in the process tightened up the storyline considerably. Unfortunately, we then fell into a pretty boring cross-country chase where the characters miraculously kept crossing paths in small-town America in their search for Westmoreland’s buried treasure. Luckily, the last few episodes of the season got Prison Break right back to where it needed to be and set the stage for a great second half of the season as Michael and Lincoln work to take down the President of the United States (“24” Season 5, anyone?). I’d also say this was the “most satifsying and surprising” of all the “fall finales”. Good work, Prison Break – keep it up!



Heroes

Grade: A-

What Brian Predicted: "My chief concern for “Heroes” is how (if ever) these characters interact with each other… they’re scattered all over the world, speaking different languages, living unique lives. Will some “big bad” appear, forcing them to work together to defeat them? Will the show focus more around the people coming to grips with being “different”? I have no idea, but this show is different enough to keep me watching for the first few episodes.”

What Happened: Luckily, all my concerns were addressed all these concerns in the best way possible – getting the characters interacting in somewhat reasonable ways, giving us a “big bad” (in addition to some potential “smaller bads”), and keeping the focus on the drama in the heroes lives rather than being a small-screen version of the X-Men.



If I had to give out a “Best New TV Show of 2006” Award (and I do, contractually), it would go to Heroes without question. A lot of people have called this show the “anti-Lost” because the storylines are quickly moving, action-packed, and the a good deal of the questions raised are answered in an episode or two instead of dragging out over the entire season. For the most part, the characters are varied and quite interesting – we care about them and are curious where they are going to end up. The storyline moves at a great clip, and I haven’t ever felt like an episode was a “filler”.

Having said that, this show isn’t perfect. A lot of the time, the dialogue can be pretty clunky, sounding more like cheesy lines from a comic book than a network drama. It’s also pretty interesting that the show involving “superheroes” has actually been very light on the action thus far. I’m looking forward to some straightforward “action” sequences (although “Homecoming” was pretty intense) where we get to see the heroes actually put their powers to the test. That could ratchet up my opinion of the show to the next level.


Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip

Grade: C-

What Brian Predicted: "It’s just a well-made show about a subject matter that isn’t overly interesting to me."

What Happened: It worries me that the rest of America agreed with me on this one, because I generally curse the masses who watch their “American Idol” and “CSI” – but it seems that my chief concern for this show was the same as theirs – the backstage world of Saturday Night Live and network TV just really isn’t that interesting.

It didn’t help that this show isn’t really funny, isn’t really exciting, and isn’t really dramatic – it just is. You can nitpick about the show’s faults, but in general it doesn’t do anything bad. It just doesn’t do anything good either. There’s no passion and no reason for the audience to connect with the show.

After three weeks, I quit watching. I’m shocked that NBC is standing by this show because I really don’t see its ratings ever improving. I’ve actually read reports that some of the actors on the show were hoping it would be cancelled, because they’re ready to move on as well. Look for this show to slowly fade away…


WEDNESDAYS

Jericho

Grade: C+

What Brian Predicted: "To me, this is a fascinating storyline. In this day and age of being constantly connected to everyone in the world via TV, Internet, and Telephone, what would happen if we were suddenly all alone?"

What Happened: It turns out, it really isn’t that interesting. The overall storyline of the show is still plenty grippy – what’s going on? Are we under attack by aliens? A foreign country? Ourselves? – it’s just that the other storylines are pretty lame. Getting supplies from hospitals in other cities, powerlines falling in playgrounds, and restoring power to the hospital don’t really interest me. It also kinda bothers me that the characters on the show seem to have everything a bit too easy given that they are completely isolated from the rest of the country.

This show needed to be much more like “24” – instead, it feels more like a family drama with an action story looming in the background. I’m still curious to find out what actually happened… but not curious enough to actually tune into the show each week.



Lost

Grade: C+

What Brian Predicted: "I think I’m more excited for the third season of “Lost” than I was for either of the previous two, if that’s possible. Coming off a season finale that had more action than the entire first season, I feel like we’re at the edge of a number of huge reveals about the show that has been teasing us with mysteries from the start. The writers seem determined to “wrap up” the lingering storylines of the first two seasons in order to open up a set of brand new ones with the third.When the show returns in October, we’re looking at a six episode, self-contained story arc dealing with the capture of Kate, Jack, and Sawyer. We’ll finally get a glimpse of the Others’ camp, begin to learn about their experiences on the Island, and determine who the good guys and bad guys really are. Even better, two of the more dynamic characters from last season, HGI and Desmond, are back as series regulars. What more can you want?"

What Happened: The answer is: a lot more. Ironically, all the things I wanted to have happen (wrapping up lingering storylines from Seasons 1 and 2, learning the true nature of the Others, lots of Desmond action) didn’t. Instead, we got a lot of storylines I was somewhat indifferent about (Kate hooking up with Sawyer, Locke saving Eko from a polar bear, Paulo and Nikki action).

Before you grab your pitchforks and start hurling profanites at me, I should clarify that I hold “Lost” to higher standards than other shows. Although it got a C+, it’s still the number one show I watch on TV without fail. There’s no other show I would rather watch just because the show is so rich, well-made, and addicting. While I respect the writers and their storytelling decisions, I think we viewers would all be much happier if they would actually throw us a bone once in a while and give us an answer or two. They don’t even have to be big answers. Just something.

Why? Because we’re actually at a very interesting place as Lost-viewers. I think a lot of people have “jumped ship” this season, finally giving up on the show actually giving us any answers, unwilling to invest their time in the show without getting any payoff. Granted, this is probably weeding out the “casual viewers”, and we “die-hard viewers” could care less, it should be a concern of the show’s creators. After all, what good is a storyline if there’s no one there to see it?

As I said, I’m hopeful that the 16 nonstop episodes in the spring will make us forget about the more forgetful parts of Season Three: Part 1. Looking back, there was one great episode (“The Cost of Living”), two good episodes (“Every Man for Himself” and “I Do”), and three mediocre ones (“A Tale of Two Cities”, “The Glass Ballerina”, and “Further Instructions”). That sounds like a C+ to me.


Kidnapped

Grade: Incomplete

What Brian Predicted: "The characters on this show are fantastic… even better, there are hints of a huge conspiracy lying just beneath the surface – which should develop as the season progresses. Why does the family speak French to each other and English to everyone else? Why do they only need a bodyguard for their son?I can’t wait to find out."

What Happened: I never found out.

In reality, there are a number of shows on this list that would probably should be “Incomplete” due to mid-season cancellation (“The Nine” and “Six Degrees”, I’m looking at you) – but I feel like “Kidnapped” was the only show that was killed before I got a chance to fairly judge it. What I saw, I liked – a lot. But just as the story was starting to gain traction, it was banished to Friday nights and then taken off the schedule altogether, leaving us to wonder where the show’s fascinating storylines were headed.

NBC – bad move in picking “Studio 60” as the show to “stick with”. This was your chance to have a kickass show in your lineup that the “Sunday Night Football” crowd would actually watch. “24” didn’t get good ratings until its third season either, and now it’s consistently in the Top 10. Frustrating.



The Nine

Grade: C

What Brian Predicted: "It sounds interesting enough, with each episode beginning with a flashback of another 10 minutes of the hostage situation – but here’s what I want to know – what is the point / storyline of the show in the present tense?It’s got a solid cast (Kim Raver – aka Audrey from “24”, Scott Wolf – aka Dreamy Boy from “Party of Five”) so I’m going to give it a try. Once I figure out what this show is actually about (is it just a regular drama about how a situation like this changes your life? Or is there something more to it?)"

What Happened: Unfortunately, my fears were correct. The “interesting” part of the show (the bank robbery / hostage situation) was relegated to the first ten minutes each week, and then we were left with typical TV-drama about unwanted pregnancies, love affairs, blah blah blah. The show hinted that there was something more intriguing lurking beneath the surface, but it would only touch on this mystery for a few moments each episode. What it needed was for this mystery to be far more integrated in the show – because this is what made the show different, unique, and interesting.ABC, here’s your lesson – it doesn’t matter how many great actors you have in a TV show. If the story is dull, no one is going to care (unless all the actors are hot and scantily clad, of course). This show has been pulled and the network promises it will be back as a “mid-season replacement”, but I wouldn’t hold your breath. Actors on the show are currently looking for other work, which isn’t a good sign.



Laguna Beach: The Real Orange County

Grade: B+

What Brian Predicted: "Although the new cast pales in comparison to the old cast (I can’t say that I really like any of them, although I do hate Cami with the burning passion of 1000 suns), the show is still beautifully shot and a great guilty pleasure to voyeuristically look into the lives of the rich kids of Laguna."

What Happened: You know what, those crazy kids kinda grew on me! While I can’t really say that I loved any of them, I was indifferent to most of them. Luckily, what this season had going for it was more teenage drama per episode than any of the previous seasons, so you didn’t really care that the characters were for the most part uninteresting and incapabale of expressing real feelings or logic.

The Kyndra / Jessica / Cameron storyline was fantastic, especially because Cameron ended up being a normal dude in the end and being like “I don’t need this drama” and walking away from both of them. Equally great was watching Rocky express her “love” for Alex way too quick and him responding with a quick break up, or the overall idiocrity of anything related to Tyler.

In the end, Laguna proved that it doesn’t matter if your “lead character” (Tessa) is as interesting as a piece of plywood, or if you don’t have a token “hot girl” (like Kristen / LC), as long as there is ridiculous teenage drama involving spoiled rich kids, it’ll be good!




Top Chef

Grade: A

What Brian Predicted: "What sets this one apart is that the challenges are damn fun (create a gormet meal out of ingredients bought from a gas station, candy bar and snack food taste tests, etc.) It’s a breath of fresh air."

What Happened: The show continued to impress. This season, there have been more topical challenges (like the Thanksgiving-related), fun challenges (make a meal without using heat), and just flat out more interesting ones (make a meal for kids at fat camp that is less than 500 calories). One thing I’m noticing this season that sets this show apart from other reality shows is that the challenges are the stars of the show. There’s maybe two minutes of “confessionals” each week, then you jump into the Quickfire Challenge, immediately followed by the Elimination Challenge – as opposed to a show like Real World / Road Rules challenge where the drama between the characters is the star of the show.

It’s funny, but a sign of how much I like this show was the week after Thanksgiving, when I got back in town and had a ton of shows backed up on the DVR. First I watched “Heroes”, then I watched “Top Chef”. It’s that good.



THURSDAY

My Name is Earl

Grade: A

What Brian Predicted: "Deep down inside, I have a fear that the show will start to feel stale since it’s pretty much the same story every week – but thus far they’ve done a great job in introducing new characters and having enough laugh-out loud moments to the show work.Now on Thursdays at 8:00, I kinda feel like “Earl” is the new “Friends” and “The Office” is the new “Seinfeld” – I can only hope NBC is smart enough to place “Scrubs” on Thursday nights this spring to complete a great comedic “Must See TV” night like the glory days of yore."

What Happened: It turns out my fears were all for naught. “My Name is Earl” wins the award for “Most Improved Show of 2006.” On more than one occasion this fall, I’ve found Earl to be funnier than “The Office”, even though my head was telling me that The Office has to be funnier by default because I like it better. But it was no use – laughs (much like my hips) don’t lie.



Earl’s imrpovement can be directly linked to the storylines, which have been much more outrageous than last season, and a bit more racier (pretending to be God, stealing from a stoner, being addicted to gambling) – but I just feel like these are the much more natural things for Earl (who was a lowdown criminal) to be involved in. I’ve also loved the show incorporating some story arcs that last longer than an episode, like Joy’s criminal case (chock full of hilariously inappropriate deaf jokes) or their recent escapade to Mexico to retrieve Catalina.

I’m also happy to report that my dream came true, and Scrubs is sitting smack in the middle of NBC’s Thursday night comedy block. I’m even happier to report that ratings for all shows involved have been great for the past two weeks – keep up the good work, people!


The Office

Grade: A

What Brian Predicted: "The Office has created one of the best ensemble comedy casts in recent memory – and there really isn’t enough time in each episode to give them all enough screen time. I mean, we all love Jim, Pam, Dwight, and Michael – but even characters like Ryan, Stanley, and Kevin are hilarious, even though they sometimes get one or two lines a week."

What Happened: The Office added even MORE characters, kept our lovebirds apart for most of the season thus far, and yet still is as great as ever.

I had no idea how the cliffhanger from Season Two would be resolved, but I’m happy to report that in my wildest dreams, I couldn’t have thought up a better storyline and resolution. Somehow, it was logical, progressed the storyline, and yet ended up putting us right back where we were before the cliffhanger (with Jim and Pam working in the same office) without seeming like a total “reset”.



It was pure genius to have the first part of the season simulataneously focus on Jim in the Stamford branch and everyone else in the Scranton branch. While it kept the core characters apart, the writers came up with enough ways for them to interact to keep fans happy, while allowing enough time to get to know new characters like Karen and Andy. Now that the branches have merged (again, smart) we have a true “love triangle” between Karen, Pam, and Jim; a new nemesis for Dwight in Andy; and a fresh batch of characters for Michael to be totally inappropriate to.

Once again, The Office is at its best when it’s heavy on inappropriate humor involving minorities, homosexuals, and criminals. Mix in some heavy doses of Pam and Jim giving hilarious looks to one another and the camera, and you have the best comedy on TV.


Grey’s Anatomy

Grade: B

What Brian Predicted: "Here’s hoping for more crazy medical situations that offer symbolism into the characters’ personal lives, hot doc-on-doc action, and a fantastic soundtrack. It might not be the meatiest show on TV, but it sure is fun."

What Happened: I can’t put my finger on this one. Grey’s seems to be using the same formula (described above) as last year, but a lot of the episodes have lacked the emotional punch of Season One. Instead of episodes leaving me with a smile on my face or a tear in my eye, most have left me just sitting there.

I feel like some of the storylines have been dragging on a bit too long (for God’s sake, just let Izzie come back full time! She’s learned her lesson!) and a few of the patients’ problems are bordering on bad-soap-opera (lady impreganted by two different guys, lady having an affair with a pair of siamese twins).

I’m hopeful that the show will pick things up (I’m smelling some hot doc-on-doc action between Addison and Alex), wrap up the “Derek has the shakes” storyline, and will be back to top form by the time sweeps rolls around – but thus far this season, it’s been good – not great.




Six Degrees

Grade: C-

What Brian Predicted: "In what seems to have spun out of the flashbacks from “Lost”, where we see how interconnected we all are, even if we don’t realize it – “Six Degrees” takes this theme to the forefront, and spins an entire show out of it. It’s a great idea for a “feel good” show, but I fear it will become a standard TV romantic drama pretty quickly. Here’s hoping it can build interesting characters and themes to keep me interested."

What Happened: See: The Nine; under “Brian’s worst fears realized”. The show quickly dissolved into a standard TV-drama, not effectively using its “hook” of “we’re all connected”, losing focus and lacking much in the way of interesting storylines. Another show on mid-season “hiatus”, another show likely to never air another episode on ABC. Next!


SUNDAY

The Amazing Race

Grade: C

What Brian Predicted: "The least trashy and exploitive of all reality shows, here’s hoping for another group of contestants that are likable, following in the footsteps of the Linz Family of two years ago and the Hippies of last season. While the star of the show for me might be seeing exotic locales, it’s always nice to have a team you can get behind."

What Happened: Honestly, due to the rigorous demands of Bengals Tailgating (drinking from 8:00 am until 4:00 pm), I’m usually in no condition to watch “Amazing Race” on Sunday nights. There are a ton backed up on DVR, and I’ve seen a number – which I’m happy to report seem as good as ever – but not enough to bump any other shows off my plate so that I can watch the rest.

You know exactly what you’re getting with “Amazing Race”, and that’s a good thing – because it’s a good show – but it’s the kind of show that you don’t need to watch every week or every season.



So there you have it. When the Fall started, I was planning on watching twelve and a half hours of TV a week. By the end of the fall, my TV watching schedule consisted of a mere five (Prison Break, Lost, My Name is Earl, The Office, Top Chef, and Grey’s Anatomy) – who says I watch too much TV? I just watch TV with a passion, that’s all. Granted, with the addition of “Scrubs” and “24” lurking right around the corner, that number will rise by an hour and a half, but if you follow my lead, you should still be well within the USDA Recommended Weekly Allowance of Television.

Lost - Moment 4

Well, finally an interesting "Lost Moment"!



Two questions:

1. What is Claire doing in the water? Trying to kill herself? Under some sort of spell? Sucked out to sea by wicked undertow?
2. Are my dreams coming true, that the writers may finally kill off Claire? Probably not - but a guy can dream!

Lost - "I Do" Analysis (Aged for One Month, So You Know It's Good!)

Hello again, it’s been too long.

How long has it been? Well, “I Do” aired on November 8th, almost a full month ago – so long ago, that I had forgotten a lot of the details of this episode and needed to re-watch it completely to spark my thoughts for this Blog Post. The good news is that for the past month, I also totally forgot that Paulo and Nikki even existed in the Lostiverse. But now I remember them all too well, along with all the wackiness that went down in the Season Three: Part One Finale, “I Do”.

So what happened?

Kate. Well, besides keeping with the writers’ central theme of Season Three thus far, we were once again treated to multiple scenes of Kate in various stages of nakedness. Both her flashback and the action on the Island featured her getting down and dirty with the current men in her life. However, we also got another snippet of Kate’s shady past – this time learning that (against all logic and reason), she actually married a Florida Cop named Kevin in her pre-Island life. Maybe it’s just me, but if you’re a fugitive, isn’t marrying a police officer a terrible, terrible idea? Was Kate hoping she would get caught or what? Wouldn’t you think at some point during their courtship, Kevin might have found some holes in Kate’s story about her past? Or was he blinded by her beauty, leaving logic at the door and marrying her anyways (a la Nick Lachey)?



Either way, the central theme of the flashback was a recurring one with Kate – that of always running. Pre-Island, whenever Kate got close to someone, she had to run in order to keep her freedom. It contrasts nicely to on-Island Kate, who refuses to leave Sawyer, even though by doing so, she could escape her cell and potentially find freedom. Heck, it takes Jack screaming at her for a good minute at the episode’s ending before she would even leave him.



To what do we attribute this newfound behavior of Kate? Is it a sign of Kate standing by her man (proving she is actually in love with Sawyer, and wasn’t just in it for dirty cage hookup action) - or just a sign of her finally being a team player, finding belonging with a group of people in Jack and Sawyer, and refusing to run away anymore?

I’m thinking a little of both.



Geometry. This episode finally brought the long-promised “resolution” to the Kate-Sawyer-Jack love triangle (although in my opinion, this was already resolved during last season’s “What Kate Did”). The writers clearly wanted us to think that she has “chosen” Sawyer as her McDreamy and the two are madly in love – but should we buy it? The whole cage match action seemed a little bit forced to me. I suppose you could argue that the two of them bonded during their time in captivity together, but short of Sawyer gawking at Kate in various stages of undress and picking fights on her behalf, I didn’t see a lot of character development that would lead to the two of them to professing their love for each other.



But at the end of the day, we’re back where we should have been mid-season two, so I’m okay with it. Smart money is on this “relationship” quickly dissolving because, let’s face it, love triangles make for more interesting TV than love lines do (Adam Corolla and Dr. Drew = boring!). The real reason we should care about Kate and Sawyer finally getting to know each other in the Biblical sense is because of what it did to the third point in the triangle, Jack Shephard.



Jack. Jack is crushed. Although you could argue that he finally decided to perform the surgery on Ben as part of a masterplan that would allow Kate and Sawyer to escape, I think it’s far more reasonable to think that he agreed to do the surgery because he quit. There was a look in his eyes when he saw those video screens – a look of defeat. Although he never really came out and said it, and definitely missed a number of opportunities to put the moves on Kate, seeing her with Sawyer – who you could argue is the anti-Jack isn’t just her picking another guy over him, it’s Kate choosing the anti-Jack. Jack quits – he’s ready to leave the Island.



Didn’t he always want to get off the Island? Maybe a little – but look at the life he left behind. Dad just died (his fault). Wife left him (his fault). It wasn’t exactly all rainbows and puppy dogs. While he doesn’t have the same sort of compelling reason as a Rose / Bernard / Locke to stay on the Island, I think you could argue that he was happy there. He was a respected leader, he seemed destined to end up with the resident Island hottie, and was getting a great tan. On the Island he had something new to focus his energies on instead of tormenting himself about the mistakes he made in his pre-Island life.

But now, he’s got a whole new set of issues. Once again the woman in his life left him and he’s trapped in an underwater prison, unable to lead, help them, or work on getting off the Island – unless he agrees to do the surgery. Doing so gives him a purpose, and I’m not talking about saving Ben. Agreeing to the surgery gives him the opportunity to have some power again – and the chance to get off the Island. But more importantly, it gives him the chance to sacrifice himself for the sake of Kate and go out like a hero.

I know a lot of people have been wondering how in the world Jack is going to get out of this situation. It’s not hard to imagine how Kate and Sawyer are going to escape (the preview showed them running through the jungle, Sawyer with gun in tow, and we know there’s a submarine / underwater tunnel somewhere), but Jack? He’s in bad shape.



Right now, he’s got Ben as his bargaining chip. The problem is, Jack has too much of a conscience to actually let Ben die. He’s not a killer. But as soon as he saves Ben, his bargaining chip is gone and he’s trapped. While I can’t see the Others flat out killing Jack, I could very easily see them keeping him captive or turning the tables and using him as a bargaining chip to get something from the Survivors. If you want to get crazy, I could even see Ben coming out of surgery and offering Jack that chance to get off the Island (he kept his promise to Michael, after all). Anyways, while I expect Kate and Sawyer to quickly be rejoining the other Survivors after one or two episodes this spring, I don’t see Jack getting back to the beach for quite some time.



Plan. From a storytelling standpoint, keeping Jack with the Others actually makes a lot of sense. Before Season Three started, I expected that after the first six episodes, we would have an idea of who the Others are and what their intentions were – but we’re still a long way from there, having only received hints and small nuggets of information about them. Keeping Jack with them gives the us, the viewers, eyes and ears inside the Others camp – where these answers can be revealed without needing a large “The Other 48 Days”-esque expository of their story.

For instance, one the most intriguing lines of “I Do” was the one Pickett uttered immediately after Ben went under surgery, as he was storming out of the operating room to find Sawyer: “Ben just put his life in the hands of ‘one of them’. Shephard was never even on Jacob’s list’.”

What “list” was Pickett talking about? If Tom had Jack, Kate, Sawyer (and Locke) surrounded during “The Hunting Party” last season, why didn’t he just kidnap them at that point? Why did Ben let himself get kidnapped? What was the Others’ plan in all this? In trying to answer these questions, I realized that I needed a timeline. Here’s the best I could come up with:

• Day 1 – Oceanic Flight 815 crashes, Ben sends Ethan and Goodwin to spy on each camp.
• Day 2 – The three strongest Tailers are “taken”. (Presumably to ensure the Others maintain strength in numbers over the new inhabitants).
• Days 2-12 – Goodwin and Ethan gather information about each of the Survivors, reporting back to the other Others. It is decided which are “good ones” and the “bad ones” based on their reconnaissance and research done via computers / magic / telepathy.
• Day 12 – Nine “good ones” from the Tail Section are “taken”. Curiously, no “good ones” from the Fuselage? (Are the Others unable to carry out kidnappings there due to Smokey being in the way? Were none of them “good”? Puzzling…)
• Day 45 - Walt is kidnapped
• Day 51 – The events of “The Hunting Party”. Kate is kidnapped by the Others and Jack, Locke, and Sawyer are warned to turn back.
• Day 58 – Ben is captured.
• Day 61 – Mrs. Klugh makes agreement with Michael to get Ben back and capture Jack, Kate, and Sawyer.
• Day 64 – Ben is freed by Michael
• Day 67 – Jack, Kate, and Sawyer are captured
• Day 73 – The events of “I Do”, with Jack doing the surgery on Ben.

Trying to make sense of this sequence is tough. A lot of the events don’t seem to add up, and I’m tempted to chalk them up to storylines that were changed mid-season - such as the fact that Michael Emerson (Ben) was only supposed to be on the show for a few episodes, but was so great that they kept him around for the better part of the last year and expanded his role – but I’ll do my best to fit them into a logical sequence of events.

The real key to my theory is that Ben is not the leader of the Others, and is a man who was sent on a mission for the true leader of the Others (who I can only assume is “Jacob”).

If you start with that, you can piece together a storyline that almost makes sense. The standard protocol that exists among the Others is whenever someone new stumbles upon the Island, they try and blend in with them, learn as much as they can about them, and determine if they are “good” or “bad”. Why? Not important right now. They take the “good ones” as soon as they can, and later steal Walt away when they find out about his power (their affinity for children is still puzzling – but again, not important for this discussion). When any of the “bad” Survivors get “too close” to the Others’ territory on the Island, they are warned to stay away.

Everything up until this point (Day 51) makes pretty logical sense… everything up until Ben getting captured. What was the purpose of this? Perhaps the Others are worried about the Survivors finding and living in the Hatch and what they might have discovered within (full of weapons, communications equipment, and a big honkin’ magnet!). It is agreed upon that someone needs to go on a dangerous mission – to get “caught” by them in order to see what they actually know, even though it will likely mean lots of torture and possible death. Our boy Ben volunteers because he is promised that if he can complete his mission, they’ll bring Jack back to their camp where he can perform the surgery needed to save his life.

After one week, the Others send Michael back to release Ben and give him the list. The all-knowing Others realize that it’ll be hard to get Jack to actually perform the surgery on someone who is viewed as “the enemy”, so they wisely bring along Kate and Sawyer as bargaining chips. Knowing that Jack loves Kate and Kate loves Sawyer (see, the Others picked up that Kate choose Sawyer with the black horse during “What Kate Did” too!), they realize that by threatening Sawyer, they can affect Kate – and by affecting Kate they can affect Jack.

They’re smart.

Thus, Kate and Sawyer are doing menial tasks that potentially have no purpose other than keeping them busy while Juliet tries to break down Jack. Once Jack sees the X-Rays, it’s determined that there isn’t enough time to see the plan to fruition and the beating of torture begins, setting the whole Sawyer affecting Kate affecting Jack wheel in motion. Little do they know that Jack would go all “hero” on them and sacrifice himself for Kate and Sawyer.

Phew. Lots of holes in there, but that’s the best I can do.

Pickett. So why is Pickett in such a rage? Well, if it weren’t for Ben getting this arrangement with Jacob, they would have never kidnapped Jack, Kate, and Sawyer. If that never happened, Sayid, Sun, and Jin wouldn’t have sailed around the Island to meet up with them. If that never happened, the Others wouldn’t have tried to steal their boat, and Colleen would have never been shot or died. Not only is Pickett full of rage against Sawyer (who embodies the Survivors), but also for Ben – who is putting them all at risk by trusting these “bad ones” who weren’t on “Jacob’s List” (the original list of “good ones” from Day 12). Pickett’s all about following the rules and his leader – and all of this bending of the rules for Ben’s benefit eats him up inside.

Jacob. With all this talk about Jacob, I think it’s time we give him a little analysis too. The name Jacob is Hebrew for “he who supplants or takes the place of another, by force or scheming.” In the Bible, Jacob was the “father of Israel”. If we apply this to the Island (“Brian’s Deeper Meaning Guess” alert!), I’m picturing Jacob as someone who overthrew Alvar Hanso and the Dharma Initiative on the Island, and decided to form a cult-like utopia there instead. It would make sense, wouldn’t it? He “supplants” Hanso and becomes the “father” to all the Others on the Island.

So where is he? Why haven’t we seen him? I’m guessing the leader of the Others is hanging out at their headquarters, and after this episode it’s clear that “Alcatraz” is not the normal home base of the Others…

Breach. How? Well, during Alex’s compound breach this episode, Pickett asks “How the hell did she get over here?” – as if she should be “over there”, along with all of the other Others, Cindy, the “good ones”, etc. I’m guessing Alcatraz is only used for “dirty matters” of imprisonment, torture, and weekend getaways. From a storytelling perspective, it’s also tough to have the Others and the Survivors interact when they’re on totally separate Island – which is why I’m thinking we’ll be done with Alcatraz after an episode of two of the spring season.

But what are we to make of Alex’s impassioned cries to Kate and Sawyer about “whatever they say, don’t believe them – they’re going to kill your boyfriend just like they killed mine”? At first I was tempted to chalk it up to part of the Others’ tricks to get Kate to think they would actually kill Sawyer, but on second viewing it all seemed legit – and I like the idea of Alex being an emotional teenager who is rebelling against the Others’ (aka – “The Man’s”) way of life. It seems that her boyfriend rebelled a bit too hard and paid the ultimate price for it. Capitol Punishment is alive and well on the Island!

The other interesting thing is that the last thing Ben asked before going under for surgery was if Alex asked about him. It seems pretty obvious that after Alex was taken from CFL, Ben had some influence as raising her, perhaps as an adoptive father of sorts. Given this connection, think back to how Ben got “captured” by CFL which allowed him to do his reconnaissance of the Survivors. I wonder if there was some bargaining between Ben and CFL to have her arrange this “capture” in exchange for information about / seeing Alex…

Eko. Switching gears a bit, back on the main Island, Eko was buried – and with his burial came some intriguing conversation between Sayid and Locke, where they have some candid conversation about “the monster” (Sayid knows that Locke has seen it, but doesn’t believe in it until he sees it with his own eyes). Locke also remarks “Eko died for a reason – I just don’t know what it is yet”, indicating that he hasn’t lost faith in the Island, Smokey, or his purpose there (amazingly). He then looks down at Eko’s staff and sees the following:

Now I know a lot of people were perplexed by this because the verse “Lift up your eyes and look north” is NOT John 3:05. What they’re failing to realize is that there is all sorts of jumbled Biblical phrases and verses running into each other on Eko’s staff, and they’re not intended to be related.

The phrase “lift up your eyes and look north” is actually from Genesis 13:14…

The LORD said to Abram after Lot had parted from him, "Lift up your eyes from where you are and look north and south, east and west. All the land that you see I will give to you and your offspring forever. I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your offspring could be counted. Go, walk through the length and breadth of the land, for I am giving it to you.

Time for more Biblical analysis! So the SAT analogy here is Locke:Abram::Eko:Lot.

In the Bible, Abram and Lot were both highly spiritual men who decided to divide and conquer the lands of Isreael. Unfortunately, Lot headed down to Sodom and Gomorrah (sin city!). Eventually, Abram rescues Lot from this life of gambling and strippers and receives the favor of God.

That’s some pretty obvious symbolism there, don’t you think? Locke and Eko were both spiritual, but went about different ways of proving their faith to God (the Island). Locke quite literally saved Eko three episodes ago, not from a life of sin, but from a polar bear – but in the end the Island smited him for refusing to repent for his sins, leaving Locke as the only one left in the favor of the Island.

The fact that the staff said “John” right below the verse just served as another “sign” to Locke that the message was meant for him. In fact, I’m guessing Locke isn’t a Biblical scholar and all this meaning is lost on him. So what is his new purpose? Well, it’s quite literal – head north. I don’t believe there have ever been any maps of the Island that had a clear indication of North, South, East, and West – but I’m betting that “north” will lead him to the Flame Hatch, and with it, “Patchy” the mysterious one-eyed man from the video screen in the Pearl two episodes ago.

Numbers. One last thought: something I noticed this season is that the Numbers have been surprisingly absent this season. There have been countless opportunities for them to appear, but instead random, stupid, non-4815162342 have been used in their place. Is this something intentional, the writers signifying that the Numbers “died” with the Hatch, where they were so integral? Or is this a product of the “Lost Experience” finally explaining what the Numbers meant, giving the writers an “out” from the Numbers that had grown far more important to viewers of the show than they had ever intended? Either way, it’s something I thought I should bring up.




So there you have it, the last of my analysis of the mini-arc of Season Three. Looking back, I give it a C+. Perhaps my expectations were too high – but like a lot of you, I wasn’t blown away by these six episodes. There were some definite high points (“The Cost of Living” in particular), but I think we all expected a self-contained six episode storyline and that wasn’t really what we got. Instead, we got more of “Act One” of a three act play that might have ended with some action, but didn’t end with some resolution.

Having said that, the writers have planted enough seeds to have some great stories coming up in the spring (Desmond’s new “power”, Kate and Sawyer’s escape, Jack’s imprisonment with the Others, Locke finding Patchy). Here’s hoping that by the time I’m writing my review of Season Three as a whole, I’ll realize that these episodes were necessary for a later payoff, and weren’t just a product of a show losing steam.


Speaking of which, it’s time for me to get working on my mid-season report cards for the TV shows of the fall. Coming soon!

Lost Moves Past Your Bedtime!

(Looks like we're going to need to start taking naps on Wednesday evenings. Per Variety today - Lost is moving to 10:00 pm EST when it comes back in February!)

In February, ABC will move 'Lost' to Wednesdays at 10 to avoid direct competition with Fox's 'American Idol.'ABC is moving "Lost" out of the way of the "American Idol" juggernaut.

ABC on Tuesday unveiled a January sked that has the spooky Wednesday drama moving back an hour to 10 p.m. when it returns Feb. 7. Shift -- the third timeslot for the show in as many years -- ensures the skein won't have to battle the Fox behemoth.

A year ago, "Lost" scored boffo numbers at 9 p.m. during the fall but took a notable ratings hit once "Idol" returned in January. Skein has since held steady in the ratings, but ABC execs clearly don't want to risk further slippage.

Net's affils should be happy with the shift. With "Lost" at 10 p.m., ABC will likely deliver local stations their best new lead-in numbers for the slot in years.

In addition to shielding "Lost" from "Idol," ABC is also protecting it from rising CBS drama "Criminal Minds" and NBC's "Deal or No Deal," which moves into the 9 p.m. Wednesday slot next month.

As for what will compete against "Idol," ABC has decided that laughter -- and games -- are the best medicine. Net has slotted its laffer "Knights of Prosperity" Wednesdays at 9 p.m., directly against the "Idol" results show. It'll be paired at 9:30 with another new comedy, "In Case of Emergency."

Laffer hour is set to debut Jan. 3, a month before "Day Break" was set to end its run. ABC News programming will fill the 10 p.m. Wednesday slot in January before "Lost" returns.

"Day Break" will either be yanked after its Dec. 27 broadcast or moved to another night. No word on what will happen with the remaining five episodes of the skein, if ABC doesn't move the show to a new night.

ABC will round out its Wednesday lineup with new episodes of "George Lopez" and "According to Jim" from 8-9 p.m. Net will double-pump "Jim" for a few weeks starting Jan. 3, with "George" bowing Jan. 24 at 8 p.m.



Lost used to be on at 8:00 pm. Then 9:00 pm. Now 10:00 pm. I understand the move, but yikes, it's going to be hard to get any sort of "Instant Review" up immediately following episodes come the spring! Stupid American Idol, stop ruining TV!

(Footnote: the phrase "stupid American Idol" does not include Kelly Clarkson, who is awesome even though she has some past affiliation with the show.)

Lost - Moment 3

(Posted for the sake of consistency, since I posted the first two - but I agree with you all - these things are pretty worthless...)




The good news is I've taken your suggestions and finally gotten motivated to get the "I Do" and Season Three Part One analysis up! With TV shows finally going into their winter hiatus, it should be up within the week! Better late than never.

Lost - Moment 2

(Wow, it's been a crazy few months. I know you all probably don't care, and are probably thinking "enough about your blasted personal life, Brian - get talking about Lost!", but to put it in perspective, over the past month I've touched the Atlantic, the Pacific, and the Mississippi. I've been in Maine, Louisiana, Wyoming, Washington, and Oregon. Why should you care? Well, it's my lame excuse for the serious lack of blogging lately. I promise to pick up the slack!)

With that, I give you the second "moment" of Lost that aired during "Day Break" last week. I'll be adding the third "moment" that aired tonight as soon as it's up on YouTube. Here's a curious thought - with the ratings that Day Break is getting, it's looking like it'll be cancelled in no time. Then what is ABC going to do? Go back to showing Lost reruns? Air more "news" type shows? And what will become of these "Lost Moments"? Will they air during whatever show is on Wednesdays at 9:00? So many questions...

For now, enjoy the clip. It makes me happy to hear that Hurley is actually questioning what happened to the Hatch implosion survivors, rather than just brushing it off like so many Lost mysteries. Ask questions people! It's the only way you get any answers!

Lost - Moment 1

In case you didn't watch "Daybreak" last night (which actually was surprisingly decent, even though I vowed not to watch it after being inundated with commercials for it over the past month - we'll see if I actually stick with it or not), here was the "Lost Moment" they aired.

If you remember, these "mini clips" of upcoming episodes of Lost are airing during commercial breaks of Daybreak each week as a way to entice us to watch and appease the crazy Lost fans currently standing outside ABC with pitchforks and torches, protesting the "fall break".

Nothing really special here, but an extended look at the scene of Charlie tackling Desmond that we saw in the preview that aired after "I Do".

Enjoy!



(PS - yes, this is not the full analysis of "I Do" that I promised. Unfortunately, it looks like that's still a week or two away. I just ran out of time this weekend. No time! There's never any time! I'm so excited, I'm so excited, I'm so... so... scared!)

"I Do" Instant Reactions

Brian's One Word Review: Representative.

This episode was really symbolic of how this entire six episode story arc felt for me. It started pretty slow - to the point that we were thirty-five minutes in before any of the "action" started, but the last five minutes were as exciting as anything that's happened on "Lost" in the past year.

In the end, I can't help but be a little disappointed. I mean, we've gotten hints about the nature and purpose of the Others, but I don't feel like we've gained the insight I was hoping for at this point in the season. Jack, Kate, and Sawyer are still "trapped" - although it seems at least Kate and Sawyer are on the brink of freedom. The rest of the Survivors don't seem any closer to saving them, or finding out what happened when the Hatch imploded. We've been hinted that Desmond has some super-power, and that Locke has found a new "mission" on the Island, but there really hasn't been much payout in any of those storylines either.

Points to Ponder:

1. "Sheppard wasn't on Jacob's list". That probably makes Jacob the "he" that Ben cryptically referred to last season, as the overall leader of the Others - and probably a seriously bad dude.
2. That also means that Jack isn't one of the "good ones" who were on the list of people to kidnap from the crash. He was brought to the Others' camp for no reason except to operate on Ben. If it wasn't for Ben's greed, Colleen would probably still be alive - thus the reason that Danny Pickett is so angry.
3. I don't remember the exact wording, but when Ben inquired about Alex, Juliet said that they took Alex "back home" - possibly to the main Island. I'm betting wherever they "took her", that's where all the kidnapped kids from the Tail are going to be too!
4. Jack is a badass. Like I said, he's quickly become the most interesting character on the show. He's taking no prisoners and isn't afraid to get his hands dirty anymore - and I like it.
5. Sawyer is a badass... but with a heart of gold underneath his tough exterior! He hearts Kate and Kate hearts him!

But enough about me. Your turn for feedback, questions, etc. I'll get a full analysis up sometime this weekend.

Lost - "I Do" (Fall Finale!!!)

(This is it. The last episode of Lost until next year - February 7, 2007, to be exact. That’s a whopping ninety-one days without any sort of fix for our Lost addiction. So what does that mean? It means this better be good. They’ve pitched this six episode “mini-season” as a full story arc, so I’m expecting an episode of Season Finale proportions!)

Episode Title: “I Do”


Brian's Deeper Meaning Guess: When you see a title like “I Do”; the first thing that logically comes to most people’s minds is weddings. I know we have the whole “Kate-Sawyer-Jack” love triangle on the Island, but I really don’t see that ending with marriage in any way this week, so I think we can rule out any wedding action on the Island. However, this is a Kate-centric episode, so it’s not out of the question that we might see some sort of Kate wedding flashback. Although she definitely seems single now (yes!), given her sketchy past on the run from the law, a prior marriage would fit her character – especially if it temporarily gave her some shelter and protection.

But if weddings are ruled out, where’s the connection of the episode title to the action that’s actually taking place on the Island? Well, I think you can point to two things:

• Kate choosing Sawyer over Jack. (Jack: “Do you love him?”, Kate: “I do.”)
• Jack making his decision regarding helping the Others. (Juliet: “Will you help us?”, Jack: “I will.” – okay so that’s not “I do”, but it’s an affirmative, so that’s close enough right?)

Anyone who has paid close attention to the preview for this episode saw the hot Kate on Sawyer clothes-stripping, baby-making action inside the cage. If that doesn’t signify her “choice”, I don’t know what does. The funny thing is? Kate really made this decision a long time ago… and I think the Others knew it.

Remember “What Kate Did” last season? In it, Kate symbolically “picked” Sawyer over Jack (read my ramblings here: http://lost-and-gone-forever.blogspot.com/2006/01/lost-hunting-party-plus-what-kate-did.html ) , and there really hasn’t been any reason to think that she would have switched sides since then. Sure, Sawyer went a bit jerkface on her, but we all know that girls love bad boys. Deep down inside, he was still the one for her. The writers have tricked us into thinking that this “love triangle” still exists by isolating these three characters, but I really don’t think it’s existed for quite some time…

…and the Others know it. Why did they kidnap Jack, Kate, and Sawyer? Well, the obvious answer is that they needed Jack to perform a surgery. They needed Kate to talk Jack into doing it (because Jack still hearts her, even if she doesn’t heart him in return). They needed Sawyer to get Kate to convince Jack (because she hearts him, even if he doesn’t fully heart her in return). Thus, Sawyer becomes the punching bag. Putting his life in danger makes Kate do what the Others say, which in this case is to sweet talk Jack. It’s almost too easy (more on this later).

In the other potential title-deeper-meaning, we have Jack finally deciding if he sides with Juliet, sides with Ben, or sides with neither. There are all sorts of questions here about who is telling the truth, who to trust, and who are the “good guys” vs. the “bad guys”. If we’re truly looking at the conclusion of this mini-story arc, there are one of two logical conclusions: Jack sides with the Others, helps them out, and effectively betrays the rest of the Survivors (making the story arc “the turning of Jack”) or Jack goes against the Others, stages a breakout, and burns any friendly bridges he had with the Others (making the story arc “the beginning of the Others vs. the Survivors”).

I really have no inkling as to which was this storyline is going to go. I know we’ve been promised a shocking finale here, and what would be more shocking than Jack switching teams? However, he’s our resident hero, and him siding with the Others would seemingly go against everything he’s been doing for the previous five episodes (that being a complete jerk to them every chance he gets). Either way, I think it makes for a great setup for the spring season – and out of nowhere, Jack is quickly becoming one of the more intriguing characters on the show.

TV.com Description: Jack makes a decision regarding Ben's offer; Kate feels helpless when it looks like Pickett is going to make good on his threat to kill Sawyer; Locke discovers a hidden message that may help unlock the island's secrets.

TV.com Breakdown: It’s intriguing that the episode description words it “Ben’s offer” and not “Juliet’s offer”. I suppose they are somewhat one and the same – since the decision really comes down to performing the surgery on Ben or not performing the surgery on Ben – but there’s an added wrinkle. Even if Jack decides to perform the surgery, does he have a slip of the knife and take out Ben, his seeming arch-enemy for the past season? Or does he save him, hoping to earn favor with the mysterious Others that can be used for not only his, but the rest of the Survivors’ benefit? There’s a part of me that feels like this whole thing is a setup for Jack – that Ben doesn’t really have a tumor, and this is more of a test of Jack’s “goodness” (more on this later).

Meanwhile, it looks like the newly widowed Pickett has gotten the green light from Ben to take his frustrations out on Sawyer… or has he? This could just be a clever ruse by Ben to get Kate fearful that Sawyer’s life is truly in danger – which would make her more likely to try and convince Jack to do the surgery on Ben. Remember, Ben said something along the lines of “we’re not finished with (Sawyer) yet”. If Jack does perform the surgery, his usefulness would theoretically be gone, and then it might be open-season on Sawyer hunting.

Lastly, we have Locke discovering a hidden message that may “help unlock the Island’s secrets”. It sounds like an ABC commercial to me. Where does this message come from? Patchy via video monitor? Not likely, as it looked like he ended the transmission during last episode. Eko’s dying words? I don’t see that helping unlock any mystery. Is there something else inside the Pearl Hatch that we missed? Will they stumble across something on their journey back to the beach? Or – more likely - will they decide that it’s too dangerous to head back to the beach, and venture somewhere else on the Island, where they find this message?

I’m not sure. Frankly, I’m pretty excited to not have much idea what’s coming in this week’s episode, other than the intense preview and promise of greatness. It’s definitely not a predictable episode, which once again gives me that hope for greatness that I pray for each week!

Previously on Lost…

Speaking of greatness, the more I think about last week’s episode, the better I realize it was. Why? Think about how many fundamental questions about the very nature of the show that were raised, changed, or revealed last week. After watching last week’s episode, you were forced to go back and re-evaluate a large number of episodes over the past two seasons – and that’s saying something. It was exactly what this season needed – an important episode that gives the fanatics among us some new meat to chew on. If this week’s episode does the same, we’re going to have plenty to keep us busy over the next few months…


Eko. With Eko's death, we can consider his story "complete". Granted, there's always the chance he'll show up as a "vision" to Locke (which I think is actually a given), or in other characters' lashbacks (a la Libby - but I think it's less likely with Eko since he was in Africa most of the time... and a drug warlord. You don't usually run into them in coffee shops), but for all intents and purposes we can close the book on him and accurately review who he was.

In the end, the big shocker for me was that Eko was never a "changed man" in his pre-Island life. After his last flashback, I assumed that Yemi's death prompted him to turn his life around - to pick up Yemi's cross and live the life that he might have had, were it not for a fateful day as children where Eko picked up a gun and killed a man to save Yemi from doing so. But he didn't. After Yemi's death, Eko might have taken his position as a priest, but he was still the same Eko, dealing and stealing drugs and medicine for profit, standing up to anyone who challenged him, and not afraid to kill anyone who gets in his way. I don't doubt that Eko was a religious man all along, but he was a clearly survivor first. He didn't think twice about killing someone if it meant he would continue living.

However, something definitely changed when he crashed on the Island – he became more religious, feeling remorse for killing those two "innocent" Others that tried to abduct him the first night on the Island (thus the silent treatment for forty days). He became concerned with things like helping others on the Island get over their sins and did things like baptizing Aaron. Maybe he felt like he was given a second chance at life and was going to do some good this time around - but he wasn't full of agony and regret over the life he once lived... and that seems to have led to his demise. The closing shot of him walking with Yemi as kids summed it all up - that life was all that Eko ever wanted, and on his deathbed, he seems to have found the peace to return to that place and find peace.

Which puts him in the same boat as Boone, Shannon, and Ana-Lucia. Each character found their peace, and then shortly thereafter died. The difference is that Boone, Shannon, and Ana-Lucia's death were each a direct result of the actions of another character on the Island. It wasn't the Island deciding that they had completed their journey and killing them, it was merely coincidence that each of them died (well, coincidence and storytelling heavy with symbolism). But Eko was different...



Smokey. Which brings us to Smokey, who we can now view in a totally different light. We always knew that Smokey was powerful, and assumed he was the one responsible for the death of the Pilot, grabbing Locke, etc. - but we've never seen this "personality" in him, taking form, showing logic, and seemingly passing judgment on Eko. So what the heck is this thing? It looks to be a living, breathing, morphing creature. I thought the Lost creators are on record saying that it's not Nanobots, but that's pretty much the only thing that makes sense at this point (if they intend to keep this rooted in science, as they claim). It would be easy to debate this aspect of Smokey for paragraphs and paragraphs, but there are far more interesting questions raised about him after this episode.

For example, a more intriguing question revolves around the control of Smokey. Does Smokey have a brain? Is Smokey some experiment run amok? Is Smokey under the control of someone (like maybe the Others)? If I were a betting man, I'd say we're looking at a Frankenstein situation here where the Dharma Scientists somehow created Smokey for some specific purpose but lost control of him. Or perhaps they never intended to create him in the first place, he's just a product of some other experiment gone awry. Either way, I think Smokey is a product of science, and not some voodoo creature that has always resided on the Island - and if he's a product of science, I'm looking to Dharma as being his creator.

The most intriguing question is what is motivating Smokey's actions. Why did he spare Locke? Why did he spare Eko the first time he faced him? Why did he kill Eko this time? As crazy as it sounds, Smokey seems to have an agenda - he's not just some wild animal-esque killing machine that mangles anyone who enters his territory. Also, keep in mind that although the Others appear to be on Alcatraz right now, when Flight 815 crashed, they were living on the Main Island. If Smokey were just some crazy killing machine, this seems like a bad place to vacation, no matter how good of a deal they got on the timeshare. If the Others aren't afraid of Smokey, they must understand these motives, and be confident that they are safe from harm.

Think back to Eko's first encounter with Smokey last season. Smokey seemed to be sizing him up, coming face to face with him and "scanning him", picking up images from Eko's memory and learning about his past. Suddenly Eko is seeing visions of his dead brother Yemi, and being told to "repent". Is there a correlation there? If you follow the logic, it seems as though Smokey learned about Eko's past, gave him an opportunity to atone for his sins, and then, when Eko refused, tossed him around like a football on Thanksgiving.

It's a little crazy, a little religious, and way, WAY out there - but it just seems to fit right in with the Others, doesn't it? All along, they've been very concerned with people being "good". They "saved" the Tailers that were "good" (whatever happened to them anyways?). Those left, including our Survivors, all have spotty pasts full of actions that could be considered "bad". Last week, Ben said he "wants Jack to want to save him", which makes it sound like he's more concerned with Jack finding his redemption (becoming a "good person" who "saves" his "enemy") than he is with getting his tumor removed.

What if Smokey is merely acting as the judge, jury, and executioner for the Others? Not a heartless one, but one that gives people a chance to right their wrongs before penalizing them. You know all those purgatory theories that were going around when the show started? Well even though our Survivors aren't actually dead and in a literal purgatory (as the show's creators have confirmed), but are instead in a pseudo-Island purgatory, where they are still being judged for their past sins and working on their redemption. If they succeed, and end up "good", they are welcomed into the Others' circle of trust, home of cheeseburgers, movies, and free tickets home. If they fail, Smokey kills them. It's harsh, but wacky religious cults always are!

I admit, this theory is WAY out there, but if you run some of our other unanswered questions through it, they give some pretty satisfactory answers. And, for a show that has always had a TON of good/bad, light/dark symbolism, wouldn't it be great that the biggest force on the show (Smokey, not Kate's hotness) was operating based on the same principles?

We also have to assume (although if you think about it, we never REALLY saw this) that Smokey can take the form of different people and things - which brings up a whole new batch of questions...



Visions. So are we to assume that all the visions our Survivors have seen on the Island are attributed to Smokey? The Lost creators told us that we saw Smokey last season without knowing it, so I think this is the most logical assumption. Off the top of my head, here are the "visions" that people have had on the Island, and the result of having these visions:

• Jack - His Dead Dad - Led Jack to water necessary for life, along with his father's coffin which helped bring closure with the symbolic "shattering of the coffin".
• Kate and Sawyer - Black Horse (and a cherry tree) - Helped Kate realize she wasn't going crazy, and that she couldn't run away from her "dark side" or past, but needed instead to come to terms with it.
• Locke - Dead Boone - Gave Locke a purpose on the Island (and in life), warned of Boone's impending death, put Locke on a path to save Eko from the polar bear.
• Eko - Dead Yemi - Helped Eko (and Locke) find the Pearl Hatch, tried to get Eko to repent for his sins.
• Boone - Shannon - Helped Boone get over his obsession with his sister.
• Shannon and Sayid - Walt - Warned about the dangers of button-pushing.
• Hurley - Dave - Tried to get Hurley to kill himself to "wake up" from the dream world he is allegedly in.
• Charlie - Got Charlie punched in the face when he tried to save Aaron from a yet unknown danger.

Is there a common thread there? Well, the three that don't quite fit with the rest are Charlie, Hurley, and Shannon and Sayid's visions. However, I think we have to throw each of these out the window anyways. Here's where it gets confusing, but I think there are multiple sources of the visions on the Island. For example, you could easily chalk Hurley's vision of Dave up to Hurley being crazy (in a non-like a fox way), since he was having visions of Dave pre-Island. You can probably chalk up Charlie's vision to numerous years of heavy drug use and church attendance. As for backwards-talking Walt? Heck, it's been documented that Walt had weird super powers - he probably had the ability to teleport himself or send visions of himself, or something weird anyways - so I'll eliminate that as well.

What we're left with are a number of visions that all resulted in something positive happening for the person having the vision. They all worked to help the person overcome some drama from their past and drop off some of the baggage they've been carrying around. Smokey might be responsible for two violent deaths on the Island, but he also might be legitimately trying to save people. Another fundamental theme of the show - redemption - ties in nicely here.

(Here's a question that I haven't had a chance to research, so I look to you, obsessive Lost Internet friends without jobs or families - have any of our Survivors had a "vision" without coming in close proximity with Smokey at some point prior? Jack, Kate, Charlie, Locke, and Eko all clearly did. It's a little fuzzy if Boone actually did, or if he was already in a drug trip due to Locke's peyote when he saw Smokey. But it could be that you need to encounter Smokey once for him to "scan you" and find out what you need saving from - before you start seeing the visions.)

Speaking of saving...


Ben. This week's episode seems all about the Benjamins (what). While there are a ton of questions surrounding the Others, who they are, and what they want – they all seem to be embodied in Ben. He’s their leader, he seemingly is the most deceptive of them all, and he seems to be the man with the master plan – which makes it all the more intriguing that he’s the one with the tumor (allegedly). Lots of stuff here…

First, why does Ben have a tumor at all? As many have asked, how could the Island have seemingly cured Locke’s paralysis and Rose’s cancer over the course of two months, but allowed Ben (a lifetime Island resident) to be near death due to a tumor. Something doesn’t add up.

For example, while Ben’s “God sent me a spinal surgeon from heaven” speech was nice, if he can truly come and go to the Island whenever he wants – why is this a big deal? As soon as he found out he had the cancer, he could have hopped on the slow boat back to civilization and gone to a real doctor, with state of the art facilities. It’s also in direct opposition to his “Even God can’t see this place” speech from last season. Fishy.

But, for the sake of argument, let’s assume Ben truly does have a tumor that is aggressively growing. There are two possible explanations:

Remember what Isaac, the creepy Professor X looking guy in Australia told Rose and Bernard? Everyone responds differently to magnetic fields around the Earth. Just because one location heals one person, doesn’t mean it will heal everyone. Maybe, by unfortunate ironic luck, Ben is living on an Island that heals everyone else except for him. Bummer.

Perhaps the healing powers were tied to the unique magnetic properties of the Swan Hatch. Maybe due to their close proximity to the Hatch, Rose and Locke were healed – but due to Ben living far away from it (potentially even on another Island most of the time), it never affected him. If you’re looking for an explanation of why Ben allowed himself to get caught last season, this is it. Maybe it was a last ditch effort to try and soak in the effects of the magnetism by getting as close to it as possible – inside the Hatch.

But does Ben really have a tumor? While all signs indicate that he does (including his angry speech with Juliet last week, which seemed to be out of earshot of Jack), it wouldn’t be out of character for him to find out this is all just a ruse to try and see how willing Jack is to trust them.


Juliet. Speaking of trust, there was something very odd about Juliet’s video message to Jack last week. She told him that Ben is a liar, is dangerous, and that there is a faction of Others who want him gone (Yes! Rebel Dharmites! Finally!) – but here’s a question: if Ben is so close to dying from this spinal tumor, why do you need Jack to perform the surgery and then “accidentally” kill him? Why not just get Jack to refuse to perform the surgery and let Ben die naturally?

If Ben truly has the tumor, the only thing I can think that would tie together the gaps in Ben’s story and the missing logic of Juliet’s story is this – Ben has the tumor, but it’s not progressing. The Island may not have prevented the cancer from coming, but it’s stopping the cancer from getting to a fatal state. Jack, used to “normal medical science” sees the X-Rays and assumes it is going to quickly grow to a fatal state. Little does he know that it isn’t getting any bigger – the Island is using its healing powers to keep it in check. Juliet truly is a Rebel Dharmite and wants Ben dead, so she’s telling Jack the truth. Ben is using this as a test to see if Jack is willing to help him (“the enemy”) out. The only question is, how far could Ben take this before knowing if Jack was on his side or not? Isn’t it an extremely dangerous position to put yourself in to determine the allegiance of someone?

If Ben is footloose and tumor-free, and the X-Rays are fake, this is all just a long con of Jack, put forth by BOTH Ben and Juliet to see which side Jack is really on. Perhaps they are curious if he would side with a “Rebel” (Juliet) or an “Other” (Ben). The problem is, if the Others didn’t want Jack because he was a surgeon, why did they want him? And Kate? And Sawyer? If Ben has the tumor, these answers all fall in line neatly. If Ben doesn’t, we’re no closer to having any answers than we were at the end of Season Two – and this six episode arc has gotten us nowhere.

…and with that, I’m spent. For as crappy as this season started out, I’m legitimately pumped for this “Fall Finale”. The past two episodes have come strong and left me very satisfied (that’s what she said) – if this week’s episode is the same, I’ll look back fondly on this six-episode arc, and be giddy with excitement for the promise of seventeen nonstop episodes come February.

Questions? Comments? Hate-filled Diatribes? Leave them below!



(Footnote: per TV Guide, the decision for Eko to be killed was that of Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, the actor who plays him. Apparently there were personal things going on in his life that made it hard for him to be in Hawaii, and the writers chose to accommodate his wishes to leave the show. So you can stop writing hate mail to the writers about “jumping the shark” and “killing Eko to make room for Paulo and Nikki”. It’s just a case of them putting someone’s real life ahead of a story. I think we should respect that.)

"The Cost of Living Reactions"

Brian's One Word Review: Holy _________!

Holy crap! Holy Eko! Holy Smokey! Holy religious symbolism! Holy Others-drama! This wasn't just the best episode of this season so far (even though the previews for next week's Fall Finale promise it will be the best episode of the year, it definitely has its work cut out for it now!), it's on the short list of the "All Time Great Episodes of Lost". Where to begin?

1. Well, how about with the whole "Spoiler" thing I referenced in my preview post? Someone posted an interview from TV Guide that said a series regular was going to die in this episode. Once you realized it was an Eko-centric episode, he became the odds-on favorite to bite the big one. When I started thinking about it, it made no sense to me. They couldn't kill all the Tailers off, could they? In addition, Eko was just saved from the brink of death two weeks ago. If you were going to kill him off, why not let him die in the Hatch implosion or get eaten by a bad CGI Polar Bear? But after seeing this episode, I have no qualms with it whatsoever. His story came to a logical conclusion and served as an impetus to move the story forward. It wasn't some gimicky death for ratings or sheer "shock value". (But here's the sucky thing - if I didn't accidentally read that spoiler, I wouldn't have seen this coming in a million years. Kinda knowing it was coming took away some of the shock of the ending - this is why Spoilers are the devil!)
2. The scene with Jack and Juliet? Absolutely fantastic. Talk about setting up a moral and ethical dilemma. Who to trust? I feel like Juliet is the obvious "good guy", and Ben is the obvious "bad guy", but wouldn't it be very Lost-like to have it be the other way around? Will Jack let his Hippocratic Oath get the best of him and save Ben? Or "slip" and end Ben's life? Excitement!
3. Smokey. Boy, have we missed you. Not only did we get some of the best glimpses of Smokey ever, but we learned more of the nature of him - he's a Shape Shifter. Think about how the Lost producers told us we "saw the Smoke Monster last season but didn't realize it". It's likely that everything from Jack's dead dad to Kate's black horse to Locke's vision of Boone were all Smokey in disguise. But how is this all possible? For a show that's supposed to be "rooted in science", we now have a shape shifting cloud and a guy that can see the future. The sci-fi nerd alert is officially on.
4. Eko. I loved Eko's "confesssion". It was flawed in its reasoning (he seemed to ruthlessly kill at least a few guys that he didn't need to), but it totally fit his character. For as much as we all loved Eko, he really wasn't a good guy. Even when he was acting as a priest, he never gave up his killer survival instinct. He didn't feel any guilt for what he did, he felt he did what he needed to do to survive, and he was okay with that. As he told the little boy, "Only God knows" how he'll be judged.
5. Well, only God and the Smoke Monster (who may or may not be some sort of "Angel of Death"). Remember, Eko survived his first encounter with Smokey no problem. What changed between then and now? Whatever happened, Smokey is now pissed. Eko's dying words were: "You're next." Looks like the carefree days of exploring the Island and going off on random hikes are over! But why? Is this related to the Hatch Implosion?

I need some more time to digest. Full breakdown and analysis this weekend. Comment away!