The Chris Moeller Archives

Lost in "Lost"

I'm a "Lost" watcher, and I want to say just these things about it before it wraps May 23rd:

"Lost" is about the journey, not the destination. All TV series are really that way. I'm not going to require of it that it tie up all loose ends, that it provide plausible explanations for all of the "Lost" island's magical qualities, or provide full closure to each character's story. I did not start watching the series from the beginning. I did a major catch-up via DVD during the middle of Season 3 (out of 6), and I've been watching it at its natural week-to-week pace only since the start of Season 4, yet I don't think that's the reason I feel so little loyalty towards the rules and the principal themes of Seasons 1 & 2. Shows evolve. Priorities change. They begin as one thing. They become another. Humans behave that way, too. That's why it's easier to become emotionally-invested in the longer-running arc of a TV series than a film, and the reason I can't think of a single theatrical release out of Hollywood that has the emotional resonance for me or the inspired loyalty to match any of the, say, ten greatest shows on television during that same period.

The characters on "Lost" were always written a little inconsistently, their motivations often contradictory, the dialogue frequently uninspired. The series broke with the rule of writing that story should always serve character, and that's a rule I would have told you I always supported, incidentally. Now I've reformed. On "Lost," every element of the show is in service to the narrative structure, the incomparable, brilliant outline of constant "reveals" and the parade of new mysteries to be explored that have continued at a whirlwind pace right up at least to the final 3 1/2 hours yet to air. I swear I've spent more time dissecting this show than I have watching many of my other favorites. That's been the fun. The cottage industry of viewer "theories" that has built up online is perhaps the greatest artistic triumph of the series. They've engaged us.

What a story outline it was. The show's creators had their doubters, remember, but I already feel vindicated in my suspicion all along that the largest mysteries of all-- the numbers, the off-island encounters, the bodies buried beneath the water, the true meaning of the island (as opaque as that might be), etc.-- were mapped out from the very beginning. Kudos to the writers and producers for delivering on each of these in a major way and holding us in suspense all along.

And that's the perfect analogy, by the way-- being "held in suspense." It's already evident that there's going to be an avalanche of criticism directed towards the show immediately upon its finale. People will feel "let down," and they'll be expressing themselves as such. But that's to be largely a natural "let down" due to the fact that we're no longer being "held in suspense." It's almost a literal thing. The show will be over. At 10pm central time on Sunday night, May 23rd, we will have been delivered everything we will ever be given in terms of new dramatic narrative on these characters. But viewers need to be careful not to confuse these inevitable feelings of abandonment that this reality will engender with feelings of dissatisfaction or contempt directed towards the show or its storytellers.

Much of the hate also will be fueled by the fact that the show that's ending no longer looks like the show that began in the fall of 2004. Yet I don't understand why this is such a bad thing. Who really wants a simple, explicit ending anyway for a show that's kept us guessing all along? Like David Chase and his abrupt, enigmatic conclusion for "The Sopranos," it appears as if producers Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof aren't going to be willing to "end" their show in just 10 days. They'll leave us guessing on a number of important items, and it's that open ending that will allow the series to live on forever. It's about tempting our imaginations and forcing us to draw many of your own conclusions, and that's a rare gift to television viewers indeed.

posted by CM @ 9:40 AM