There’s nothing like a greatsmile. But only a few are blessed with pearly white teeth, and our teeth normally become discolored as we grow up.

Thank you for sharing this with your us.

2. The fact that you think I would actually care about being in the minority in my opinion of a tv show, is comical. I don’t remember actually consulting anyone before allowing myself to enjoy what I enjoy. Nor do I imagine that I would ever apologize for it.

3. Your repeated usage of words like “melt down” does not rankle me at all. Nor am I any less calm than the other times you seemed to be trying to get some sort of reaction. I find it rather amusing, actually.

4. Since this is someone else’s web site, I feel it inappropriate to continue this exchange. So I bid you good day, Mr. X. I hope you will find the satisfaction you didn’t find with LOST, somewhere else in life.

I’ve come to the conclusion that your posts must be some kind of meta joke that I just don’t get. It’s the only thing that makes sense at this point.

Prefer to fight a strawman than your basic arguments? What did I do but answer your questions and then ask you to expand your argument so I could understand what you were saying?

I’ve very respectfully disagreed with your point of view and I wish I could say you’ve extended me the same respect. You prefer to fight a strawman rather than my basic arguments — so be it.

Please in the future try to listen to people who disagree with you and engage them with reason rather rather than attributing to them various motives you imagine. I respectfully suggest you do a little soul-searching about how you’ve handled this dialogue.

I’m ending this here because this is your opinion:

“there is a limit to the number of loose ends before character development becomes just a rationalization.”

That is fine. That’s your opinion. You’re not right or wrong. The above is just your take on the show. You expected something you didn’t get. You’re disappointed. That’s fine. I wasn’t and you can’t convince me (or anyone) that the way they look at the show is “wrong.” That’s ridiculous.

Don’t act like you’re saving me from being “disgraced” or that I need to hear your words like you’re converting me from Paganism to Christianity. And even if you’re right and time is cruel to Lost and people regard it ultimately as an ambitious failure that MELTED DOWN that doesn’t mean I have to agree. Just because something may be the popular opinion doesn’t make it “more right” than another one.

You claim that everyone can have different opinions on Lost. As if all are equal. In the end, you seem to think your opinion is “more equal” than others.

(By the way your choice of phrasing hasn’t rankled me, you just said something like four times without explaining what you meant. I’m not the first person to comment on that here.)

By your own admission, you “stopped expecting anything specific to happen because I’d just be wrong and I enjoyed the show more during its last three years than I did during the first three (despite season 1 being probably the best and most consistent run). I wanted to enjoy the show free of the burden of expectation.”

That says a lot about why you’re digging your heels in. Whether you have moved on to troll in other threads (“I will not be around to answer a third”) I wanted to try to get you a little further along why you probably will be in the minority for a long time on these issues.

I think, very humbly, that as time goes on you will find yourself in a minority with these views. There is no judgment with that, just a prediction.

The reason is that you & Beena have elected to grade a show far differently than most do. So, for example, if we all went to buy a car, I would grade it on how it drives, mileage, comfort, etc.

By analogy, you & Beena would grade a car on its ability to provide shelter. Can a car provide that? Yes. Many homeless people live in cars. But that is not what people expect to get out of a car.

Most people watch shows with the “burden” (your word) of expectation. And I expected to get much more out of Lost in the end. I didn’t give up my expectations mid-way the way you did. For me, and like most people, there is a limit to the number of loose ends before character development becomes just a rationalization.

Given those premises, the show MELTED DOWN. Those words seem to rankle you but it’s important you hear them because I’m concerned you view your analysis as the way the majority of viewers saw the show, and that is (in my view) simply not right.

The good far outweighed the bad (and there certainly was some bad stuff) but it really was a wonderful ride and one I look forward to revisiting once I have to time to decompress.

I’d also like to commend you on being able to make statements with supporting evidence; alternatively called “making a valid argument”. A skill seemingly in short supply.

And that isn’t about anyone in particular, just a problem on messageboards in general.

“Hoping for more:
I’m just responding to your nonsense, I’m trying to help you. Please don’t disgrace yourself needlessly.”

here:

“Beena:

Yes, after 6 seasons of waiting, it’s great to have a whole new set of questions to think about…

Jesus…”

and here:

“I’m with you on everything you said, except for the fact that season 6 was a fool’s errand and a disgrace.”

And then have the gall to accuse me of ad hominem attacks and crown yourself the prince of reason and objective opinions?

Lets also start with some basic definitions. For example you use the word “filibustering” in your post. Filibuster is defined as “obstruct deliberately by delaying “. I think you’d agree with that definition. How was I filibustering by answering the question you asked? If anything you keep skirting the issues that you bring up and change the subject. I’d call that delaying.

You also used the phrase “ad hominem.” I don’t believe I called you any names or disregarded your opinion because “you’re just a snotty man of science” or anything like that. If you can point out where I attacked you personally (and do remember I was answering your question directly) I’ll try to explain myself.

You’re also changing your argument to fit the situation. What you said, and I quote is: “Could an entire series be about character development and never materially resolve basic plot questions? Sure. But I argue that is not what this show was sold as, at least for seasons 1-4″

“Sold as,” that sounds to me like “marketed as.” If that wasn’t your intent then fine but I’m just working off of what YOU have said.

Now my final point: What I did was answer your question. Just to repeat in case you forgot: ““We instead are (or at least I am) arguing that given what we were led to expect the story was going in seasons 1-4 (even 1-5), the ending that was done was unfulfilling. Could an entire series be about character development and never materially resolve basic plot questions? Sure. But I argue that is not what this show was sold as, at least for seasons 1-4.”

You ask either I or Beena to address this “core point” (to an argument you never brought up previously but I’ll let that slide). Hilariously, you choose not to even reference my answer (except when it suits you to deride my post: “your “answers” are blended in with your own guesswork and philosophizing”), decide that it was nonsense and riddled with personal attacks and then ask ANOTHER QUESTION.

So I answered your first question, Beena just answered your second one and I will not be around to answer a third. You’re obviously disappointed. I’m sorry, truly I am. I’m sorry you expected something you didn’t get and feel aggrieved by the way the show ended. We’re at an impasse here because you fail to actually acknowledge anything that I write in response to something you’ve written. We’re at an impasse because I’m not disappointed and you can’t persuade me to be disappointed.

I don’t think the show is perfect and have never stated as such. It has a lot of loose ends, that much is undeniable. I do think it’s the best drama that Network television has ever seen. I was pleased with the way it ended but acknowledge that not everything added up–though I don’t necessarily have a problem with that. You call my “answers” philosophizing and guesswork, I’d like to counter with isn’t that being what a Lost fan has always been? I don’t think a slew of answers rubber stamped by the creators needed to be provided in order to validate my interest in the show. There’s enough in the text of Lost to answer a lot of the question the show didn’t answer explicitly. Were some storylines built up and never expounded upon? Certainly. But this is the nature of network television, not every show is going to end up like The Wire where everything absolutely matters. That just can’t happen on network television.

1. Juliet died.
2. They were no longer in the 70′s.

What can you do about that? I doubt your cable company will issue a refund for all the hours you spent watching something which you feel was misrepresented. And although you may certainly find some tea and sympathy on various LOST boards and be able to vent, I think you do one better writing to ABC or LOST/co ABC. At least that way, you will get the satisfaction of getting it off your chest with the people responsible. While I don’t share your opinion, I do still feel bad that you are frustrated. And I’m sorry that I have been unable to diminish that for you in anyway…

My point is not based on “marketing” of seasons 1-4, it is based purely on content. Let me save time and inches on this post (because your “answers” are blended in with your own guesswork and philosophizing) and put it to you directly — what was the effect of Juliet triggering the bomb at the end of season 5?

If you can answer that in any way other than your imagination, I’d appreciate it.

Let’s start there – concretely and respectfully and without filibustering by you or Beena or whoever else.

The show MELTED DOWN. That is my conclusion. I am explaining to you my reasoning, because I think I can persuade you.

Aside from that, I also personally did not like the change in direction with the show. Lost started out having this great blend of science fiction meets the supernatural, and then sort of grew into this faith vs. science thing but it always had this sense of ambiguity where you thought it could go either way. Maybe the island is sealing in real evil that could destroy the world and maybe the evil was just a metaphor for a large amount of electromagnetism that could destroy the world. Had the sixth season continued to follow this formula I think I would have liked it much better, even if it had the same ending.

Secondly… I feel the biggest problem with this show was pretty much nothing. It lead us on an adventure, I felt like Encyclopedia Brown, I felt like it was a scavenger hunt of mystery, and as I kept digging, it kept getting better. With every answer came more mystery, and the cycle continued. That was until I was presented with the finale. That adventure ended, and it ended beautifully. I loved it, at first I was shocked. I just don’t know how the thought never crossed my mind. It truly was a beautiful ending. I’m not much of a religious person, but I deem myself to be spiritual I guess. This showed it, I was pretty moved by what I saw.

Thirdly… “I felt like Encyclopedia Brown, I felt like it was a scavenger hunt of mystery, and as I kept digging, it kept getting better. With every answer came more mystery, and the cycle continued.” This is where everyone seems to have problems. It pretty much is the side of disbelief. Completely Man of Science. People want to know everything. I want to know everything, I was as intrigued with the character of the island, as I was with any of our main characters. In fact the writers stated on numerous occasions that the island was a character in and of itself. I agree, the island had just as much of a dark past as the characters themselves. The island suffered from surrogate parental issues just as much as our characters did.

But… I think people are too hung up on the reoccurring answer – question cycle. With every answer or clue lead to dozens of other questions. Did you ever really expect the writers to give a satisfying answer? I wanted answers as much as the next person, but are you ever truly getting answers? All answers open more questions. n 1675 a man discovered the microorganism. We studied, we asked questions. Then we discovered many bacteria in these organisms, we studied, we asked questions. Then we discovered DNA, we studied, we asked questions. Look at where we are now, still studying, still asking questions.

You see where I am going, mother really did say it best “With every answer there is going to be more questions.” I think everything we got was somewhat satisfying. I mean, it is pretty lame to think the numbers, this valenzetti equation, Hurley’s bad luck, Lenny’s insanity, the hatch serial number, our beloved characters drawn to the island to absolve it of evil. It somewhat sounds ridiculous, but it works.

Everything in the end, it was about self discovery, redemption, love, resolution. It was about community, friendship, adventure. I think the show did a fantastic job ending it the way it has. Black and White, Good and Evil, Man of Science and Man of Faith. It was very epic, it was bad, it was good, great characters, bad characters, and one crazy ride. Our generation got its very own Chronicles of Narnia, Lord of the Flies, Paradise Lost. I feel honored to have been a part of it, and I do not think there will be anything like it ever again.

Thank you Lost.

Your argument seems to be one of marketing versus content, expectation versus what the show gave us. ABC marketed this show on its mysteries, that’s certainly true. Can the marketing a television show’s network does be considered canon? Of course not. Can it even be trusted to be indicative of where the show is going? It probably shouldn’t be. You have to separate the expectation of what you were going to get from the marketing, or “how the show was sold” as you put it, from what was ultimately produced.

I stopped “expecting” something specific a while ago because I knew the show wouldn’t do what I wanted it to and that if I just watched the story it was going to tell that I’d be much happier. I loved going on forums during the second season, at that point in time I had my theories of what was happening. Then the third season came along. A Scotsman started time traveling, a cabin shook and said “Help me” and it appeared (at the time) everyone got off the Island in a FLASH FORWARD. My theories didn’t have any of that in them. They could not even be adjusted to encompass the show’s new direction. It was then that I stopped expecting anything specific to happen because I’d just be wrong and I enjoyed the show more during its last three years than I did during the first three (despite season 1 being probably the best and most consistent run). I wanted to enjoy the show free of the burden of expectation. Everyone I know who watches the show reached a point like that with Lost which is why it’s no surprise that everyone I know were pretty content with how it ended.

Now I’m curious, what “basic plot” questions were left unresolved? I suppose you’re going to have to define what you mean by basic plot. I take basic plot to mean the destines of the core characters introduced since season 1. Did they not do that? They explained how the plane crashed (Desmond didn’t push the button + Jacob’s touch), they have suggested since season one that all of these character’s had intertwined destinies they just perhaps weren’t aware of their connections. In the end their destinies came together in what I felt was a very powerful and moving scene in the church. They explained what the Island was (a cork to contain evil, something that was Jacob’s fault, another bad parenting cycle that needed to be broken) and why it had to be protected in the future (the light) because people might try to exploit its uniqueness for their own selfish ends (Dharma, the old Romans, the Egyptians I’m sure and every other culture that got a little too close to tapping into the Island for not altruistic reasons). We saw the Dharma initiative for what they truly were (stupid hippies and self serving scientists), we saw the Incident (as remarked about in the first Dharma station video), we saw the conclusion of the light versus dark struggle that had been dominating the Island since the time of Christ (maybe). Every character was flawed. They came to the Island and most found redemption in some way or reconciled their past, though some did not (poor Michael).

To me “basic plot” means what these characters experienced during their lives from 04-07. The basic plot revolved around the characters. The ancillary plot revolved around the Island’s dark history and deep mythos. I thought they resolved all of the questions regarding the basic plot but then again you and I could have totally different definitions of what constitutes basic plot.

Let me ask you this: Has the weight of your disappointment made it so that, knowing how the show ends and knowing the direction it ultimately went, is it possible for you to re-watch the show and enjoy it for it was and not feel let down by what you expected it to be?