We know what happened to them in their life. They crashed on the island and went through some crazy shit and created some very important bonds. Some buckwild shit was on the island. They all went through some terrible things together. Some escaped. Some didn't. Eventually everyone died. You really need to fill the void and find out "Oh my what happened when Frank Lapidus got OFF the plane in the actual reality" shit? Or "what was the stone cork in the hole really" shit? That's cool, I'm cool with letting it lie. Just saying, different stokes I guess.
Hmpph. They lost me. I wasn't expecting answers to everything or really anything in particular, but I'm not really feeling like I got anything. Did any of it happen? Was Jack closing his eyes supposed to be from the original time they showed him in season 1. Did they all die on the plane? If so, why would they care about eachother. Why was Penny in the church? When did she die? Ben killed her?
So was Jack dead for awhile, chugging along in sifeways life and just not ready to accept that he is dead? Why was he the last to join? He wasn't last to die, or was he?
Hmpph. They lost me. I wasn't expecting answers to everything or really anything in particular, but I'm not really feeling like I got anything. Did any of it happen? Was Jack closing his eyes supposed to be from the original time they showed him in season 1. Did they all die on the plane? If so, why would they care about eachother. Why was Penny in the church? When did she die? Ben killed her?
I need some sort of an explanation.
Okay, what I got out it before I hit the hay.
- It all happened. The time they spent together was the most important time of their lives... which means they didn't die in the plane crash, and is why they had such strong bonds with each other.
But they were all dead. That's why there were all dead at the end. And Penny was there because of the bond she had with Desmond etc*
Jack closing his eye was just the bookend - the scene was a mirror to the opening scene of the series. Nothing more I don't think. But obviously it had to have a visually aesthetic way that "worked" along those lines.
* Was thinking that the same end situation might be played out with everyone involved but players might change as to whomever is the "first person" and who the individual perception is, know what I mean?
So was Jack dead for awhile, chugging along in sifeways life and just not ready to accept that he is dead? Why was he the last to join? He wasn't last to die, or was he?
jack died saving the island, in 2006 or whatever. But he was the last to joint cause he was the last to accept (in ALT). People died before AND after him*. Which leads me to believe that the scenario we saw at the end was via the Jack perception and it was made for him, and that scenario might / would be different for each other individual.
*Xtian Shep says point blank to him something along the lines of "Here there is no real time it is just here" It's like a way station until whatever is next.
Ok. I guess I get it. I just read something that said the island was a place for people to work out their personal issues and find themselves before they moved on onto afterlife.
I'm just confused because I'm reading about people crying and seeing this Jimmy kimmel with the whole audience crying. I was not affected at all. Maybe I didn't get it.
I just read something that said the island was a place for people to work out there personal issues and find themselves before they moved on onto afterlife.
The island was that place. It was the place where the most important time in these people's lives was spent, the bonds were created and the place was a catalyst for self realization. I mean, that's what I got out of it.
I mean it's a lot more that that too but I'm going to bed dudes!
Ok, I'm cool with that explanation. Why couldn't the mib leave the island? What was that all about?
Who knows. Tons of stuff about the island that won't be explained I guess. Was it the electromagnetism? Or the "rules" - whatever they are? I personally don't think that stuff matters in the end. At least to me it doesn't What happened is what happened.
I mean there is one other alternative theory that I have in my mind, but I'll stick with this one... Shit, I could have SWORN that Tony Soprano lived when that episode was over.
Yeah he's a triple threat - acting, beats, rhyming. Ill dude. Plus carpentry. Shit is crazy.
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,913 Posts
in order for them to tell the story that they wanted to tell they didn't have to unravel the mythology behind the island that's been building for 6-some years.
What I found frustrating about it was that they never needed to set that mythology up in the first place.
Completely irrelevant plot threads;
Widmore The Dharma Initiative Most of Ben's story, such as the plot thread where he was acting as Sayid's handler (all symbolised by him being left outside the church - "your character actually doesn't matter, even though you've been at the centre of the story for years") The Others
The ending wasn't especially unsatisfactory, inasmuch as it bore out one of the most widely-held theories about what was going on and what it all meant. What angered me was that they could have told the story in half the time, and there was no need to pad it out with innumerable red herrings, McGuffins and suchlike. There's a difference between leaving a few loose ends that the audience can debate at their leisure and leading them down a succession of ultimately pointless cul-de-sacs knowing full well that you've no intention of ever resolving them (because you can't?).
It's clear now - at least, to me it is - that they knew all along how they were going to end the story. But the route they chose to get to that ending was largely a complete waste of time. Over here they showed it as a simulcast with the west coast broadcast, and trailed it as "the television event of a generation". To me, it was the 21st century equivalent of Bobby Ewing in the shower.
Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof get the bozack for life.
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,913 Posts
in order for them to tell the story that they wanted to tell they didn't have to unravel the mythology behind the island that's been building for 6-some years.
What I found frustrating about it was that they never needed to set that mythology up in the first place.
Completely irrelevant plot threads;
Widmore The Dharma Initiative Most of Ben's story, such as the plot thread where he was acting as Sayid's handler (all symbolised by him being left outside the church - "your character actually doesn't matter, even though you've been at the centre of the story for years") The Others
I know what you're saying, trust me dude. But 6 years of not having those dead-ends would probably have made for story that was a pretty boring. I don't know - like I said I think there's 2 camps. Those that need to have the questions answered and those that don't.
You know, I've only watched a few episodes (and this might be stating the obvious), but it looks like they died and the island was kind of a personal purgatory they all had to go through to reach the next level. I know there were a lot of unanswered questions, but on a whole it seems pretty straight forward in the idea. What do I know though, I've only seen 3 episodes.
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,913 Posts
You know, I've only watched a few episodes (and this might be stating the obvious), but it looks like they died and the island was kind of a personal purgatory they all had to go through to reach the next level. I know there were a lot of unanswered questions, but on a whole it seems pretty straight forward in the idea. What do I know though, I've only seen 3 episodes.
No, day, you're right on the money. That's exactly what it was. That aspect of it makes perfect sense.
It's not that I found the conclusion unsatisfactory; just the route they chose to get to that conclusion. There were literally hours and hours of the story which have now been revealed to have no significance whatsoever - everything from minor story arcs to plot threads that drove entire seasons. Ultimately, they could have told the story in three or (at most) four seasons, without diminishing the dramatic impact. So my big question is; why did they pad it out to such a ludicrous degree? And the answer to that is; because of the way the show was commissioned, the creators sign up with a watertight plot and then find they have to string it out for an indefinite number of seasons.
So they have to tread water with polar bears, time travel, a button you have to push, a community of scientists, engineers, labourers and their families who've all lived on the island for decades, alternate planes of existence, characters named after philosophers, a mysterious shadowy figure who may or may not be manipulating the whole thing, etc., etc...
I'm just glad it didn't turn out that it was all taking place in the dog's mind. Although for a moment there...
All of this could have taken place within the second they died and all these bizzare things/polar bears etc. could be akin to synapses firing off in the brain or collective disparate memories and experiences past. One persons boogie man (smoke monster) becomes relevant to the whole for their ultimate experience to move forward. Again, I don't know since I didn't watch too much, but that's how I would explain it if I were JJ Abrams.
Plus they probably wrote as they went along to continue the show and get paid.
i quit when charlie drowned in the underwater sub-esque station. it seemed like my time could be better spent getting emotionally involved or deeply inquisitive about drying paint
The Island wasn't purgatory. It's "real" and the events that happen on it are real, even if completely unexplained.
The so-called "sideways" universe that was the focus of this past season...that's more like purgatory. It's where the dead go to "work out their issues" before moving onto the after-afterlife. That part makes vaguely more sense then the island itself; it's why all the characters get to be on their best behavior and are thusly rewarded.
This said - a lot of it doesn't make a ton of sense when you try to follow the logic through, completely. Charlie, for example, wasn't really redeemed in his alternate world; he was still selfish and self-destructive and it was only through the good graces of other that he was "saved". Likewise, Sayid's Sideways story seemed pretty close to his real life (his reunion with Shannon was probably the dumbest part of the finale).
But it sort of makes sense for the other characters: Sawyer went from con man to cop, Jack has an emotionally non-destructive relationship, via his son, Hurley is confident and a winner, etc.
BTW" The exchange between Hurley and Ben was interesting at the end because it suggested that the two of them had clearly lived through a lot of shit together that we never saw, in other words, their timeline obviously continued after where we left them on the island. (Spinoff! J/k).
I don't know - a lot of this still doesn't make sense to me but I like how my life put it: "it was like a reality show reunion show where you get to revisit all your favorite characters." ANd to that extent, I did like seeing Sawyer/Juliet, Sun/Jin, et. al. together again.
I've been hearing about this show all morning on the radio, I feel pretty lost since I have never seen the show. DVD box sets are about to go through the roof
why did they pad it out to such a ludicrous degree? And the answer to that is; because of the way the show was commissioned, the creators sign up with a watertight plot and then find they have to string it out for an indefinite number of seasons.
That's not my understanding at all. I've interviewed the two lead writers and I've certainly read enough other interviews with them and they try to make it clear that Lost never had a watertight, overarching arc to begin with. It had an idea - "what happens if we crash a plane onto an island?" and had the bare skeleton of specific relationships and characters in mind but not a ton past that. They always were making it up as they went along.
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,913 Posts
What I got out of it:
The Island wasn't purgatory. It's "real" and the events that happen on it are real, even if completely unexplained.
The so-called "sideways" universe that was the focus of this past season...that's more like purgatory. It's where the dead go to "work out their issues" before moving onto the after-afterlife. That part makes vaguely more sense then the island itself; it's why all the characters get to be on their best behavior and are thusly rewarded.
This said - a lot of it doesn't make a ton of sense when you try to follow the logic through, completely. Charlie, for example, wasn't really redeemed in his alternate world; he was still selfish and self-destructive and it was only through the good graces of other that he was "saved". Likewise, Sayid's Sideways story seemed pretty close to his real life (his reunion with Shannon was probably the dumbest part of the finale).
But it sort of makes sense for the other characters: Sawyer went from con man to cop, Jack has an emotionally non-destructive relationship, via his son, Hurley is confident and a winner, etc.
BTW" The exchange between Hurley and Ben was interesting at the end because it suggested that the two of them had clearly lived through a lot of shit together that we never saw, in other words, their timeline obviously continued after where we left them on the island. (Spinoff! J/k).
I don't know - a lot of this still doesn't make sense to me but I like how my life put it: "it was like a reality show reunion show where you get to revisit all your favorite characters." ANd to that extent, I did like seeing Sawyer/Juliet, Sun/Jin, et. al. together again.
(Poor Michael though. No redemption for him!)
Yeah, yours seems to be a quite widely-held reading, from what I can gather.
The main issue I have with it is the platitudinous, sentimental, quasi-mystical way in which they decided to tie it up; nobody really knows why they're here (or, indeed where "here" is), life is full of mysteries and unanswered questions, etc. Also, I thought that by effectively saying that the story was really always about the characters and their journey, the mysteries and perils that plagued them along the way were simply inexplicable, and that it was unreasonable to expect every question to be answered - like what the island actually was, to pick a random example - was just a cop-out. It's as if at some point in season 2 or season 3 (the point where, in hindsight, I probably should have got off) the creators realised they'd written themselves into a corner and that the simplest way out was to resolve the personal odysseys of the characters because anything more complex was probably beyond them, hence the deus ex machina dressed up in some cracker-barrel philosophy. But they really took some unspeakable liberties with the notion of the open-ended plot thread.
And yeah, no room for black folks in the Lostiverse - no Michael, no Walt, no Eko, no Abaddon. The return of Rose and Bernard seemed to make little sense beyond getting Desmond out of the well.
It could have been worse, though; it could have all been in the dog's mind.
DocMcCoy"Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,913 Posts
why did they pad it out to such a ludicrous degree? And the answer to that is; because of the way the show was commissioned, the creators sign up with a watertight plot and then find they have to string it out for an indefinite number of seasons.
That's not my understanding at all. I've interviewed the two lead writers and I've certainly read enough other interviews with them and they try to make it clear that Lost never had a watertight, overarching arc to begin with. It had an idea - "what happens if we crash a plane onto an island?" and had the bare skeleton of specific relationships and characters in mind but not a ton past that. They always were making it up as they went along.
Yeah, maybe I was generalising a little there. I think my point about unnecessary padding stands though.
Doc: I do agree that part of what happened with the show is that it "got away" from the writers at some point. Which, to be sure, is hardly unique to "Lost."
See also: "X-Files" and "Twin Peaks."
For example, Ilana - one of Jacob's recruits who ends up blowing herself up with dynamite by accident a few eps back - was supposed to get her own backstory episode and clearly, she was set-up to have some kind of better character development, but the writers admitted they ran out of town and couldn't fit that back story in.
I'm trying to stay some what zen about this by just noting that what I enjoyed about "Lost" the most wasn't the mystery/mythology or the push towards resolution. I enjoyed the characters and their relationships and to that extent, the finale catered to fans like me vs. those who wanted to see more things answered.
Don't get me wrong, I do think it's kind of lame - from a narrative point of view - for the show to have gone out of its way to create all these mysteries only to leave most of them unanswered - but hey, I'm a sentimentalist. It was more fun seeing Juliet back on the show than still wondering where the polar bear came from.
I guess this is sort of the reverse of "losing the forest for the trees." Forget the forest and focus on the trees: Ben and Locke's final conversation, Sun/Jin learning English in a flash, Lapidus in, well, anything. To that extent, I found the finale satisfying even if the other part of me also found it frustrating.
This all said, some things that are really nagging me:
What was up with the crash imagery in the end credits?
And the shoe in the bamboo grove that Jack passes on his way to his death?
why did they pad it out to such a ludicrous degree? And the answer to that is; because of the way the show was commissioned, the creators sign up with a watertight plot and then find they have to string it out for an indefinite number of seasons.
That's not my understanding at all. I've interviewed the two lead writers and I've certainly read enough other interviews with them and they try to make it clear that Lost never had a watertight, overarching arc to begin with. It had an idea - "what happens if we crash a plane onto an island?" and had the bare skeleton of specific relationships and characters in mind but not a ton past that. They always were making it up as they went along.
Yeah, maybe I was generalising a little there. I think my point about unnecessary padding stands though.
Well, I agree with you that, in hindsight, it could have been a lot cleaner. It all seems very "kid in a candy store" after a certain point; you could have erased the entire Dharma Initiative, for example, and I'm not certain the show would have been vastly different.
But I think of it from the writing point of view (since I know one of the writers and have talked with her about the process): you're given a loose sketch and then invited to fill it in. There's a lot of freedom with that and clearly, the lead writers/show runners/etc. seem content with people going out there to do so. I do believe there was never a clear meta-arc from the beginning and I wonder, even in S5, if they had figured out the manner in which they were going to end this thing.
Comments
I need some sort of an explanation.
Okay, what I got out it before I hit the hay.
- It all happened. The time they spent together was the most important time of their lives... which means they didn't die in the plane crash, and is why they had such strong bonds with each other.
But they were all dead. That's why there were all dead at the end. And Penny was there because of the bond she had with Desmond etc*
Jack closing his eye was just the bookend - the scene was a mirror to the opening scene of the series. Nothing more I don't think. But obviously it had to have a visually aesthetic way that "worked" along those lines.
* Was thinking that the same end situation might be played out with everyone involved but players might change as to whomever is the "first person" and who the individual perception is, know what I mean?
jack died saving the island, in 2006 or whatever. But he was the last to joint cause he was the last to accept (in ALT). People died before AND after him*. Which leads me to believe that the scenario we saw at the end was via the Jack perception and it was made for him, and that scenario might / would be different for each other individual.
*Xtian Shep says point blank to him something along the lines of "Here there is no real time it is just here" It's like a way station until whatever is next.
Not that I was surprised but there were a crazy amount of commercials. Out of the 2.5 hours almost a full hour was commercials.
I'm just confused because I'm reading about people crying and seeing this Jimmy kimmel with the whole audience crying. I was not affected at all. Maybe I didn't get it.
The island was that place. It was the place where the most important time in these people's lives was spent, the bonds were created and the place was a catalyst for self realization. I mean, that's what I got out of it.
I mean it's a lot more that that too but I'm going to bed dudes!
Who knows. Tons of stuff about the island that won't be explained I guess. Was it the electromagnetism? Or the "rules" - whatever they are? I personally don't think that stuff matters in the end. At least to me it doesn't What happened is what happened.
What I found frustrating about it was that they never needed to set that mythology up in the first place.
Completely irrelevant plot threads;
Widmore
The Dharma Initiative
Most of Ben's story, such as the plot thread where he was acting as Sayid's handler (all symbolised by him being left outside the church - "your character actually doesn't matter, even though you've been at the centre of the story for years")
The Others
The ending wasn't especially unsatisfactory, inasmuch as it bore out one of the most widely-held theories about what was going on and what it all meant. What angered me was that they could have told the story in half the time, and there was no need to pad it out with innumerable red herrings, McGuffins and suchlike. There's a difference between leaving a few loose ends that the audience can debate at their leisure and leading them down a succession of ultimately pointless cul-de-sacs knowing full well that you've no intention of ever resolving them (because you can't?).
It's clear now - at least, to me it is - that they knew all along how they were going to end the story. But the route they chose to get to that ending was largely a complete waste of time. Over here they showed it as a simulcast with the west coast broadcast, and trailed it as "the television event of a generation". To me, it was the 21st century equivalent of Bobby Ewing in the shower.
Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof get the bozack for life.
I know what you're saying, trust me dude. But 6 years of not having those dead-ends would probably have made for story that was a pretty boring. I don't know - like I said I think there's 2 camps. Those that need to have the questions answered and those that don't.
No, day, you're right on the money. That's exactly what it was. That aspect of it makes perfect sense.
It's not that I found the conclusion unsatisfactory; just the route they chose to get to that conclusion. There were literally hours and hours of the story which have now been revealed to have no significance whatsoever - everything from minor story arcs to plot threads that drove entire seasons. Ultimately, they could have told the story in three or (at most) four seasons, without diminishing the dramatic impact. So my big question is; why did they pad it out to such a ludicrous degree? And the answer to that is; because of the way the show was commissioned, the creators sign up with a watertight plot and then find they have to string it out for an indefinite number of seasons.
So they have to tread water with polar bears, time travel, a button you have to push, a community of scientists, engineers, labourers and their families who've all lived on the island for decades, alternate planes of existence, characters named after philosophers, a mysterious shadowy figure who may or may not be manipulating the whole thing, etc., etc...
I'm just glad it didn't turn out that it was all taking place in the dog's mind. Although for a moment there...
Plus they probably wrote as they went along to continue the show and get paid.
The cool stuff was a red herring for the romance/emo/drama.
For a while the cool stuff was more interesting. But then even it got stupid.
I still give Lost a "B" overall. The finale was solid.
doesn't seem like I missed much
glad to know the ending satisfied a few though.
The Island wasn't purgatory. It's "real" and the events that happen on it are real, even if completely unexplained.
The so-called "sideways" universe that was the focus of this past season...that's more like purgatory. It's where the dead go to "work out their issues" before moving onto the after-afterlife. That part makes vaguely more sense then the island itself; it's why all the characters get to be on their best behavior and are thusly rewarded.
This said - a lot of it doesn't make a ton of sense when you try to follow the logic through, completely. Charlie, for example, wasn't really redeemed in his alternate world; he was still selfish and self-destructive and it was only through the good graces of other that he was "saved". Likewise, Sayid's Sideways story seemed pretty close to his real life (his reunion with Shannon was probably the dumbest part of the finale).
But it sort of makes sense for the other characters: Sawyer went from con man to cop, Jack has an emotionally non-destructive relationship, via his son, Hurley is confident and a winner, etc.
BTW" The exchange between Hurley and Ben was interesting at the end because it suggested that the two of them had clearly lived through a lot of shit together that we never saw, in other words, their timeline obviously continued after where we left them on the island. (Spinoff! J/k).
I don't know - a lot of this still doesn't make sense to me but I like how my life put it: "it was like a reality show reunion show where you get to revisit all your favorite characters." ANd to that extent, I did like seeing Sawyer/Juliet, Sun/Jin, et. al. together again.
(Poor Michael though. No redemption for him!)
That's not my understanding at all. I've interviewed the two lead writers and I've certainly read enough other interviews with them and they try to make it clear that Lost never had a watertight, overarching arc to begin with. It had an idea - "what happens if we crash a plane onto an island?" and had the bare skeleton of specific relationships and characters in mind but not a ton past that. They always were making it up as they went along.
Yeah, yours seems to be a quite widely-held reading, from what I can gather.
The main issue I have with it is the platitudinous, sentimental, quasi-mystical way in which they decided to tie it up; nobody really knows why they're here (or, indeed where "here" is), life is full of mysteries and unanswered questions, etc. Also, I thought that by effectively saying that the story was really always about the characters and their journey, the mysteries and perils that plagued them along the way were simply inexplicable, and that it was unreasonable to expect every question to be answered - like what the island actually was, to pick a random example - was just a cop-out. It's as if at some point in season 2 or season 3 (the point where, in hindsight, I probably should have got off) the creators realised they'd written themselves into a corner and that the simplest way out was to resolve the personal odysseys of the characters because anything more complex was probably beyond them, hence the deus ex machina dressed up in some cracker-barrel philosophy. But they really took some unspeakable liberties with the notion of the open-ended plot thread.
And yeah, no room for black folks in the Lostiverse - no Michael, no Walt, no Eko, no Abaddon. The return of Rose and Bernard seemed to make little sense beyond getting Desmond out of the well.
It could have been worse, though; it could have all been in the dog's mind.
Yeah, maybe I was generalising a little there. I think my point about unnecessary padding stands though.
See also: "X-Files" and "Twin Peaks."
For example, Ilana - one of Jacob's recruits who ends up blowing herself up with dynamite by accident a few eps back - was supposed to get her own backstory episode and clearly, she was set-up to have some kind of better character development, but the writers admitted they ran out of town and couldn't fit that back story in.
I'm trying to stay some what zen about this by just noting that what I enjoyed about "Lost" the most wasn't the mystery/mythology or the push towards resolution. I enjoyed the characters and their relationships and to that extent, the finale catered to fans like me vs. those who wanted to see more things answered.
Don't get me wrong, I do think it's kind of lame - from a narrative point of view - for the show to have gone out of its way to create all these mysteries only to leave most of them unanswered - but hey, I'm a sentimentalist. It was more fun seeing Juliet back on the show than still wondering where the polar bear came from.
I guess this is sort of the reverse of "losing the forest for the trees." Forget the forest and focus on the trees: Ben and Locke's final conversation, Sun/Jin learning English in a flash, Lapidus in, well, anything. To that extent, I found the finale satisfying even if the other part of me also found it frustrating.
This all said, some things that are really nagging me:
What was up with the crash imagery in the end credits?
And the shoe in the bamboo grove that Jack passes on his way to his death?
Well, I agree with you that, in hindsight, it could have been a lot cleaner. It all seems very "kid in a candy store" after a certain point; you could have erased the entire Dharma Initiative, for example, and I'm not certain the show would have been vastly different.
But I think of it from the writing point of view (since I know one of the writers and have talked with her about the process): you're given a loose sketch and then invited to fill it in. There's a lot of freedom with that and clearly, the lead writers/show runners/etc. seem content with people going out there to do so. I do believe there was never a clear meta-arc from the beginning and I wonder, even in S5, if they had figured out the manner in which they were going to end this thing.