Lost: The Final Season (Premieres Feb. 2)

As much as networks seem to screw up shows by revealing too much, using a clip out of context or flat out lying in the "end credits/previews of the next show." I thought the wreckage shots were a nice, graceful touch, a coda if you will, for the show.
Extra points to the guy who added the Willy Wonka "poem/rant" over the previews a couple of weeks back.
And I've got to give the network credit for letting the show play out and spending the bread on the series.

 

Jeebus, what a bunch of idiots.

Rewatched the finale today, and having sat with it for a couple of days and read some of the good analysis, I enjoyed it a lot more the second time.

 

Wow. That is incredibly retarded by ABC to do that. Someone has not paid attention to a show and should be scolded or reprimanded. Seriously. You can't put something like that in after that ending.

 

I think most of the ABC stations "eased" the transistion themselves, but leading their broadcasts with Lost related stories. Because, really, that show ending its run was the most important thing that happened Sunday whether you are in L.A., San Francisco, Cleveland, Chicago, Washington DC or New York.

Again - I think people looking for meaning in the end credits would have noticed that promotional consideration was paid by the Dharma Institute and Oceanic Airlines.

 

They could have just run the credits with the ocean view in the background and without the plane wreckage, and everyone could be happy.

 

I think they should have scrolled the credits over video of Vincent eating Jack's body. I mean... a dog's gotta eat, you know?

 

Mike Hale was the same idiot who blasted the show here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/arts/television/21lost.html?ref=television

Basically, Hale doesn't like a show that challenges a viewer and makes them think. The dialogue here and with friends and in blogs is what made this show so worthwhile. We got a show that was intelligent, fun, challenging and worth discussing. Hale wants all shows to be procedural, no big plot points. Sorry, but that's not my style.

 

My first thought when I read the NYT piece was that it was written by Alessandra Stanley. She really seems to have a knack for being totally wrong.

 

I knew that Matthew Fox had tried out for Sawyer, but I never realized how weird that would have been until I saw the audition tape. Pretty cool. In the related videos are the tapes for a bunch of other actors too.

 

Jorge Garcia also tried out for Sawyer. Imagine how strange that would have been.

"Hey Freckles, dude. Let's go hang out in the polar bear cage."

 

Yeah, I saw that too. Shockingly enough he seemed too nice in his audition .

 

They both auditioned for Sawyer for basically the same reason - because when the producers first started bringing in actors, they didn't have a finished script for the pilot at all, they had basic sketches of a few key characters. A lot of the actors ended up unintentionally having a lot of influence on who their characters ended up being - Hurley was custom-written for Jorge Garcia; Terry O'Quinn didn't even have to audition for Locke (having worked with Abrams on Alias); Charlie was made younger when Dom Monaghan came in to read for the character; Sayid was originally neither Iraqi, nor male; Sawyer was a southerner because they liked that interpretation that Josh Holloway used in his audition; Yunjin Kim auditioned for Kate, and prompted Abrams and Lindelof to make the foreign couple (originally conceived as German) Korean instead - paving the way for Daniel Dae Kim to join the cast as well; and once ABC's executives convinced JJ and Damon *not* to kill off Jack halfway through the pilot, Matthew Fox nailed that role. The special edition of EW has a really fascinating article about the incredibly convoluted process that eventually resulted in the finished pilot.