Lost Video Island

[SuperKC]

Maybe I'm spoiled because I'm a former Buffy fan. Maybe my creative juices long for the grandiose and the meaningful Shakespearean type deaths. Maybe I just don't get it.

Is it just me? Or does Lost suck in the death department? You kill any character that we have grown to know and love... well. Know anyway. And we are going to get a bit emotional. We're only human. (Well, most of us anyway.) But I feel that we're given it rather cheaply.

Let's take the first big death in the Buffy-verse for example. Jenny Calendar. She was a character who was redeeming herself. She was taking a chance to right the wrong things she felt she'd done. She was trying to save Angel from his alter-ego and she died at his hands before she could see her plans through or share them with anyone. (That's Shakespearean.)

Her death meant many things in the Scooby-verse. It gave us the opportunity to see Angelus at his worst. We SAW him kill her. We knew just what he was capable of and how sadistic he could be with the way he put on the show for Giles in his apartment afterwards. She died heroically, I thought. Doing the right thing. She left a legacy behind. Her translations of the spell survived her and eventually played a huge role in the rest of that season. Passion, is in my opinion one of the best episodes of the series. (One amongst many.) It continued the Joss tradition of pulling the rug right out from underneath you in a meaningful way. One that made you want to simultaneously slap him and kiss him. It was definately one of the episodes in which you took in a little gasp and thought, "This cat is NOT playing around." Deaths in the Buffyverse were serious business and were always given their proper due.

So why can't Lost take a cue from its Cult-Ville sister and give us a little bit of meaning behind all of the "mysterious island" fodder? I love this show. It is definately one of the best on television these days. But there are moments you long for in a show like this that Lost just does not deliver. That moment of clarity. That moment where you go, "This is what is at stake here. This is what has to be done." I don't see that in Lost. And it makes me wonder if I ever will.

I'm not sure I feel like the writers have more than a "sketchy" plan at best for the future. (Spoilers regarding the switching around of episodes tell you that they're not quite as organized as we wish they were!)

I am all about a little mystery, but if the story is good enough it should tell itself. Buffy was good because it bared all. I think Lost could use a little more "exposure" in that department. Maybe then I would understand. But right now? I am at a loss as to how to justify this.

[Enchirito]

All that Buffy Talk is lost on me.
But I completely agree with everything you said.
_________________

[SuperKC]

As long as my message got across, E. That's all that matters. And I'm glad someone agrees with me! I know people were upset about Shannon's death and all, but not in a "that was cheap and easy!" way. But I did just see your post in the show discussion and so I know that you feel EXACTLY the same way I do.

"Shot on accident? WTF!?"

Big Damn Mystery only works so long. Shannon's death was on par with Boone's. Total crap. Let me see something REAL Lost producers, before I tune out.

[Hobbes]

What was so wrong with Boone's death? they handled it excellently, asbout as much emotion over it as you could get on an island full of stangers that have only known each other a month plus, it was the marking point of many people here that Locke would do anything, and wasn't just the mysterious guy. It had a touching ending, and was a huge impact on Shannon's character (which I HOPED we'd get to see more of) but that ultimately led to many of us liking her character before this last episode.

And so this leads me to Shannon's death. First thing: we only got to see about 30 seconds of it we don't even know if she's still savable or something! All they had time for was a few seconds for Sayid to look pisssed off.
As for the method: yeah, it does seem like one very stupid thing for A-L to do (she only had one bullet! Wouldn't she be a little reluctant to fire at first sight?) but we do know that the others were involved there, and we don't know Ana Lucia's motives. Furthermore, something supernatural was going on there to make that happen, so we could chock that up a bit
Reason why they did it was probably to make a switch-up. Sacrafice a less-liked main character in order to make the new character really interesting... in theory at least Maybe next episode will make A-L more interestng, but otherwise... I say it's a crappy trade I liked Shannon, she had potential! Take Sayid or Jack instead!

I agree with you, I wasn't all that engaged in the death, and I certainly didn't feel anything, but I would wait for the situation to play itself out before just chocking this down as a "bad death".

Comparing these deaths to the Buffy ones is really stretching it they're very different shows, with very different themes. Lost tries to portray realism and real characters, without resorting to direct supernatural happenings to make a character do something. It also doesn't have "pure evil" and "pure good", at least not yet. Even the nay-sayers to Locke can't possibly prove he's evil or prone to murder Lost can't use Deux ex Machina to create conflicts as easilly as Buffy. I loved the wackiness and deep drama of Buffy that seemed to sway back and forth when it was needed, but unfortunately Lost has to stay on that more realistic "mellow" route I'm still waiting for the musical episode though
What I'm trying to say is when everyone's motives have to be made clear beforehand in Lost, there's not much room for cold hearted murder or something that really defines the characters such as those on Buffy. Or if there are, then we'll probably have to wait a while until it becomes time to use them (you see, Locke can only go crazy and kill everyone once, or it looses its impact. ) You just can't expect something as intense as that so early!

Besides, Ms. Calander's death was season 3 wasn't it? They're up one season The characters knew each other better, we knew the characters better! More emotion! Blah blah blah... Lost will get there if we give it a chance ...probably.

I hate the previews for these thngs most of all though... they make it sound like survivor ("Someone will be Lost FOREVER!") just so annoying, it makes it sound like they're getting voted off, and its our fault, like we ask specifically for it . I don't need deaths to make it interesting, but they should be in there, and they should be a surprise bah... you don't know how lucky you are E. You think you hated the death this way? Imagine it like some boxing rink ("Ohhh, Sayid looks like he's in danger there.... uh oh... DAMN they got Shannon! All right mom, I owe you $5...")

So to recap: I thought Boone's was well-done and touching, This one I'm giving a chance, it's not done yet, too soon to just judge that suddenly all the deaths are badly done.

[SuperKC]

Haha, Hobbes you crack me up.

Actually, Jenny Calendar died at the beginning of the last 3rd of the 2nd season of Buffy. But remember that Buffy only had 13 episodes its first season so it wasn't much "older" in episode count than Lost is right now.

But in all seriousness, I don't see anything wrong with having clearly defined enemies and "sides." (Even between the lostaways.) There's always a bleed-through anyway, EVEN IN BUFFY. Who the heck ARE the others? I mean, really. Let us have a little of that action. We had an awesome villian in Ethan who is now DEAD thanks to DUMBBELL! Ethan could have been one of those great characters that you love to hate and it would have made things a hell of a lot more interesting than they are now if he had survived. Forgetting for a moment arguments that people are making that he is good. Maybe he is, but will we EVER see those flashbacks? I DOUBT IT! And what would be even more interesting would be a mercenary doing the WRONG THING for the RIGHT REASON. Right now, we don't have any concept of what is "RIGHT" and "WRONG" on the island. Having a glimpse into that would be a welcome favor.

(Did I forget to mention the psychological ramifications that killing Ethan ought to have had on Charlie? He has experienced NONE OF IT.)

Why CAN'T deaths be meaningful and be realistic? They are obviously WARRIORS on that island now. Does everything have to be an accident? I mean, "they survived through all of this and then became the victim of bad luck." Having them "accidentally be killed by one of their own," is the equivalent of having a coconut accidentally drop on one of their heads. What changes? Someone dies and it is sad. Duh. The only difference when it is one of their own is that someone has guilt for it, might get blamed for an episode or two, and then all is forgiven. Puh-lease. It's a COP-OUT!

(You KNOW that Ana-Lucia might face some wrath, but in the end, she will be freed of all charges on an "I didn't know she wasn't one of 'the others,' Officer," plea.)

I also find it funny that one of the biggest Locke fans is arguing that this show is made to be realistic. Have you switched to the Jack camp, you man of science you? (I jest!) Hello D. Double-W that's OBVIOUSLY not the real Walt sending messages to Shannon AND Sayid, Polar bears, A kid with "powers," Psychics, "Everything happens for a reason" (except Shannon's death), Conglomo-Monster-Machine able to push billion year-old jungle trees up by their roots, A pirate ship in the middle of the jungle, Prophetic Dreams (hello Locke), unexplained selective amnesia (Claire, anyone?), the "eye of the island," creepy whispery voices in the jungle, a Mayday that's never heard by anyone for 16 years, a magical "sickness," mysterious "bad" numbers that keep re-appearing everywhere, adam and eve and the rocks and the emphasis of light and dark (which we have STILL yet to see come to play) etc. etc. etc.

What do all of these things have in common? None of them are explained and ALL of them could be that explicit "supernatural" stuff you were talking about.

Maybe the reason people die because of accidents is because the writers just can't think of anything better. You expect BIG, and you get "M'eh."

This is not to say that they aren't sad or emtional or even have implications for the remaining characters, but in the end, they were used.

Buffy would have been a VERY different show if Jenny hadn't died in countless many ways. Starting with Angelus' reign of terror being a hell of a lot shorter and less important. And yes, it made it "real." Showed that people could actually die in this battle. But aside from that, they faced apocalypse because of it, Joyce might never have found out about Buffy, Acathla would never have been opened, Spike and Buffy would have never joined forces, Angel would never have had to be sacrificed, Buffy would never have had to experience the awful truth about what she was (as a slayer, you have to do what it is right, even if it means killing the person that you love the most), etc. But think about Willow! The Becoming spell was her first big one, would she have become the powerful witch that she did WITHOUT having experienced that? That was the first time that the magic "overcame" her, so to speak. (Those moments when she appeared posessed.)

How different is Lost now that Boone is dead? We could argue that he "gave away" the hatch secret. But he would have done anyway. He was becoming quickly disillusioned with Locke's plight to get into the hatch and keep it a secret from everyone. The truth would have come out sooner rather than later.

Now, the ramifications of Shannon's death are still yet to be seen, so I can't comment on that, but I have a feeling, judging by the very nature of it and it being so like Boone's in its accidental nature, that it won't have many far-reaching ones.

But the thing itself that killed her (if indeed she is dead ), that was just cheap and easy. CHEAP, and EASY.

[Ringwench]

SuperKC, have I told you lately how much you rock?

Very good analysis and I totally agree with you. Lost just doesn't do death very well.

Boone's death wasn't completely pointless, it did serve as a catalyst for a few things (finding the hatch, Shannon becoming less of a bitch--which is pretty much worth nothing now, providing character development for Locke), but it didn't cause nearly as many ripples as it should.

I thought it would cause a huge rift where people would have to choose between Jack and Locke. That didn't happen. Sure, it might still happen, but I don't think it's going to have much to do with Boone's death. So what was the point?

I can't say for sure right now that Shannon's death will mean nothing because we haven't seen the fallout from it yet, but I don't know how much it can really effect. Obviously, Sayid and Ana-Lucia are going to be the most effected, but for how long? As you said, I'm sure Ana-Lucia will be forgiven (which, well, she *probably* should, it sure looked like an accident--pretty stupid thing to do, but an accident nonetheless).

Even Boone's death is rarely mentioned on the show anymore, and even though it's been months of our time, it's been just under a week in island time! Would evreyone but Shannon really be forgetting about him so easily?

I guess that speaks to how important his death was to the overall story. Answer: not very.

Boone's death should have meant more, or they should have killed someone who would have moved the story along better.

What would have been really ballsy, thinking back on it, would have been for Charlie to die after he'd been hanged. That was such a shocking and terrifying scene to watch and it would have been more realistic for him to have died instead of miraculously coming back to life (and yes, I know the whole point of it was to have him miraculously come back, but still).

I'm hoping that Shannon's death will open up a lot of storylines and conflicts so that it doesn't seem to be all in vain. Thinking about it now, it does seem to be a bit of a cop out.

The only people who will be really effected by Shannon's death will be Sayid and Ana-Lucia (albiet for different reasons). How much are any of the other castaways really going to be effected by Shannon's death (aside from being sad that someone they knew lost her life)? My guess is, not many.

I get the feeling sometimes that the "Lost" writers are just killing people off because they can, and because they think it will shock us, not because those deaths are actually neccesary to move the plot along.

As you were saying, SuperKC, on Buffy, deaths MEANT something (well, maybe not Anya's--but to be fair, that was in the series finale), they were a jumping off point for many many storylines. Jenny's death sent ripples throught the show, Tara's death (as much as I'm STILL shocked and saddened by that one all these years later) sent ripples through the show, Joyce's death, Jonathan's death, I could go on. The deaths on "Lost" SHOULD be like that, but so far, they really haven't been.

On a show like this, that puts such importance on fate and connections and everything happening for a reason, the fact that these deaths wind up being so hollow and pointless doesn't make sense to me.

If they're going to kill someone, they'd better make damn sure their death will mean something to the show.

I know in real life deaths don't always have to mean something, but "Lost" is not reality. When a precedent is set that everything on the island happens for a reason, why have deaths happen for seemingly no reason?

If we are to believe that the castaways were all "chosen" to survive the plane crash what's the point in killing them off in random, meaningless ways?

I'm not going to formulate an opinion on how Shannon's death was handled quite yet, as we haven't seen any rammifications of it, but I'm hoping her death resonates in more than just a few episodes otherwise I'll feel a little cheated.
_________________


Geekdom abounds.

[Hobbes]

You know, I think you've convinced me a bit Shannon and Boone were wussy choices of people to kill. Boone's didn't shake up the story NEARLY as muich as it could have if they'd killed off a main, main character, and probably the same thing with Shannon's, but well have to wait on that.
I was saying back when they were going to kill their first character I wish it was going to be some big character tht would really shake up the plot, such as Jack. I knew they'd never take that risk, but at least I could hope.

It seems that they're just picking those characters who are least popular, or seem to be, to kill off. From a network standpoint, it seems like that's a good idea, all the favourites stay and the fangirls are happy... la la la la la. But if they kill characters we don't really care about all that much, and they don't stir up the plot as much, then what's the point? Ratings probably...

[marcus]

I just think the producers realised Shannon and Boone were incredibly boring and decided to kill off them so there wasn't any more weird siblings-in-love flashbacks.
_________________

It's official - Aislynn is 36. Add a 0 to the end of that and you've got a full circle.

[Enchirito]

I agree with everything said here! well except for Hobbes's few attempts to justify the obvious shortcomings being pointed out.

[Hobbes]

[Enchirito]

[Hobbes]

[SuperKC]

Carnivale was never mainstream fodder anyway, so that's hardly a worthwhile comparison regarding any looming ideas of cancellation. (Not going to happen any time soon on Lost.)

I don't think "revealing" things would mean Lost has switched its genre. It has become less that they are "being really clever" and more that they are just AFRAID to reveal anything. Maybe there's just an empty void behind that curtain after all?

And if you are still worried about changing directions challenging the life span of the show, what about the dangers of continuing on like this? Let me remind you of another show that was cancelled "too early." (If you're a David Lynch fan.) Twin Peaks. If I have my facts straight, that show did VERY WELL in the ratings during its first year. Chock full of mystery and strangeness. But you know what? THEY NEVER REVEALED ANYTHING. The audience got bored, and that was the END of that. Just a little food for thought.

I have more to say, but I also have a paper on the Holocaust due in 1 hour and 49 minutes so...

[Enchirito]

^^I agree again.
_________________

[Hobbes]