Here’s an observation - please take a look. In reading it, do you think there is some truth to it?
Lost, at its heart as a TV show, has one Big Bad Arc - meaning one central story that we are seeing play out - may involve multiple parties of varying degrees of badness or goodness, but all revolving around a central plot line.
This is an inherent weakness, unless the show is treating as a finite-ending miniseries more than a show. We viewers perceive that there is one central theme, and don’t have the experience to believe anyone can weave it out over indeterminable seasons - and we’d want sooner satisfaction anyway.
Heroes, thus far, appears more truly comic-book serial in its basic structure. We have characters put in motion over a variety of threats, and Sylar is clearly the current Big Bad, but one can readily imagine Sylar being vanquished - or at least sent to the back of the story after a bruising defeat ala Voldy at the opening of HP Bk 1 - and the series continuing.
Heroes seems to have three more or less independent bad guys. There’s Sylar, who is inequivocably bad, since he chases good guys and eats their brains. There’s the ambiguously evil organization that ambiguously evil Mr Bennet works for. We’re not really sure what their agenda is, except that they appear to collect superpowered individuals. Then there’s Linderman about whom we know even less, except that he makes a good pot pie. Each Hero also has his or her own agenda, that intersects with the different characters, good and bad, in different ways. Plenty of room for different storylines.
I don’t watch Lost, so I can’t really say anything about it.
Can’t argue with the OP, except that unlike Otto, I believe there will be closure and the mysteries will be explained. The Lost writers will want to work in TV again, and they’ll lose credibility if they leave viewers hanging too long.
The Lost writers/creators said in an interview that the show isn’t intended to go on for more than four years. (I think it was in Entertainment Weekly but I don’t have a cite.)
I don’t see the one-big-mystery of Lost as a weakness. Everything ends, and people who read books and watch movies are accustomed to it.
It’ll be fun when Lost is over to watch the DVD and see if everything was explained, catch more clues, etc.
So I don’t see it as a weakness, unless the network and the writers are thinking of going on for more than a few years. In they are, then yeah, they messed up, because people will lose interest.
I am not a fan of Lost. In trying to describe why, I usually compare to either Buffy or NYPD Blue. In Lost, most of the characters seem to in a race to the bottom of humanity; it’s as depressing as Survivor. Meanwhile, the series-lon arcs in Buffy and NYPD were about people battling such impulses in an effort to be a good person, despite life’s temptations and challenges. IOW, I find that my favorite series are about, to oversimplify, a journey of redemption. Lost just seems to wallow in the worst aspects of humanity.
Hmmm, I see what you are saying - I think you are inferring that the writers either don’t know how they intend to reach closure, or that - in the act of stretching things out to accomodate multiple seasons - they lose the ability to attain clean closure. If my understanding of your post is correct, then I agree.
My argument, to my mind, is different. My argument is not whether they can achieve closure, but rather whether the story / set of characters they have set up are based on an arc that would require clean closure to be satisfying. My argument is that yes, that is the case, whereas for Heroes, there is obviously a Big Bad arc that requires closure, but it is not the overall *raison d’etre *of the whole series…
the creators have said that the first season is “chapter one” and they may reset with all new characters and plotlines each season (thought not necessarily abandoning all the previously established characters) so yes, they have a very open-ended format.
One has literally NOTHING to do with the other. No tv show runner is going to look at one of the LOST writers and say " I was disappointed in the ending… therefore I won’t give you a job on my series."
The business doesn’t work like that.
Damon Lindelof (sp) has said the show will run 5 years and the ending won’t explain EVERY mystery.
Good point. Viewers might remember and be wary of investing time though.
We’ll know the purpose of the Dharma Initiative, won’t we? Won’t we? That’s all I care about. The smoke monster and Walt and the comic book and the black and white stones – not so much.
Since the creators have had experience in Hollywood, I can’t believe they actually said that. That’s not the way television works.
They’ve already changed the program to accommodate the more popular characters. They will keep the more popular characters, next season and for as many seasons after that as the ratings will permit. Nobody at the network would ever allow them to reset with new characters. They may add new characters but they are doing that practically every episode already, so how would that be a change? A reset has never happened, even with 24 which was designed to allow it. It never will happen.
I’m just reporting what I’ve read: Tim Kring reveals: The upcoming second season will constitute a new volume in the multi-volume series, with new characters and an entirely new storyline. “If you remember, the opening of the pilot pronounced the episode as the beginning of Volume One,” Kring said in an interview. “Volume One comes to a conclusion at the end of episode 23, and Volume Two starts with the opening of season two. And Volume Two is a different story.” Kring added: “We could have new people and new storylines and new ideas and new threats and new bad guys and new heroes. So I would prepare the audience for that idea, that it’s not just a continuing serialized storyline about only these people. It’s a little more the 24 model than the Lost model.” Kring also confirmed that some of the current heroes just might not survive this season, but added: “Many of your favorites will live to fight again.” Source: Sci Fi Wire
While I don’t watch either show (or any television, pretty much) I see in your OP a parallel with the world of comic books. Forgive me.
There’s been a growth lately, beginning with things in the 80s and 90s like Cerebus (300 issues and done) and Sandman (75 issues and done), in which comic books have gone to the series of arcs heading for a final conclusion thing. And I, for one, feel it makes for a stronger, tighter narrative that lends a certain weight to the entire affair. Whereas with open-ended serial comics such as your traditional Superman, Batman or whatnot comics the audience knows none of it has any long-term meaning. Kill the central character and you KNOW they’re coming back. Kill a major villian and they’ll be back…guaranteed. It’s at the point where something like ‘Action’ (900 issues or so) is sort of endlessly pointless.
However, some of the greatest comic books of the recent ages, such as Preacher, Transmetropolitan, Watchmen (for the 80s), Y the Last Man, and others were all started by the creative team with the knowledge that, even though it would take five or more years (on a monthly schedule) to tell the story they wanted to tell.
So, for my money, something close-ended has a greater ability to draw my attention simply because I know I’m reading a story rather than a series of marketing campaigns.
That’s all I care about. The smoke monster and Walt and the comic book and the black and white stones – not so much.