webby Wrote:I've never watched Lost, don't know why I sometimes look at this thread, but I clicked this link that Scott H posted and ... dang, that guy could so be Repairman Jack in the movie! Really.You need to watch some Firefly or Serenity. He is funny when he is supposed to be humorous. He is tough when he is supposed to kick ass.
Nathan Fillion does a good job as Captan Mal Reynolds.
Mal means "bad."
Now that you mention it, he would do a good job as Repairman Jack.
This post was last modified: 10-30-2006, 02:23 AM by Auskar.
Here's an interesting point of view on TheTailSection.com (I have this same quote from Lost's producers elsewhere):
We all hate reruns. However, since most prime-time television shows run on a 35-week schedule and only produce twenty some episodes a year, reruns are, unfortunately, a necessity. For far too long networks have solved this with the same formula: two weeks of new shows followed by a week of reruns. Or three weeks of new episodes, then two weeks off. The only time we really ever get four straight weeks of new programming is during November and May sweeps. This is not a problem for sitcoms or procedural dramas (like CSI and LAW and ORDER), because the chronology isn't important. They all work as stand alone episodes. However, for a serial like LOST, where missing an episode can lead to unbridled confusion, a helter-skelter schedule is debilitating. LOST is so dense it can sometimes be hard to remember key moments from an episode you watched a day ago, let alone a couple of weeks.
In the past few years, however, networks have begun to get far more creative in their scheduling in order to please their audiences. They've taken their cue from cable and, specifically, HBO. HBO has no set “season” in which they show their original programming and, as a result, they air their episodes from the beginning to the end of their seasons, week after week, with no breaks. Of course, for a viewer, this is optimal; they know exactly where they stand, the story is easy to follow and there are absolutely no excruciating waits between episodes.
Networks have started paying attention, finally. 24 waits until after the first of the year, then goes twenty-four weeks straight until the season ends. No reruns. Now, LOST is jumping on the bandwagon. For season three, LOST will be airing original episodes in two large blocks. In the Fall, a block of seven episodes will air in a seven-week span. Then, after a thirteen week break, the remaining episodes will air weekly, uninterrupted, all the way through to the season finale. This is a wonderful step for LOST and terrific news for LOST fans. The season will basically be two seasons in one. The Fall “mini” season will likely end in a cliffhanger, as LOST is wont to do, followed by thirteen weeks for LOST fans to speculate, spout theories, and exchange possible spoilers regarding the rest of the season.
However, though baffling to me, there has been a lot of fan backlash regarding LOST's change in schedule. Fans mostly dislike the idea of a thirteen-week hiatus, which is understandable. It is extremely long for a mid-season break. Some are concerned that LOST will lose momentum over the break. I suppose this is reasonable, but shows use cliffhangers all the time between seasons, and momentum doesn't seem to wane during the summer months. Regardless, the move by ABC to rework the schedule was done specifically for the fans. Here's a excerpt from an LA Times article, quoting one of LOST's executive producers, Carlton Cuse:
"Our audience was incredibly frustrated with repeats," Cuse wrote in an e-mail. "Now when 'Lost' is on, it's on. And, the audience doesn't have to wait all the way until the spring for the show to return, which given the cliffhanger nature of our finale would be too long."
The new non-repeat schedule "allows us to really keep the momentum of our particular type of storytelling," he added.
No matter how fans feel about the change, it should be encouraging to know that LOST's producers are sincerely looking out for their fans. This bodes well for coming seasons.
We all hate reruns. However, since most prime-time television shows run on a 35-week schedule and only produce twenty some episodes a year, reruns are, unfortunately, a necessity. For far too long networks have solved this with the same formula: two weeks of new shows followed by a week of reruns. Or three weeks of new episodes, then two weeks off. The only time we really ever get four straight weeks of new programming is during November and May sweeps. This is not a problem for sitcoms or procedural dramas (like CSI and LAW and ORDER), because the chronology isn't important. They all work as stand alone episodes. However, for a serial like LOST, where missing an episode can lead to unbridled confusion, a helter-skelter schedule is debilitating. LOST is so dense it can sometimes be hard to remember key moments from an episode you watched a day ago, let alone a couple of weeks.
In the past few years, however, networks have begun to get far more creative in their scheduling in order to please their audiences. They've taken their cue from cable and, specifically, HBO. HBO has no set “season” in which they show their original programming and, as a result, they air their episodes from the beginning to the end of their seasons, week after week, with no breaks. Of course, for a viewer, this is optimal; they know exactly where they stand, the story is easy to follow and there are absolutely no excruciating waits between episodes.
Networks have started paying attention, finally. 24 waits until after the first of the year, then goes twenty-four weeks straight until the season ends. No reruns. Now, LOST is jumping on the bandwagon. For season three, LOST will be airing original episodes in two large blocks. In the Fall, a block of seven episodes will air in a seven-week span. Then, after a thirteen week break, the remaining episodes will air weekly, uninterrupted, all the way through to the season finale. This is a wonderful step for LOST and terrific news for LOST fans. The season will basically be two seasons in one. The Fall “mini” season will likely end in a cliffhanger, as LOST is wont to do, followed by thirteen weeks for LOST fans to speculate, spout theories, and exchange possible spoilers regarding the rest of the season.
However, though baffling to me, there has been a lot of fan backlash regarding LOST's change in schedule. Fans mostly dislike the idea of a thirteen-week hiatus, which is understandable. It is extremely long for a mid-season break. Some are concerned that LOST will lose momentum over the break. I suppose this is reasonable, but shows use cliffhangers all the time between seasons, and momentum doesn't seem to wane during the summer months. Regardless, the move by ABC to rework the schedule was done specifically for the fans. Here's a excerpt from an LA Times article, quoting one of LOST's executive producers, Carlton Cuse:
"Our audience was incredibly frustrated with repeats," Cuse wrote in an e-mail. "Now when 'Lost' is on, it's on. And, the audience doesn't have to wait all the way until the spring for the show to return, which given the cliffhanger nature of our finale would be too long."
The new non-repeat schedule "allows us to really keep the momentum of our particular type of storytelling," he added.
No matter how fans feel about the change, it should be encouraging to know that LOST's producers are sincerely looking out for their fans. This bodes well for coming seasons.
I'm not frustrated by reruns. I create my own. I tape the shows as they air and watch them at least 2 or 3 times. Then I buy the DVD sets and watch them all again.
I'm hooked. I'm addicted. I can watch episodes of "Lost" repeatedly and they never fail to entertain.
As was stated in the post above, each episode is dense. For instance, because I never cared for Shannon, I didn't watch her flashbacks too carefully. This weekend I finally discovered for myself, though I'd heard it from other fans, that Shannon's father was killed in the crash that crippled Jack's then-patient-later-wife-now-ex. I realized that only because I saw Jack in the background of the scene where Shannon and her hellish stepmother are being given the news by another doctor.
I also finally saw the Dharma sign on the shark, and heard the sound of Mr. Eko's brother's plane flying overhead and then crashing in the dream sequence where Charlie's mother and Claire are angels telling Charlie the baby must be saved. As you hear the plane crash, a dove flies out of the forest towards Charlie and out over the ocean.
No way can I pick up all these tiny, myriad details in one viewing. So I'm happy to see episodes multiple times.
I'm hooked. I'm addicted. I can watch episodes of "Lost" repeatedly and they never fail to entertain.
As was stated in the post above, each episode is dense. For instance, because I never cared for Shannon, I didn't watch her flashbacks too carefully. This weekend I finally discovered for myself, though I'd heard it from other fans, that Shannon's father was killed in the crash that crippled Jack's then-patient-later-wife-now-ex. I realized that only because I saw Jack in the background of the scene where Shannon and her hellish stepmother are being given the news by another doctor.
I also finally saw the Dharma sign on the shark, and heard the sound of Mr. Eko's brother's plane flying overhead and then crashing in the dream sequence where Charlie's mother and Claire are angels telling Charlie the baby must be saved. As you hear the plane crash, a dove flies out of the forest towards Charlie and out over the ocean.
No way can I pick up all these tiny, myriad details in one viewing. So I'm happy to see episodes multiple times.
Reading is freedom.
The mind soars, no earthly cares,
no limitations.
A Maggers Haiku, 2005
Years ago my mother used to say to me... "In this world, Elwood, you can be oh so smart or oh so pleasant."
Well, for years I was smart.
I recommend pleasant.
You may quote me.
Elwood P. Dowd
RIP, Eko.
Scott Hajek
[i]"A beer right now would sound good, but I'd rather drink one than listen to it."[/i]
Who's the new "babe" of the moment with the golfer guy? Why haven't we seen them before? I know that it's a way to introduce new blood into the cast, but why now?
Scott Hajek
[i]"A beer right now would sound good, but I'd rather drink one than listen to it."[/i]
Lisa Wrote:I don't see why we need new people when they can't even focus on the ones we already know. :mad:
Dare we hope that the new people are the "red shirts" of LOST? Maybe the new "babe" will end up as shark bait and "golfing guy" is used by the black 'smoke to get out of a sand trap. Could "golfing guy's" name be "Wedge"?
Scott Hajek
[i]"A beer right now would sound good, but I'd rather drink one than listen to it."[/i]
Poor Eko, beat to death by the dark cloud. But only after it toyed with him, trying to make Eko admit that he was a bad person. I know that Eko had done some very nasty things in his past, but as he said, "I did what I had to do to survive."
Now what does every one think of Jack's newest dilema? Does Jack operate and let his captor live, or let him die on the table? And is the tape played a trap for Jack, or do the Others want a new leader? Oooohhh an ethical dilema of major amplitude!
Now what does every one think of Jack's newest dilema? Does Jack operate and let his captor live, or let him die on the table? And is the tape played a trap for Jack, or do the Others want a new leader? Oooohhh an ethical dilema of major amplitude!
EWMAN