mitch Wrote:If you have no taste for exposition, this is not the show for you.
Exposition in drama is that part of the story that provides background about the motivations, conflicts, setting, major characters and so forth. I like exposition (especially about characters), provided it is also in a PLOT that moves along.
That's sort of why I keep sticking with "Lost."
At the same time, "plot" is
essential. When the plot does not progress, viewers become frustrated -- no matter how great the exposition may be. Most often these types of shows get cancelled (like "Daybreak," for example), at least prime-time shows. Sometimes these "expostion" dramas may be a HIT for awhile BEFORE they get cancelled, like "Twin Peaks." However, even Twin Peaks focused too much on "expostion" and not enough on plot, and it eventually got cancelled, too.
The writers of the show get frustrated, too. That's why the writers of LOST asked for a solid commitment on WHEN the show would end. That way they know how much to advance the plot each week so that it eventually has an ENDING.
And a purpose.
Some of the "exposition" DOES have a purpose. Some of it is just FILLER. What I'm saying is that it seems the longer I watch, the more it seems like I'm seeing "filler" instead of informatiion that actually advances the plot toward an ultimate conclusion.
In "regular" television primetime drama, this isn't normally a problem. Every show has a beginning, a middle, and an end -- though there may be some "exposition" that continues from week to week and year to year.
"Lost" needs to balance the exposition and plot development more equally, in my opinion. As a regular watcher, I am free to hope that things WILL become more balanced so that my frustration levels will decrease and I can begin to enjoy the show again. I am certainly free to express my disappointment.
I do not expect all of the LOST audience to share my disappointment.
But some do.