Lost Without Lost

The second series of Lost has just finished its initial run here in the UK, and once again I'm left feeling exasperated and thrilled in equal measure. The show's success is well-deserved. The programme-makers have expertly kept us enthralled for two series now, but I wonder how much longer they can keep this level of intrigue up. I love the show, but I've stopped watching a couple of times: once in the middle of series one and quite early on in series two. But I keep coming back. When the show first started I thought it was a mini-series. Hah! Mini! When it became clear that this show wasn't going to give up any of its secrets by the end of the first series my interest dropped off. But I came back to it because it so finely constructed, so entertaining. And it's got Evangeline Lilly in it, which is always a good reason to keep watching. Now I have to sit and stew for who knows how long, waiting for series three. Waiting for answers. If I was running the production I would be looking to wrap things up by the end of the third series. Then the show would go out on a big big high. But then, the American TV networks don't work like that. How many great US TV shows have been spoiled by that "one series too far"?
JJ Abrams said in a recent interview that they had an ending for Lost in place for the end of series two (I think), but the success of the show prompted a big rewrite and extension of the entire plot. Let's hope that ending is not too far off.


Marlo said…
It will go five years. The network will demand it.

A show needs to hit 100 episodes for the big syndication money, and if it has any chance of getting that far with decent numbers, the nets insist on it.

Of course, often the axe falls in your back the second you wrap your 100th episode, no matter the quality or popularity of the series.

They can count on 100 eps to tell their story, but they'd be fools to expect 101.

Popular posts from this blog

Music for Writing


"Hope is found": Star Wars Episode VII The Force Awakens