Lost: Season 5 (1 Viewer)

[Joseph DeMartino]

No discussion of TV and theatrical promos/trailers is complete without mention of the worst, most "spoilerish" and most counter-productive trailer in the history of studio stupidity, the trailer for the Mel Gibson/Renee Russo film Ransom which gave away what should have been a major, shocking and original plot twist.

Compared to that the Lost promos have been models of discretion.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Steve Y]

Yes, that was infuriating! Infamous trailer. A number of directors (including Robert Zemekis, who steadfastly defended his spoilery "What Lies Beneath" trailer) believe wholeheartedly that most audiences want a map of the twists and turns before they enter the theater (or turn on the TV). I don't know what's more depressing - that it is commonly believed, or that it might actually be true!

 

[Holadem]

Oh it is true. Discussing this very topic with friends has made as much clear to me. The more they know the better. One explicitly said so, when I got upset at a spoiler in a Heroes promo: "knowing what happens" made her look forward to the episode even more.

I have never met anyone outside of these boards who was upset by spoilers, in trailers, promos or otherwise. I'd say the opposite is true. Heck, a guy at work would see a movie, others would huddle around him and listen to him tell the story pretty much from beginning to end before deciding to see it (meanwhile I am a few cubes away covering my ears.)

Zemekis has it exactly right...

--
H

 

[Scott-S]

I admit, I am one of of the few here that doesn't mind spoilers for the most part.

Don't get me wrong, Knowing the major twist of "The Sixth Sense" would have not been good, but for most TV shows, I like to know enough to look forward to the episode.

I get to hear about Lost on Thursdays (the cubical discussions) before I get to see the episode (I watch it on Thursday nights) and it actually gets me excited to see it for myself.

Once again, I have to be different. LOL

 

[Josh Dial]

I won't post the interview, since it might contain sploilers (I myself only skimmed it every so briefly), but Michael Emerson said the season finale will, and I quote, have viewers "eating their own souls."

On second though, here's the interview: Lost's Ben: The Finale Will Make You Eat Your Soul - E! Online just don't blame me/click it if you don't want spoilers (again, I'm not sure there are any in there, just playing it safe!).

 

[Albert_M]

I'm sorry if this point has been made, but it seems obvious any attempt to change history only really ends up being part of the "original" history that created what enevitibly/ultimately happened to begin with.

Not saying that I am not really enjoying the season, but it seems very clear that they are creating the future that they would ultimately experience.

And I agree that Locke is going to "kill" the myth of Jacob.

As usual Locke and Jack are greatly determined that they are right and set out to follow through on their thoughts and end up being wrong.

We know that there is a Jacob and we know that attempts to change history really end up being part of the original timeline.

 

[Josh Dial]

I think it's possible that Cuse/Lindelof know that it's obvious, and are indeed going out of their way to make it obvious, so as to pull the ultimate "what the hell?!" moment in the last few minutes of the season finale. It's almost a scenerio of "they know we know that they know we know..."

 

[TravisR]

I don't mind reading the synopsis or cast info that you'd see in the listing on a cable guide but I'd never want to know that "It's actually a flashforward and Jack and Kate are off the island!" or "Ben makes the island dissapear!"-type of major events.

 

[Steve Y]

This has been my main problem with the end of this season. The audience is suddenly supposed to consider the possibility that averting the original crash is actually possible. After everything they've set up this season, I find it difficult to remotely invest in this possibility, but I feel as an audience that we're being asked to consider it quite seriously.

If I'm wrong, and they do just that, I'm going to be pretty surprised.

 

[BrettB]

I'm in Oklahoma and it looks like there is a really good chance that the weather totally fubars this tonight. :frowning:

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Some of the characters are supposed to believe this. That belief shapes their actions. I don't think the producers necessarily expected to audience to believe it.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Steve Y]

The writers have been pretty good about writing doubts and alternate possibilities into the dialogue, especially in the past couple of seasons. Even if the producers want the audience to be several steps ahead of its main characters, I don't think it's the best way to feel connected to them as the finale approaches.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

When the audience knows things that the characters don't, it is called "dramatic irony". It can actually add to the tension (and the connection to the characters), since you know a Bad Thing is about to happen when the characters don't. Every horror film in the world has used this when someone approaches the door to a supposedly safe room, while we know the killer is lurking behind it.

Different strokes and all that. I don't have a problem with how they've handled the whole thing this season.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Joseph Young]

In the case of LOST, the realization (in "The Variable") that people might act as variables to change the course of events, was treated like a revelation and contained, as far as I can tell, no sense of dramatic irony. If anything, on a basic level, the writers want the audience to ask themselves, 'could this really work?' but one thing the writer's AREN'T saying is whether the plan is bunk or not. We simply don't know that for sure. In that sense, we have no more information than the characters do.

The genesis of Jack's plan was handled, from a dramatic sense, like a potentially game changing revelation that raises some uncertain possibilities, given all the information we had before. All it took was a a brief, dramatic speech/reversal by post Ann Arbor Faraday. The character deeply opposed to Jack's plan (Kate) is open to the possibility that preventing the Oceanic crash places her in L.A. in custody of an Air Marshall. The character working with Jack to detonate the bomb (Sayid) has a very alive Nadya waiting for him in L.A., if the Oceanic flight doesn't crash. This tells me that characters other than Jack have seriously considered the possibility that his plan might work.

So yeah, I'm not necessarily seeing irony, just a lot of misdirection and uncertainty. Nothing new for LOST.

 

[Joe_H]

In case people didn't know (I had no idea) there's a recap episode on before the new one.

 

[todd s]

Can someone tell me who the actor is that is plays Jacob
.

Thanks!

 

[Steve Y]

I know what dramatic irony is, but I don't see any here. Agree to disagree.

 

[TonyD]

Mark Pellegrino

 

[Steve Y]

 

[Joe_H]

You might recognize him as:


Paul on Dexter.


That's where I knew him from.