A question I have about Lost and its endings; Why did it end? It was rich with all elements that make a show interesting. If it was ratings, then why does Star Trek endure (not to knock ST for I am a mild Trekie myself)? I believe Lost could have gone on for years entertaining us. Slowly creating more mystery, answering existing mysteries without giving the whole show away – eg MIB’s real name, introducing new characters and reintroducing old characters and so on. What’s 16 hours a year in a life when we’re being entertained?
TV shows often attempt to go out on good footing. Seinfeld, Cheers and MASH are good examples; however these shows had run the course. Lost appeared to be in its prime. Was the idea to kill it before it got old? There seemed to be so much more to explore whether it be science fiction, the mythology or the characters; People can grow even when they’re old.
I understand as it is argued, the answers to many of the mysteries were presented directly or indirectly. The ones that were answered directly ALWAYS created more mystery and the indirectly answered ones are obviously debatable. The argument to me, boils down to — was/is the production genius or bulls–t? A dichotomy..imagine that, the essence of the show! Even in summation the argument can lead to more conjecture.
We had a good thing here and now it’s gone; now time will be the ultimate judge as to whether the show was really that good. I think it will say it was, but there is always room for improvement,
There is a concept called synergy and in the TV program called Lost, I think the concept found an application. What’s wrong with thought provoking TV when it’s well presented, anyway? I say absolutely…..nothing!
The adventure continues…