As mysteries pile up, 'Lost' risks getting just that ontv
TV Goddess
Published: October 13, 2006
Last Modified: October 13, 2006 at 06:50 AM
There is a fine line between a brilliant, nuanced mystery series that peels back its layers one by one until the big reveal (think "Veronica Mars," season 1) and one that does the opposite: continues adding layers until viewers can barely discern what it is they're trying to solve (Fox's "Vanished").
"Lost," ABC's mega-hit now in its third season, has been walking that line since it began. From the creator of "Alias" -- which walked that line well for two seasons and then lost its way -- "Lost" began with some fairly straightforward mysteries: Where are these plane crash survivors? And how are they all connected?
Since then, however, layers upon layers have been added to the initial mysteries (Who are the others? What is in the hatch? How many hatches are there? What do those numbers mean? How did Stephen King find a publisher who will deliver his book all the way to the island?), sucking some viewers in but leaving others behind.
For every step "Lost" takes forward toward a solution to the big questions, it takes about five steps backward. This is the type of series that could go on forever, with the creators and writers adding more and more mysteries until the initial story line is almost indiscernible in the muck. It doesn't seem very far from that point right now.
And the show's continued success makes this scenario even more likely, as network executives will want the show to keep going, forcing extended stories that lead nowhere. The incessant flashback format the series has adopted makes this not only possibly, but also quite probable.
This critic could be wrong, of course, and "Lost" might end up being a television masterpiece unlike anything before. It could easily happen if producers don't let executives or fans dictate what's to come. After all, "Lost" certainly has a fantastic ensemble cast, mostly terrific dialogue and, obviously, compelling story lines.
But without a precise timeline -- at least in the creators' brains -- for when the mystery will be solved, it's easier to keep adding layers to the plot than to offer solutions, or even clues, about the mysteries that are already there.
Given the difficult goings, and the possibility of immense frustration if the end resolution isn't satisfactory -- and, really, with all of the hype and the "extended experiences" and the online guessing games, how can it ever live up? -- fans might be smarter to tune out now, and wait. Wait until the series is over, observe how those who kept watching the series react to the big ending, and decide whether to finish it out on DVD.
If it does turn out to be the best show in the history of mankind -- and the masses and most critics certainly think it has the potential -- it will be more fun to watch it all at once, DVD-style, anyway.
And if it doesn't? Well, viewers who put down the Kool-Aid and stepped out of the haze early on will look awfully smart compared with those who wasted four, five, six or more years on a mystery that ended with a thud.
• TV reviewer and Portland, Ore.-based freelance journalist DeAnn Welker can be reached at deann@tvgoddess.com. To read more of her TV ramblings, visit www.tvgoddess.com.
Friday Night Lights
7 p.m. Tuesday, NBC: Sure, this is the heartfelt drama you heard about, but it also has high-caliber writing and acting -- and it was created by Peter Berg, the director of the excellent film of the same name. If this isn't prematurely canceled before this episode airs, new viewers should tune in to watch the Tigers' coach go to great lengths to keep his players together in this divided football town.
What About Brian
9 p.m. Monday, ABC: Almost no one watched the first short season of this charming series about a charming bachelor (Barry Watson) and his charming group of friends. Smart viewers will watch this episode -- when Marjorie is supposed to get married to Brian's best friend, Adam. But of course, an encounter with Brian the night before has her questioning everything.
Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip
9 p.m. Monday, NBC: Yes, the title is too long. Sure, the premise is far-fetched (a zealous Christian successful -- and dating -- in Hollywood? Ha!). And the comedy elements aren't quite clicking yet. But the dialogue is witty and wonderful, the acting is superb, and the chemistry is palpable. It's one of the few hour-long shows this season that is so quick and entertaining that it feels more like 15 minutes. If that's not enough, the talented and lovely Lauren Graham of "Gilmore Girls" plays herself and the host of the show within a show this week.
Veronica Mars
8 p.m. Tuesday, CW: Critics and a loyal following adore this show, but it seems no one else is ready to commit. Well, this week's plot involves a pot-smoking sorority house mom, an athlete losing his playbook -- and possibly his scholarship -- and Veronica's ongoing love triangle between two adorable college boys: her boyfriend, Logan (Jason Dohring), and newcomer Piz (Chris Lowell). Weevil is back this week, too, helping Keith solve crime. There's something for everyone.
One Tree Hill
8 p.m. Wednesday, CW: Strangely enough, this far-fetched teenage drama (starring actors who are very much NOT teenagers) is one of the more entertaining shows on the air. It's pure fluff even when trying to deal with serious topics (teen pregnancy, for instance, becomes a guessing game: Which of the two teenage main characters is pregnant?). This week, that teen pregnancy becomes public knowledge, and a mother struggles with her addiction as her husband grows closer to his college girlfriend, with whom he also has a son. A teenage husband continues to have a wandering eye. And those are just the highlights. There's much more soap and candy to come.
-- DeAnn Welker Lost
airs at 8 p.m. Wednesdays on ABC, Channel 13
Web: abc.go.com/primetime/lost
