Why We Can't Figure Out This Show.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The writers of Lost made a huge mistake. I'm sure, at the time, it seemed like a good idea, a casual jab in the rib of hardcore fans and a clever little 'easter egg.'
I'm referring, of course, to Hurley's appearance in Jin's backstory.
While this was an ultimately cool little aside to feature, I think that this moment was almost single-handedly responsible for the EXPLOSION of conjecture and theorizing that surround this show.
Before the Hurley/Jin connection appeared, Lost was a sci-fi mystery with heavy dramatic elements. It was confusing, and fun, and full of secrets that kept us all guessing and made for interesting surprises down the road.
However, the appearance of Hurley on the tv in Jin's story 'raised the stakes' for a lot of us. We went from viewing LOST as a show with mysterious goings-on to viewing LOST as a PUZZLE that has to be solved. I don't think that was ever the creators' intent from the get-go. The show was never intended to be 'solvable' - as a weekly episodical, writing is constantly occuring, plot points change - this isn't a game of Clue, it's a television show (re: business investment) and far more significant plot points will be controlled by things that happen in THE REAL WORLD (focus groups, contract negotiations, fiming hiccups) than onscreen development.
Iit seems that a good portion of people who enjoy theorizing on these boards are under the impression that their 'pet theory' will pan out in such a way that will reinforce the OBVIOUS LINK between the show and their second-favorite science fiction novel or their favorite episode of Transformers. However, these theories, while relying heavily on logic, seem to ignore the basic fact that, in order to be succesful, Lost MUST engage its viewers - not present with a 'new version of something they've heard before.' ESPECIALLY if the proposed 'source material' is from an in-genre sci-fi work less than ten years old.
Here's the thing - what Lost has showed us so far has been surprising. Sure. It's, for the most part, been full of twists and turns. It also, contrary to popular belief, has NOT been predictable whatsoever. I doubt anybody honestly thought, prior to the reveal, that the Black Rock was an old boat, or that "The Others" would troll up to the raft in a fishing boat, talking like Deliverance extras - and THESE are the things that make Lost so surprising and cool.
Lost is a great show, but it's not made ONLY for internet weirdos like us. The average viewer is not going to be freeze-framing, motion capturing, and dissecting ad nauseam. They're going to be watching the show, and enjoying it. If something is hidden so deeply that it needs to be freeze-framed, googled, or played in slow-motion to catch, I hate to say it, but it's probably not there.
Lost caught on so quickly and so strongly because it's a dramatic sci-fi type of show that still revolves far more heavily around CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT than it does around bang-pow-whizz-boom action. That's the formula that got them where they are today. It had nothing to with hiding secrets deep within subtext - it had to do with making an engaging show. Unfortunately, most theories I read, while logically sound, would NOT make for an engaging television show. They'd make for a sullen retread of a previously used idea.
So, in summation: Lost is NOT Twin Peaks. Lost is NOT Fight Club. Lost is a weekly episodical with WONDERFUL writing and a lot of twists and turns, but I believe it ends there. I think a lot of us, if we keep theorizing so extravagantly, are setting ourselves up for supreme disappointment if and when the circumstances are revealed.
)
If you haven't noticed, I love to analyze. For instance...
