Lost!

[Frikitiki]

we knew they were shooting from the hip. Michael Emerson was only supposed to be a short part and ended up being a regular and one of the most intriguing characters on the show.

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by Frikitiki

we knew they were shooting from the hip. Michael Emerson was only supposed to be a short part and ended up being a regular and one of the most intriguing characters on the show.

I stick with what I said earlier:

Originally Posted by Me

This also speaks to what is bothering CP...I do think that sometimes along the way they've had to say, "gee, we implied this because we wanted to go here and now we need to add these things in order for it ultimately happen and make sense."

I would add that there have been wrenches thrown into their plan (i.e. Micael Emerson) that they have decided to incorporate into the story and/or had to explain them away. I also think the idea that they had planned the story from the begining doesn't mean they had the entire story fleshed out; it merely means that they had their story arc, they knew the story they wanted to tell. The specifics have been fleshed out as circumstances changed and the story was being told.




eta: Of course now I could just sum up my thoughts as, "I agree with GD."

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

Walt is the best evidence that the writers made all this up as they went along.

Any show that knows they are going to be reshooting the same scenes over and over again, even 5 years down the line, is NOT going to cast a child. He couldn't even stay young enough to last more than a short while. As a result, we may have a split timeline but we are not going to see Walt and Michael in LA X, unless they go the soap opera route and cast the role with a new kid.

It's a bummer, since I liked their story a lot.

The writers vehemently argue that they always had a story to tell and that they knew it would take them 6 seasons to do it (and in fact told the network that at the begining).

Having said that, I don't think having Walt in the original story means anything (re them not knowing where it's going). The sideways timeline is clearly not a continuation of what would have happened had the plane never crashed, things vary like Shannon, Michael and Claire not being on the plane. There is every possibility that in the sideways timeline Walt never existed in Michael's reality.

[Ghoulish Delight]

I'm sure it's a little of both. They may have had the broad strokes of the story arc in mind, however the details of how they were going to get from A to B had to at the very least have a lot of flexibility built in.

Among other things, it would have been lunacy to plan for a 5 year show (that was their original plan, stretched to 7 after it proved successful) and not have a way to deal with unexpected things like cast members leaving, popularity waning, unexpected popularity of what they thought would be a minor character.

The way I figure it, they had big picture things like, "The island is moving in time", "there was a society of scientists there beforehand", and "the island is a complex analogy for the greek concepts of hades and the river styx" or whatever it turns out being. But the details of who is working with whom, or against whom, or the mechanics behind how and why the island might be moving in time would by necessity had to have remained fluid.

[BarTopDancer]

They always said they had an ending and a 5 year plan (it was supposed to end last year but the writers strike extended it). What's left as filler is up to debate if they had that planned out. I think some of it was, but a lot of it seems like they got distracted by a shiny object and followed it a different direction.

[lashbear]

LOST Series 6 starts in Australia tonight - although they are showing TWO episodes back to back. Maybe we'll catch up to you guys one of these days.

[bewitched]

Until you west coasters have a chance to watch I'll just say:


"What?!"

and

"Noooo...not Sayid!"



And something to think about that Michael Emerson said in an interview:

"What if you saw what the show meant, but couldn't recognize it?"




Until tomorrow....

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by bewitched

"Noooo...not Sayid!"

errr, that's kind of a spoiler, no?

[bewitched]

Not in the way you think, it's more of a commentary. So...don't worry, the comment shouldn't ruin anything.


I also posted above a "cryptic spoiler" that Michael Emerson gave which makes me REALLY scratch my head.

[Stan4dSteph]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

errr, that's kind of a spoiler, no?

Err, why are you opening the thread before you've seen this week's episode? Seems pretty basic to me.