Take your seats, class: We're picking up the second class in week 4 of EW University, as Doc Jensen continues to explore the cultural influences in Lost. Check out our gallery of 15 Must-Answer 'Lost' Mysteries, or jump ahead and test your knowledge with our final exam on season 5. Stick around all summer long for future EW University courses on Quentin Tarantino and more.
'Lost': Balancing the scales
Throughout the 1990s, cult TV began morphing into something more than just a category of brilliant-but-canceled-yet-fondly-recalled programs. "Cult" became a sensibility, made sexy by the rise of "alternative culture" and made marketable by a paradigm shift toward demo-targeted niche marketing. David Lynch’s Twin Peaks (1990-1991) quickly went from phenomenon to joke, yet nonetheless proved that mainstream audiences were game if not hungry for adventurous, idiosyncratic visions — provided there was genuine vision involved. Chris Carter’s The X-Files (1993-2002) formalized the modern model of cult TV: a hard genre show anchored by accessible characters goes from a critics' darling watched by a devoted few to being embraced by many, although the show’s new big tent audience may not all agree on which elements are most compelling or should be emphasized by the show. Indeed, the phenomenal success of The X-Files introduced a new tension into the cult-TV conversation: finding and maintaining the proper balance of "mythology" (mysteries, historical backstory, big picture plot — the geeky, cerebral stuff) and the emotional human drama, which conventional wisdom says is usually favored by the late-adopting mainstream. Buffy The Vampire Slayer (1997-2003) found the perfect equilibrium, although to be clear, the exceedingly talented Joss Whedon never had the pressure of delivering a broad audience, as Buffy was produced for youth-targeting weblets The Wb and UPN. On the other hand, J.J. Abrams’ Alias (2001-2006) taxed the patience of its faithful and decidedly geeky constituents with incessant tweaking and rebooting designed to draw a larger audience that never came, resulting in a mixed creative legacy for the show that made Abrams a brand-name escapist auteur.
After the jump: Find out why having an end date is so important
By the time Lost launched in 2004, TV was primed for a new cult sensation. The X-Files and Buffy had both passed on; Alias was on the wane. David Chase’s The Sopranos (1999-2007), a different sort of cult phenom, had launched an era of creative risk-taking, while the Internet had provided a medium for cult TV tribes to gather, gab, buzz. And, sadly, the post-9/11 culture seemed ready to process its confusion and fear through the allegory of dark fantasy. Lost had the goods to fill the cult TV void, and more, elevate it into a pop phenom. But as much as geeks and non-geeks alike came to Lost wanting to love it, their enthusiasm was tempered with guardedness: recent history — specifically, the weak finishes of Twin Peaks, X-Files, and Alias – had taught them that mystery-mythology shows that demand a long-term commitment are gambles that don’t always pay off. And so it went that promptly upon seizing our imagination, Lost was under intense pressure to be responsible with it. Exec producers Abrams, Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse were constantly asked: Do you have a master plan? Do you know where all of this is headed? Or are you just making this up as you go along? For the creators, it must have been like a nervous new spouse getting after-the-fact cold feet and hectoring for a prenup agreement during the honeymoon. Another analogy, frequently used by the producers themselves: the high-wire walker, traveling between two skyscrapers without a net, the audience below alternately cheering for him to succeed and bracing to see him fall — and maybe even expecting to see him fall.
Toward the close of Lost’s third season, with the wire-walking show smack in the middle between two towers and showing signs of teetering, the producers negotiated to end the series after three more (shorter) seasons. The move helped alleviate the anxiety of Lost loyalists and deserves to be applauded and imitated. The certainty of an end puts storytellers in the best possible position to realize an artistic vision and please the fans. Whether broadcast networks will embrace and replicate the Lost model remains to be seen; the example of 24 or Heroes — serialized dramas with more open-ended premises, comprised of shorter, closed-ended arcs — is more financially attractive. Regardless, the final, most critical stage of the Lost experiment is yet to come: the final season of the show — the last chapter in the sprawling epic novel that Lost has become — begins in six months. And when it does, cult TV will have come full circle, from brilliant shows that never wanted to end, to brilliant shows that do — and, hopefully, are better for it.
Extra credit viewing!
The following are examples of other really cool cult TV series. The ones in bold indicate shows with particularly strong Lost resonance. Wiseguy (1987-1990); Profit (1996); Nowhere Man (1995-1995); Veronica Mars (2004-2007)
Extra credit reading! Watchmen (1986-1987), the brilliantly conceived, intricately constructed graphic novel with a massive cult following. Its storytelling gambits — Easter eggs and flashbacks — have been emulated by Lost’s producers.
For discussion: What’s so wrong with "making it up as you go along?" Why do you think that idea spooks viewers so much? When producers say they have a "master plan," do you really believe them? Have the creative flame-outs of past cult TV series (Twin Peaks, Alias, and at present, Heroes) shaped your expectations or impacted your patience for serialized TV? Would you be more willing to commit to a long-term, multi-year serialized saga from the get-go if it launched with an announced end date?
For more 'Lost' EW U:
'Lost': The cult of "cult-TV" (Part 1)
'Lost': 15 Must-Answer Mysteries
EW U Final Exam: 'Lost' Season 5
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with making it up as you go along, but when you do that, there’s a bigger chance of leaving loose ends. I realize on this show-that’s bound to happen- but I think knowing “the end is near” (sniff), reduces the chance that a bunch of meaningless filler will air. Plus, you tend to appreciate something more when you know it will end soon. Just like Doc Jensen’s Lost analysis!!
I think what the great cult shows do is reinvent themselves each season, with a different thing to keep fans on the hook. It was true of Alias and Veronica Mars, while Nowhere Man had it’s arcs and a second season would have changed the game. Those series, plus LOST kept what was great, while at the same time changing a theme from season to season. Alias always had spy missions, Veronica Mars always had investigations, and Nowhere Man always had the search for elements in the Hidden Agenda photograph or people from Tom Veil’s past to search for in each episode.
One thing they had going for them was endings. Perhaps less than satisfying in Veronica Mars (though all arcs were wrapped up), but when the story is over, close the book.
Babylon 5 was cult and serialized tv at its best. Strazynski had a 5 year plan for the series from the start and wrapped up virtually every storyline. That is really the only show I can think of that the creator had the entire series mapped out from the start. Watching it over from the beginning is just as fun as the first time because you get to catch all the easter eggs and forshadowing of what will happen in future seasons.
I wouldn’t want to know an end date when the show started, but I wouldn’t mind it gaining one within it’s first season or two, IF it’s pretty good. I prefer to have more good TV to watch than less, so if, say, Fringe were to decide to end after 2 more seasons, but would’ve gone on for 4 if they hadn’t set an end date, I’d probably be annoyed. Unless they started to suck, of course.
There’s nothing wrong with Alias’ or any other show’s reinventions. Something has to differentiate the seasons other than the year.
Alias’ season 4 major reinvention in story arcs and settings actually boosted ratings… by a lot thanks to a little bit of Lost, a little bit of scheduling changes and a whole crapload of promotional material.
And then ABC smoked crack and moved the show to pre-Grey’s Anatomy Thursdays to see if ABC actually had a shot at Thursdays. It didn’t work, Michael Vartan left as a series regular, Jennifer Garner got pregnant, Alias got its lowest ratings and ABC decided to make the fifth season its final and cut the season by 5 episodes for Jennifer’s maternity leave.
So Alias basically had to sum it all up with 7 episodes left.
And they aired the 2-hour series finale on a Monday…where it has never aired on before, making Alias’ grand total of moving nights and time to 4.
Props for ABC giving it a chance, but boo on not nurturing it.
Check please!
I marathoned Alias recently and it is the first box set I have ever given up on before I got to the end. I quit soon after the start of season 3. Much as I enjoyed the mythology, what kept me watching initially was that the relationships between characters had been well-established and down-to-earth, and during action sequences the peril felt real. Season 3 felt plodding and many of the lead characters that were our anchor had disappeared. I watched an episode from the final season and was pretty horrified by how much it had changed. Life-threatening situations were made light of, and the subtle characterisation were gone in favour of wisecracks and shouty arguments. Sidney had a baby. Her boyfriend had faked his own death. The whole thing had descended into farce. (cont)
A show that seems to have taken the opposite trajectory recently is Supernatural – a cult TV show in both the modern and old-fashioned sense of the word. It started as a fun but forgettable episodic thriller, but as it has gone on the storytelling has become increasingly sophisticated, the mythology has come to the forefront and the writers have been consistently brave in their decisions regarding the lead characters. Best of all, the writers have made it clear that they only want five seasons, making next season the last. The network have expressed a desire to keep it going into season six, in light of the show’s increasing ratings, and it will be interesting to see if they are willing to learn the lessons of Lost and let Supernatural finish while still in its prime.
Dark Angel, the first season, is right up there with Battlestar and Lost in my book. It was for a younger audience, true, but so was Star Wars, and we all know how much Star Wars rocked the universe.
Great analysis, Doc.
That would’ve been cool.
I don’t agree that Twin Peaks ended on a “weak” note. The last episode rocked my world.
The whole “red room sequence” should have been more inspirational in the whole infamous “Ben’s smokemonster vortex” sequence in Dead is Dead.
I don’t believe there’s anything wrong with a show “making it up as it goes along” (however I’m glad Lost is not doing that). The reason people use that term is actually quite clear: they are using it as a derogatory term to put the show down. It might be because they can’t follow the complex plot, it might be because the way the story unfolds isn’t the way they would have wanted, or it could simply be that they wish their own favorite show was in the spotlight, so the more negative press for another hit show the better. The point is that “making it up as it goes” has become a derogatory term for some reason, and people use it as a means of trashing what they don’t like.
A show like Heroes started off with so much potential that many were comparing it too Lost. What happened after the first season was that the show had no sense of direction. The creators were clearly making it up as they went along. You never got the sense that you had to keep watching to find out how it ends because there doesn’t seem to be any push toward that ultimate goal. Lost has succeeded because from the beginning you new that the overall plot was leading towards something, even if you what you thought was the goal of the series changed (ex: getting off the island – been there, done that already). A story that continues on and on forever with no end in sight like Heroes can only be compared with one other genre: soap operas.
I rarely start watching new shows anymore. Why start watching them when their chance of success is less than 20%. Look at all the shows ABC has tried advertising for during LOST and usually airing after LOST. None have made it. They did give a few of them an ending, but I feel robbed afterwards. It is ashame LOST is ending. I hope ABC does as it should and commission another show from this creative group to follow in the footsteps of LOST. I would watch it. I am also hoping ABC does a final show to talk with the creators of LOST to get insight into what was left out, what was changed due to actors leaving etc….to see where the story could have went instead.
Shows that ‘make it up as they go along’ only work when they are episodic or set in the ‘real world’ so they don’t have to keep thinking up crazy things to surprise us. Anything serialised or with fantasy elements has to have a grand plan, or lengthy build-ups of suspense collapse into anti-climax, and the only way to sustain pace is to add ever-escalating plot twists to try and keep it interesting. The other problem is that bigger ideas tend not to be explored. The longer a show runs without clear direction the more the ideas expressed start to get muddled and contradictory. A grand plan is not just about story, it is about knowing exactly WHY that particular show needs to be made apart from earning ad revenue. ‘Cult’ shows succeed because the maker’s ‘vision’ allows it to transcend its marketing pitch. Their success is sustained when the makers do not lose sight of this central vision but if every tweak is only designed to keep it running a little longer that loss is inevitable.
Networks, especially the big 4, are the ones most responsible for ruining series like these. Buffy could never have survived even 2 seasons on Fox, and ABC pressures on David Lynch sank Twin Peaks. Lynch never wanted there to be a reveal of who killed Laura.
I agree with you. Cult shows like LOST work better when there is an “end in sight” they can write and prepare for. I always appreciated Buffy for the way each season had a sort of 3 act perfection to them. Its too bad Joss Whedon wasnt given the chance with Dollhouse.