LOST has achieved somewhat of a cult-icon status. Those who have not been following the show since episode one are hesitant to delve into the LOST experience, while those who have eagerly await every Tuesday night.
To be honest, participating in LOST, and it truly is a participatory experience, requires a lot of time and a lot of active viewing. Every episode of LOST is a breeding ground for discussion afterwards. The writers also leave subtle clues that a casual watcher would miss. LOST requires effort. Those who fail to offer that quite often find that LOST is a disappointing show.
In 2004, this method of storytelling was, for the most part, rare. While shows would occasionally have story arcs that carried over into the next episode, there were hardly any shows that centered their focus on a truly serialized structure.
In addition to ending the show with remarkable cliffhangers, LOST used, to great effect, the technique of flashbacks. Every episode was focused on a particular character, exploring their backstories as they applied to current predicaments. The flashbacks were more often-than-not revelatory. We were surprised to find out just who our characters really were. Often times, we found ourselves looking forward to what we would find out about our favorite characters' histories more than the problems they faced on the island. This was a defining characteristic of LOST.
J.J. Abrams (currently Hollywood's Wunderkind) and Damon Lindelof had grabbed onto of this style proved to Hollywood that it could be successful. Other shows picked up on this and attempted to follow suit, to varying degrees of success (I will review them in later posts).
Don't forget to check out LOST: A Cultural Phenomenon, Part III, where I explore the causes for LOST'S decline in popularity.
Until next time...
