Lost, Season 2

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

I don't see it. I also don't think Locke is so much as concerned that others percieve Jack as the leader. It seemed to be more personal than that. There is something deeper in there. Like I said, he has had numerous fits/outbursts like that. He is also big into being his "own man", especially after being confined by the wheel chair for so long. I think it's a bit more complicated than what it appears and, remember, we really haven't seen all that much of Locke.

as usual, I agree entirely.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Henry will prove to be the elusive "he" referred to by the unbearded Mr Friendly in his conversation with Ethan.

Could you help an Ardent out and refresh me on the conversation?

[Raiders Army]

The unbearded Mr. Friendly and Ethan had a conversation when Claire was in her son's "room" in another hatch. Mr. Friendly (who took Walt and warned Jack to stay on his side of the island) told Ethan that "he" wouldn't be happy with the turn of events...or something like that.

I've been drinking a a little so this may not be too accurate, but it's about 69% accurate.

[Draft Dodger]

yeah. he wanted to know why Ethan had brought Claire there instead of just making a list as he had been asked. Ethan said that he had to bring her because they figured out he was an imposter.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

yeah. he wanted to know why Ethan had brought Claire there instead of just making a list as he had been asked. Ethan said that he had to bring her because they figured out he was an imposter.

Thanks. I was watching, but had an old guy in the office tossing out comments every two minutes on the show...which made watching...difficult.

I originally thought you were referring to the the meeting of Jack with the fake bearded guy.

Here's what I don't get:

The others want the baby. The others know where Claire and the baby are. Why, uhm, I don't know, don't they go get the baby?

[Raiders Army]

Maybe they needed a baby from birth for some reason instead of a month old?

[Rizon]

Originally Posted by rexallllsc

The Shield has what - about 15-20? No breaks unless there's a holiday. I think 24 does something similar as well.

.

It seems like there's only 8. And it ends within a month. Then a couple of months go by. Then Rescue Me comes on for 9 episodes and ends in a month. Then a couple of months go by. Then Nip/Tuck comes on for 11 episodes and ends in two months.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

Thanks. I was watching, but had an old guy in the office tossing out comments every two minutes on the show...which made watching...difficult.

I watched one episode around Thanksgiving with my two sisters - one of them hadn't seen an episode since season 1, one of them had never seen a single episode. I could NOT get them to shut up with the questions, and won't repeat that experience EVER.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

I watched one episode around Thanksgiving with my two sisters - one of them hadn't seen an episode since season 1, one of them had never seen a single episode. I could NOT get them to shut up with the questions, and won't repeat that experience EVER.

I tore my roommate up this morning when he provided a rather horrible explanation for something regarding Lost.

I don't recall the argument, but I remember saying, "Get back to me when you rewatch the first season."

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

Maybe they needed a baby from birth for some reason instead of a month old?

I think they want all children. Remember they took the two kids that survived from the tail end, they took Rousseau's daughter Alex, and then Walt. Maybe they are waiting until Claire's baby is no longer nursing and is healthy enough to be without her?

It seems apparent that they want children. My guess is that they are experimenting with ESP or something on them.

[Swaggs]

When the tail episode(s) were on, were they taking adults, too? Like were they trying to take Mr. Echo or were they trying to kill him?

[Bearcat729]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

Here's what I don't get:

The others want the baby. The others know where Claire and the baby are. Why, uhm, I don't know, don't they go get the baby?

Well Ethan did go back for her, and it didn't end up too well for him. Maybe that provided a little incentive for them not to go back.

[cthomer5000]

I thought it was the best episode in quite some time.

Ethan was now definitely in league with the people who took Walt. I wasn't so sure of this previously.

I agree that having Locke (over) react so quickly to what the Henry Gayle character said was a mistake. Would have been better as a slow-boiling situation, one that could explode at an inopportune time.

I think Ecko's visit was half confession, half intimidation.


I'm still frustrated by the groups lack of practical action in terms of day-to-day living.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I think they want all children. Remember they took the two kids that survived from the tail end, they took Rousseau's daughter Alex, and then Walt. Maybe they are waiting until Claire's baby is no longer nursing and is healthy enough to be without her?

That's a good explanation.

Originally Posted by Swaggs

It seems apparent that they want children. My guess is that they are experimenting with ESP or something on them.

At first, I was like okay. After thinking about it for a second, if they needed kids to experiment on, why not take children from the United States or Mexico? Not to minimize the loss of a child, but there are plenty taken from their parents right here in the United States.

Maybe it has something to do with the particular children they take. For example, we know Walt has some type of powers...at least telepathy to communicate with Shannon, possibly some reality-altering powers as well.

[Anthony]

so where did Ethan's powers come from? didn't he have like super strength in the 1st season?

Charlie killing him was one of the most retarded things that could have happen. shoulda been banished for that.

this 2nd season is crap. at least my expectations will be lowered when the series comes to an end.

[OldGiants]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

oh, I don't think they will plant the balloon. It's already there, from a real crash. But the real Gale is long gone - taken by the Others. This guy is just using that info to gain trust. They'll find the balloon wreckage and think he's telling the truth - and in fact give him more access to the secret stuff because they'll feel bad for torturing him.

That's a real possibility. The real Henry Gale could have died in the crash leaving his identity to be looted by the Others.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Hell Atlantic

so where did Ethan's powers come from? didn't he have like super strength in the 1st season?

Charlie killing him was one of the most retarded things that could have happen. shoulda been banished for that.

this 2nd season is crap. at least my expectations will be lowered when the series comes to an end.

Not sure if he had super strength. He was pretty tough and moved fast and kicked the crap out of Jack (in round 1), but the Others seem to be pretty deadly. Could be drugs or some such.

2nd Season certainly has been weaker. It's still better than almost anything else on TV now. Anna Lulu has brought the show down a bit and the flashbacks aren't nearly as interesting because, for the most part, they are just re-hashing what we already now. In the first season, almost each flashback was exciting because it was all new and fresh and it was fun to learn about the characters post-crash.

[Celeval]

I came on (watching the episode on DVR) thinking what was said about around Gale being an Other and having the balloon be there from the "real" Gale.

Also... with all the stuff about the craziness the previous group caught and Rousseau killed. Locke acting in a slightly irrational manner may be a precursor... he's definately the one most tightly tied to the island.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Celeval

Also... with all the stuff about the craziness the previous group caught and Rousseau killed. Locke acting in a slightly irrational manner may be a precursor... he's definately the one most tightly tied to the island.

Absolutely. He knows he's only walking because he's on the island, so he has a lot invested in it. I think he's a great character, but he seems pretty all-over-the-place recently.

[mgadfly]

Originally Posted by Celeval

I came on (watching the episode on DVR) thinking what was said about around Gale being an Other and having the balloon be there from the "real" Gale.

Also... with all the stuff about the craziness the previous group caught and Rousseau killed. Locke acting in a slightly irrational manner may be a precursor... he's definately the one most tightly tied to the island.

I think that ever since the episode where Locke lost his ability to walk temporarily, he has been more and more like he was in the flashbacks. He acted the same way outside the tour company that wouldn't let him go into the outback, he behaved that way with the security guard at his father's house after his dad stole his kidney, and there was a conversation with his girlfriend on the phone where he didn't like what she was saying and was kind of a whiney wimp.

Since being on the island, for the most part, he has been a calming force that comes off as being very secure/confident and a leader. However, each flashback for him has shown that this is not necessarily the normal social position he held in his previous life. Now that other strong personalities (Jack mainly, but also Sawyer, Kate, and Sayid) are starting to take his leadership role and tell him what to do, he's beginning to revert to his pre-island behavior.

And all that is to say that I think Locke might start acting in a destructive manner (as far as personal relationships go), but that this won't be the "infection" that everyone is worried about.

[kingfc22]

Finally caught up on my Tivo. However, it did cut off the last 3 minutes of the last episode when Gale and Locke were talking. Can I get a brief recap of what was said?


These breaks BLOW!!!

[samifan24]

Originally Posted by kingfc22

Finally caught up on my Tivo. However, it did cut off the last 3 minutes of the last episode when Gale and Locke were talking. Can I get a brief recap of what was said?


These breaks BLOW!!!

They were making small talk when Gale asked Locke why Locke "lets the doctor run the show" or something very similar. Locke left the room and locked the door and then went nuts and threw stuff all over the place. The camera cut to Gale, who had a smirk on his face as he heard the commotion.

[DeToxRox]

I just finished watching all 15 season 2 eps, oh man intense stuff.

Weak at times yeah but still damn solid. I think Ecko will resort back to his ol dways before the season ends, just not sure why yet.

Glad to be able to finally contribute to this thing.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by DeToxRoxDVHStyle

Glad to be able to finally contribute to this thing.

not as much as we are, I'm sure.

[Raiders Army]

I'm not surprised this has slipped so far down the importance ladder. This show is losing steam fast. I'll probably watch though.

[gottimd]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

I'm not surprised this has slipped so far down the importance ladder. This show is losing steam fast. I'll probably watch though.

Lately, there has been a movement by ABC brass and LOST production staff to educate the rerun averse masses on the necessity of the frequent, and painful, hiatuses. The question is, does this understanding help? Should frustrated viewers feel better about the "cool off", knowing it is necessary for the networks to calculate their advertising rates?

Are the business aspects of LOST more important than presenting the story in an optimal way? LOST is, after all, a cliff-hanger styled serial.

According to the approximately six-million viewers who have tuned out, permanently, the answer seems to be no. Sadly LOST has developed an attrition in season two that is enormous. If the trend were to continue on track through season three, the show will be history by season four.

Surely, part of the drop off is due to frustration over the answers given, and what is apparently an uneven season in a sense of quality. (While consistently good, there have been a few boners this year.) The problem is compounded when one of these elements is left to resonate around the water coolers.

In averages, Fox's 24 has now surpassed LOST in loyal viewers, (around 14 million to LOST's 12), and this success is attributed largely to the networks no rerun policies.

Of course the big question is, would LOST viewers do better with a longer hiatus between seasons, and no reruns?

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by gottimd

Of course the big question is, would LOST viewers do better with a longer hiatus between seasons, and no reruns?

Methinks yes.

[Toddzilla]

HOLY SHIT. Did you see the scene where the Korean Doctor stops Sun while she's walking her dog? He's explaining something (no spoilers) and when he refers to Jin, the subtitles said:

"You're husband..."

I could hear a million teachers and Quiksand screaming in disgust.

[Raiders Army]

Saw that too. Just shows you that even with the hiatus, they couldn't edit the show properly.

Overall, the episode was blah.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

Saw that too. Just shows you that even with the hiatus, they couldn't edit the show properly.

Overall, the episode was blah.

I'm starting to think the previews are more exciting than the actual episodes.

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I'm starting to think the previews are more exciting than the actual episodes.

I said the same thing last night.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by gottimd

According to the approximately six-million viewers who have tuned out, permanently, the answer seems to be no. Sadly LOST has developed an attrition in season two that is enormous. If the trend were to continue on track through season three, the show will be history by season four.

Not sure where you got the six million tuned out viewers from. Probably because there was a big dropoff in viewers for the last episode. It will be interesting to see if this week's numbers rebound.

Based on the ratings I've seen, Season 1 averaged 18.5 million viewers. Season 2 so far 20.5 million. 2Million more viewers this season. Now it took a while to build up fans in season 1, so an average accross episodes might not be fair.

A better comparison might be to review the episodes that aired roughly the same time of season (as things like Spring Break, holidays, etc... could affect ratings). In Season 1 the 5 episodes prior to March 1st (ep. 14-18) averaged 19million viewers. The same time period for season 2 (ep. 11-15) averaged 18.3 million viewers or a drop of only 700K.

So, in rough comparison to season 1 ... there hasn't been a real drop off in viewers yet. Yeah, some folks have tuned out, but others tuned in thanks to DVD's etc.

If we look at the Season 2 trend, neglecting episode 1 which was obviously a big draw: Episodes 2-6 averaged 21.7million, the 5 episodes prior to last nights' averaged 18.3 million. So there has been a potentially worrisome drop off of 3.4 million viewers this season, but nothing that airing a few strong episodes towards sweeps/year end can't correct.

Don't get me wrong ... I hate the constant delays. I'm not sure though that there's enough there to worry the ABC execs yet. The viewing audience for the episode before last night's were the lowest of the show's history, but I think we'll need a few more shows to see if that drop off will continue.

Ep Season 1 / Season 2 (viewers)
1. 18,653,000 // 23,469,000
2. 17,004,000 // 23,166,000
3. 16,539,000 // 22,377,000
4. 18,157,000 // 21,665,000
5. 16,824,000 // 21,381,000
6. 16,834,000 // 20,012,000
7. 18,729,000 // 21,868,000
8. 18,435,000 // 19,293,000
9. 17,639,000 // 21,541,000
10. 17,150,000 // 20,557,000
11. 18,882,000 // 19,126,000
12. 21,590,000 // 19,050,000
13. 20,807,000 // 18,737,000
14. 19,694,000 // 18,199,000
15. 19,480,000 // 16,432,000
16. 17,875,000 // TBD
17. 19,494,000 // TBD
18. 18,851,000 // TBD
19. 17,752,000 // TBD
20. 17,123,000 // TBD
21. 17,196,000 // TBD
22. 17,096,000 // TBD
23. 18,624,000 // TBD
24. 20,713,000 // TBD
25. 20,713,000 // TBD

ratings from lost-tv.com

[Cuckoo]

Originally Posted by moriarty

The viewing audience for the episode before last night's were the lowest of the show's history, but I think we'll need a few more shows to see if that drop off will continue.

Nice find on the numbers. I think going from their best audience yet in season 2's premiere to their worst audience yet this past week should set off some alarm bells for the folks at ABC, regardless of whether the drop continues. They were on a nice build from last year with the potential to be one of the bigger hits on television, and they've blown that so far. It seems to me it's either a drop in quality or the scheduling that are obvious answers. And in my humble opinion, both are a problem.

I enjoy the show and will continue to watch it (I consider myself hooked), but it doesn't hold nearly the same "excitement factor" for me that it did last year.

[Honolulu_Blue]

I thought it was a decent episode. Not too exciting, but not ridiculous. Henry Gale is great. I love all the scenes with him. I think they've handled this plotline excellently.

I'm as frustrated as the next guy/girl at the long hiatus between episodes, but it's how television works for the most part. Lost is still an excellent show, I look forward to it (whenever it's on), and it's a great way to spend an hour (well, usually around 42 minutes or so, since we TiVO it).

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

I thought it was a decent episode. Not too exciting, but not ridiculous. Henry Gale is great. I love all the scenes with him. I think they've handled this plotline excellently.

I'm as frustrated as the next guy/girl at the long hiatus between episodes, but it's how television works for the most part. Lost is still an excellent show, I look forward to it (whenever it's on), and it's a great way to spend an hour (well, usually around 42 minutes or so, since we TiVO it).

I'm not gay or anything if I agree with you twice on the same page, right?

[Daimyo]

I wonder how much (if any) ratings are affected by the near immediate availability of the episodes in iTunes? I haven't watched the last two episodes off the air because of conflicts with AI and just downloaded and watched them the next day.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Daimyo

I wonder how much (if any) ratings are affected by the near immediate availability of the episodes in iTunes? I haven't watched the last two episodes off the air because of conflicts with AI and just downloaded and watched them the next day.

I'm sure it does affect them somewhat. But I can't imagine over 500,000 viewers downloading the episode to their IPODs ... and even at 500,000 that's just a 2% drop. In other words, I don't think iTunes sales is signficant enough to move the ratings ... yet.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Cuckoo

I enjoy the show and will continue to watch it (I consider myself hooked), but it doesn't hold nearly the same "excitement factor" for me that it did last year.

same for me. i've lost interest, but basically since i've devoted a year and a half of my life to this story i'm just eager to see how it ends.

imagine that, though - being eager to see a show end, rather than having that "i wish this show would go on forever" feeling. that's very telling.

at this point in time i no longer care about the backstories, and some things are starting to become predictable:

1. what happens in the preview is an intentionally false representation of what actually happens in the upcoming episode
2. the hostage is obviously an Other, i think the writers were trying to string us along slowly with that but all bets were off when he made that comment to Locke involving letting Jack call all the shots. he will be killed prematurely, thus eliminating any chance of finding out answers and allowing the writers to let this nonsense drag out longer.

whatever, it's something my wife and I do together. we watch Lost, Sopranos and #1 Single so even if i don't care as much anymore it's now just "something to do with the wife" rather than a "must-see" event.

[Celeval]

Originally Posted by moriarty

I'm sure it does affect them somewhat. But I can't imagine over 500,000 viewers downloading the episode to their IPODs ... and even at 500,000 that's just a 2% drop. In other words, I don't think iTunes sales is signficant enough to move the ratings ... yet.

More a meta-question... but how are the ratings affected by TiVo? A good percentage of the people I know who watch Lost will TiVo it, not necessarily watching it live - at least partly due to wanting to rewatch it, rewind, etc. to pick up on the smaller things (like the symbols when the clock hit 0:00).

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Hell Atlantic

1. what happens in the preview is an intentionally false representation of what actually happens in the upcoming episode

This point is basically a non-issue. Most drama shows have done this for years. It is how you draw viewers. I don't like this style of preview, almost as much as I dislike the "someone you know will die this episode" previews, but they are very common.

[moriarty]

Originally Posted by Celeval

More a meta-question... but how are the ratings affected by TiVo? A good percentage of the people I know who watch Lost will TiVo it, not necessarily watching it live - at least partly due to wanting to rewatch it, rewind, etc. to pick up on the smaller things (like the symbols when the clock hit 0:00).

Good question. To my knowledge Nielsen's ratings still do not take into account DVR viewings (although they have plans to do so). See here for an interesting read:
hxxp://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=512266

There was another thread where the ratings were discussed and someone said only 3% of the households have DVR's, which I found suprising. In that same thread (at the time) Lost was the #2 recorded show according to Tivo, but it was only 8th in Nielsen ratings. So I guess my answer would be, it depends on how many people actually own DVR's. If it is still 3% I guess it wouldn't make much impact. Here's the other thread (see towards the end) if you're interested. http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/...674#post961674

[Anthony]

i hate they conveniently started having the fat guy (i think his name is Harley) always appear with candy in his hand, just so the internet chatter about how come he isn't losing weight could cease. all too obvious what they're trying to do.

[rexallllsc]

The folks @ ABC should take some hints from 24/Fox and The Shield/FX on how to run a series.

People are losing interest.

[Sublime 2]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

I'm as frustrated as the next guy/girl at the long hiatus between episodes, but it's how television works for the most part. Lost is still an excellent show, I look forward to it (whenever it's on), and it's a great way to spend an hour (well, usually around 42 minutes or so, since we TiVO it).

I agree...I haven't lost interest in the show at all. The weeks in between episodes every now and then is a pain in the ass but that doesn't stop me from sitting down (sometime changing my schedule) at 8pm on Wednesdays to watch. I'm too caught up in it.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by rexallllsc

The folks @ ABC should take some hints from 24/Fox and The Shield/FX on how to run a series.

People are losing interest.

While people may be losing interest, the way ABC is running "Lost" is the way the vast majority of primetime Network shows are run. Shows like "24" and "The Shield" are the anomalies. The television season typically runs from around mid-September through mid-May, with the peak viewing months being November and February Sweeps.

Primetime TV shows don't produce enough episodes a season to be on every week. While I like how Fox handles "24", I just don't see ABC doing the same with "Lost." Too much money to be had and it would throw off their entire schedule.

[rkmsuf]

they can't have their schedule throughn off

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

they can't have their schedule throughn off

Throughing off there entire schedule would be a disaster, or so I here.

[BrianD]

What is it about Lost that makes people complain about the time off when it really is standard operating procedure? Are they handling the time off a little bit differently, or are people just so caught up in the show that they notice the time off much more?

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by BrianD

What is it about Lost that makes people complain about the time off when it really is standard operating procedure? Are they handling the time off a little bit differently, or are people just so caught up in the show that they notice the time off much more?

I don't think ABC is handling the time off too differently than most shows. I think it's about a 50/50 split between your second point, people are caught up with in the show so they notice it more, and the mystery-based/cliff hanger nature of the show (which pretty much related right back to your point). The show is built around the mysteries on the island, the tension between the characters, and most episodes end with a cliff hanger. This not only gets people caught up in the show, but it also drives you nuts when you have to wait X number of weeks before you find out what happens. Most other shows aren't like that, so, while they may have similar delays, it's not quite as agonizing/annoying.

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

While people may be losing interest, the way ABC is running "Lost" is the way the vast majority of primetime Network shows are run. Shows like "24" and "The Shield" are the anomalies. The television season typically runs from around mid-September through mid-May, with the peak viewing months being November and February Sweeps.

Well maybe they should note the success of those shows and follow suit.

Primetime TV shows don't produce enough episodes a season to be on every week. While I like how Fox handles "24", I just don't see ABC doing the same with "Lost." Too much money to be had and it would throw off their entire schedule.

Then make a new schedule.

If you can't make money on the show showing it nearly every week, then there's something wrong with your model.

Either way, the numbers will probably continue to decline. How much money will that cost them?