Slow Burners

[Zombie Jim Undead]

It seems that the current craze in American TV is to create dramas with incredibly protracted story-arcs that take flippin ages to get going.

I lost patience with Heroes about half way through the first series. It felt like a comic book origin story that was never actually going to get anywhere.

I had avoided watching Lost…up until now. Am currently enjoying / being annoyed by it in equal measure. Nearly at the end of series 1….and there just seems to be too many mysteries to be coherently wrapped up / answered. Feels like it’s being made up as it goes along and I fear that it’s going to end with no resolution…and I will be compelled to kill people and destroy things.

Does anyone else lack the patience for these slow-burning story arcs or is it just me?

Topic

[John Hoare]

Jonathan Capps and Andrew Ellard to the briefing room, please.

[ChrisM]

For me it depends on how long the mysteries are kept. I find myself growing impatient if we have a lot of episodes with no resolution, but part of the enjoyment is also trying to work things out. Too long though, and it get’s a little irritating. Doesn’t stop me watching though.

In the case of Lost, I found myself getting rather impatient, and I felt a bit like you did, that things were being dragged out, and possibly made up as they went along. I especially found myself growing tired of the constant flashbacks, and wishing they’d just have a few episodes (or even just 1 episode) set entirely in the present day to move things along.

However when I caught up on it using Virgin On-Demand, particularly the last series, I was pleasantly surprised. (There was always flashbacks- which let’s face it is part of the format- but there definitely was some resolution, as well as other interesting questions.)

As for Heroes, I never found the long story arcs much of a drag for me. I don’t think they left it all that long before answering questions. I’ve also heard negative things about Series 2, but so far, I’ve seen the first 2 episodes and I’m still rather liking it.

[Zombie Jim Undead]

Totally agree about the flashbacks. They’re particularly annoying when they happen in the middle of a tense / action-filled episode…and if they’re unrelated to the main story. I thought that we’d get one flashback for each character…which was an intrusive but necessary way of getting their back-story…but the bloody things never end.

Think the problem with Heroes isn’t a prolonged mystery…just a hugely prolonged story where nothing seems to happen.

Like I said….it feels like an origin story of an X-Men-style comic…which should last a couple of episodes before getting on with the real story.

[Andrew]

Just to get the Lost thing out of the way:

Weakcharactersunlikelytocometoasatisyingconclusionpointlessflashbacksdraggedoutplottingbuttheproductionvaluesarenice.

Old news. Moving on…

The rise of DVD and the net have allowed a more protracted form of TV storytelling to take hold. (Babylon 5 may be the beginning of this particular wave, I guess.) I don’t care for Lost or 24, but that’s to do with things other than the continuing nature of them – I love Prison Break, and had great fun with the first series of Heroes.

Lost is aiming for a fixed point, a definite end, while Heroes, 24 and Prison Break are rebooting with every series. I’m happy with either as a format, just as I’m happy with episodic TV. Still, if you don’t have the patience, don’t watch ’em! (I tend to feel the problem is that some viewers are in it for the climax, and some are there for the journey; this form can suit one bunch better than the other.)

Interesting to note that Angel really didn’t work as an episodic show initially – the first series is a mess – but thrived in its difficult fourth year with a decidedly 24-ish ‘continuing after another cliffhanger’ structure…

[peas_and_corn]

>The rise of DVD and the net have allowed a more protracted form of TV storytelling to take hold.

I noticed this in the commercial for the Star Trek Deep Space Nine DVDs they described it as a “ hour epic”

[pfm]

Lost has solved pretty much all the problems it had (I never saw them as problems, but I like the mystery and character development, unlike some people). The show flows much better now with no restraint on the story. I love how Damon Lindelof and co aren’t afraid anymore of throwing tons of sci-fi and general geek-out moments into the show.

Even though people wanked over season 1 I reckon it’s definitely the weakest of the four. It’s hard to watch episodes from it now, many of which end with stuff like musical montages of people sitting by fires with zero drama or story. Both seasons 1 & 2 were too long. They would have benefitted greatly from having at least 4 episodes sheared off each. Season 3 got away with it because, aside from the odd *Jack tattoo* episode it was fucking amazing. Bringing in Ben and Juliet and Desmond as a main character helped massively.

Season 4 episode 9 was one of the best ever with the pace being arguably more urgent than any other Lost episode, this of course being largely due to the writers’ strike cutting the season short so now they have to cram more story in. It’s living proof that American seasons are too long in the first place (aside from cable shows like Dexter, Sopranos etc)

[Pete Part Three]

But season two was rubbish…

[Jonathan Capps]

Where as I love a good long running story in my TV show, I wouldn’t say that Heroes was protracted at all. It’s specifically designed to be contained season by season, and I always thought it was a good, fast moving antidote to Lost. But Lost is better, obviously.

I totally agree with what monkey said (which kind of makes me question every opinion I’ve ever had, but never mind that for now) on the subject of Lost and what kind of a show it is now. Any of the perceived problems that people had with the show before have started to disappear a bit as revelations are starting to becomemore regular and significant. But, if you’re only going to watch the show so you can moan it’s not telling you all the juicy stuff then you should stop your whiny bitch ass moaning and watch something else.

Season 2 definitely gets the most flak but I’ve been rewatching it recently and I can honestly say there’s only one episode that’s dud, and that’s Fire + Water. The rest is some extremely well placed character/mystery/sci-fi/headfuck drama, including the best finale of the lot. THIS IS FACT.

[Pete Part Three]

Yeah, I’m really glad I watched those Ana Lucia and Mr Eko stories. I didn’t particularly enjoy them but I knew they’d pay off at some point.

Oh.

[Jonathan Capps]

SPOILERSO.

Ana Lucia had her payoff in season 2, though! She was a pretty rubbish character, but her job on the show was to turn up, shake things up a bit by killing Shannon, introduce us to the Tailies and eventually be killed my Michael to spring board that story. I thought she was quite effective, and I’ll be buggered if I can think of a single thing that still needs to be ‘paid off’.

You may have a point about Mr. Eko, but he had so much mystery surrounding him it’s difficult to tell WHAT they could’ve done with him. As far as his back story goes I think that was all wrapped up pretty well in 3.5 when he’s offed. It completed his conversion to ‘good’, showed us why he spent most of season 2 building a church and finally gave us a way in to learn two really important things about the monster. It can apparently take the shape of people and it kills anyone who doesn’t properly repent to a bloody death against the nearest tree. I mean, I would’ve loved to have seen more Eko, but his on island and off island issues were all quite neatly completed.

What would you have prefered?

[Pete Part Three]

NOT introducing a bunch of characters at the start of the season and systematically killing them all off after hours of, ultimately pointless, exposition that had little to do with the main story?

Ana Lucia and Libby being killed off had nothing to do with the story, of course, and everything to do with the actresses being caught drink-driving.

[Jonathan Capps]

> NOT introducing a bunch of characters at the start of the season and systematically killing them all off after hours of, ultimately pointless, exposition that had little to do with the main story?

It wasn’t pointless exposition. It was all part of that character’s story. And, like I said, Ana Lucia and Eko were involved in some very important events in the show and I think they deserved every minute of flashback time they got.

> Ana Lucia and Libby being killed off had nothing to do with the story, of course, and everything to do with the actresses being caught drink-driving.

BULL CRAP. It’s a widely known fact that Michelle Rodriguez only every signed a one year contract and Cynthia Watros has very recently returned to the show and the producers have said (even when she was killed off) that she’s a big part of the show and she’ll be crucial in flashbacks to come.

I mean, that all comes from the producers and people can believe it or not, but when the alternate is two actresses being sacked for DUIs and then them both being SHOT IN THE GUT in an episode called TWO FOR THE ROAD as a result is just… stupid.

[Jonathan Capps]

Oh, and for the record, not all of the Tailies are dead. Bernard is still one of the stars of the show and Cindy is still skulking around with The Others looking after the kids.

In fact – being more general for a minute – I was watching a bit of season 2 the other day with a friend who’s watching it for the first time, and I realised what an absolutely brilliant episode 2.4 ‘Everybody Hates Hugo’ is. It’s the quintessential Lost episode. Really brilliant character stuff with Hurley (both on island and in flash back) lovely funny dialogue and the continuation of the whole mind fuck hatch situation. Easily one of the best ever episodes.

[Jonathan Capps]

This whole thread has made me want to watch Babylon 5 all over again, though. As much as I love Lost and have every faith that all the important beats and plot points are well planned, you really can’t beat a show like B5 for structure, even if the plan was fucked up towards the end.

Also, Garibaldi is a baldy. This never fails to amuse me.

[Pete Part Three]

>It?s a widely known fact that Michelle Rodriguez only every signed a one year contract and Cynthia Watros has very recently returned to the show and the producers have said (even when she was killed off) that she?s a big part of the show and she?ll be crucial in flashbacks to come.

Fair enough. If it’s true (and not spin from the producers).

I’m playing Devil’s advocate here, Cappsy as I know how much you love the show but I just think it really lost its way in the second season. And, with the way the show works, that’s unlikely to be proven for sure until it finishes in a couple of years.

>It wasn?t pointless exposition. It was all part of that character?s story.

But when that story is dull and has no bearing on the main arc it just feels like padding. Looking back, the tailies just seem like season two’s gimmick.

FWIW (not much, probably), I thought the show found its feet again in the third season. Unfortunately, I find it incredibly inconsistent so, when the only reason you’re watching an episode full of boring flashbacks about Ana Lucia is to get a hint on the “bigger picture”, it’s a bit annoying when she’s bumped off a few episodes later. (Well, it would be if she hadn’t been so bloody annoying). This is the reason why the show has little re-watch value for me.

I enjoy watching it and am looking forward to its return on Sunday but I dislike the suggestion that there’s some meticulously detailed master plan.

>Bernard is still one of the stars of the show

Ah yeah, Bernard. I’d forgotten he existed. And Cindy…Um?

[Jonathan Capps]

> I enjoy watching it and am looking forward to its return on Sunday but I dislike the suggestion that there?s some meticulously detailed master plan.

See, this is something I definitely don’t subscribe to. I don’t think it’s even possible to have a detailed master plan when no fixed end point was defined until recently. I do believe the producers when they make the analogy on how the show is planned, which is they’re on a road trip and they know exactly what major locations they’re going to visit along the way right up to the end. However, they reserve the right to take detours between locations so long as that detour still gets them to where they want to go.

I think all the main mysteries of the island (what is its exact history, what all of its properties are, how the island is related to Flight 815, what are all of the outside influences on the island, what is the history of DHARMA etc) have been in place from the start of season 1, but there needs to be flexibility when you start thinking of individual characters because of actor’s contracts and how characters naturally develop etc. So long as whatever they write serves their pre planned framework it doesn’t matter *too*. For example, someone like Locke or Eko could easily have developed the time travelling side effects Desmond is experiencing if that character never returned after the start of season 2. henry Gale didn’t *need* to turn out to be the leader of The Others. It doesn’t matter, so long as it addresses the grand plan and ends up fitting together ina satisfying way.

I’d love the show to have absolutely everything painstakingly detailed, but B5 showed that it just can’t work like that in the network TV environment over a period of years.

> And Cindy?Um?

Air hostess who gave Jack his vodka at in The Pilot, she crashed with the Tailies and goes missing during a bout of The Whispers when they’re trekking to the beach in season 2’s Abandoned. She then turned up in the Other’s camp in season 3’s Stranger in a Strange Land looking after the stolen kids and telling Jack “they’re there to watch”. In a nutshell.

[Jonathan Capps]

Out of interest, how have you enjoyed the change in pace in season 4 so far? Do you think the change to flash-forwards has helped solve some of the problems you had with the show?

[Pete Part Three]

I’m finding it just as inconsistent as it ever was. Great episodes such as “The Constant” sitting unevenly with dull stuff like “Eggtown” (and populating an episode with a lot of Evangeline Lilly is usually a good move for me).

What marked season three as a good season was that there were a lot of good episodes in contrast with “meh” episodes. I’m about half way through, so can’t really judge its worth as a whole.

I think the flash-forwards are a very interesting idea but, aside from Hurley and Sayid’s, they haven’t really gripped me. Naomi’s colleagues are an interesting bunch and the boat stuff has been semi-intriguing.

Needs more Jim Robinson, though.

[Ian Symes]

Wasn’t the reason Eko was killed off because both the actor’s parents died within about a week of each other?

[pfm]

‘Eggtown’ is the only just okay episode out of the 9. The rest have ranged from really good to fucking excellent. I’m watching the 720p version of episode 9 right now actually (well I’m obviously not watching it this second, it’s on pause you fucks). One of the best ever. I was for once completely gormenghasted when Alex was killed (as a fan of 24 you tend not to be shocked when characters get shot when normally they wouldn’t). Ben’s reaction was class too. Widmore changed the rules. Or DID he…? I think Charles was right when he said Ben was responsible for her death, not him.

EDIT: Blanked out monkey’s post in white because it contains spoilers for an episode Sky hasn’t shown yet. What a PRANNOCK.

[Jonathan Capps]

> Wasn?t the reason Eko was killed off because both the actor?s parents died within about a week of each other?

That’s what I thought originally, but according to Lindelof and Cuse he signed a similar ‘One Year Only’ deal to Michelle Rodriguez, only they managed to persuade him to stick around in season 3 for a bit to stagger the deaths.

It’s hard to tell if it’s just LIES to protect the actor a bit, though. You can never be sure.

[Author]

Replies