LAST EDITED ON 03-23-06 AT 11:36 AM (EST)

Was it written on a page out of the book Henry was reading? I didn't pay close enough attention.

*ST*

Yes, it was written on the back of the title page torn from the paperback version of Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov.

I'm a huge lost fan but my interest is waning. I mean they made the Sun and Jin pregnacy thing to be a big deal. They're married. So What? If they want drama have Kate sleep with Sawyer and Jack then get pregnant and see the sparks fly. I'm fine with an episode that doesn't have a lot of action. I really liked the Charlie one a few weeks ago. And the Claire ep was excellent but I forget that when there is 2 weeks between them. It's just not fun. I'd rather have them take a whole month off than for them to do the have an ep then take 2 weeks off crap. I'm sorry but Grey's Anatomy is my new favorite show b/c unlike Lost and Desperate Housewives it actually manages to air almost every week. I still love the show. I just want it to be consistent.

I agree Grey's Anatomy is fun to watch, but give it time, the re-runs will come.

TenPin

It sounds like a lot of people are still upset over the amount of re-runs. For what it's worth, Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse addressed the "Why so many re-runs?" question during their podcast this week. Here is my messy transcribed version of the answer for anyone interested:

It takes us about three weeks to one month to make an episode of the show. We work pretty much year-round on the show, but by the time we actually write the episodes, produce the episodes, do all the post-production on the episodes, we physically cannot produce more than 22 to 24 episodes a season. This year we're doing 24 and we are killing ourselves to accomplish actually making 24 hours of the show. The problem is, there are 52 weeks in the year and the network business works in its own mysterious ways, but they have certain periods when they really need to have original episodes. One is at the beginning of the season when they are launching new shows and, because "Lost" is successful, they want the ratings of the show to launch the show behind it. And then there are three sweeps periods, which matter to the networks because that's when ratings are measured on a much more intensive level and they use those ratings to set advertising rates, and since this is a business about making money, they want to get the most ratings that they can during sweeps. So, basically, the show has to be on at the beginning of the season, it has to be on during November for November sweeps, it has to be on in February for February sweeps and it has to be on in May for May sweeps. As a result, the 22 episodes get scattered across those four periods and, you know, I think the whole schedule is 36 weeks or something like that.

It gets very frustrating and I think, more importantly, the season catches up with you - that is to say right now, at the time of this podcast, we are basically writing the final three episodes - four hours of the show, but production is right up against us. We're going to be shooting the last three hours simultaneously with three different crews in order to get the episodes on the air by May sweeps.

We're delivering the episodes wet, which is the best we can do, which is why you probably see shows like "24". They can do a consecutive run because they start in January, as opposed to September when "Lost" starts, but they're writing the show at the same rate that we are. So, essentially, all of us are cramming at the end stages.

another fantabulous Kittyloaf® creation

Take what you wish from that, but I forgive them. I still love this show and there's no doubt in my mind that each episode is not easy to write and produce quickly - that's what makes it a good show, IMHO.

I'm glad they are addressing the re-run issue. That means they know we are getting p'd.

My beef is not with the production. I can imagine how long it takes to write and produce this show. My beef is with the networks who are still operating their business as they did 50 years ago. Television is a different beast...with DVR's and crazy lifestyles. I think they need to adapt. If I am going to invest my time to one of their shows, they need to commit to a schedule. Enough already!!!!!!!

To Fester...
Right on! Great ep. Henry Gale is freakin' awesome. He gives me chills.

I agree that ABC needs to address the growing frustration surrounding re-runs and commit to a schedule, but the problem is a little more complicated than that. Ratings, which is what drives Networks, are compiled by Nielsen. Nielsen is the engine that drives survey periods. "Sweeps" periods are the times when all markets are surveyed (November, February, and May), not just the top 25 or so. Those periods are determined by Nielsen, not ABC. So, considering that their advertising revenue is based in large part on the Sweeps ratings, ABC's choices are limited.

Unless they're willing to say, run "Desperate Housewives" September through January and "Lost" January through May, or some such "outside the box" arrangement, then I'm afraid we'll still be saddled with a 40-week season, with 24 episodes. That's nearly 4 months of dead programming weeks, unfortunately.

Now if they could just convince Nielsen to change their methodology...

Fester

I don't blame them...I blame ABC....you've got a great thing and you're killing it because you're being gready to launch a new program behind it and hit all 3 sweeps....

sig by arkieglr and bouncy by IceCat

I guess I just don't get all of the fuss about re-runs. Every other show has them, so why should we expect Lost to be any different. I've said it before, I like the re-runs. I don't have Tivo or tape the shows, so it gives me a chance to re-watch them and look for things I might have missed or watch an episode I might have missed entirely. I didn't catch all of the episodes from the first season, so I'm enjoying watching some of them for the first time. It's kind of fun to watch an old episode knowing what's going to happen or to see how characters have changed, etc. I love the show so much that I'll watch whatever episode they're airing whether it's a repeat or not.

Maybe the problem is that the show is so good that we just can't wait for the next new episode. Do people complain when they show re-runs of every other program? No.

I guess I just don't get all of the fuss about re-runs. Every other show has them, so why should we expect Lost to be any different.

I think it is different from other shows. When I sit down to watch CSI I am committing to an hour of my time for a story. If it is a rerun that week, it does not affect the overall story. Lost is different. We are committing to 24 hours of a story per year. The sequence matters to the storytelling. The timing matters to the storytelling. Each episdoe is part of the overall story and not a self-contained piece such as a CSI or a Law and Order episode. Would you watch a rerun of Survivor out of sequence?

I understand the need for re-runs, but don't have two weeks on, two weeks off. If there needs to be block scheduling, then have six episode blocks or something.

Timing is everything.

The Sun and Jin plotline was brilliant. You just never see character development like that on television anymore, and it was phenomenal.

(And for the question asked earlier... I don't think Sun cheated. The "other man" said, "Don't go to America. Stay... but for me, not Jin." From the first season, we know she didn't take that advice. I don't think she stayed for him at all, even temporarily.)

The Sayid and Ana subplot was tense and well-written. I thought it entirely well done. And Charlie was the perfect level of comic relief, not at all over-the-top.

The show was brilliantly written. Even Henry's wondering about the food in the hatch was so outside "stock character" stuff. It was brilliant, and the writing for all of his stuff was wonderful. The whole episode was well written.

I'm wondering about Henry's beard, though. The fact that he was cleanly shaved at capture coming up so immediately after the beard and theatrical glue just made me wonder a little. (Yeah, I know it was Zeke's, or whatever, but still, it seems to mean something, Henry's being shaved.)

The Sayid and Ana subplot was tense and well-written. I thought it entirely well done. And Charlie was the perfect level of comic relief, not at all over-the-top.

i agree. Sayid and Ana have always reminded me of each other, but for the whole "killing Shannon" thing they would work great together--as they kind of did with Henry.

I'm wondering about Henry's beard, though. The fact that he was cleanly shaved at capture coming up so immediately after the beard and theatrical glue just made me wonder a little.

Henry really gives me the creeps. he has be one of the Others. the parachute as test idea--they find a parachute and that means his story is true? i guess asking where he buried his wife is not much better--if he's an Other. the whole creepy/devious factor would make me keep a really close eye on him either way. why would someone who has been stranded on an island, lost his wife, caught in a trap, shot with an arrow, locked in a cell, and tortured f with his captors like that? seems a little odd to me.

maybe he's mad as a hatter because of all that.

actually, it's a PhoenixMons