Re: 4th Season Lost - The Other Woman - 5 star poll - SPOILERS AHOY !

tdciago wrote:
> On Mar 8, 7:20?am, "Neil Harrington" <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> So how does *that* enhance your understanding of the show?
>
> For one thing, it tells me that we're going to see a big "shake-up" on
> the island.  Literally.  And it will involve Annie, which will
> probably explain a good deal of Ben's behavior.
>
>> I don't give a flying fargle what "the producers have already said."
>> If it's im****tant or has any relevance to the story, it should be in
>> the show itself as we all see it on TV. Having the producers explain
>> or elaborate on the story outside of the show itself is as bad as it
>> would be for an author to write a book and then spend a lot of time
>> explaining it orally to the readers.
>
> They're breaking new ground here.  "Lost" is a true multimedia
> experience.  This kind of thing is likely going to be the future of
> television.  You may not like it, but it's already happening.

I doubt that very much, but then I don't watch that much TV anyway. People
I 
know who *do* watch a lot of network TV don't look elsewhere for such 
information. Where is it "already happening" other than with Lost?

They may well be "breaking new ground here" as you say, but I'll be 
surprised if anything they build on it will be commercially successful.
It's 
an interesting idea I'll admit. But of course ornithopters were an 
interesting idea too.

>
> It isn't mandatory that viewers know what the producers have said
> about the show, but it helps to know that there's something planned
> that involves Annie (or someone else), because then we're less likely
> to assume that it's all gobbledegook without a plan.  The people who
> seem most annoyed with the show are the ones who stubbornly insist,
> "If it's im****tant, it should be *on* the show!  I'm not going to look
> anywhere else.  This is too much work."

It. is. a. TV. show. Most people watch TV shows on TV and that's the end
of 
it. The expectation that they "look anywhere else" for relevant
information 
about the show is unreasonable. It's like a publisher putting only part of
a 
news story in a newspaper and other im****tant parts in a magazine, a few 
flyers and a radio broadcast, and expecting readers to track them all down

and assemble the story himself.


> Those are the people who are
> giving up on "Lost" before everything is played out.  Maybe we're just
> so used to instantaneous gratification nowadays that it's impossible
> to have patience anymore.

You seem to have missed the points of the criticisms here. It isn't a
matter 
of "instantaneous gratification" vs. "having patience." If you really 
haven't been paying attention, which appears to be the case, would you
like 
me to copy and paste some of the criticisms in here so you can peruse them

more carefully this time?

>
>> When was he last seen doing that? I haven't noticed the doll in any
>> recent episode.
>
> Already answered by RWG.
>
>> No, not yet anyway. It may develop into some more gobbledegook but
>> we'll have to wait and see. Fair is fair.
>
> So wait and see, then, without throwing darts.

That's what I said, isn't it? You're the one who said I would probably
call 
it gobbledegook. I never suggested that I would, and I haven't "throw[n
any] 
darts" at the Annie thing at all.

>
>> Maybe you shouldn't even suggest that. I suspect a lot of erstwhile
>> viewers have already taken a timeout from the show -- and made it a
>> permanent one. Remember, the complaints you see here are just from a
>> few of us ?who are still watching.
>
> I don't care if you stop watching the show.  In fact, it would be
> preferable to the repetitive negativity in your posts, which are
> saying the same thing over and over.

But reading my posts of course is, and has always been, your option. Are
you 
using some odd sort of newsreader that compels you to read every single
post 
in a newsgroup whether you want to or not? I read only a fraction of the 
threads in this or any other newsgroup. If a subject title looks
interesting 
I'll take a look at it, post if there seems a reason to, and otherwise
not.


> You've gone beyond constructive
> criticism, and now you're just making yourself look like a grumpy old
> whiner. If you're going to watch something on TV, you may as well
> enjoy it.  It certainly doesn't seem as if you're still enjoying
> "Lost."  Why continue to do something that irritates you?

You've confused enjoying the show with being a dedicated, intensely loyal 
and often defensive fanboy of the show. You are obviously the latter; I am

obviously not, but I do enjoy the show. It's the only series I watch 
regularly on TV, and I expect to keep watching it at least until it
becomes 
excessively silly.

And I enjoy this newsgroup as well, including these sorts of discussions, 
arguments, comparing notes, exchanging views and opinions, etc. When the 
producers do something that seems really silly or stupid, I (along with
some 
others here) enjoy discussing and commenting on it. Since the quality of
the 
show is IMO not what it was in the first two seasons, it sometimes happens

that poking fun at it is as satisfying as watching it, and occasionally
more 
so.

It's unfortunate if that gets under your skin, but in that case I can only

quote back to you your own question: "Why continue to do something that 
irritates you?" Reading my posts, or those of other sometimes unkind 
critics, is not something anyone is forcing you to do.

Neil