Dec 17th 2010 5:06PM That CollegeHumor link is a terrible way to make your case - it lists everything not answered with a GIANT NEON SIGN as unanswered. Like the 3rd question is "why does the psychic insist Claire get on Oceanic 815?", which is an absolutely moronic question when it's revealed there's an extremely powerful demi-diety with loads of direct and indirect minions manipulating their lives to pull them towards Flight 815. While it's not explicitly stated, it's safe to assume that that was part of the influence. About half the questions in there are of a similar nature.
I think that's a major disconnect people have with LOST. On most shows, the questions and answers are explicit. In Episode 1, it's "Who killed my father" and then someone in Episode 10 will literally say "I killed your father because XYZ". LOST is far less direct.
Jul 11th 2010 9:29PM Just FYI, David Tennant was naked after his half-human duplicate "regenerated" from his cut-off hand.
May 8th 2010 4:11PM " I don't see any reality shows getting the axe. Why not? Where are these ratings coming from?"
Reality Shows are generally much cheaper than scripted dramas. I mean, you're splitting a million bucks between most of your cast for the season, you've got a static set, and skimp more on writers. So the ratings needed to justify the show aren't as high as they are for dramas. It costs networks like $2 million per episode for a drama, and a lot less for an episode of "Biggest Loser" or "Big Brother".
May 5th 2010 9:33PM @OnTheRecord - No, if Jack had run with it, it would have still gone off, because Sawyer was the one to trigger the sped-up countdown.
Locke seems to know the rules better than we do, and his intention was to trick one of the Candidates into activating the bomb, so it's likely it still would have killed Sawyer had he run with it.
Feb 25th 2010 12:46PM The Fox approach seems to be "see what sticks". It makes sense from their PoV: many of their hits like House or 24 are shows that really could have gone either way. Heck, back in the day, who could have predicted Idol would take off like it did? So they'll pick up stuff like Dollhouse or Human Target or Glee or Past Life, and see how it goes.
They're also in a weird position among the networks. They have less primetime, and because of things like Idol and primetime sports (like the World Series). As a result, their ratings distribution among their shows is really screwed up, with even their strong shows "underperforming" the network average. As a result, they can afford to give shots to shows that other networks wouldn't, and can give time to shows that other networks would cancel.
I mean, "Past Lives" is still a Wall Banger, but when you think about it, we've got detective shows with pretty much every other twist premise out there. If any network was gonna air it, it'd be Fox on a whim, or NBC because they're desperate.
 - cranky asshole as your lead? Piles and piles of medical jargon (way more than other medical shows)? Completely serial series? A show about terrorists airing right after 9/11?
 - tvbythenumbers.com
Feb 25th 2010 12:45PM I would actually be potentially interested in such a show - the whole "cleaning up after the end of the world" part that is, not Roland Emmerich blowing more stuff up. I mean, I thought those aspects in Jericho and BSG were very interesting, and there's loads of potential for drama there. I don't see why you couldn't do that on a TV show budget, or even a cable budget.
I haven't seen 2012, so I'm speaking generally here, but you're talking about an isolated band of survivors. That means fewer sets, and cheaper costumes. Lost is expensive because it has like 15 main cast members, is filmed in Hawaii, and has all the flash-back/forward/sideways locations. Film it somewhere less expensive than Hawaii (plenty of cheap, empty land in First World countries if you look hard enough), limit your number of flashback sets, and have a smaller cast.
Feb 18th 2010 12:16AM Maybe Kate was originally on the list, but got crossed off for some reason. Although finding a reason that disqualifies Kate and not Jack, Sayid, or Sawyer is tricky. Maybe taking Aaron from the Island?
Dec 10th 2009 8:15PM Gordy, the problem with that interpretation is that it ignores the context (in which anchors refer to the poll as suggesting 90%+ of the population thinks the scientists lied. It's also not accurate to present the poll in that manner even if the numbers work, because it suggests that "Somewhat Likely" and "Very Likely" are disjoint sets, which your comment suggests is not the case.
It can be argued that the numbers are not an outright lie, but it's certainly not a fair or reasonable way to present the data.
Nov 6th 2009 2:36PM IMHO, NBC's problem is that they are too decisive. If a show starts out well, they'll bank off that for 3-4 years of falling ratings, but if it starts out poor to middling, they won't give it a chance. Shows like Chuck and FNL and Life would get better audiences if NBC went out of their way to promote them and build them up, and NBC has cancelled several other shows before giving them a real chance. They seem to be sort of fatalistic - "oh, you're not doing well? Nothing we can do about that."
Oct 23rd 2009 1:30AM If you're not going to pay or watch ads, they really don't care whether or not you watch their show.
And if it's that bad, then what on earth are you doing watching it anyways?