Lost (spoilers)

[MacGuffin]

New 'Lost' episode hits a ratings low

LOS ANGELES - "Lost" crashed in the ratings this week, hitting an all-time low for a new episode. ABC's drama about plane crash survivors stranded on a mysterious island drew an estimated 12.8 million viewers Wednesday, according to preliminary figures from Nielsen Media Research. That's well off the peak of more than 20 million for the drama that became an instant sensation when it debuted in September 2004.

ABC has worked hard to try to protect a show that helped turn the network's fortunes around, moving it to 10 p.m. EST Wednesday this year to steer clear of Fox's blockbuster "American Idol" and CBS's increasingly strong "Criminal Minds."

After "Lost" fans complained about reruns interrupting the show's serial flow last season, the network tried an experiment: It split the current season in two, airing six episodes before an extended break and then resuming with 16 additional episodes.

The show's Feb. 7 return was heavily promoted and drew nearly 14.5 million viewers. But the bounce didn't last, with the show slumping this week.

Although protected from top-rated "American Idol" in its new time 10 p.m. time slot, "Lost" now has the disadvantage of trying to draw viewers at an hour when fewer people are watching television. This Wednesday, Valentine's Day put a 7 percent dent in overall TV viewership.

In the show's defense, ABC noted that it beat the competition among the advertiser-favored young adult crowd, drawing 7.3 million viewers age 18 to 49 compared to the 5.8 million that tuned in to CBS' "CSI: New York."

"Lost" also handed ABC nearly 4 million more viewers in the time slot compared to last year, when short-lived drama "Invasion" aired, the network said.

But there's no question that "Lost," once riding big ratings, buzz and cachet, has lost significant ground.

Some fans and critics complain that the story has gotten confusing and unsatisfying. The show, named best drama at the 2005 Emmy Awards, was shut out at the 2006 ceremony.

[Gamblour.]

Pfft, whatever.

[diggler]

i wonder if they're ever going to factor in how many people watch it online. ever since abc.com put the episodes online the next day, thats usually how i watch the show.

it's a shame so many people think it's jumped the shark. as soon as a show requires viewers to exhibit the least amount of patience they lose interest. The only good thing i can see coming from this is that the dip in ratings will convince abc to end the show sooner as opposed to dragging it out 4 seasons too long like x-files.

[RegularKarate]

Hm, if Malcolm David Kelley (Walt) was 13/14 when we last saw him, and the next time we see him will be when he's 15/16....that will be a pretty awkward bit of show continuity.

or pretty intentional?

[Ravi]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070216/ap_en_ot/tv_lost_is_lost

Will 'Lost' ratings plunge doom series?
By LYNN ELBER, AP Television Writer

LOS ANGELES - The show was smart and intriguingly spiked with supernatural and sci-fi twists. It featured hot new stars who graced glossy magazine covers — until the ratings tumbled. So much for "The X-Files," which enjoyed a nine-year run before misguided plots and a time slot change eroded its appeal. Flash forward to today and you'll find its counterpart in "Lost," another spooky, cerebral, sexy show — which may end up killed off before its time.

"`Lost' is the tragedy of the season," said Marc Berman, TV analyst for Media Week Online as well as a fan aggrieved by what he considers ABC's bungled handling of a favorite show. "They really prematurely put the nail in the coffin. It's too late to save it."

The saga of plane-crash survivors stranded on a dangerous and surreal island once drew an impressive 20 million-plus viewers as it helped raise ABC from ratings purgatory, gained cultural-phenomenon status and won the 2005 Emmy for best drama. But eight episodes into its third season, "Lost" has taken a painful nosedive, with an audience of 14.5 million for its Feb. 7 episode and 12.8 million — its lowest ever — for this week's show.

"Lost" will return for one more season, Berman predicted, and then likely sink from sight. (ABC declined requests for comment.)

Like Fox's "The X-Files," "Lost" has been pelted with viewer complaints (especially on many formerly adoring Web sites) about confusing plots and dangling mysteries — who the ominous "Others" are; whether the survivors are part of an elaborate scientific experiment; what is real, imagined, important or trivial. It has endured scheduling changes that were intended to help but ended up hurting, including a prolonged midseason absence that Berman called "suicide" and a move to 10 p.m. EST Wednesday.

Also like "The X-Files," "Lost" proved that offbeat tales and characters can mean a limited shelf life.

"Whenever you get outside one of the big three franchises — cops, doctors or lawyers — and into the more high-concept shows, they tend to burn bright but burn out faster," said veteran network executive Tom Nunan, now a TV and film producer ("Crash," "The Illusionist").

"Our expectations are higher, they're expected to reach greater milestones in a more original fashion," said Nunan, a follower of the show who believes it still deserves hit status.

"The X-Files" managed to maintain ratings growth into season five and didn't crash until its final year, 2001-02. "Lost" is slumping badly in year three.

"Viewers have become very unhappy with the show because they've left people hanging for too long," Berman said. "They've opened up too many cans of worms and haven't resolved enough issues."

Taking the focus away for long stretches from lead characters including Hurley (Jorge Garcia), Locke (Terry O'Quinn) and Sayid (Naveen Andrews) is another fan grievance, voiced even by those who feel warmly toward "Lost."

"You won't see characters for a bit, then you see them again and you have to recollect what was going on," said Chris Becker, 43, of Newport Beach.

But Becker, who admits to a fondness for science fiction, said he intends to stick with "Lost" to the last: "You're this far into it, you want to see how it ends."

That final chapter should have been years off for a property which, along with "Desperate Housewives" and "Grey's Anatomy," helped ABC (owned by Walt Disney Co.) regain ratings traction and buzz. The network tried to protect "Lost," moving it out of the way this month of returning Fox juggernaut "American Idol" at 9 p.m. Wednesday.

Switching "Lost" to 10 p.m. also created a stronger lead-in for lucrative local evening newscasts, important for ABC and its affiliate stations.

"The networks own a lot of affiliates. Strategically, as a business plan it's a little more clever than some people are giving it credit for," said Nunan, who was president of the now-defunct UPN network and worked at ABC, Fox and NBC.

But he dings ABC for failing to provide a strong lead-in for "Lost," which now follows either its own reruns or sitcoms. Another challenge: There's a smaller pool of viewers available during the 10 p.m. time slot than earlier in prime-time.

The series' producers said earlier this year they don't want to outstay their welcome, as they believe "The X-Files" did, and that they were talking with ABC about setting an end date for "Lost."

Certainly, however, no one had anything immediate in mind.

[Kal]

As much as I hate to admit it and somehow disagree... they are not so off with those predictions and reasons.

The break was too long, the fact that there are so many unanswered questions from season 1 and 2 bothers a lot of people, and the inclusion of new characters (some of them with no purpose) also left important characters behind. Some of us love the show and dont want to admit it, and we defend it and wait for answers with more patience, but the truth is that the show has changed a lot from what it was and they made some decisions (artistic and commercial) that made a lot of people lose interest.

[picolas]

http://www.decalgirl.com/browse.cfm/4,4309.htm

[modage]

yes this is terrible news.  as much as i gripe, i still have the faith that the next episode will always be the one to turn it all around.  getting cancelled early would be terrible.  lowest ratings ever DURING SWEEPS!  not good.

[Chest Rockwell]

Well, to an extent it does seem like the creators are losing grip on their own material. But I keep watching because individual episodes are still so damn good, and I have confidence that by the end of the season they will know what they're doing. Whether the general public will stick it out with them is uncertain, but I also feel pretty certain ABC will let them do their thing for two more seasons. They owe the show that much.

[Gamblour.]

Hm, if Malcolm David Kelley (Walt) was 13/14 when we last saw him, and the next time we see him will be when he's 15/16....that will be a pretty awkward bit of show continuity.

or pretty intentional?

I mean, considering not even a year of being on the island has passed, time moves slowly, and if we were to return to Walt from the time they left in year 4, as Lindelof described, that wouldn't work so hot.

or would it?

[JG]

i think something like 75 days has passed.

[pumba]

i hope isabelle is not a dude.

[grand theft sparrow]

OK, last night's episode was the first major disappointment for me... maybe ever.  I've defended the less than stellar episodes and, in retrospect, have even grown to appreciate certain episodes I wasn't so hot on the first time around.  But Jack's flashback this week was far and away the most uninteresting one in the run of the show. 

Maybe it's partially because of the fact that I enjoyed last week's as much as I did and this paled in comparison.  And definitely it's partially because the marketing people were pressured by ABC execs to act desperate overhype this week's episode that "reveals 3 mysteries" while, with the exception of the translation of part of Jack's tattoo, it reveals nothing more than we saw in the ads.  Yeah, that's gonna bring back the people who tuned out because they felt like the show was fucking them around.

I'm starting to get where mod is.  I've been content with them having little mini seasons that work an entire subplot over a couple of episodes without focusing on any of the other characters.  But this episode was one too many.  I know this is "the season of the Others" and I'm fine with that; it's just feeling like they're stretching it too thin.  Give us something else already. 

[diggler]

minor spoilers:


the lack of communication between the characters is starting to grate on me.

"you had a back yard?" "yea"..... (where?)
"you can't go back, they will kill you".... (why? why the hell are you here kid?)

"we're here to watch"...(watch what? no don't talk to the little girl, answer me!)

sorry. i'm always first to defend the new season among my friends, but last night was really just treading water, seemingly existing only to get jack and ben to the main island. i still love the show, but i really hope the storyline gets a little more focused.

[Chest Rockwell]

Last night's episode was probably the worst I've seen from this show. They're really pushing the Jack-Juliet thing a little too forcefully and a little too fast. The ending was cheesy. The flashback was lame, and I typically like Jack's flashbacks the most. After the last two episodes this was a major drop-off. But whatever, here's hoping they come back next week and beyond.