I began watching Lost during the airing of its final season, catching the final 5 or six episodes as they were broadcast. At the time, I couldn't have been more disappointed with how the series wrapped up. I recall the final season being a train wreck, but the finale felt particularly amateur hour and relegated the show to a regrettable investment of TV viewing time when, instead, Lost could have been a classic. Rather than make sense of things as it should have, the finale seemed to celebrate the show's inability to tell a story. The finale could have at least made an attempt at tying together the shards of broken storytelling the writers had strung viewers along with for several years.
In subsequent years, I've seen a few websites attempt to make sense of it all by piecing together clues, hoping to salvage the show's legacy and convince readers of the genius behind Lost's creators. I'm not convinced. It seems to me that if a PowerPoint presentation is required in order to make sense of a TV show, the TV show has failed to tell a story.
Having said all of that, I would be interested in seeing your presentation. Is there video of it? I've been considering watching the series again to see if eight years of separation can lend a new perspective.
Sorry, no video. However, if you want to "Get"
Lost, you'll need to watch a lot of video, not just of
Lost itself, but of its precursor material, especially
Department S. For an introduction, see
the chronologic entries I made during, and then following, the run of
Lost; I'm still making entries there as I find more clues & cx, but I haven't consolidated it into an explanation. It'd be easier to convey in a present'n + Q&A format live. In the meantime if you want to save time, read the 1st entry, then skip to the last few. For ultra-short, that index page has on "an index card" the plot outline that
Lost's makers could fit on an index card, with superimposed on it a 1-word title alluding to the means by which the audience would be clued in.
Lost was a cloak-&-dagger story disguised as SF/fantasy. Once you figure out what was really going on on it, you'll see there was no fantasy & only 1 piece of sci-fi: a machine which could induce brain damage, by which one could knock a target out & induce a stuporous, suggestible state. This was Faraday's machine, which did nothing like time travel but only "mind travel" under suggestion, apparently inspired in the writing by Marvel Comics character Jason Wyngarde -- who was based on
Department S character Jason King, played by Peter Wyngarde.
It is possible to trace the development of
Lost by Damon Lindelof via allusions such as in the previous paragraph, & from the conversations & shared experiences I had w him in years preceding
Lost. I was as frustrated as you at the conclusion of
Lost, because I'd expected a conventional denouement as typical in detective drama & fiction. Instead the makers of
Lost pretended there'd been no mystery after all, & that it'd just been something of a sloppily-made shaggy-dog-cum-adventure tale. Once you solve it, though, you'll see the "prod'n mistakes" were all clues. You'll laugh where you cried; you'll suck in breath where you laughed, once you get the import of the events. Many things were the reverse of what they seemed.
There were clues in the dialog, action, props, scenery, character names, acting, music, promos, & podcasts.
If you want to study the background material on your own, I can supply a syllabus. I can also address questions here.
