MovieChat Forums > Flashforward (2009) Discussion > It failed because of Lost

It failed because of Lost

posted 13 years ago by Holy-Fire
17 replies | jump to latest

Lost not only set an high standard (whether you liked it or not) but it also took away viewers patience. The general viewing public didn't want another show that was cliffhanger after cliffhanger, where every episode took us further down the rabbit hole. Flashforward came at the wrong time. You can argue all the other points about character depth, dialogue, etc, etc. If all that had been done to perfection the show would have struggled; either way, no show is that perfect and if it had come about post-lost then it would have been a much stronger show. There's a real gap right now for this kind of show. Lost, FF, Heroes; so the next one that comes along will lap up the glory.

[–] Avatar2154 13 years ago

True. Just look at the comments for all the serialized dramas now.

"I don't want to get invested in another show to be let down"
"No answers.. blah blah blah..
"Exhausting.. I can't do this six more years. I loved lost, can't imagine it doing this again.."

So, yeah. If Flashforward would have came on in 2004, and LOST came in 2009, chances are things would have been switched around.

[–] Glaezn 13 years ago

What you guys seem to forget is that without Lost, shows like Flashforward, the V remake. The Event or even Heroes wouldn't even exist. So no, it did NOT fail because of Lost - it EXISTED because of Lost and people like you two should finally start to appreciate what Lost achieved for this genre a little more (proving to the networks that a captivating serialized sci-fi show CAN sustain a large audience over manyyears). The real reason why FF failed is because it was simply not a very good show for the most part and took way too long to get going (yeah, so did Lost S1 but - unlike FF - Lost had excellent characters to which the audience could relate).

[–] edens_demise 13 years ago

^That!

The difference between Lost, and the post Lost dramas isn't in the creativity or in the level of investment of the story, it's in the strength of the characters.

Lost achieved so much as far as a highly mysterious, Sci-Fi based serialized Drama, however the characters were the heart and sould of Lost. People were invested and cared about the characters, I believe even more than finding out the answers to the mythology. They wanted to know where the characters fit in to that mythology and how they made out.

Flashforward, V, The Event and other similar dramas, all had strong ideas, but were unable to deliver on that aspect of it.

The new question is, can Alcatraz do it?

[–] JayneVeidt 13 years ago

These kinds of shows exist because of Twin Peaks.<3

Hednahären leds av Vintersorg!!!

[–] Glaezn 13 years ago

[–] ravmeltt 11 years ago

Twin Peaks was a great show but I have to disagree. From a financial perspective Twin Peaks was more or less a failure and a warning to networks that serialized mystery shows can NOT sustain a large audience for a long period. I mean, Twin Peaks DID get cancelled after all. And as early as S2.

I'm watching Twin Peaks now because of The Killing. And you may be right. It's hard to sustain a show like these after 2 seasons, unless you change the dynamics. For instance, in The Killing, they stretched who killed Rosie Larsen (no spoilers so don't worry), onto 2 seasons. The fans were relentlessly critical of that. They wanted it solved at the end of Season 1. The series was almost cancelled, but after solving the murder at the end of Season 2, and after much waiting and wondering and skepticism about whether it was going to be renewed, they eventually got a Season 3, but with a different killing, which was solved at the end of the Season. Whether there will be a season 4 I don't know, but no one seems to want a prolonged solving of the crime. I think what it is referred to is an Anthology series, where some of the characters may remain the same, but the plot or dynamics differ.

Anyhow, I'm watching Twin Peaks, which I saw years ago but couldn't remember, and which I now find sort of comical, and almost unbelievable; and less serious than I remember. It's no "The Killing", that's for sure (and I don't necessarily mean that in a good way). lol

RIP Lee Thompson Young. Too young and gone too soon!

[–] georgegates 13 years ago

What you guys seem to forget is that without Lost, shows like Flashforward, the V remake.

moron

-==-
Life's too short for mediocrity
Best shows:http://www.imdb.com/list/n9h_caKA-ZU/

[–] Glaezn 13 years ago

WTF? Why? It is well-known that shows like Flashforward, V, The Event and The River are the result of the networks trying to find the "next Lost". I was not making any statement about the quality of these shows - I was merely stating a fact about why they exist. So what's your problem?

[–] georgegates 13 years ago

Lost was hardly the most successful show, or much more than well-performing.

The Walking Dead, should easily fit the bill of one of the most successful shows. low production costs, high viewernumbers, high internat. sales

-==-
Life's too short for mediocrity
Best shows:http://www.imdb.com/list/n9h_caKA-ZU/

[–] Glaezn 13 years ago

Are you kidding me? I'm sorry but you must be completely delusional.

Lost pulled 18-20 million (!) viewers during Seasons 1 and 2 (Look for yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Lost_episodes). That's incredibly good for a heavily serialized sci-fi show. And that's exactly the point: Lost proved to the networks that heavily serialized sci-fi shows can sustain a large audience over a long time period (the series finale was still watched by 14 million viewers, which is still great) and ever since that time, the networks have been trying to find another show that can capture this large sci-fi audience that the networks now KNOW (due to Lost) exists out there. This is well-known. Flashforward is just one example of this. And just like all the other show, Flashforward failed ratings-wise. Again, these are facts.

The Walkign Dead is something else entirely because a) it is a cable show and genre shows such as sci-fi or horror have a much better chance at survival on cable tv because the entire system is financed differently and doesn't depend on actual viewership, b) TWD's ratings are much lower than Lost's ever were (Look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Walking_Dead_episodes; which is not saying much because naturally cable shows have a much lower viewership than network shows) and c) TWD was created in the post-Lost world and I'd say just like FF, TWD owes a lot to Lost, too.

So please check your facts before you call anyone a moron. You are flat-out wrong and completely misinformed on this issue as it seems.

[–] georgegates 13 years ago

It did not just fail because of competition alone.
There is a a lot of upheaval going on in the field of entertainment. I refuse to believe that people are no longer into serialized drama, but in the long term a substantial amount of people will watch them end to end, season-wise without breaks and pay-on-demand.
What changed compared to two decades ago are today's choices of media and entertainment consumption.

Simple put: serialized scripted drama is the least suitable at the moment for the state of TV, stuck in an archaic business model. At the moment, ads finances the shows, and networks dicatate the play-times. In 10 to 15 years, things will be different.

-==-
Life's too short for mediocrity
Best shows:http://www.imdb.com/list/n9h_caKA-ZU/

[–] theatog 13 years ago

Can I add that Lost is great because it picked up the scattering hype of Survivor, which I can't believe they are still doing new ones from time to time.

This show is a bit harder to relate to I guess.

Yes it sucks. There are some people who love exciting new ideas, probably like most of us who post around here. Then there are (probably the majority) people who just want a TV show with familiar elements fully loaded and care less about the creativity or idea behind it.

[–] Glaezn 13 years ago

Can I add that Lost is great because it picked up the scattering hype of Survivor, which I can't believe they are still doing new ones from time to time.

That's nonsense, sorry. I highly doubt that the majority of Lost fans watch shows like Survivor just because both are about surviving on a tropical island. Most Lost fans are sci-fi fans and geeks (that includes me, so it's no an offense).

This show is a bit harder to relate to I guess.

Yes it sucks. There are some people who love exciting new ideas, probably like most of us who post around here. Then there are (probably the majority) people who just want a TV show with familiar elements fully loaded and care less about the creativity or idea behind it.

Oh please. There is nothing "deep" or "challenging" about Flashforward. In fact, most viewers were far ahead of the writers in terms of understanding and challenging the show's inner logic and consistency.

Not ANY sci-fi is good sci-fi. It's subject to opinion, of course, but if I had to guess then I would say that the reason FF failed was because it was not a well-written show. In fact, it was highly flawed. People who accept badly written sci-fi just because it is "different" from reality tv and cops shows are not doing the genre a favor. In fact, they are hurting it because what sets sci-fi apart from other genres (or at least what used to set it apart) is that it is usually thought-provoking and intelligent. Accepting mediocre sci-fi only helps to diminish the genre's quality and we end up with even more poor efforts like V, FF and The Event.

[–] j_p_j_p 13 years ago

It failed because it was a terrible, terrible show. As a big fan of Lost, I found myself laughing throughout parts of this show.

[–] jimmybuf12 13 years ago

It failed because Brannon Braga had creative input...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEsD4J26En4

[–] puschit-1 13 years ago

That's very true. I stopped watching TV altogether several years ago and even the greatest show, even if it was better than Lost, would not be able make me watch it on TV. First, times are over where the TV is able to put me on a schedule, my lifestyle and work hours are flexible and that means my entertainment has to be flexible as well. Secondly I would never try to watch something like FlashForward or Lost on TV where I have to wait a week for the next episode to air and with brakes of several months between seasons. This ain't the A-Team where each episode is fire-and-forget-style and closed in itself. If you have brakes of 7+ days in between episodes you have forgotten many important details.

And I tried. My roommate has Sky so I can watch for free if I want. We are fantasy and roleplaying geeks and naturally were intrigued to watch Game of Thrones. It was great but when we missed the third episode we never bothered trying to catch up. We'll buy the whole thing on DVD when it is out and watch it whenever we can find the time.

So, yes, the system is flawed where shows are payed with ads and where the number of people actually watching the first season decides if a show gets continued or not. We lost Firefly this way and I could still punch someone in the face for that. And that's coming from a guy that has never been in a fight before.

[–] color_of_money-413-682145 12 years ago

your so right puschit-1, i'm only watching this FF series now, which i'm enjoying. House of Cards was good Uk series was better and i do still have Game of thrones to watch. But you really are spot-on with your points