LOST/FOG! Finale Roundtable!!!

With LOST ending after six seasons, we gathered up both contributors and friends to discuss the finale that aired on Sunday, May 23rd. The participantsof the round table are FOG! contributors Steve Ahlquist, Bill Machon and Matt Bergin; friends of FOG! George Palmer, Josh Selle, Ben Sweeney, Kurt Jansson, Larry Young, Chris McQuaid and Rosemary Darigo and finally, FOG! Editor-in-chief Stefan Blitz





Did you find the series finale satisfying?

Rosemary Darigo: Yes. It was a hell of a ride, and you can't tell me people didn't have fun going over every little detail to try and figure out what was going on. Shows like this are supposed to entertain and I think it did that in spades. I think it's also a little humbling: The characters (and the viewers) spent six years fighting the good fight only to be reminded that in the end, death always wins. At least (if Darlton are to be believed) we get to move on to the next life with the people we love, and that's sweetly reassuring.

Kurt Jansson: I believe there were many ways they could have gone with the ending, but the chosen ending, to me, was the way I wanted to see the characters ride into the sunset. It stayed true to what was really important all along (even if we didn't know it) which was the relationships between them and how they've grown over the past 6 years. I liked how they handled "death" (outside of Christian spelling it out for Jack) and was surprised. I had thought the flash sideways was an alternate universe being created by the events, but I was not disappointed. Yes, very satisfied.

Ben Sweeney: I think it's too soon for me to really put the whole 6 seasons together and weigh it as a whole but I will say that I feel satisfied. I still have problems with this last season as a lot of the mythology has been boiled down too much into things like light caves and guardians that, while they didn't need to be explained to the last minute detail, I would have liked a little bit more. I will say that I liked the finale a lot more than most of this last season though. One thing that REALLY bothers me about the ending is, if people like Kate, Sawyer, and Claire lived theoretically long lives after they left the Island, then why didn't they ever find anyone else to love? That seems pretty grim to me. I would like to think that these people were able to move on an find new love in their lives and not dwell on people long dead (Jack, Juliette, and Charlie).

Matt Bergin: I loved it! Of course, I wish we had been given a little more science with our fiction in the mostly saccharin, spiritual ending. And I wish there were a more complete resolution to all of the Desmond-Eloise course correction business, or at least a clearer connection between that and sideways heaven. With "Adam and Eve" off the table, I wish we had been given something else to tie time travel back to the big picture. I was really hoping Vincent would have gotten his long-awaited hero moment by knocking FLocke off the cliff. And, even though it was probably logistically impossible for the producers, I wish everyone from Oceanic 815 had been invited back to the reawakening reunion, so there wouldn't be any nagging confusion about the fate of missing characters (Mr. Eko? Michael and Walt? Frogurt?!). But none of these things are deal breakers for the episode or for the series--they're just fuel for post-LOST conversation.

Bill Machon: Yes. Both the finale and the series were satisfying. I think during the course of the seasons there were times that I expected and hoped for a bombastic finale, but the mood of the finale made sense in the grand scheme of things, especially the way the final season spun down. It was many years of fun TV watching, period.

Stefan Blitz: I felt that the finale was fantastic! Watching both storylines play out to their ultimate conclusion was both intellectually and emotionally satisfying. With a show as layered as Lost, with such a devoted audience it would be inevitable to disappoint a certain percentage of the audience. That being said, I loved every moment of it!

Steve Ahlquist: I thought the dual nature of the ending allowed for the full exploitation of all the emotional and fannish character good-bye's to take place in the "purgatory" world and still allow for a logical and more satisfying conclusion to the series and the mythology on the island. The Island was in a sense the "real" story, the other world was some sort of post-life "fiction." However, the nature of this purgatory is rather confounding. You can have fake children, or give birth to babies that have no real substance... Did Claire's baby in the real world grow up? And if he did, would it have been weird for him to show up as a thirty-something UPS delivery man?

Josh Selle: Extremely. I was marveled by the compression of story, and the resolution characters seemed to feel as they remembered The Island (or their deaths).

Larry Young: I did, monumentally so. While it might not have provided a linear set of answers I might have wondered about intellectually, it was a home run from an emotional standpoint. Jacob was right; it only ends once, and everything else is just progress. What a fitting metaphor for life, and a great metafictional observation from the writers to the audience.


Chris McQuaid: Absolutely. There was a lot to take in, a lot of emotional moments that really stood out (Charlie and Claire was the one that got me the most for some reason) and a lot of information that you really needed to pay attention to. True they didn’t explain everything, but that’s not always a bad thing. I seem to recall a huge comic book crossover that ended with a whole issue of dialogue explaining every little detail of what just happened and it was fairly boring. If they had done something similar on Lost you’d have a lot more disappointed people today.

George Palmer: I actually found it to be just about perfect. I've always been in the group that held the theory that the island was a form of purgatory, and until they had atoned for their sins, the castaways would always be stuck on the island. To see them go into the light was a great way to wrap it up.

LOST experimented with both it's linear storytelling and point of view. With the series concluded, do you feel that this was successful or not?

Rosemary Darigo: Absolutely. I enjoy a story more when it's revealed through different characters and I have to work a little to put the pieces together in my head. Remember how we all freaked out when beardy alcoholic Jack called up Kate and and told her they had to go back to the Island? That's good TV.

Kurt Jansson: Confusing at times, but always intriguing. To me half the fun was trying to just figure out what I was seeing exactly. Damon and Carlton had said last night that they didn't want to treat the viewer like an idiot (or something to that effect) and that they wanted things to be "figured out" and I think that worked well. The linear storytelling was especially cool because it gave the sense of watching multiple shows all at once. More bang for the buck! The linear storytelling also made me want to go back and rewatch earlier episodes constantly... not a bad marketing ploy either when the complete dvd box set comes out!

Ben Sweeney: I think Lost's playing with linear and non-linear storytelling was very successful. The first season set up a storytelling structure using flashbacks that allowed the writers to tell a compelling story while simultaneously exploring interesting characters. This, of course, evolved into the flash-forwards and ultimately into the flash-sidewayses all of which continued to move story and character exploration forward.

Matt Bergin: I appreciate all of the risks and experimentation the creators took with the series, and I was absolutely entertained and intrigued by every bit of it. That said, in retrospect, an entire season and many major plot points involving time travel seem like non-sequiturs (or worse, red herrings) in a story that was clearly always intended to be about spiritual mysticism, life, death, and the island in between. The episodic POVs, flashbacks, flash forwards, and even the sideways narrative worked fine, but the time travel season created a nerdy itch that the finale failed to scratch.

Bill Machon: Absolutely it was successful. It totally opened up the storytelling and added to the mysteries, creating new angles and brain-teasers and challenging viewers who were new to sci-fi.

Stefan Blitz: Completely. In addition to being addictive and engaging, the series only paid off for the regular viewer. As a parallel to a television novel, skipping an episode here and there was the equivalent of skipping chapters.

Steve Ahlquist: Non-linear appreciate successful it was storytelling did I.

Josh Selle: Yes, without the non-linear story telling, there would have been a greater need for answers, instead of the strange questions that The Flashes produced.

Larry Young: I love non-linear storytelling, so I was already primed to accept all the various flash-forwards and flashbacks and flash-whatevers. A good story, told in an entertaining way, is all I want. And say what you want about the end result, but watching LOST was nothing if not involving.

Chris McQuaid: I’d say yes, for the simple reason that it was memorable. On top of that it will most likely influential. Years from now the way this story was told will have been copied to the point of cliché. Lost may not have invented it, but they have certainly popularised it. And the people who love it really love it, people that don’t might not ever really “get it.”

George Palmer: I think the method of storytelling was rather successful. However it did demand a lot of the viewer, making it nearly impossible to be a casual fan. You were either all in or all out.

Do you think that the reason why Ben Linus didn't join the other characters was because he hadn't passed away?

Rosemary Darigo: I don't think so. I think he was more a function of the island and part of the trial the other characters had to go though. It wouldn't have been as warm and fuzzy for me if Ben was in the church slapping Sayid on the back and linking arms with everyone to walk into the light. He's dead, but he's got some of his own stuff to work out before he moves on.

Kurt Jansson: Nope. Didn't think that for a moment. I saw it as he never belonged in that group of people. He was a huge part of what they all went through, but not "spiritually" connected with them. Not sure what the timelines were as far as him and Hurley were #1 and #2, but Ben had a lot of redeeming and penance to serve, and that's exactly what it looked like as he sat there outside the church. Reflecting on what he was.

Ben Sweeney: I agree. He's dead, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to FEEL IT, but he, like Ana Lucia and Daniel Faraday, wasn't ready to move on yet. I think seeing him have some revelations about his Sideways relationship with Sideways Alex and Sideways Rousseau were indicators of this. He also didn't really fit in with that group which was mainly 815ers.

Matt Bergin: I really love the possibilities of Hurley running fantasy island and Ben spotting planes as his Tattoo, and I like to think their exchange about having a good run together implies that it was a long stay as island co-caretakers. But Hurley was right--Ben was a great #2, even before his redemption. And by that, I mean he was a real piece of sh!t! A smattering of noble acts and a few good years working with Hugo don't change the fact that Ben brought a great deal of pain and misery down on all of the people in that church gathering. They may forgive him, and Ben may even have forgiven himself by then, but they wouldn't forget. Wiser and more compassionate now, Ben simply didn't want to ruin the moment for anyone.

Bill Machon: I think he passed away but was choosing to remain in limbo (like Eloise and some others) rather than moving on like the rest. I think he was still searching for meaning, answers, and peace.

Stefan Blitz: Although perhaps these people were significant to Ben, he never felt to be a part of them and his connection was with Alex and Rousseau.

Steve Ahlquist: The idea of purgatory is to spend time outside heaven to atone for your sins after death. Ben is still working to forgive himself, and doesn't feel worthy to join the others. He has more time to spend in purgatory, learning to be a better person, so he can "move on" in some mumbo-jumbo vaguely spiritual sense. So he's dead, because everybody in the sideways universe in dead, but he's sticking around. There was also an interesting exchange between Desmond and Daniel's mother, who seemed to know about the nature of the place she was in, but also didn't feel the need to move on, possibly due to her self-evaluated sins.

Josh Selle: Yes. It seems to me that must have found a way to use The Island to travel through ALL time and space. Or, maybe he found a way to use The Island to travel back to the land of the living in some way.

Larry Young: No, I think Ben hadn't yet earned the right to pass along to the next stage of existence yet, and he knew it. Didn't want to embarrass himself in front of the crew when the double-doors wouldn't open to admit him.

Chris McQuaid: I’m not overly religious or anything, but perhaps in his mind he felt that he wasn’t finished atoning for his “sins” and had more work to do in “purgatory.” Obviously we don’t know how long Ben was Hurley’s “number 2” (it could have been centuries right?) so maybe he did make up for all he had done, then again maybe purgatory is the best he could hope for.

George Palmer: Oh I think Ben is dead, I just think he went in the opposite direction of the 815'ers......

Over the series some of the mythology introduced, such as the Dharma Initiative, the numbers, The Others, kidnapped children, the island's healing and supernatural properties, and Walt were either explained suddenly or forgotten about altogether. Do you think these gaps in the narrative logic or structure affected the series in a positive or negative way?

Rosemary Darigo: It is what it is. Keeping up a weekly show for six years is a tough job, especially one as new and strange as Lost. And if you subscribe to my view of the story (that everything that happened on the island doesn't matter; it was just a means to get everyone together at the end) then it doesn't matter that we didn't resolve some of the mythology.

Kurt Jansson: I admit that I would see things and have forgotten them by the following week, so keeping continuity wasn't extremely important to me as I wouldn't have noticed much. That being said, I feel they did a great job keeping things together and the loose ends were meant to be loose in my opinion. Not everything has an ending or continuation. The meat of the story (the group of connected souls) was always solid.

Ben Sweeney: I don't think there was so much of a negative impact although I would have liked some more explanations this last season. However, I have to admit to being disappointed with some of the explanations we did get (light cave)so maybe this is a good thing. Also, spending too much time explaining every little detail would have gotten really boring and pointless. Do we really need to know who was dropping the food pallets at the Swan Station?

Matt Bergin: I loved the series episode to episode, moment to moment, and mystery to mystery...but with so much padding around things that barely paid off, the series could have been wrapped up in four tight seasons. But then again, all of that so-called padding was character driven...so without it (and the unresolved threads that came with it), would a shorter series have held as much weight? I don't think so.

Bill Machon: I think the positives outweighed the negatives. There will always be unexplained holes in stories this complex. These mysteries, whether plot holes or supernatural phenomena, were what fired up the imaginations of the viewers and will continue to do so now that the series has ended.

Stefan Blitz: Part of the challenge might have been the fan speculation online which in order to keep the ideas fresh meant changing original plans and storylines. Despite the introduction of these plot points, as the series progressed, they meant less and less and the fate of the characters meant more and more.

Steve Ahlquist: I'm not sure the mysteries unresolved were all that important, or unresolved. Obviously a lot of different factions in the real world were aware of the island and wanted to appropriate its power. Some, like the Dharma Initiative, were more successful than others. The big unresolved mystery in my mind is the exact nature of the hydrogen bomb that destroyed the island in the 1970's and seemed to (at the time) set in to motion the events in the sideways universe. This was an enormous red herring (or cheat) and is completely unresolved.

Josh Selle: I think both positively and importantly. The Flashes created a disjointed distraction with which the show could interrupt it's narrative, eventually making these plots obsolete, thus allowing the show to be less about The Island and more about the characters that The Island was affecting.

Larry Young: Whatever happened, happened. This is the story they told, using the resources available to them at the time. No one wakes up in the morning and thinks, "I'm going to half-ass it at work, today," so I just assume they did the best they could at the time under the constraints they had. I appreciate their hard work, myself. I was wildly entertained.

Chris McQuaid: This might sound stupid, but life is full of gaps. The gaps are what keep things interesting. People will be talking about this show for years, speculating on every little detail that wasn’t explained, writing fan fiction, attending Q&A’s, etc. One of the things I didn’t care for in the Star Wars prequels was that the story we were told didn’t match the story I had formed in my head, as I’m sure it didn’t for millions of others. Well of course it didn’t, that’s imposable. The best stories are the ones that get you so interested that you start filling in the gaps yourself. Once you’ve done that there is no way for the writers to live up to the story you have created in your own head.

George Palmer: The narrative gaps affected the series, but only in a minor fashion. Sure at times it was infuriating to watch storylines dead end or simply not end at all. But I think in any scripted series you would see that happen, Lost is no different. The difference with Lost however was that we were sucked in to believing that every little nuance mattered, needed to be researched, so when storylines died, it left a tiny bitter taste given the amount of time you could spend on looking into someone's back story.

Why didn't Eloise Hawking want Desmond to reunite the Oceanic 815 passengers in the sideways world?

Rosemary Darigo: I think everyone in the sideways world was a fully realized person, even if we didn't follow their particular stories and it seems like she knew, on some level, that her particular world was about to end. She's a mom (although a really crappy one); maybe her grinchy little heart grew three sizes and she didn't want to lose her son.

Ben Sweeney: Actually, Eloise Hawking's super-knowledge in both the Sideways world and real world is one of the mysteries they had addressed. I can only assume that, in the Sideways world, she had experienced her personal epiphany (i.e. she FELT IT) and couldn't let go to move on. Remember how terrified she looked when she asked Desmond if he was going to take Daniel with him? She had a horribly damaged relationship with her son int he real world and is unable to let go this healed, if not actually real, relationship in the Sideways world.

Matt Bergin: Keeping with my comments above, I don't really know why Eloise Hawking wanted or did much of anything. When there was hope for time travel and course correction to pay off in a big way, the introduction of Eloise and her implied role of time cop was an exciting, mind-expanding addition to the show's mythology. But then there was the whole embarrassment at the Lamp Post, where she overacted her way through a horribly contrived scheme to get the major players back to the island, and he presence and purpose on the show has been questionable ever since. I wouldn't do away with any of the time travel freighter folk business, which gave us so many wild moments and excellent characters...but I really with some of the two and a half hours of finale had gone to helping it all make better sense.

Bill Machon: It would appear that the sideways reality was limbo, and once a person is conscious of that, they can choose to move on, or stay. Eloise did not want Desmond reuniting everyone because she didn't want Daniel to move on yet. Perhaps Eloise is not ready to move on, and does not want to be separated from Daniel.

Stefan Blitz: She's a bitch.

Steve Ahlquist: I addressed this above in the question about Ben Linus. I think the nature of this particular afterlife or purgatory allows you to make decisions as to when to move on. They decided to move onto the "next adventure" together.

Josh Selle: She has a side deal of some unsavory sort with Ben Linus?

Larry Young: I just assumed that she knew the purgatory-like nature of the Sideways, and thought that if the 815ers reunited she'd be deprived of her happily-ever-after with her son Daniel. Her protestations about Desmond's machinations being "against the rules" seems to indicate she knew what was going on.

Chris McQuaid: I thought she just didn’t want to lose her son again. Perhaps she thought she was atoning for what she had done and she thought that if Desmond reunited them he would go off with them.

George Palmer: I think Eloise was on the side of the Man in Black. As was indirectly Ben Linus. I think Ben was doing what he thought was right, having been deceived by the Man in Black. Which is why I said before I think Ben is indeed dead, but heading to a warmer place.

Who was your favorite character on the series and why?

Rosemary Darigo: I was a huge fan if Sayid just based on ass-kicking skills alone. How can you not love a man with massive guns who can snap a neck with his legs? But I also admired his journey to overcome his past and try to be worthy of the woman he loved.

Kurt Jansson: Sawyer. I rooted for Locke in the beginning, but ended up being a Sawyer fan. I liked his back story the most and the fact that he was such a negative person who ended up experiencing trials and tribulations (as they all did) changing him, or letting him be someone different. Someone maybe he always wanted to be. Plus he had great one-liners.

Ben Sweeney: I didn't have one character that I would call my favorite but I liked the funnier characters like Sawyer, Miles, and Lapidus the best.

Matt Bergin: Hurley and Sawyer were always a lot of fun, Locke was at the center of so many brilliant twists, and I've always found Ben and Juliet to be gripping characters, but I'm going to have to go with "the obvious choice"--Jack. It always felt like the story was moving around him and the characters were supporting his bigger picture arc, and it was that central narrative that I always found most compelling.

Bill Machon: Sawyer. I can't pin down an exact reason. I thought he was naturally charming and well-acted in the way that he carried and dealt with his emotional baggage. Sawyer was the one character that I was scared of losing throughout the series. I'm glad he made it to the end.

Stefan Blitz: I agree with Ben that the characters with a bit more humor were certainly more fun to watch. So, I'd agree with Lapidus, Sawyer, Miles and add Desmond, who was always an incredibly rich and interesting character.

Steve Ahlquist: Ben. When he showed up the show finally had a great villain. And Ben was a great villain, even with the Darth Vader style switch from the dark side finale.

Josh Selle: Lapidus. Just a classic archetype. A rough, tough pilot who seems to survive more than what he should, unflappable in the face of the super-weird and still cool, calm and collected under fire.

Larry Young: I loved Lapidus, who arrived on the show in such an unkempt state, tousled, hungover, but also indignant. "What the hell kind of pilot do you think I am?" he'd complained, when someone asked where he'd crashed the helicopter. He'd only have one or two lines each episode, but they were always the best lines of each episode. It almost seemed like he was in a different show than all the other characters, and was always responding to something that maybe he didn't hear quite right. I loved that. Jeff Fahey is great.

Chris McQuaid: Right from the start it was Sayid. First of all I was a pretty big fan of Naveen Andrews’ work in the TV series “The Buddha of Suburbia.” Secondly Sayid was a total badass. Oh sure, Sawyer talked a good game, but Sayid was the one who you really needed to be afraid of. And Third, I found Sayid’s story of redemption to be one of the most compelling (not that they others weren’t compelling, I just liked Sayid’s the best.)

George Palmer: Mr Eko. You don't get much more badass on primetime than him

If you could have one question answered that the series didn't, what would it be?

Rosemary Darigo: Why didn't Vincent get to move into the light? As a dog person, it split my heart open to see him lay down next to Jack in his final moments on the island. Vincent deserves to move on to the land of neverending Milkbones.

Kurt Jansson: I would have to watch the entire series again to answer that. Nothing stands out. It got to a point where I just started enjoying the show for what it was, not looking for answers or questioning things. When I learned of easter eggs or little surprises they were a bonus. It lead to a much more enjoyable experience.

Ben Sweeney: There are too many unanswered questions that became moot as the series concluded that I can't really pick any one thing to answer. As I said before, getting answers to thing like who was dropping the food pallets or why women couldn't survive pregnancy on the Island don't really matter in the grander scheme. That said, again i would like to know more about Eloise Hawking and maybe why Waaaaaaaalt was so special early on.

Matt Bergin: Every answer is just going to lead to more questions, but it would be nice if Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindeloff just admitted that the island was always intended to be purgatory, and any deviation from that was just a work-around to throw savvy fans off their scent.

Bill Machon: How would the world outside of the island been affected had Smoky been able to actually leave the island?

Stefan Blitz: What plot points changed as the result of fan speculation?

Steve Ahlquist: I'm with Ben: explain what happened with all that wacky time travel crap with Daniel and Eloise resulted in two islands, but really there's only one island, and the hydrogen bomb blew them all into purgatory. Why did everyone settle in the 1970's for three years, and how was that important? But you said any one question. Again, I agree with Ben. Why was Walt so important early on?

Josh Selle: How did Jacob and The Man in Black's adoptive mother get her job as protector of The Island? More specifically, how was she able to transfer her power to Jacob with only prayer and a cup of water?

Larry Young: What in God's name was going on with the actors wearing two different colored contacts in a scene, or having characters with brown eyes suddenly having blue eyes? The Season Three promo posters from ABC show this quite clearly, even if you don't catch it in the show as it airs. I'd really like to know what that was all about.

Chris McQuaid: What is the Man in Black's name, damn it?!

Do you think that LOST will be remembered as an important series in the history of television? Why or why not?

Rosemary Darigo: Absolutely, on so many levels. From a media entertainment standpoint, this show spread across all media platforms to create a global watercooler where people just ran with it and made it their own. People Twittered their theories,had live chats during the shows; I even know someone who gained some minor internet celebrity for the hilarious recaps of each episode she posted online. Every Tuesday night, you knew where half the population of the US was: in front of their TV, tuned to Lost. I'm sure advertisers were peeing their pants over it.

From a pure storytelling standpoint, I think the writers showed that smart, challenging, complicated storytelling has a place on TV. We've got the brains and the willingness to get involved with well-written characters, intricate plots, science, science fiction, and spirituality. It doesn't all have to be dumbed-down, Jersey Shore crap.

Kurt Jansson: Yes. The fan base alone is proof. I think it was constantly challenging the viewers thoughts, believes, intellect in some cases! Most remembered tv series are based around the human element and the emotions that go with it (M*A*S*H, Cheers, etc) where we realize in the end it was all a big ride and that ride always ends... and when it does, what are you left with? I think everyone who watched also was able to connect with at least one of the characters, which brings the story/show closer to your heart and you become a part of it. No matter how little or small. It certainly changed a lot of the ways I had watched tv and I'm sure I'm not alone. That kind of stuff sticks with you.

Matt Bergin: If not for the diverse and diversely talented cast and the producers' ambitiously creative approach to storytelling, LOST will be remembered for changing the way we watch television--from the obsessive watching and rewatching episodes looking for clues to unravelling mysteries or to identify possible easter eggs, to the advent of TV on DVD and free downloads on Hulu and ABC.com. The density of pop culture, philosophy, and book learnin' crammed into a single episode of LOST could fuel more discussion and debate than an entire season of any other show to date.

Bill Machon: Yes. Because it elevated sci-fi obsession into the mainstream in an unprecedented way.

Stefan Blitz: Absolutely. The show spawned copycats based around the style of storytelling, and although most of them failed, they introduced, like other memorable series before them, that television doesn't have to be done the same way.

Steve Ahlquist: I hope so. Otherwise television will become crap. But look at the shows on the horizon, and you don't really see anything standing out yet. Happy Town is stuck somewhere between Eastwick and Twin Peaks (with Eastwick dominating) and V is just awful. Fringe is okay, but it's no The X-Files, and even that upcoming Spielberg dinosaur show sounds more like Earth 2 meets Land of the Lost than anything approaching the quality of LOST. I'd love a new show that really grips me.

Josh Selle: Every decade or so has a show that changes either how we tell stories or how we watch stories. From the radio-play adaptations of television infancy to the development of The Sitcom and The Variety Show....then The Twilight Zone, All in the Family with the racism and M*A*S*H. with the blood. Cosby, The Simpsons, X-Files. LOST is in good company and a welcome addition the millennial spot

Larry Young: I think it's obvious that the way they handled the transmedia marketing and influenced not just promotions but the creations of similar shows indicates they've carved out a spot for themselves in Pop Culture Valhalla.

Chris McQuaid: That’s tough to say. The public is fickle, you never know what cultural icon will live on in the hearts and minds of the average viewer. I’d like to say that yes it will just because I think it does deserve to be remembered as such, but I don’t know. One thing that I know for a fact is that it will be remembered in many press releases for new dramatic series over the next 50 years “It’s the next LOST!” “It’s LOST meets 24!” “I think we have another Lost here!”

George Palmer: I think LOST will be remembered for many years to come. Simply for the fact that it had a story, it told it, and it moved on. Even when the ratings were thru the roof, and the creators could have kept it going and rode the money train for years and years, they stuck to their guns and went out when they still had good stories to tell.

What did you think?