Didn't they imply someone was IN that vault/cell at the end? I think the Warden told the inmate that somebody was impressed with his con and wanted to see him. I think it's the smoke monster.

 

If they brought back John Locke it would become must-see television.

I thought that it may have been that strange lady who really liked when he was patting her leg. I dont know they made some indication that she only comes out 1 time a year. Otherwise its completely unknown.

poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop poop

Didn't they imply someone was IN that vault/cell at the end? I think the Warden told the inmate that somebody was impressed with his con and wanted to see him. I think it's the smoke monster.

They've taken a number of steps to imply that the hidden person, the person who somehow knows what was going to happen in the 60's, is also the grandfather of the main female character and the person who killed her previous partner.

They've taken a number of steps to imply that the hidden person, the person who somehow knows what was going to happen in the 60's, is also the grandfather of the main female character and the person who killed her previous partner.

 

They've certainly implied he was special in some way.

 

I don't think he's in the vault though. Whoever is in there has to be pretty important, someone they want to keep secret, and possibly someone extra dangerous (3 keys necessary?). The gramps has been seen in the infirmary a couple times giving blood like other prisoners have to, so he's not treated specially, he's not a secret (talks to the other cons), and he's not dangerous (left unguarded).

 

The con who was being put in there in this episode also had a pretty shocked expression on his face, more so than if there was just another prisoner schmoe in there.

I liek turtles

Its hard to speculate because its unclear what the rules of the Alcatraz universe are. It could be something like a prisoner who was supposed to be dead or a guy who is over 100 years old. Just really a million possibilities because theyve given very little background

JJ Abrams says "Stop asking questions."

 

There are definitely a lot of conveniences for the cops. We have to find the kidnapper! Oh hey I just found a piece of paper that says he worked for a cement company that made bunkers and there's only one in this area! We have to find the sniper! Oh hey I just found a scope in his cell and even though you can see an entire side of San Fran, he must have gone to one of these 2 tall buildings in this photo!

 

Didn't they imply someone was IN that vault/cell at the end? I think the Warden told the inmate that somebody was impressed with his con and wanted to see him. I think it's the smoke monster.

 

J.J. Abrams is very impressive when you're willing to give him every benefit of the doubt and basically do all of the work for him. Otherwise, he's a hack that throws s*** at a wall and people think he's the cleverest person in history because of his glasses or some s***.

The Only way I can watch Alcatraz on DVR cuz there are commercials every 5 minutes.

The Only way I can watch Alcatraz on DVR cuz there are commercials every 5 minutes.

Yeah, I was down for the OnDemand route, but they've locked the commercials in with no fast forwarding. Thus, bye bye Alcatraz.

 

I also agree with Milkman. The shows really aren't that smart because they don't really give clues to anything to let people figure it out. They fly by the seat of their pants and events are magical and mostly don't pertain. It was fun on Lost for a couple of seasons, but that well has run dry a bit, I think.

 

To each his own, I guess. The ratings certainly have been solid enough. I know I greatly enjoyed the first evening of "Alcatraz", but in my defense I was drunk.

This season is only 12 episodes and I don't watch anything else on Mondays so I may as well keep DVRing it to finish the season out.

J.J. Abrams is very impressive when you're willing to give him every benefit of the doubt and basically do all of the work for him. Otherwise, he's a hack that throws s*** at a wall and people think he's the cleverest person in history because of his glasses or some s***.

 

I gave him every benefit on Lost and then he proved all of the critics correct with the terrible last season.

I gave him every benefit on Lost and then he proved all of the critics correct with the terrible last season.

 

I think that's a bit harsh. No matter what he did he would be criticized for it. There was literally no ending that would have been satisfactory for as much build up as that show produced.

 

I'd also disagree with the hack assessment. If he was a hack other people would be able to copy what he does successfully. Far as I can tell every Lost-style show since Lost has failed pretty miserably.

 

Edit: Though I guess to be fair, even a show like Fringe, which he produced and wrote and co-created, has been pretty successful.

Edited January 31, 201214 yr by Jenksismybitch

I wouldn't call him a hack, but those last several episodes of Lost were just terrible and exposed his claims that they had this whole story planned from the beginning to be a lie.

 

I did enjoy Super 8 this summer.

 

They had a fantastic show with Lost for several seasons, but then abandoned the whole first half of the show in favor of the jacob plotline that left almost everything unresolved and/or meaningless.

Edited January 31, 201214 yr by StrangeSox

I've never been more satisfied with a series finale than the LOST finale.

 

People that hated it, went it fingers on the keyboard ready to write a Novel about how bad it was. I just sat back and enjoyed the living s*** out of the last episode of one of my favorite TV shows of all time and absolutely loved it. There was nothing that wasn't resolved that I absolutely needed resolved to be happy with the show. Sometimes a little ambiguity is a good thing in art. I don't need every little thing spelled out for me to dig something.

 

If you have a spare 2 hours and 40+ minutes to kill, watch Damon Lindelof interviewed on The Kevin Pollack Chat Show. Gave me a whole new appreciation for the show and respect for show runners everywhere.

the last episode wasn't terrible in and of itself, but several leading up to it were and the fact that so many plot lines (ultimately, wtf was the point of Dharma or the others or Penny's dad looking for the island etc.) were just dropped.

People that hated it, went it fingers on the keyboard ready to write a Novel about how bad it was. I just sat back and enjoyed the living s*** out of the last episode of one of my favorite TV shows of all time and absolutely loved it.

This type of post is ridiculous and becoming all too common around these parts. So anyone who hated it is some nerd who writes pages about hating it, but anyone who sat back, relaxed, and strapped it down (and enjoyed it, of course) is just simply able to enjoy tv!

This type of post is ridiculous and becoming all too common around these parts. So anyone who hated it is some nerd who writes pages about hating it, but anyone who sat back, relaxed, and strapped it down (and enjoyed it, of course) is just simply able to enjoy tv!

 

The whole ambiguity thing in movies/TV is getting out of hand. No, not everything needs to be spelled out, but there ought to be an effort to provide enough plot or dialogue so that an intelligent fan can draw a logical conclusion. Lost was just a series of random events designed so that it got people interested, but the writers didn't have a complete story in their heads and predictably couldn't provide explanations for a ton of things. As a counterpoint, I'll say the Sopranos. We didn't see Tony die, but given all of the events/hints/common sense, it is possible to logically draw that conclusion.

The whole ambiguity thing in movies/TV is getting out of hand. No, not everything needs to be spelled out, but there ought to be an effort to provide enough plot or dialogue so that an intelligent fan can draw a logical conclusion. Lost was just a series of random events designed so that it got people interested, but the writers didn't have a complete story in their heads and predictably couldn't provide explanations for a ton of things. As a counterpoint, I'll say the Sopranos. We didn't see Tony die, but given all of the events/hints/common sense, it is possible to logically draw that conclusion.

Maybe we should all follow that example and cut to black just before the end of every.

This type of post is ridiculous and becoming all too common around these parts. So anyone who hated it is some nerd who writes pages about hating it, but anyone who sat back, relaxed, and strapped it down (and enjoyed it, of course) is just simply able to enjoy tv!

 

Hey, I'm a nerd who enjoyed it. I can fit into both categories.

 

It's just my opinion, I'm not gonna try and convince people who hated it that they were wrong. I was just spelling out how I viewed the finale and show in general. Writing/Producing great television is f***ing HARD, so I'm willing to cut people some slack for giving me (for the most part) free entertainment....

Maybe we should all follow that example and cut to black just before the end of every.

The period ruined it.

We are plowing through 'Friday Night Lights'. I can't believe we waited so long. This show is as good as people say.

I think that's a bit harsh. No matter what he did he would be criticized for it. There was literally no ending that would have been satisfactory for as much build up as that show produced.

 

I'd also disagree with the hack assessment. If he was a hack other people would be able to copy what he does successfully. Far as I can tell every Lost-style show since Lost has failed pretty miserably.

 

Edit: Though I guess to be fair, even a show like Fringe, which he produced and wrote and co-created, has been pretty successful.

Lost was a great great television show. No matter what people would have been dissapointed given the great build up. In regards to Fringe, he's done a tremendous job. Alcatraz (albeit I haven't watched this weeks episode) is an entertaining show but so far it has been more of a CSI show involving Alcatraz. If thats the case I probably won't continue to watch it, however, I'll give it a few additional episodes to create some sort of back-story.

Steve,

 

Help me with Justified. I like it but not gonna watch first two seasons until April when I am out of commission for a bit. Too many bad guys for me to follow. Cliff notes Please.

Lost was a great great television show. No matter what people would have been dissapointed given the great build up. In regards to Fringe, he's done a tremendous job. Alcatraz (albeit I haven't watched this weeks episode) is an entertaining show but so far it has been more of a CSI show involving Alcatraz. If thats the case I probably won't continue to watch it, however, I'll give it a few additional episodes to create some sort of back-story.

 

Yeah i'm not arguing Alcatraz is some great piece of television. It is WAY too procedural right now. But so was Fringe in the first season. I think the networks don't like shows like Lost that require viewers to watch every episode to know what's going on. With shows like Fringe or Alcatraz, they've made an effort to grab some of the drop in/drop out viewers so they don't ignore the show. Do that for a season and you probably pick up some more dedicated viewers, and then in later seasons you can start to ramp up the episode-to-episode plotlines that require you to watch each episode.