Quote:
Originally Posted by Third Eye
I guess I don't see the show being that cerebral and certainly not philosophical. I'll give you the good v evil, but that isn't very deep. They played with the science v faith thing, but in the end I don't really think they broke any new ground there either. They loved to hint at big ideas with book references and character names but to me those themes existed only on the periphery. As an example, sure there are characters named Locke, Rousseau, and Hume (all philosophers who wrote about the "state of nature"), but I don't feel that they ever really developed that other than superficially.
Again, just for clarity, I LOVED the show, just didn't think it was deep.
|
Yeah, that's fair.
I can see that. LOST definately is an "entertainment-first" kinda show. But I think they tackled some pretty heavy issues. Beyond just naming characters or the good vs evil dicussion. There's the fate vs free will debate. As well as science vs faith. The "playing God" debate. They even debate the necessity of torture. There's a lot going on. There are moral and ethical power plays in almost every episode.
I do agree that some of it was on the periphery. But I think it's still there. One of the things I loved about the show was it's balance of heavier issues with exciting entertainment.
When I think "fluff" I think more of shows like Grey's Anatomy. Which is another show that pretends to tackle issues. There are many "morality" issues at play on that show, but it's certainly not opporating on the same level as a show like LOST. To me, Grey's is fluff. LOST is more cerebral.