I started out with an IMDB rating of 8,
and over time and these episodes it has
gone steadily down to a 4 now.
Who knows, maybe it will go back up.
I guess my question is, if a TV series or
story has some really great parts in it, do
you rate it for the best it is, the best it
made you feel or think, or do you take
the full overall feeling of the thing and
rate that?
I rate it overall. So if I loved seasons one and two (9/10) but not three that much (5/6) I might give it a 7/8 total.
shareThis program has a lot of parallels with Lost for obvious reasons.
Lost when it started had so much potential and really captured people,
and then it just led them down a path of stupid. I watched it to the
end ... well, watched it online ( glad I did not pay for it) but there is
something about programs like this that seems like junk food for the
mind, it might taste good, but it has no value.
So, while at first say when you bite into a Twinkie, you might think, this
is a new taste treat, that is are good as it will ever get. Same with Lost
or Leftovers, you just lose the more you watch it, thought the penis
identification thing was pretty funny, it is a bit joke, that would be better
in a Monty Python or SNL skit. It just shows me that they have nothing
and have to throw in this junk because with junk you need speed and
diversity to keep someone "mentally orienting" - that is the purpose, so
as to confuse and confound any real thinking.
This show is what Lost would have been (unconventional narratives, religion, nuclear weapons, temporal shifts, deep character episode studies) if not for the ABC network interference and JJ Abrams. Thank God, which there is none, for HBO.
share100% agree. If Lost went this route, the show would focus a lot more on the characters than the history of the island.
sharei see it rather in the direction of "under the dome". it could have headed to something great, but turns into shit quite fast.
share