• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

scary article - 20 ways the show could have been frakked!

I wish season 4 hadn't been cut short. I would have liked to have seen what they had planned and what stuff we missed out on.

I do hope, someday after the series has ended, one of the writers or head people will let us know what all that sort of stuff would have been, sort of an "alternate Lost". I'd like to know how Paulo & Nikki would have been "woven through the Lost mythology" or what would have happened if Ben hadn't been the leader, and what the cut season four stuff would have been. Or Walter's storyline would have been had he not grown so much. Stuff liek that would be really interesting to hear about when everything is over.
 
If season 4 had been longer I think we would have had flashbacks for the freighter crew, perhaps Charlotte and Frank in particular.

I disagree with the article when it refers to losing Mr. Eko as a good thing. I really don't think his arc ended well. Same goes for what they said about Libby as well. Why begin plying her charcter with mystery only to never revisit her? Her relationship with Hurley was sweet as well.

I laughed when I read that they were going to kill Jack off in the first episode. I wouldn't have minded that, but then seeing their alternate idea to have Kate become the leader - ew! :D

No Sawyer would have been a bad, bad thing. No Sun and Jin would have been just as bad. I don't think whoever wrote the article understood Jin's character though. He can fish and steer a boat because he's a magical Asian? Surely it has more to do with his father being a fisherman? Jeez, it's almost as bad as throwing a stuffed polar bear at the camera. :lol:
 
I agree that they were wrong about Libby's loss being a good thing. As for Kate being the leader, interesting notion. Would have needed different casting (a young Sigourney Weaver type) and writing (Kate really makes more sense as a character if she's depicted as somewhat mentally ill).

An unstable but charismatic ass-kicking character could have easily taken over as leader among a bunch of directionless civilians, particularly if she were clever and cemented some key alliances, such as with Sayid, who is also a natural leader but kept himself in the background intentionally. A character who hid their instability well from the others, and managed to gain everyone's trust while being a loose cannon (known only to the audience) would have lent some interesting dramatic tension to the show. I'm envisioning a younger version of Gemma, the character Katie Sagal plays in Sons of Anarchy, with an intense combination of ruthless ambition and maternal protectiveness.
 
I think they could have handled an Eko plot, but, at the same time, I do think having him die did help refocus Locke. Libby being alive or dead would subtly change Hurley, but I'm not sure for better or worse. Still, her death was probably one of the most shocking moments for me (I didn't entirely expect Anna Lucia to get shot, but it wasn't out of the range of possibility in my mind, Libby caught me completely by surprise and made me hate Michael). The biggest reason I'd want to keep at least one was to give the Tailies more of a point, but they did serve their role in the season, so I won't complain.

A longer season 4 would have probably given Frank and Charlotte flashbacks. Charlotte would have annoyed most fans, while I would have enjoyed it because she's a hot redhead (plus, there would probably be some information about the history of the island passed through her). The Frank plot would likely be a bit more pointless and be about his alcoholism or guilt for not being the pilot or something like that, but would be pretty fun because Lepidus is a fun character. In the end, neither was needed, but wouldn't have hurt the show.

The one I agree the most about (there are others I support somewhat) is Jack. Yeah, he's been annoying at times, but he's also been stable as the leader, which allows other characters to shine in their roles. Plus, as much of a waste as Kate seems to be, I don't know if she could have handled the lead in the show.
 
I agree that they were wrong about Libby's loss being a good thing. As for Kate being the leader, interesting notion. Would have needed different casting (a young Sigourney Weaver type) and writing (Kate really makes more sense as a character if she's depicted as somewhat mentally ill).

An unstable but charismatic ass-kicking character could have easily taken over as leader among a bunch of directionless civilians, particularly if she were clever and cemented some key alliances, such as with Sayid, who is also a natural leader but kept himself in the background intentionally. A character who hid their instability well from the others, and managed to gain everyone's trust while being a loose cannon (known only to the audience) would have lent some interesting dramatic tension to the show. I'm envisioning a younger version of Gemma, the character Katie Sagal plays in Sons of Anarchy, with an intense combination of ruthless ambition and maternal protectiveness.

Yeah that sounds interesting. Just as long as she's not like the Kate we did end up with.

I think they could have handled an Eko plot, but, at the same time, I do think having him die did help refocus Locke. Libby being alive or dead would subtly change Hurley, but I'm not sure for better or worse. Still, her death was probably one of the most shocking moments for me (I didn't entirely expect Anna Lucia to get shot, but it wasn't out of the range of possibility in my mind, Libby caught me completely by surprise and made me hate Michael). The biggest reason I'd want to keep at least one was to give the Tailies more of a point, but they did serve their role in the season, so I won't complain.

I loved the shock of Ana-Lucia and Libby biting it. Michael what the hell? Libby surviving would also have been good as it would have left more trace of a Tailie presence, rather than just Bernard. After Eko went as well I felt a bit bitter (stupid really!) - why did we go through everything in season two? It all plays better on rewatch though I think. The Tailie characters don't stay around forever, but they help to get our regular Losties to certain places they wouldn't have otherwise reached.
 
^ The season finale got an additional hour late in the game, so we got 14 episodes instead of 13. Without the writers' strike, we might have gotten 17 episodes instead of 16. That's why I suggested that we were either 2 or 3 episodes short.
 
I disagree with a lot of that article. I don't think too many of those things would've fucked up the show. Made it different? Yes. Fucked it all up? Doubtful.
 
Having Jorge Garcia play Sawyer, the character he originally read for, and not the great Hurley would have screwed things up for me.
 
I've never been a huge fan of the Sun - Jin story. That might not have been a bullet dodged IMO.
 
Having Jorge Garcia play Sawyer, the character he originally read for, and not the great Hurley would have screwed things up for me.
He (and Dominic Monaghan) only read for Sawyer because Sawyer was one of the few characters that were already written into the script at the time. It was not like they ever actually were up for the role. The producers simply liked Jorge from his Curb Your Enthusiasm appearance and they wanted him on the show, and they wanted Dominic on the show as well, but they had to have auditions first, and they just gave them the initial script and told them to read Sawyer's lines. Then they created the role of Hurley specifically for Jorge Garcia. Charlie was meant to be a middle-aged has-been junkie rock star, kinda like Ozzy Osbourne, but when they cast Dominic they made him... a young has-been junkie rock star. :lol:

Sawyer was first supposed to be a slick conman from New York, but they liked Josh Holloway's Southern accent so they changed his background.

They always wanted Terry O'Quinn to play Locke, and he and Harold Perineau were the only people who were cast without having to audition.

Matthew Fox read both Jack's and Sawyer's role. Another interesting tidbit is that Jack was supposed to be played by Michael Keaton and to be the apparent lead character & initial leader of the Losties who gets killed by Smokey at the end of the Pilot. Then when the executives convinced J.J. and Damon to keep Jack alive and have him really be the lead character, they had to look for another actor who could commit to a regular series.

Yunjin Kim originally read for Kate, or rather, an earlier version of Kate, who was supposed to have lost her husband in the crash, was not supposed to be a fugitive, and was meant to become the leader of the Losties, after Jack's death. (The part about sort of losing a husband was later transferred to Rose in the final version of the Pilot.) They liked her and she was the first person to be cast, but they decided to create a Korean character for her instead , and a character of her husband (they said they always wanted to have characters who didn't speak English). So apparently Daniel Dae Kim has Yunjin Kim to thank for getting a role on Lost.
 
You know, killing Jack might not have been a horrible thing. Offing the obvious male lead and replacing it with a woman would have really been ballsy. Plus it's not like they've done much with Jack since.

I can also understand the Sawyer hate. I didn't like him until the time travel arc. I hope that marked a more permanent change to the character because if they go back to the same Jack-Kate-Sawyer BS I'll kill myself.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top