[orangedays]

You continue to miss my point here. The details didn't "stop mattering". Lost was always a show that you had to be very tuned in to. It still brought many discussion points to the table. Many episodes made more sense after a second viewing. What I stopped doing was obsessing over every..single..moment of the show. I stopped reading the incredibly detailed blogs/sites that broke down every single moment and talked about what each meant and what theories this did or did not help.

I think this is less an issue of my missing the point and more one of your inability to clearly communicate your point. You said this:

once it became painfully obvious that 90% of these "details" were basically Easter eggs, rather than actual plot points.

If 90% of Input A does not contribute to Output B, one can safely assume that A does not matter. But I digress from turning this into an argument over semantics. I understand your position, you liked the details but weren't obsessed. 10-4. Again, that might have worked for you but my enjoyment derived from the belief that those details held greater meaning. When it became apparent that they did not, that's when my relationship with LOST began to deteriorate.

I love detailed television. The Wire is the greatest thing that's ever been on television, and that show fit the pieces together across multiple seasons masterfully.

I have heard nothing but good things about this show so it's creeped way up to the top of my list after I polish off The Civil War, Baseball and The War by Ken Burns. The Wire and Friday Night Lights.

As to what the point was..I already said, it was about the characters. The first season was great BECAUSE you spent the whole season learning about these characters, why they were here and what tied them together. That's what set the entire show into motion, for me.

And I agree on this point - Season 1 was phenomenal. A tour de force of cinematic television. Season 2 was great, reminiscent of Season 1. Then the wheels started getting a little creaky, then they started coming off. For me (emphasis on the caveat), it was better not knowing certain things about these characters than seeing them in their full, imperfect splendor. I thought the story was better off just being Jack + Kate. Not Jack + Kate + Sawyer - Jack + Jack. I hate soap operas.

One final point: I could not disagree more with the notion that they "sold out". They did exactly he opposite, actually. Selling out would have been to start answering questions they never intended on answering. Selling out would have been simplify the plot, make it easier for people to follow along. In my opinion they went the opposite direction. They dug their heels in the ground and made the show they wanted to make, regardless of what was happening with the ratings.

This is pure speculation. How are we to know what they intended to answer or not? As a perpetual conspiracy theorist, I think Big Boy Laroux hit the nail on the head. There were probably more answers than we saw - but what was the point when every base had already been covered by obsessed netizens? It was better to leave us scratching our heads. The Soprano school of ending a dramatic series. You don't think they simplified the plot? Here's an easy question - was Season 6 as good as Season 1 or 2? Was the show moving on an upward or downward trajectory? This had everything to do with the plot. Maybe there were more moving parts (and by that definition, the plot was more complex), but there were fewer compelling elements. People were getting bored.

My guess is as good as yours, but I truly believe there were exogenous factors that made continued production of the show untenable, economic (cast salaries, shooting costs, declining ratings) and non-economic (exhaustion, other projects). As a result the powers that be made the decision to pull the plug quickly and play it off as "this is what we intended all along and it's so deep you might not understand it, but trust us. "