My Name Is Sawyer Too! LOST, HEROES -- reviewed!

- Man, last night's LOST was so up and down for me. On one hand, it had some stellar, I'm-talkin'-Emmy-worthy, performances. Terry O'Quinn turned in another memorable performance as John Locke. Even though Locke can be one of the most frustratingly-written characters on the show (and last night was no exception), I still love watching his story unfold, in large part because O'Quinn is just that damn good in his role. Similarly, Josh Halloway is truly kicking ass as Sawyer. Even though the character's been kind of neutered and watered-down of late, last night Halloway turned in one of his best acting performances to date. And no one is better at delivering those slightly campy but oh-so-cool cut-to-commercial lines than him. "What's your name?" "Sawyer." "Funny, Sawyer is my name too." Awesome. Can't say much more than that. Speaking of which, holy lord, can Kevin Tighe play evil or what? Locke's dad, aka the real "Sawyer," has to be one of the most purely evil bastards ever seen on television drama. Superb acting by Tighe in this supporting role.

All this being said, this episode often had me screaming at the TV in frustration. So much of this episode was totally nonsensical. Of course, we had plenty instances of what is by now old hat for viewers of Lost -- inane conversations that set up all kinds of questions - questions that are inevitably met only with some kind of lame, cryptic response that reveals nothing. This episode practically exploded the thermometer in this regard. Not only were there a lot of frustratingly vague, non-conversations, but much of the basic premise of this episode just lacked any real internal logic. The craziness culminated when the Others string up Locke's dad, and as a bunch of Others look on, led by Ben, they demand that Locke kill his father right then and there, as some kind of strange test of will. Why did the Others want this? Why would Locke even consider doign what they want? None of this felt adequately explained. Ben is a great character, a cool villain, and expertly acted by Michael Emerson. But like Locke, he is uber-frustrating at times because he is forced to speak in unintelligible ambiguities. Same goes for the great Elizabeth Mitchell as Juliette. She's had moments of true greatness on the show, but too often she is just made to smirk mysteriously and speak in riddles. When we have characters taking time to ASK the same questions that the viewers are asking - the how's, who's, why's - and even then, are met only with more riddles - well, that makes for frustrating viewing. It doesn't come off as clever or mysterious - it feel like the writers have decided "Okay, we can't reveal anything until episode 35, so let's just string 'em along for episodes 32, 33, and 34." It feels artificial. It feels forced and contrived.

It's too bad - because in many ways last night's ep was a sterling example of everything that Lost does so well -- great characters, superb acting and production value, moments of great drama, tension, and intensity. The scenes of Sawyer locked in a room with the man whose name he adopted in a fit of vengeance were some of the very best I've seen on TV this season. But so much of this episode, in contrast, was simply placeholder, filler, a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. I just want to see the show, as it's done every so often, fire on all cylinders. All these great character moments will, ultimately, feel hollow, if the show continues to be about nothing in particular.

My Grade: B

- Meanwhile, I finally saw this past Monday's HEROES. Okay, I'll bite. I agree, basically, with all you Heroes geeks out there, when I say: DAAAAAAAAAAAAMN~! That was pretty kickass. I mean, the thing with Heroes is, as I've talked about, it has very familiar tropes. Anyone who's seen X-Men or whatever will find little new under the sun with this show. But I give 'em credit - this week's Heroes just may have out-X-Men'd X-Men. There was high drama, time travel, a huge sense of scope, twists, turns, and even Back to the Future-level space/time continuum craziness. I give Heroes credit of late for packing so much into every episode - in a world of decompressed serial TV shows, you've gotta love a show that is going 100 mph. It still has flaws, still has a little bit of the derivative factor, and man, still some subpar acting. But Monday's ep, I think, probably cemented Heroes in the annals of TV lore, and earned it a permanent place in the hearts of geeks everywhere. It's not many mainstream shows that can flash forward to a post-apocalyptic dystopia that may or may not ever occur thanks to the headache-inducing power of time-travel, and come out the stronger for it. Claremont and Bryne on Days of Future Past. Waid and Ross on Kingdom Come. James Robinson's The Golden Age. Byan Singer's X-Men film franchise. Alan Moore's Watchmen. All legendary in their own right. If Heroes hadn't pulled off this episode, it could have rightly been deemed a knockoff, a wannabe, a retread. But Heroes did pull it off, with flying colors. This was some kickass stuff, and it may be that Heroes: "5 Years Gone," is one day mentioned in the same sentance as those classics.

My Grade: A