Blogs > Tuned in to Pop Culture

They’re not standing around the watercooler, but Cheryl Sadler, Mark Meszoros, Mark Podolski and Nicole Franz are talking about what they’ve been watching, listening to and playing during their free time.

Sunday, October 31, 2010

What is "The Event"?

The promos on NBC refer to "The Event" as the lovechild of "24" and "Lost". Six episodes in, I'm starting to see that.

I watched several seasons of "24" via Netflix and was somewhat burned out after that. I don't remember which season I last saw, and I don't know if I'll ever go back to finish the entire series. "Lost," on the other hand, might be my favorite TV series of all time. I've mentioned that I didn't think any show could replace "Lost," but that was all the chatter I had heard about "The Event." So, I'm giving it a try, and it's kinda sorta growing on me.

The show flashes back and forth between present time and the past -- 66 years earlier, five years earlier, 10 hours earlier, 10 days earlier. Jumping around in time can be a tricky tactic to tackle, and it's something "Lost" did really, really well (maybe "The Event" would benefit from a sound effect to notify the audience of a transition). "The Event" is getting better at it as the show goes on, or I'm just getting more used to it -- not to mention that the jumping around is starting to make more sense as it now is actually advancing the plot.

The show in general is beginning to make more sense as more of the mystery is revealed. I guess that is where the "Lost" elements enter: These characters are trapped in some kind of crazy happenings, trying to figure out what is going on so they can get home safely. The "24" aspects of the show include a national emergency, government secrets, bad guys pretending to be good guys, and one guy who is determined to save the love of his life and her family -- all in a fast-paced, high energy setting that is incredibly similar to Jack Bauer's adventures. "The Event" also seems to have a bit of "Heroes" in it, with people who aren't exactly human. (And, the same creepy guy from "Heroes" is portraying the same character from "Heroes": the governmental aide who wants to keep the special beings locked up.) ("Heroes" is another show I started and stopped but might return to someday. The first season was so great, and the second season went nowhere. I think I tuned out in the third season.)

So can a mix of a highly successful show, a darn successful show and a moderately successful show that got awful fast become a success? I can't tell yet. I think the rest of the season will be fine, but I'm not sure where it will go from there. After all, we're still trying to figure out what the namesake of the show is (was that what was happening at the end of episode six????). And after "The Event" of season one, are we going to have another "Event" for season two, and so forth? Or will the "event" keep happening? (Or is it what happened in 1944????) I'm curious about what's going to happen in the next episode, but not in the same way I was with "Lost," when I would watch and re-watch and re-watch the preview for the following week (and spend a big chunk of my free time talking theories about the show, browsing Lostpedia, and preparing for an audiocast about the show for I just don't feel that way about "The Event," and I'm not entirely confident the series will become my new "Lost."

For now, I know of two things that will keep me tuning in every week: Jason Ritter and Ian Anthony Dale.

-- Cheryl Sadler

Labels: , ,


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home