Brace Yourself For The Reboot Of Lost, Five Years From Now

When Lost ends this Spring, the story will be over, producers Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof insist. But that doesn't mean there won't be any more Lost. And they explain what the ending will have in common with Battlestar Galactica's.

Cuse and Lindelof are adamant that the show won't end with any cliffhangers or open-ended resolutions that seem to be crying out for a continuation or a movie or an additional miniseries. But at the same time, they tell The Hollywood Reporter's Live Feed blog, you should expect to see more Lost:

Cuse: The Walt Disney Co. owns "Lost." It's a franchise that's conservatively worth billions of dollars. It's hard to imagine "Lost" will rest on the shelves and nothing will ever be made with "Lost." Eventually somebody will make something under the moniker of "Lost" — whether we do it or not. We just made a commitment to this group of characters whose stories are coming to a conclusion this May.

Lindelof: Somebody made a sequel to "Gone With the Wind." Sometimes the franchise transcends the storyteller. The definitive edition of "Lost" ends this May on ABC, and that is the story that we have to tell. It has a beginning, middle and end. That ending will not have cliffhangers, or be set up in such a way that people will be saying, "Clearly they're going to make more of these." We don't have any connection to another TV series or movie, but there's a new "A-Team" movie coming out, for god's sake. This is a business that thrives on known commodities. "Tron" is the most buzzed-about Disney movie for next year, and it has been gathering dust for 20 years. I cannot imagine there will not be something with "Lost" on it involving smoke monsters and polar bears and time travel.

So how will you feel about that definitive ending? THR asks Cuse and Lindelof a bunch of different ways, and they're cagey. But they do say it'll be controversial, but hopefully will feel connected to the six years of television that precede it. Fans will have one reaction: a gut reaction, at the time, followed by a "legacy reaction" six months or a year later, as you come to grips with it. They also say the Locke/Jack relationship, with the faith/science conflict that goes with it, will come to a resolution.

And Lindelof says there are two different kinds of endings: clear-cut and awesome, like The Shield's, or debatable, like The Sopranos' or BSG's:

Lindelof: It really boils down to: Is it satisfying? Have you given the audience an emotional ride that makes them feel that they're satisfied, that it's a good meal? Every one of those shows had a different criteria. The ending for "The Shield" was, asking whether Vic Mackey would get some form of comeuppance for all the things he's done over the series. That's a similar question that went into the "Sopranos" ending, which is why people who didn't like the cut to black were unsatisfied, because they felt, "I feel the resolution of this show has to be what happens to Tony Soprano, and you didn't answer that question." The "Battlestar" ending had 10 different things on its agenda other than character resolution ... you have to admire it for the sheer audacity for what it was trying to accomplish. That being said, the "Shield" ending was phenomenal, and almost every fan of the show agrees with that. Whereas the other shows — and probably with the ending of "Lost" — there's some debate about the ending. "Did I like it? Did I love it?"

It's worth reading the whole interview, for more hints about Cuse and Lindelof's process in crafting the last season. [THRFeed]