We are now 15 episodes into HBO's "The Leftovers" and after all this time I am still faced with one looming question: is this a good show?
I think "The Leftovers" is an interesting show; it's well acted (Kevin Carroll's John Murphy has been a revelation this season and Carrie Coon's Nora Durst is a constant presence) and it is shot in creative ways that make it feel different. It does things that good shows are supposed to do like force the audience to think for themselves and flesh out fully formed characters. The themes of loss and grief and emptiness are universal, powerful and easily relatable and there's certainly a whole lot of show-not-tell. But does it all add up to an actually good show? To answer that question would be like asking the Guilty Remnant to change up their fashionable color scheme.
One of the main problems I have with "The Leftovers" is unsurprisingly the same issue that plagued "LOST" in its latter years. Both focus on supernatural or unexplainable elements though it seems like neither is ever interested in using these to serve the actual characters or overall story. Instead, they are frustrating plot devices meant to act as fleeting WTF moments. Rather than offering profound realizations or insights, the lack of clarity has compounded to the point that we can no longer compute what is real and what is not; what is improtant and what is not.
You would think that showrunner Damon Lindeloff, who was also one of two shot callers on "LOST," would have learned his lesson by now, but it appears as if he is steering right into the skid.
As a viewer, I don't need an explanation for The Departure. In fact, I think leaving that particular mystery open ended allows for an air of suspense and wonder. But the constant teasing of other, smaller mystical feats without any payoff is beginning to wear on me. For a show that deals heavily with the notion of faith, "The Leftovers" doesn't give a whole lot of reasons for the audience to have any.
In season one, the series dangled several interesting carrots that either turned out to be Red Herrings or just unexplained phenomenon. I can deal with the ambiguity surrounding Holy Wayne because he represented both the best and worst of humanity; faith and hope versus greed and exploitation, purpose versus meaninglessness. But why and how was Kevin special? What was the significance of that National Geographic issue? Is Kevin's father just plain old crazy or does he really know something we don't?
Raising these questions didn't impact the audience on an emotional level, they just stoked the flames of plot intrigue without ever really being explained or put to use. Why build these mysteries up if you aren't going to explore them further? Doesn't that ultimately render the story insignificant?
This season has been a vast improvement but I still find myself scratching my head as it relentlessly focuses on Kevin's psyche and the town of Miracle, Texas. Ann Dowd's Patti is a joy to watch as she commands the screen (ditto for Christopher Eccleston) and chews up scenery like it was Thanksgiving dinner. But is she only there to reinforce Kevin's severed connection to reality, or does she serve a larger purpose? I'd like to see even more interaction between her and Kevin and for that relationship to lead to greater implications beyond the debate of one character's sanity. Perhaps they are finally starting down that path as the homeless man atop Miracle Tower acknowledged Patti's existence earlier this season. But who knows?
Similarly, John has spent this entire season fighting against the belief that Miracle is a special place, yet the audience is led to believe otherwise in several instances (the girls' disappearance, the lake draining, Mary's brain activity, etc.). Presenting two sides to the argument is all well and good and makes for some solid message board fodder, but it has left me more confused than any show has a right to do. Right now I feel like I need a PhD in philosophy to make sense of it all.
Watching TV shouldn't be a chore nor should it feel like a slog through another mentally confounding episode. There are aspects of season two such as the intense character focus that I absolutely love, but they are drowned out (pun intended) by the constancy of the inexplicable.
It's perfectly fine for a show to raise questions and leave certain things for the audience to decipher. That's what makes potent symbolism, allegories and deeper meaning possible and even enjoyable in TV. But for "The Leftovers" to constantly teeter on the edge of fantasy and actuality without ever providing any sort of context or resolution takes away from the overall quality of the show. For a series dedicated to exploring human nature, it doesn't seem to realize that audiences need answers every now and then.
If you don't want to provide them then that's fine, but don't rub our faces in it every week with a new mystery.
