Skip to main content

Los Angeles Times: "Is Harrold Perrineau the 'Lost' Holdout?"

Earlier this morning, I indicated my belief that Harold Perrineau was the Lost cast member mentioned by E! Online's Kristin Dos Santos who wouldn't be returning for the series's sixth and final season.

Over at the Los Angeles Times/Show Tracker site, I wrote a piece entitled "Is Harold Perrineau the 'Lost' Holdout," which--you guessed it--takes a look at whether Perrineau is the mystery cast member in question who has refused the producers' offers to return to the series next year.

After ruling out other potential parties, it seems as though Perrineau's Michael Dawson won't be making another appearance on the ABC drama series, which makes me wonder just how Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse will work around his absence.

Do you agree with my sleuthing? Is Perrineau the likest suspect and why? Any other theories? Head over the comments section and have your say...

Comments

Mrs. James Ford said…
You're completely correct. Harold has every right to pass on coming back after the dreadful way they used his character when they brought him back the first time around. They completely wasted him that whole season and then just killed him off with a dismissive "you can go now."
Anonymous said…
It's definitely him. Wasn't he reluctant to come back last time and only did so after they gave him an obscene amount of money? I figured the reason the end of his story last time was so definitive was b/c they figured they probably wouldn't get him back a second time.
Anonymous said…
I thought the actress that played Libby was not coming back
Anonymous said…
Are you saying the writers are not creative enough to write around his character? It was a waste of time to bring him back in season four and Perrineau didn't exactly keep his hurt feelings to himself. What is left of his story that can't be told from another character's perspective? Nothing. No one is going to say at the end of the season "Oh this would have been so much better if they had just used the Michael character one more time to say WAAAALLLLTTTT!"
Heatherette said…
Regarding the last comment, the writers are definitely "creative enough" to do things without Perrineau but it could be problematic if all of the other original cast members are in the final season and he's not. I'm not sure what story the writers are going to tell but it could be odd with him not there.
Jeff C. said…
Having watched season 1 again over the summer, I was struck by what a good and central character Michael was. He was badly used in seasons 2 and 4, but if there really is to be a reboot (and I'm not yet convinced there is), it would be a shame not to have a pre-kidnapping-of-Walt Michael around.
fenster said…
It does not seem to be Harold: http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/watch_with_kristin/b150014_harold_perrineau_sets_record_straight.html

Popular posts from this blog

What's Done is Done: The Eternal Struggle Between Good and Evil on the Season Finale of "Lost"

Every story begins with thread. It's up to the storyteller to determine just how much they need to parcel out, what pattern they're making, and when to cut it short and tie it off. With last night's penultimate season finale of Lost ("The Incident, Parts One and Two"), written by Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse, we began to see the pattern that Lindelof and Cuse have been designing towards the last five seasons of this serpentine series. And it was only fitting that the two-hour finale, which pushes us on the road to the final season of Lost , should begin with thread, a loom, and a tapestry. Would Jack follow through on his plan to detonate the island and therefore reset their lives aboard Oceanic Flight 815 ? Why did Locke want to kill Jacob? What caused The Incident? What was in the box and just what lies in the shadow of the statue? We got the answers to these in a two-hour season finale that didn't quite pack the same emotional wallop of previous season

Pilot Inspektor: CBS' "Smith"

I may just have to change my original "What I'll Be Watching This Fall" post, as I sat down and finally watched CBS' new crime drama Smith this weekend. (What? It's taken me a long time to make my way through the stack of pilot DVDs.) While it's on following Gilmore Girls and Veronica Mars on Tuesday nights (10 pm ET/PT, to be exact), I'm going to be sure to leave enough room on my TiVo to make sure that I catch this compelling, amoral drama. While one can't help but be impressed by what might just be the most marquee-friendly cast in primetime--Ray Liotta, Virginia Madsen, Jonny Lee Miller, Amy Smart, Simon Baker, and Franky G all star and Shohreh Aghdashloo has a recurring role--the pilot's premise alone earned major points in my book: it's a crime drama from the point of view of the criminals, who engage in high-stakes heists. But don't be alarmed; it's nothing like NBC's short-lived Heist . Instead, think of it as The Italian

The Daily Beast: "How The Killing Went Wrong"

While the uproar over the U.S. version of The Killing has quieted, the show is still a pale imitation of the Danish series on which it is based. Over at The Daily Beast, you can read my latest feature, "How The Killing Went Wrong," in which I look at how The Killing has handled itself during its second season, and compare it to the stunning and electrifying original Danish series, Forbrydelsen , on which it is based. (I recently watched all 20 episodes of Forbrydelsen over a few evenings.) The original is a mind-blowing and gut-wrenching work of genius. It’s not necessary to rehash the anger that followed in the wake of the conclusion last June of the first season of AMC’s mystery drama The Killing, based on Søren Sveistrup’s landmark Danish show Forbrydelsen, which follows the murder of a schoolgirl and its impact on the people whose lives the investigation touches upon. What followed were irate reviews, burnished with the “burning intensity of 10,000 white-hot suns