Enjoyed the first season, unsure of the second, and thought that maybe I just didn't "get it"
NYTimes : The Unseen and Unexplained, Inching Closer to the Truth
"“Lost,” on ABC tonight, is the most intriguing of all the series that traffic in the supernatural, mostly because it defies its own illogical reasoning. As the third season resumes after a three-month hiatus, nothing about the fate of the plane wreck survivors marooned on a paranormal island (or is it an archipelago?) makes much sense. But the real mystery of “Lost” is not the Dharma Initiative, the Others or why some characters are named after British philosophers (John Locke, Edmund Burke). It’s whether the writers actually have a cohesive story line that ties together all the unexplained subplots."
I thought maybe the plot was complex, set as a puzzle you had to solve... but maybe not. Maybe it's more like a long running soap opera.
"The fans of these kinds of serialized thrillers are unusually passionate and devoted, carrying a clout not unlike that of anti-abortion activists — their intensity is in some ways more powerful than their numbers. The writers of “Lost” say they pay close attention to Web sites and blogs devoted to the show, and sometimes adapt the script accordingly.
A reference to “Our Mutual Friend” surfaced at the end of the second season, a hint that the show’s executive producers identify with Charles Dickens. Yet “Lost” seems less like a sprawling, serialized 19th-century novel than like “American Idol”: the show’s writers and producers are so responsive to public reaction that viewers may as well be voting characters on and off the island by phone and text message."