[Standback]

[color=#000000ost_uid0][quoteost_uid0]
Instead of answering such important questions, Enterprise is making the viewers think about them.[/quoteost_uid0]

[quoteost_uid0][quoteost_uid0]
Simply saying "we won't explain to you what the h*** is going on, neener neener neener" does not qualify.[/quoteost_uid0]Then what would you call most [iost_uid0]X-files[/iost_uid0] episodes? They don't always answer everything. Or do they? It's been too long...[/quoteost_uid0]

I'm not going to argue with you about the X-files, because I perfectly agree with you there. They had far too many episodes ending with some weird deus ex machina and no explanation whatsoever. They were trying to create that mysterious, "we-don't-know-anything,-but-the-truth-is-OUT-THERE" atmosphere. Sometimes they did it very well - suddenly the whole episode comes together, and we realize how alien and bizarre the threat-of-the-week was, and what was so special about it that let it do whatever it did. A lot of times, they just went, "it was ALIENS, get it?". And those episodes - at least their endings - rather sucked.

Please tell me that you can see the difference I am talking about here - between information that is deliberately withheld in order to provoke curiousity, suspense, thought and mood, and information that's withheld "just because" or because the writers don't know it either. The first is good storytelling. The second is very bad storytelling, and highly frustrating for the reader or viewer who sense that the writer isn't quite bothering to do his job.

In this case, it's quite obviously the latter, not the former. For what purpose are the writers keeping the information from us? What reaction are they hoping for? It's not suspense and awaiting for an actual answer - if there's another movie, it's not going to start with, "Well, what ACTUALLY happened was, Neo waited until Smith had melded with him, and then returned to the Source, dragging Smith along with him." Nothing like that. We're never going to find out the answer.

Emotion? A statement on how much we don't know? What, exactly, is the emotion/debate at stake here? "The Lady and the Tiger" ends without us knowing the end - because that, in itself, is the point - what difficult choice she'll make. That's how open-ended stories generally are - we see the options, we're aware of the consequences, and that's it, either because we can predict enough of what will happen for ourselves, or because the choice and the consequences are themselves the point of the story. This, on the other hand, is an utterly pointless and neutral-value question - how did Neo win? This isn't a debate, or a conflict, it's just a question of objective fact. There's no emotional question or debate.

Thought? If there was a single clever answer, I could accept that - "it's there, if you just think about it. It'll come to you." But it was so vague, and I've heard so many conflicting answers, none any better based than another, that there is clearly no "right" answer. Or, if there was, it's incredibly subtle. Given the quality and style of [iost_uid0]Reloaded[/iost_uid0] and [iost_uid0]Revolutions[/iost_uid0], I'm not going to bet on "subtle".

Just please say that you can see the difference I'm talking about. Please.[/colorost_uid0]