By now you probably know that season 6 of LOST may potentially bring back many, if not all, of the original cast members.  We don't know how, we don't know why, and we don't know for how long, and we don't want to know until they lay it on us, but the LOST producers have dropped heavy hints we will be seeing some old favorites once again.  Meanwhile, though, two erstwhile LOST cast-members will be reuniting off the island, in the big screen sequel to 30 Days of Nights.

Bloody Disgusting is reporting that Harold Perrineau (Who last battled zombies in 28 weeks later) and former LOST co-star Kiele Sanchez (of Paolo and Nikki fame) are amongst those already cast for 30 Days of Night: Dark Days, which creates a new thread in Steve Niles original graphic novel skein.  The plot concerns Stella, played in 30 Days of Night by Melissa George who has NOT yet committed to the sequel, bent on getting revenge on the vampire behind the attacks that left her husband along with most of the other residents of an isolated Alaskan town dead.

A possibly related angle is that E!Online's 'Watch With Kristin' is reporting that a particular LOST actor declined the opportunity to return in season 6.  Could it be that they had 'bigger and better' things on their plate?

LOST Actors Reunite... Off The Island

"The Unusuals" is ABCs quirky new cop drama, but it hasn't done very well so far in the ratings, despite good reviews. The new series is on Wednesday nights following "Lost" and even features Lost alum Harold Perrineau as Detective Leo Banks (it also stars Jeremy Renner and Adam Goldberg).  The Alphabet Net seems to be making a valiant effort for the new show, airing two new episodes this week, and pre-empting "Cupid", to help it find it's audience.  But if ABC really wanted this series to do well, why would they set it up to fail by placing it following Lost?  For that matter, is Lost still a viable lead-in series for ABC, or would the network be better off placing it in the 10pm timeslot?

Now before Lost fans start sending me hate mail, please understand that I love the show more than anything else out there, and I prefer the timeslot it is in right now, because it fits best into my Wednesday night routine.  But you can't deny the facts that first of all, Lost isn't really carrying the viewership for a good lead-in series, and second, the proof is in the pudding, so to speak, with the show's track record of new series that follow it.

Lost Season 2 (2005 - 2006)

The new series Invasion premiered following our favorite island drama, and although Lost was pulling in an average of over 15 million viewers for the season, Invasion fell flat and was canceled.  It did manage to put away a full season of 22 episodes, something no series following Lost has done since.

Lost Season 3 (2006 - 2007)

This season of Lost the new series was called The Nine, and it was actually a pretty well put together tv series.  Lost's ratings had started to fall slightly during season 3, and was only pulling in an average of 13.7 million viewers.  The Nine only made it seven episodes and pulled in an average of just 7.7 million veiwers.  For the second half of the season Lost was moved to the 10pm timeslot and was therefore followed by local news.

ABC did try to give the series a second chance the following year (not after Lost) but it was too late for this series.  Lost had already done its damage.

Should "Lost" be a Lead-in Drama?