I recall reading that Nikki and Paulo were supposed to be important, integral characters to the storyline of Lost when they were first introduced. Important and integral for what, filler?? Who cares about characters who turn out to be nothing but an O. Henry story that is in no way pivotal or important to the ongoing plot? The episode was entertaining, and it was nice to see some long-Lost characters again, but as far as the storyline goes, it was a complete waste of time and effort. I can't see them being rescued from that mound of heavy sand, so what was the point?

If you are not of a certain age group, the humor in this episode (and most of the series) will go right by you. And it is obvious that the show does not care if you don't, they know who their audience is. Slowly but surely, this total absurdity is starting to make sense. One almost has to have a degree in (pop) psychology to understand the subliminal humour hidden behind the easily accessible slapstick and wisecrack that explains the character's behaviour.
It is always amazing to watch a show written and acted by people who can make it seem so simple to introduce new excuses and reasons for their characters in every other episode, and never lose the fun factor. It's also amazing how some reviewers refuse to admit they just aren't old and wise enough to watch the show.

I have no idea why I started watching this show, maybe because it's on at a time when I have nothing else to watch, but the more I see it, the more I love it - I laugh out loud almost all the way through. What is boring and redundant in most television comedies becomes new and different here. The kid is totally believable as a kid, even while the adults are all total caricatures - every cliche sitcom character you can think of is represented here, but the writing, performances and chemistry elevate this show way above typical sitcom standards.

Ok, too easy to make the jokes, but this episode seemed very influenced by the movie, even to the point of calling Cooper a cowboy. All in all a good one: a veteran director, songs that made sense, nice use of color, oldsters actually resembled youngsters, aside from the wife - the older she got, the taller she got, but I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume she wore arch supports.
Now all I have to complain about is Lily's hair - it looks like early sixties bouffant prom queen from the chin up and late sixties hippie straight from the chin down - get a haircut, Lil!

Well acted, great story, great acting by some of the guest stars, notably the female guest, who fortunately played herself both older and younger; she should get an Emmy nomination. But once again it all is almost ruined by poor casting choices. Are we really supposed to suspend so much disbelief as to accept that some of the younger actors grew up in a short ten years to look like the older actors?? At least two characters looked nothing whatsoever like their older counterparts and that almost ruined the entire thing for me.
The first mistake was using kids who couldn't possibly be aged into older appearances through makeup. Use actors who can play both young and older and then the problem is solved.
Does this show have such a huge budget that they can throw money away on hiring two actors who don't even vaguely resemble each other when hiring just one would serve for the role, and add needed credibility?