Support NeoGAF

[BenjaminBirdie]

It would certainly help if I saw some compelling arguments.
Think you could try and provide some, or are you "physically incapable" of it, as a recent conversation seemed to indicate?

I'd be willing to bet that it wouldn't help at all. You have dug yourself a little foxhole, semantically, with "compelling" which allowed you to summarily dismiss my discussion of Kate's character arc. That was the point at which I decided to shift my percentages of attention to you from 60% Discussion/40% Laughter At You to 1% Discussion/99% Laughter At You.

In case you were wondering.

 

[Erigu]

I'd be willing to bet that it wouldn't help at all.

So you won't try. And that's not a cop-out at all, damn it!
I see you've learned a lot from Lost and its writers...

You have dug yourself a little foxhole, semantically, with "compelling" which allowed you to summarily dismiss my discussion of Kate's character arc.

Your "discussion"? Dude... You didn't elaborate at all. I quote:
"Pointless? Kate's character arc refutes this. Pretentious? See previous answer. Inconsistent? Shit, please see #1 again."
How compelling! How could I summarily dismiss such a fine argumentation?

 

[Drealmcc0y]

sigh

 

[andycapps]

Started rewatching the series from the beginning a week or so ago and am halfway through season 2. Holy crap the show was so good back then.

Holy crap, this pissing contest right now is interesting. I don't get how people get so upset about a TV show, but maybe that's just part of the appeal of the show and the hold that it got on people that makes it give off such strong reactions.

 

[Erigu]

I don't get how people get so upset about a TV show

Because of the contempt of its writers for their audience and the genres they've been working with, because of the terrible precedent it set when it comes to consistency in a science fiction / fantasy show, because its oh-so-spiritual message is a (self-serving) plea for blind faith over rationality... Pick one.

 

[Mr. B Natural]

Because of the contempt of its writers for their audience and the genres they've been working with, because of the terrible precedent it set when it comes to consistency in a science fiction / fantasy show, because its oh-so-spiritual message is a (self-serving) plea for blind faith over rationality... Pick one.

Furious masturbation story-telling is "in" now-a-days, dude. Nothing your complaints can do about it. Just pray it's a fad and move on with your day.

 

[Drealmcc0y]

Furious masturbating storytelling?

 

[andycapps]

Because of the contempt of its writers for their audience and the genres they've been working with, because of the terrible precedent it set when it comes to consistency in a science fiction / fantasy show, because its oh-so-spiritual message is a (self-serving) plea for blind faith over rationality... Pick one.

I don't see how you can say that the writers literally had contempt for their audience. I'm sure they understood that you can't please everyone.. There were quite a few bumps along the seasons of Lost, that is for sure. Part of it seemed to stem from the fact that they didn't know how long they'd have to resolve this thing in the beginning so they threw out as many ideas as they could, and then halfway through when they heard how long they had, they had to figure out how to resolve as much as they could.

 

[Erigu]

Furious masturbation story-telling is "in" now-a-days, dude. Nothing your complaints can do about it. Just pray it's a fad and move on with your day.

I'm not sure Lost qualifies as masturbatory storytelling. I don't think the writers got any satisfaction from what they were writing (I'm not sure how anybody could, really), just from the fact they got away with it and their bank account is there to tell the tale...

I don't see how you can say that the writers literally had contempt for their audience.

Toward the end, they took a bunch of jabs at the idea of expecting answers, both on the show (those hippies in the New Man in Charge... does that even qualify as meta, at that point?) and in interviews... Let's say that's "somewhat cavalier" of them, considering the mysteries were the reason the show took off in the first place, and they were never shy about capitalizing on those, with their cliffhangers, bonus videos, fake websites, etc.
Also, check those quotes, in that post I linked to above: *
Long story short, they never gave a shit. They merely pretended they did (again and again, with the reassurances that they had a plan, that they knew the answers to their mysteries as they were introducing them), and were certainly glad their audience did, for the longest time. And then: "hey, it never mattered! but thanks for the cash monies!"

 

[Drealmcc0y]

I gotta laugh at saying they never gave a shit.

Darlton lived and breathed lost for 6 years

 

[andycapps]

Toward the end, they took a bunch of jabs at the idea of expecting answers, both on the show (those hippies in the New Man in Charge... does that even qualify as meta, at that point?) and in interviews... Let's say that's "somewhat cavalier" of them, considering the mysteries were the reason the show took off in the first place, and they were never shy about capitalizing on those, with their cliffhangers, bonus videos, fake websites, etc.
Also, check those quotes, in that post I linked to above: *
Long story short, they never gave a shit, but were certainly glad their audience did, for the longest time. And then: "hey, it never mattered! but thanks for the cash monies!"

Well the problem was that they kept adding in questions that needed resolution up until the very end. At some point the show would have stopped to have the intrigue of cliffhangers and each episode would have just been dialogue between characters of them figuring out what things were. So the show would have changed a certain point when they just got into the answers phase. For me, I'm okay that many of the questions from the series were left unanswered. I didn't like some of the answers, and some of them seemed like they'd backed themselves into a corner in previous seasons.

Part of the appeal of the show was the questions, the other for me was the characters and seeing the interactions between them and learning about their past histories and how they were all linked.

Watching it through again has been interesting to see how they'd make you think that from one character's perspective (when you're missing part of the info) that another character was doing something wrong, but then you get to a later episode and see that person's point of view and you wonder how you were so foolish to think that they could have ever been in the wrong.

 

[Erigu]

I gotta laugh at saying they never gave a shit.
Darlton lived and breathed lost for 6 years

Charlatanism can be a full-time job.

 

[Patrick Klepek]

Wow, there's a reason I haven't ever clicked this thread.

 

[andycapps]

Wow, there's a reason I haven't ever clicked this thread.

This has how it's been for.. years really. :/

 

[Jeff-DSA]

Wow, there's a reason I haven't ever clicked this thread.

Man, can you believe the show wasn't perfect? How could they do this to us?!

 

[Erigu]

Well the problem was that they kept adding in questions that needed resolution up until the very end. At some point the show would have stopped to have the intrigue of cliffhangers and each episode would have just been dialogue between characters of them figuring out what things were.

I know they've been using that excuse, but it's a cop-out (besides, they actually went there, with Jacob's campfire, or Michael's "yup, that's what the whispers were!")... Making the reveals compelling is part of the writer's job. And so is anticipating whether or not your new mystery can have a compelling reveal at all.
But never mind "compelling": some of the mysteries they introduced were so silly they simply couldn't be resolved in a satisfying manner anyway (cursed numbers, countdown hieroglyphs, arbitrary phenomenons, etc). A professional writer, who cares about his work and his audience, would know better than to go there in the first place.

For me, I'm okay that many of the questions from the series were left unanswered.

Just to be clear, I don't think all questions should necessarily be answered. But not explaining what possessed those people in that other outrigger to suddenly open fire on Sawyer and the others doesn't add to the show in any way, for example, on the contrary. A lot of unanswered questions fall in that category.

I didn't like some of the answers, and some of them seemed like they'd backed themselves into a corner in previous seasons.

I think they backed themselves in a corner several times over and in record time. But then again, I don't think they ever cared either, as long as people kept watching and buying the season sets...

Part of the appeal of the show was the questions, the other for me was the characters and seeing the interactions between them and learning about their past histories and how they were all linked.

I can definitely see how appealing that would be. That's also something I personally like a lot... in other, well crafted stories.

Man, can you believe the show wasn't perfect?

Euphemism of the year, already?

 

[Mr. B Natural]

Furious masturbating storytelling?

Yes.

Every commercial break needed to end with a "Whoa" moment with a brass crescendo accompanying it. Every episode needed to end with a mega reveal followed by a "DUN"...<pause>..."LOST." Every character had to have a long drawn out overly emotional background with irony to present time events. Every season had to have a gimmick...either be it "end of the world," "time travel" "Flash Sideways." Every damn character had to be so mysterious and illogical to the point that they couldn't even explain what they were doing or why they were doing it without being ambiguous and force-ably and self-destructively coy. But then 4 seasons later, they explain why they did what they did, and you realize it's shallowly put together and there really wasn't a reason why they didn't explain themselves in the first place...other than the writers getting off on everything I just explained (and there's probably more basic self-inflating concepts here that I missed).

Now imagine a bunch of writers, executives, directors, etc actually not only thinking this is a good idea, but also relishing in it. I'm not even getting into how ridiculously stupidly pretentious the story actually is, and dumb, unnecessary and pretentious the "mysteries" were. Details not needed despite being easy pickings for critique. The shear barebones concept is pure non-stop masturbation.

It's like Inception or a bad 90's anime if it was roughly 7200+ minutes long and just HAD to keep upping the ante for the sake of it. The idea that this is how you go about telling a good story, being entertaining and being good at your job as a writer is hopefully some kind of strange fad, that will die soon.

They didn't quite reach L Ron Hubbard levels of you-know-what, but they gave it a college try.

 

[Iceman]

I agree with Erigu, guys.. why are you giving him such a hard time?.. LOST really was terrific. Preach on.

"The idea that this is how you go about telling a good story, being entertaining and being good at your job as a writer is hopefully some kind of strange fad, that will die soon."

Wait what? LOST was exactly that. Entertaining.

If there's only one inviolable rule of story telling (especially in film) its this: NEVER BE BORING.

LOST excelled at that.

 

[Blader]

I think blaming Lost for the existence of narrative hooks and themes/arcs in storytelling is kind of a reach (read: a hell of a reach).

 

[Erigu]

I think blaming Lost for the existence of narrative hooks and themes/arcs in storytelling is kind of a reach (read: a hell of a reach).

I don't see what's wrong with each season having its own gimmick, myself (although I would have a problem with the gimmicks themselves and how they're used), but I completely agree with Mr. B Natural about the rest.

 

[big ander]

Yes.

Every commercial break needed to end with a "Whoa" moment with a brass crescendo accompanying it. Every episode needed to end with a mega reveal followed by a "DUN"...<pause>..."LOST." Every character had to have a long drawn out overly emotional background with irony to present time events. Every season had to have a gimmick...either be it "end of the world," "time travel" "Flash Sideways." Every damn character had to be so mysterious and illogical to the point that they couldn't even explain what they were doing or why they were doing it without being ambiguous and force-ably and self-destructively coy. But then 4 seasons later, they explain why they did what they did, and you realize it's shallowly put together and there really wasn't a reason why they didn't explain themselves in the first place...other than the writers getting off on everything I just explained (and there's probably more basic self-inflating concepts here that I missed).

Now imagine a bunch of writers, executives, directors, etc actually not only thinking this is a good idea, but also relishing in it. I'm not even getting into how ridiculously stupidly pretentious the story actually is, and dumb, unnecessary and pretentious the "mysteries" were. Details not needed despite being easy pickings for critique. The shear barebones concept is pure non-stop masturbation.

It's like Inception or a bad 90's anime if it was roughly 7200+ minutes long and just HAD to keep upping the ante for the sake of it. The idea that this is how you go about telling a good story, being entertaining and being good at your job as a writer is hopefully some kind of strange fad, that will die soon.

They didn't QUITE reach L Ron Hubbard levels, but they gave it a college try.

There are certainly hooks at the ends of commercials or episodes, but calling that a fault of Lost is magnificently idiotic.
In film we have plot progression. We watch and expect events to occur at a certain rate. We want development in the story we're viewing because we want to want to keep watching.
Because television is so long-form, the crescendo's have to keep coming and they have to come often. Television is stretched out and often interrupted. Those high points are necessary to the format.
They are in no way at all even remotely a feature of Lost that you can criticize. EVERY SINGLE SHOW DOES THIS. They end before commercials on a big progression in the story of the episode. They end each episode with a small tease for the next one. It's a facet of the format.
So is having a "gimmick." That term has negative connotations but in actuality, every show has story arcs and plot devices that are meant to cause progression and develop the characters.
You're trying way too hard to undermine the creative process behind Lost. Instead of revealing problems with the structure of the show, you're listing standbys of the television format and acting like they're faults. They aren't. They are features.
As for the characters: this debate has been done so many times in this thread that I don't feel like going digging for posts where the entire arcs of characters have been analyzed. All I know is that I didn't find them offensive like you did. I found them satisfying. Maybe they weren't as deep as other shows. But they were plenty to keep me watching.

 

[Erigu]

There are certainly hooks at the ends of commercials or episodes, but calling that a fault of Lost is magnificently idiotic.

Not when the "reveals" and cliffhangers are so silly (because they're shallow clichés, not nearly as shocking as the music would like you to think, or more random shit that even the writers haven't figured out).

EVERY SINGLE SHOW DOES THIS.

That's not quite true. And few shows are so over-reliant on those.

 

[UraMallas]

I'm sure this interpretation of the final scene has been discussed to death but I didn't see it in the last two pages so I'll just bring up my thoughts on what the ending was supposed to convey.

Jack is the last death on the show, making him the most current death to us. The presently on-going "afterlife" that we watched in the final scene. For lack of a better word, the Losties were in Purgatory. Non-denominational Purgatory, I guess. I think the writers were trying to get away from any one religion and were basically just trying to make an "afterlife" but it is obviously heavily influenced by the Western ideas of Catholicism. That is fairly obvious but I thought I'd state my opinion on that part again.

In addition, I think the ending is an interpretation. Not for the viewer but for each character and how they viewed each other. The final scene and the scenes before that involving Jack is Jack's interpretation. That's why Christian is the one to give us exposition because he is who Jack needs to find before he can finally move on. It's who he needed in life, as well. That person was different for each Lostie, just like who was in the church would've been different for each person. The people in the church are the people that most affected Jack's life for the better in his most important time. Everybody in there contributed to who Jack was, he took part of them along with him. They are not manifestations. They are part of Jack, parts that he took with him from those people. Whether he saved their life (half of the people in the room) or they affected him deeply (Locke and Kate) it was these people that mattered the most to him.

You don't see Ji Yeon, you don't see a 4-year old Aaron. You don't see Helen. Alternatively, you see Sayid and Shannon together. He didn't know Nadia and from what we know, Jack never talked to Sayid about her. Libby was there, Jack saw how she made Hurley happy and of course Jack needed Hurley to be happy. Penny was there because of Desmond's relationship with Jack, not because she was or wasn't on the island.

Jack comes into the church last. (Remember that this is all juxtaposed with Jack's final walk into the jungle to die.) They are there waiting for him, shaking hands, laughing and loving as he walks in. It makes for a good "reuniting" scene but it also makes sense that he would want them all like that, these are the people he most cared about. I don't know if there is any sort of method to the order in which Jack greets all of them but there is part of me that feels "right" when I think about how Locke was the first to shake his hand. Locke was mistrusted and disliked by many in the room in life but Jack holds him in high regard so he is embraced by them all. or the way Hurley picks Jack up off the ground to hug him. Kate takes his hand and sits down next to him in the pew. He sits, they all sit, as if on cue. The music and the looks on faces show anticipation. Christian touches Jack and only looks at the rest. His father leads him on. The last thing you see is Jack's face, completely contented, sitting next to the love of his life and then it fades to white...

This is what Jack wants and needs. It's not right for everybody, not the way this scene would go for everyone, but only the way it would happen for Jack. That is why his death scene is the one juxtaposed with this final scene. That is why "We've been waiting for you." is the last line in the show. I personally like to think of him thinking of each character they flash to as he walks wounded to his final resting place on the island.

One last thing I'd point out is that Jack didn't have a son in real life. Maybe his one true regret? So he makes one up in his "afterlife." I keep putting the word afterlife in quotations because I interpreted it as the first step on a path to the end, but not The End.

One thing I haven't quite made my mind up on with this interpretation is if everything we see in the flash-sideways was Jack's version of the afterlife or if bits and pieces were. I think there is an argument either way for that. It certainly doesn't take anything away from the show, for me, when I think that each of the people had their own, similar version of The End road and we saw parts of everybody's throughout the final season. Especially there "awakening" scenes which I feel make more sense if they are coming from the version of The End that the given awakee is experiencing.

*shrugs* Sorry it was long, it's just how I like to interpret it. People can tear it apart but I find that it fits well with what I thought the show was about and what I took away from it. I'm not religious at all, I'm agnostic. That didn't destroy the ending for me at all, though. This wasn't my story to tell, it was the writers', so I took away from it what I could with my beliefs.

 

[oatmeal]

Well like I say, the bomb was the catalyst moment.

Everything they had gone through in seasons 1-5, the light granted the access to this FSW.

They get this status because of everything they had involving the island.

This is why aaron was a baby and Ji Yeon a fetus because thats the status they were in when they were on the island.

This is why there is no Nadia.

I understand your argument with Penny. Its probably the writers bending the rules slightly here. They had to have Penny in the church with Desmond. But if you really want an answer then, you can just say 1) She did have some involvement with the island even if it was just minimal. or 2) Desmond is an electromagnetic extraordinaire and bent the rules himself.

Or perhaps Penny was there because she is Desmond's constant. Young Aaron was Claire/Kate/Charlie's constant. Etc. etc. etc.

 

[Erigu]

Something, something, something, constant.

Unless I'm mistaken, that term only designated the nauseatingly mushy cure for Desmond's peculiar-yet-strangely-documented illness ("wait, your friend, Desmond? has he recently been exposed to high levels of radiation or electromagnetism?" whoa, doc, you so informed! it's almost like you cheated by watching previous episodes of the show! but I guess you just had enough samples to make that educated guess... and presumably, Brandon and Minkowski were just as special as Desmond, then!)...
Sure, the same episode also had a cliffhanger with some foreshadowing about Desmond being Faraday's constant, but ha ha wait no that never happened just forget about it.

 

[WillyFive]

This thread is ridiculous. Erigu, how can you stand television?

 

[Erigu]

You make it sound like Lost is the best TV show ever.

 

[WillyFive]

You make it sound like it's The Event.

 

[Erigu]

Same calibre, pretty much.

 

[WillyFive]

That's offensive.

The Event tries to duplicate Lost, but without any redeemable qualities, like good characters, stories, production values, music, and yes, especially writing.

 

[Erigu]

That's offensive.

But true, plot-wise.
It's just that the Event is less reliant on "it will all make sense in the end! like, in several years! just trust us!" promises (you know, the one that were followed by "bwahaha! c'mon, don't be nerds: that never mattered! let's focus on what's really important, here: who ends up with who?"), so the ludicrousness of its plot is more apparent.

 

[Drealmcc0y]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1ZE5OXScTY

This is both incredible and terrible at the same time.

 

[Tim-E]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1ZE5OXScTY

This is both incredible and terrible at the same time.

Besides them somehow having access to the old sets, that was pretty awful.

 

[WillyFive]

But true, plot-wise.
It's just that the Event is less reliant on "it will all make sense in the end! like, in several years! just trust us!" promises (you know, the one that were followed by "bwahaha! c'mon, don't be nerds: that never mattered! let's focus on what's really important, here: who ends up with who?"), so the ludicrousness of its plot is more apparent.

Plot-wise? Yes. But Lost did it better and did it well.

Lost had actual pacing, they made sure things that happened were important, and that you were alongside the characters on the ride.

Also, other than whatever Widmore was supposed to do and the bad guy's name, it didn't actually play out like you said it did, unless you missed stuff.

 

[threenote]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1ZE5OXScTY

This is both incredible and terrible at the same time.

oh, god that was painful.

 

[Shorty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1ZE5OXScTY

This is both incredible and terrible at the same time.

makes you appreciate professional acting and dialog
cinematography and music was very good though

 

[threenote]

makes you appreciate professional acting and dialog
cinematography and music was very good though

No, not really.

 

[Shorty]

No, not really.

yeah it was. for an amateur project. they immitated the lost camera work quite accurately.

 

[Tim-E]

It's hard to make the gorgeous locales in this show look bad.

 

[dave is ok]

Plot-wise? Yes. But Lost did it better and did it well.

Lost had actual pacing, they made sure things that happened were important, and that you were alongside the characters on the ride.

Lost used the same bullshit six act structure that network TV requires almost every show use now. That means five or six different 'hooks' or 'twists' to lead into the commercial breaks and is a huge reason why television is so much better on cable these days.

 

[Erigu]

Plot-wise? Yes. But Lost did it better and did it well.

So you agree with me, except for the part where you completely disagree with me? Okay.

Lost had actual pacing

It was just slow. Something Lost copycats can't afford to be because people aren't willing to put up with many shows like that. That's why there was so much enthusiasm for the first season of Heroes. Problem being, if you don't dilute the bullshit, it's easier to detect.

they made sure things that happened were important

Right. Remember when the sky turned purple? Shit was important, son. Consequences were never the same again.
Also, the tail section, Michael and Walt, Ethan and the experiments on Claire's baby, the DHARMA Initiative, Ben and Widmore's rivalry, ...
It all mattered so damn much, in the end, when it turned out it was all about trying to stop/kill some Locke-looking supernatural bad guy who was up to no good (but no clearly defined evil either, so I guess it wasn't all that bad).

and that you were alongside the characters on the ride.

... as opposed to shows that don't do that?

Also, other than whatever Widmore was supposed to do and the bad guy's name, it didn't actually play out like you said it did, unless you missed stuff.

...
I'm not sure what you're talking about, now. But I probably disagree.

Lost used the same bullshit six act structure that network TV requires almost every show use now. That means five or six different 'hooks' or 'twists' to lead into the commercial breaks and is a huge reason why television is so much better on cable these days.

Yes, and it's funny how shows like the Wire don't need cliffhangers up the wazoo to be compelling. Nor overbearing music to tell you how you should feel about what's going on the screen because the script certainly couldn't do that job by itself.
(why do I always feel bad about mentioning the Wire in Lost discussions? it's like I'm cheating or something... I'm not, am I?)

Remember how EPIC that last jungle trek was, in the final episode of Lost? Boy, that's like something out of the Lord of the Rings, isn't it? Yeeeeah!
Now, why is that?
Because of the music?
Because of the cinematography?
Or because our characters are on that ultimate quest that consists of... well, trying to see if they can find Desmond... because maybe he's important... for something...?
And we, the audience, know there's actual urgency, there! Because the bad guy got to Desmond already, and they're going to... er.... destroy the island, now, is it? Somehow? For some reason?
...
Okay, so maybe that wasn't because of the plot.

 

[Drealmcc0y]

Dont compare garbage like The Wire and Mad Men to LOST plz.

LOST is a masterpiece.

 

[Erigu]

Well, its title is in all caps, and that should certainly count for something.

 

[Catalix]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1ZE5OXScTY

This is both incredible and terrible at the same time.

goddammit Hurley, I thought things were supposed to change. Your recruits are just as douchey and evasive as Jacob's.

 

[evilgreg]

I got LOST complete on blu ray for christmas and I've been re-watching over the past few weeks. Last night I watched my favorite episode of the series, 'Do No Harm,' (the one where Boone dies).

I cry EVERY time I watch this episode.

 

[oatmeal]

Something, something, something, constant.

No real argument against it? I'm surprised!

Penny was Desmond's constant, so I think there's a little lee-way there to say he brought her into the fold at the end.

 

[dave is ok]

No real argument against it? I'm surprised!

Penny was Desmond's constant, so I think there's a little lee-way there to say he brought her into the fold at the end.

Desmond was Daniel Faraday's constant, right? Where was he?

 

[oatmeal]

Desmond was Daniel Faraday's constant, right? Where was he?

Staying behind on request from Eloise?

Desmond and Penny being there can be explained by her being his Constant. If Daniel WAS there and Penny/Des weren't, then you could ask that question.

But as it stands, Desmond and Penny were linked eternally...so it makes sense that she was there. Is that really a point that needs to be argued?

 

[Erigu]

No real argument against it?

Against what? Penny was something familiar that Desmond really cared about (the definition of a "constant" according to the show... cue the Dan/Des slashfics), so she got a special permission to join the supposed club of "those privileged enough to move on with their schmoopie (cue the John/Boone slashfics)"?
No, that sounds air-tight.

Staying behind on request from Eloise?

So he was grounded?
And I don't really remember a request, actually:

ELOISE: I thought I made it clear that you were to stop this.
DESMOND: Perfectly clear. I chose to ignore you.
ELOISE: And once they know...what then?
DESMOND: We're leaving.
ELOISE: Are you going to take my son?
DESMOND: Not with me...no.

Des chose the woman over Dan. Their love was not to be.
Or, more probably: minor characters should know their place. Let's say they're "not ready yet".

Desmond and Penny were linked eternally...

I'm tempted to say once again that that's not really what the "constant" thing was about, but Faraday probably changed his mind on that as well, after three years with the DHARMA hippies... "The solution to the equation is... INFINITE LOVE!"

 

[oatmeal]

Against what? Penny was something familiar that Desmond really cared about (the definition of a "constant" according to the show... cue the Dan/Des slashfics), so she got a special permission to join the supposed club of "those privileged enough to move on with their schmoopie (cue the John/Boone slashfics)"?
No, that sounds air-tight.

Not sure what you're confused about. The show never said "ONLY THOSE ON THE ISLAND CAN BE IN THE ROOM".

So he was grounded?
And I don't really remember a request, actually:

Again, why are you confused? Desmond clearly said he wasn't coming with them, he has his own shit to take care of.

Des chose the woman over Dan. Their love was not to be.
Or, more probably: minor characters should know their place. Let's say they're "not ready yet".

Ooooor, you know, Desmond's constant was Daniel...it was Penny. Talking in circles here...forget Daniel, he only needed Desmond as a constant IF anything goes wrong.

I'm tempted to say once again that that's not really what the "constant" thing was about, but Faraday probably changed his mind on that as well, after three years with the DHARMA hippies... "The solution to the equation is... INFINITE LOVE!"

Oh Lord. Just because I said "eternal love", doesn't mean that is what the writers are saying...I'm just using it as an expression as the type of constant they seem to have. No matter what life they're in, they'll find one another.


You really did well in that argument, bro.