Support NeoGAF

[Erigu]

The show never said "ONLY THOSE ON THE ISLAND CAN BE IN THE ROOM".

Cool, we agree on that.

Desmond clearly said he wasn't coming with them, he has his own shit to take care of.

More wheelchair-bound people to run over? This late in the night?
Desmond was all over the place for the main cast. But Faraday's just going to have to wait for another driver, apparently.

forget Daniel, he only needed Desmond as a constant IF anything goes wrong.

Does that mean he'd have to fall in eternal love with him first? Ah, but would that qualify as "something going wrong" already? Faraday and his paradoxes!

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.

Again, did I miss an episode? Or some other work of fiction that popularized the term "constant" as some synonym for "destined second half for this life and the next"?
My argument would be that you're blowing this "constant" thing out of proportion (and context). That's about it.

As for why those characters and not others were in the church... Like I said, good luck figuring out in-universe "rules". I'm pretty sure there aren't any and I already explained why.
Real world explanations, on the other hand... Desmond and Penny somehow ended up being our power couple, so of course they get seats! But we're really trying to give off a "look at how this went full circle!" vibe, y'see, so "episode 1 characters" get precedence, overall. And exceptions can be made for their schmoopies. No Nadia though, because Shannon's actress is available, and we wouldn't want her to be left alone with Boone. A bit creepy, ya know. So Sayid gets with Shannon. And of course, no Michael nor Walt. C'mon, now.

 

[oatmeal]

Cool, we agree on that.


More wheelchair-bound people to run over? This late in the night?
Desmond was all over the place for the main cast. But Faraday's just going to have to wait for another driver, apparently.


Does that mean he'd have to fall in eternal love with him first? Ah, but would that qualify as "something going wrong" already? Faraday and his paradoxes!


Again, did I miss an episode? Or some other work of fiction that popularized the term "constant" as some synonym for "destined second half for this life and the next"?
My argument would be that you're blowing this "constant" thing out of proportion (and context). That's about it.

As for why those characters and not others were in the church... Like I said, good luck figuring out in-universe "rules". I'm pretty sure there aren't any and I already explained why.
Real world explanations, on the other hand... Desmond and Penny somehow ended up being our power couple, so of course they get seats! But we're really trying to give off a "look at how this went full circle!" vibe, y'see, so "episode 1 characters" get precedence, overall. And exceptions can be made for their schmoopies. No Nadia though, because Shannon's actress is available, and we wouldn't want her to be left alone with Boone. A bit creepy, ya know. So Sayid gets with Shannon. And of course, no Michael nor Walt. C'mon, now.

*sigh*
Like talking to a wall.

You misread almost every single word of my post, as usual... Your reply is gibberish to me. When you can come back with a real reply I'll answer. But you struck out looking there.

 

[WillyFive]

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.

That's stretching for complaints. Most people don't even notice.

I notice how everything has orange and blue on them, I notice how new shows are always trying to abuse shaky-cam (and I dislike it for the most part), and when special effects shots have a single very rapid zoom on them so that they seem dynamic (which I hate), but I wouldn't base my dislike for a show over that.

I can like Star Trek TNG even though live action shots and special effects shot have a completely different frame rate from one another.

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

Not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying the genre is inherently bad? Or are you saying that the you don't like what happened in the show? Because neither response can be taken seriously because both would be hilariously based on taste.

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.

I didn't think it was slow. But I did watch it back to back. Everything was clearer that way, and no time was given to create my own ridiculous theories, and basing everything on that theory, so that I wouldn't be disappointed when it turns out my whole theory was wrong from the beginning, and then dare to complain the show had plot holes for a story you made up.

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).

Sky turning purple? You actually cared about the color of the sky, a special effect that visually told you something big was going on? I bet you also went crazy when you realized every car that crashed into someone in the show was yellow...LIKE JACOB!

Also, what about the tail section? That's where the Season 2 characters came from. Was it supposed to be something more? Did you want the tail to be magic or something?

What about Michael and Walt? Michael did bad decisions and caused him to be in limbo, and Walt had to be the one to set him free. What did you want to happen with them? What was your theory like?

What about Ethan and the experiments? Because of the atom bomb explosion and the release of the electromagnetic thing under the island, women couldn't give birth in a healthy matter and usually died. Did you want superheroes, or monsters?

What about Dharma? They studied and did the experiments. I'm not sure what you want here.

Lost is not just one big story ark, they are many. Some began and ended before The End, except Michael and Walt's ending, which was for the DVD thing. You can't have every single story go at the same time, it would be a ridiculous mess, like The Event and later Heroes seasons.

The only one you got right was Ben and Widmore, but I already told you were right about that one.

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

The try, but they don't exactly work. Were you as interested over what happens next to whatever the main character's name was for The Event as you were for Kate getting her toy plane back? The fact I even remember such a small plot point shows that Lost did it better than The Event, in which I can't even remember his name.

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

No, you agreed. Ben and Widmore was an unresolved plot line (that I know of).

 

[Spotless Mind]

The try, but they don't exactly work. Were you as interested over what happens next to whatever the main character's name was for The Event as you were for Kate getting her toy plane back? The fact I even remember such a small plot point shows that Lost did it better than The Event, in which I can't even remember his name.

You choose to bring up that subplot in defense of Lost?! lol The robbery to get back a toy fucking aeroplane is one of the single dumbest things i have ever seen air in a tv drama. Holy shit it was hilarious. Lost may have better production values, but the writing is just as terrible as The Event and that's what matters most.

 

[Erigu]

You misread almost every single word of my post, as usual...

Yes, let's say that.

Not sure what you mean by this.

I say that the Event and Lost are pretty much the same calibre, plot-wise.
You reply "Plot-wise? Yes. But Lost did it better and did it well."
... Wut?
Which is it? Same calibre or not? Do you agree or disagree?

I didn't think it was slow.

Well, many people did. Even in its final season.

But I did watch it back to back. Everything was clearer that way, and no time was given to create my own ridiculous theories, and basing everything on that theory, so that I wouldn't be disappointed when it turns out my whole theory was wrong from the beginning, and then dare to complain the show had plot holes for a story you made up.

You got me, there: I made it all up, indeed. All those quotes, those plotlines I mentioned? They were from a fan fiction of mine, actually.
Nobody noticed anything, until you showed up. Watching the show back to back gave you a far keener insight, and that's how you were able to tell.

Or maybe that's a tiny bit ridiculous.

Sky turning purple? You actually cared about the color of the sky, a special effect that visually told you something big was going on?

Well, the sky turning purple apparently mattered:

[On-Island - Back in the operating room, Jack works on Ben's spine while Tom stands by looking green.]
JACK: You okay?
TOM: Yeah, I just don't like blood too much.
JACK: [holding a chunk of tissue in the air] Well, then you probably won't want to be looking at that. [he tosses it in a tray] So, if you really can get off the island why didn't you just take him to a facility? Why all this?
TOM: Because ever since the sky turned purple, we've been...
[We see blood spurt up from Ben, and Jack takes a step back. The heart monitor starts beeping.]
TOM: What the hell happened?!
JACK: I just nicked an artery.

Damn you, Jack! Tom was about to spill the beans, and you ruined it! I'm pretty sure that wasn't yet another hilariously transparent attempt by the writers to indefinitely postpone an answer!
After all, Ben's slightly convoluted plan to grab Jack was the source of much drama in seasons 2 and 3!
... Wait, that's right: it started before the sky turned purple, didn't it? Hmm.
Ah, well, I'm sure Tom had a great explanation for that, but we'll never hear it because Dr. Shephard nicked an artery!

I bet you also went crazy when you realized every car that crashed into someone in the show was yellow...LIKE JACOB!

Now, now. Jacob's color was white, and his brother's was black. And like many things on the show, that was highly symbolic and so deep, but it would be quite long to explain...

Also, what about the tail section? That's where the Season 2 characters came from. Was it supposed to be something more?

Yeah, I keep forgetting that Ana Lucia was always supposed to die like that, for example. Maybe because the show made such a big deal about Jack and Ana Lucia meeting again (and they're both leaders of their respective groups, too!), maybe because I tend to expect newly introduced characters to have a purpose, maybe because of that orphan plot thread about building an army... If only I hadn't known a damn thing about storytelling!

Michael did bad decisions and caused him to be in limbo

Well, yeah: he betrayed the good-looking main characters in order to be reunited with his son, and that's arguably worse than, say, becoming blinded by your thirst for revenge and killing an innocent man, or murdering your father-in-law in his sleep because you hate his guts.

What did you want to happen with them?

Maybe some explanations as to what made Walt so special and interesting for the Others (until he was too old to be interesting anymore, that is). That would have been nice, seeing how a lot of drama stemmed from that, in the earlier seasons...

What about Ethan and the experiments? Because of the atom bomb explosion and the release of the electromagnetic thing under the island, women couldn't give birth in a healthy matter and usually died.

Yes, and? Why did the Others need Aaron? It's not like they were stranded on the island and had to kidnap children to insure their group's survival over the years: they had a sub. They could recruit. They could give birth on mainland.

What about Dharma? They studied and did the experiments. I'm not sure what you want here.

Some relevance, for starters? They really didn't matter much, in the end, did they?

You can't have every single story go at the same time, it would be a ridiculous mess

It is a ridiculous mess.

Were you as interested over what happens next to whatever the main character's name was for The Event as you were for Kate getting her toy plane back?

Pretty much, yeah.

No, you agreed. Ben and Widmore was an unresolved plot line (that I know of).

I'm still not sure what you're talking about...

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

You choose to bring up that subplot in defense of Lost?! lol The robbery to get back a toy fucking aeroplane is one of the single dumbest things i have ever seen air in a tv drama. Holy shit it was hilarious. Lost may have better production values, but the writing is just as terrible as The Event and that's what matters most.

Your "dumb" (probably easily translatable to "featured on the television program Lost" in your specific case) is someone else's "resonant". I remember watching it the first time and the idea that this thing from her childhood is the specific thing that landed her on the island was not without its own levels of meaning and significance for the character.

Sure, Lost isn't Mad Men. The Dark Tower isn't Infinite Jest either. Doesn't mean the former has just as much capacity to be emotionally involving as the latter.

 

[butter_stick]

I have never seen a more successful troll. What is wrong with you people?

 

[Catalix]

EVEN THE BABY BLANKETS. :lololol

man, these links always deliver.

 

[Erigu]

Your "dumb" (probably easily translatable to "featured on the television program Lost" in your specific case) is someone else's "resonant".

We're talking about a woman who killed her father-in-law in his sleep because she hated the guy. You know, if we were talking about a young child, I guess I could understand... But no, she was an adult, and murder seemed like a much better option to her than, say, going to the authorities. Oh, and she did that after taking out an insurance policy, so that was as premeditated as can be.
Ironically, the same authorities she didn't bother to go and look for would then look for her. Guess they might have done some good, back then, huh? Well, Kate does go to a cop, at some point, and marries him. Because what could go wrong? But then, she finally thinks, and leaves the guy. After drugging him. He should get over it rather easily.
Anyway, she wasn't quite done being a walking catastrophe, so she enlisted her childhood friend's help. That goes about as well as you'd think, and in the ensuing car chase, the childhood friend (whose life was apparently going quite well, thanks: he was a doctor) gets a bullet to the head for his trouble.
So that's when Kate realized that maybe she'd be better off either facing her charges or becoming a really, really low profile fugitive.
Just kidding.
She gets nostalgic over her (now dead) childhood friend and wants to get a toy plane back. And that means conspiring with a gang to rob a bank.
(she then finds out that *gasp* her accomplices aren't nice guys, and she shoots them dead (*)... one of them was her boyfriend)

I'm not sure I would want to live anywhere near somebody finding that "resonant".


(*) EDIT: My bad: as oatmeal pointed out, I was apparently mistaken about the "dead" part. There's always that!

 

[Spotless Mind]

LMAO. Erigu is the bestest poster ever.

Boggles the mind that this constitutes amazing character writing to some people.

 

[Korey]

Have we covered the magic lighthouse yet?

 

[Erigu]

Have we covered the magic lighthouse yet?

Guess we weren't lookin' for it.

 

[Lafiel]

We're talking about a woman who killed her father-in-law in his sleep because she hated the guy. You know, if we were talking about a young child, I guess I could understand... But no, she was an adult, and murder seemed like a much better option to her than, say, going to the authorities. Oh, and she did that after taking out an insurance policy, so that was as premeditated as can be.
Ironically, the same authorities she didn't bother to go and look for would then look for her. Guess they might have done some good, back then, huh? Well, Kate does go to a cop, at some point, and marries him. Because what could go wrong? But then, she finally thinks, and leaves the guy. After drugging him. He should get over it rather easily.
Anyway, she wasn't quite done being a walking catastrophe, so she enlisted her childhood friend's help. That goes about as well as you'd think, and in the ensuing car chase, the childhood friend (whose life was apparently going quite well, thanks: he was a doctor) gets a bullet to the head for his trouble.
So that's when Kate realized that maybe she'd be better off either facing her charges or becoming a really, really low profile fugitive.
Just kidding.
She gets nostalgic over her (now dead) childhood friend and wants to get a toy plane back. And that means conspiring with a gang to rob a bank.
(she then finds out that *gasp* her accomplices aren't nice guys, and she shoots them dead... one of them was her boyfriend)

I'm not sure I would want to live anywhere near somebody finding that "resonant".

I think you summarized everything about Kate. That makes her such a terrible character.:lol and shit i actually forgot about the "toy plane" thing until you brought it up here. I forgot how awful it was.:lol

 

[Erigu]

I think you summarized everything about Kate.

Oh, there would be more. Lost is the gift that keeps on giving.
For example, the thing that apparently drove her over the edge was finding out that her father-in-law was actually her biological father! And that's added incentive to kill him, obviously.
And we have this scene between Kate and the man she thought was her biological father (the oh-so-emotional climax of that particular episode's flashback plot):

KATE: Hi, Dad.
AUSTEN: Katie, the police and the U.S. Marshals are looking for you. You shouldn't have come here.
KATE: I've been waiting outside for 2 hours, they're not here.
AUSTEN: Is it true what they're saying? [Kate doesn't answer.] Katie, what'd you come here for?
KATE: Why didn't you tell me, Dad?
AUSTEN: Tell you what?
KATE: I was making a scrapbook -- a surprise for your birthday. So I called one of your COs to get some pictures of you in uniform. The pictures that he sent me had dates on the back -- photos of you in Korea up until 4 months before I was born. Why didn't you tell me that Wayne was my father? Why?
AUSTEN: I didn't tell you because I knew you'd kill him. And your mother loved him. You were 5 years old. I wanted to take you along with me. She wouldn't let me.
KATE: So why didn't you kill him?
AUSTEN: Because I don't have murder in my heart. I'm going to have to call them.
KATE: Can I have an hour?
[He nods, and Kate hugs him.]
KATE: Bye, Daddy.

...
Where to begin.
Her father always knew she'd kill the guy if she were to find out he was her real father? Really? And he knew that because she had murder in her heart? ... Is Kate a female Damien Thorn?
Also, doesn't that kinda imply that the great guy who says that he doesn't have murder in his heart (take that, Kate!) knew there was something wrong going on? And yet, he didn't do anything about it (or, as Kate naturally puts it: "why didn't you kill him?"... our lead female, ladies and gentlemen!).
Well, okay. Never mind all that: let's hug, now. Awww.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

LMAO. Erigu is the bestest poster ever.

Boggles the mind that this constitutes amazing character writing to some people.

"Amazing"? No. I don't think Eddie Dean is much of a Mario Incandenza either. It's broad, genre writing, but that doesn't mean it can't have an impact.

...
Where to begin.
Her father always knew she'd kill the guy if she were to find out he was her real father? Really? And he knew that because she had murder in her heart? ... Is Kate a female Damien Thorn?
Also, doesn't that kinda imply that the great guy who says that he doesn't have murder in his heart (take that, Kate!) knew there was something wrong going on? And yet, he didn't do anything about it (or, as Kate naturally puts it: "why didn't you kill him?"... our lead female, ladies and gentlemen!).
Well, okay. Never mind all that: let's hug, now. Awww.

Could you do this with The Stand? Or Detta Walker from The Dark Tower? I would seriously love to read it.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

So, can we get Erigu to analyze anything else? I'm sure he'd have a field day with BSG and their creators who openly admitted and enjoyed making shit up on the fly.

In fact, I think it'd be a great idea if we just made an actual Lost thread and then he can just wank by himself here.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

So, can we get Erigu to analyze anything else? I'm sure he'd have a field day with BSG and their creators who openly admitted and enjoyed making shit up on the fly.

In fact, I think it'd be a great idea if we just made an actual Lost thread and then he can just wank by himself here.

This is my new goal. I don't even remember if he ever said the other stuff he likes. I want the Erigu Take on so many things.

I wonder if he's seen Cyrus....

 

[dave is ok]

That Kate post was pretty much the greatest thing I've ever read.

 

[Erigu]

It's broad, genre writing

No, it's just shitty writing.

Apparently, neither Kate nor her father even considered going to the authorities or something like that. Nope, it's like there simply was no such thing, and murder was the only option (and since good dad "didn't have murder in his heart", he just left her to her own devices, naturally... don't let that get in the way of the emotional moment).
But of course, once Kate killed the guy, all of a sudden, authorities were all over the place to chase or marry her.
It's like the world conveniently changed overnight, all in the name of drama.

Then again, Lost taught me many things, and among them was the idea that murder was a perfectly viable option. When you're part of the good looking main cast.
In fact, it's actually quite cathartic, healthy even, as we've seen with Cooper or the executed Others.
Anyway, it's not a big deal at all, and people shouldn't hold that against you. Just look at Kate when she got back on mainland: Jack explained she was a great girl (he lied a tiny bit in court, but that was for a good cause), so "well, in that case, I guess it's fine, then!"

If you're not part of the good looking main cast, on the other hand, you're in trouble, obviously. That gives the good looking main cast carte blanche to eliminate you.
Even if you're lucky enough to be a popular bad guy, you'll still have to get the shit beaten out of you on a regular basis, and to go through some (slightly preposterous) redeeming arcs.

What about Michael, then? Well, yes, Michael was part of the cool kids, but he betrayed the good looking main cast. So that was a sin, right there, obviously.
And maybe him being a bit "dark" in the first place meant he simply had to work harder than the others? (see also: Sayid)

Such a moral show. It's heartwarming to see audiences being moved over all that.
It's like the writers don't have a moral compass. Or maybe they lost it a while ago in a gratuitous causal loop. These things happen.

Could you do this with The Stand? Or Detta Walker from The Dark Tower? I would seriously love to read it.

I would think Stephen King has enough critics already, by now? Can't say I'm motivated, myself... "LULZ THE HAND OF GOD DETONATED THE BOMB LULZ"?

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

No, it's just shitty writing.

Apparently, neither Kate nor her father even considered going to the authorities or something like that. Nope, it's like there simply was no such thing, and murder was the only option (and since good dad "didn't have murder in his heart", he just left her to her own devices, naturally... don't let that get in the way of the emotional moment).
But of course, once Kate killed the guy, all of a sudden, authorities were all over the place to chase or marry her.
It's like the world conveniently changed overnight, all in the name of drama.

Then again, Lost taught me many things, and among them was the idea that murder was a perfectly viable option. When you're part of the good looking main cast.
In fact, it's actually quite cathartic, healthy even, as we've seen with Cooper or the executed Others.
Anyway, it's not a big deal at all, and people shouldn't hold that against you. Just look at Kate when she got back on mainland: Jack explained she was a great girl (he lied a tiny bit in court, but that was for a good cause), so "well, in that case, I guess it's fine, then!"

If you're not part of the good looking main cast, on the other hand, you're in trouble, obviously. That gives the good looking main cast carte blanche to eliminate you.
Even if you're lucky enough to be a popular bad guy, you'll still have to get the shit beaten out of you on a regular basis, and to go through some (slightly preposterous) redeeming arcs.

What about Michael, then? Well, yes, Michael was part of the cool kids, but he betrayed the good looking main cast. So that was a sin, right there, obviously.
And maybe him being a bit "dark" in the first place meant he simply had to work harder than the others? (see also: Sayid)

Such a moral show. It's heartwarming to see audiences being moved over all that.
It's like the writers don't have a moral compass. Or maybe they lost it a while ago in a gratuitous causal loop. These things happen.


I would think Stephen King has enough critics already, by now? Can't say I'm motivated, myself... "LULZ THE HAND OF GOD DETONATED THE BOMB LULZ"?

Aw, come on, man. Don't wuss out. Start a new thread if you have to. It'll literally be the first one I've ever subscribed to.

As far as the rest of that, I honestly have no clue what you're talking about. It sounds like you're conflating general cast attractiveness with moral storytelling but I'm not 100% sure what "conflating" means.

I don't think the Lost characters were ever supposed to be strictly moral. Pretty much everyone except Hurley fucked up in big ways and/or small ways. That seemed to be the general point of the show.

It also seems like a slippery slope to require characters to be "moral". Does that mean I'm not allowed to like, well, shit, anyone on Deadwood? I was going to say Jewel but even she illegally procures guns for Al's whores.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

What about Michael, then? Well, yes, Michael was part of the cool kids, but he betrayed the good looking main cast. So that was a sin, right there, obviously.
And maybe him being a bit "dark" in the first place meant he simply had to work harder than the others? (see also: Sayid)

I think you're just making larger (and really, unsurprisingly dumb) assumptions about Hollywood productions here and as Lost criticisms, I give it a C-. You need to step your game up Erigu, you're losing the plot of your own criticisms (just like Lost, HI-O! amirite).

 

[Erigu]

Aw, come on, man.

Nah, thanks. I'm sure you could already find all that online anyway...

Pretty much everyone except Hurley fucked up in big ways and/or small ways

Yeah, I, too, completely forgot about that time when Hurley blamed himself for causing the deaths of two people. Sounds like another life, right? Then again, food jokes (because hey, hey: Hurley is fat! *laughs*) sure beat that shit.

It also seems like a slippery slope to require characters to be "moral". Does that mean I'm not allowed to like, well, shit, anyone on Deadwood?

It's one thing to feature immoral or amoral characters (and those can be quite interesting indeed), it's another to make it look like that doesn't matter and portray them as great people.
Locke, in a faith relapse, kills a woman he never met by throwing a huge-ass knife in her back, but that has no lasting consequences at all. We just don't talk about that. Jack gets mad at the MiB for "disrespecting his memory by wearing his face", and we're reminded that Locke is an awesome dude as he enters the limbo church on his new working limbo legs, all smile. He sure deserved it.
There's a bit of a problem, there.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

It's one thing to feature immoral or amoral characters (and those can quite interesting indeed), it's another to make it look like that doesn't matter and portray them as great people.
Locke, in a faith relapse, kills a woman he never met by throwing a huge-ass knife in her back, but that has no lasting consequences at all. We just don't talk about that. Jack gets mad at the MiB for "disrespecting his memory by wearing his face", and we're reminded that Locke is an awesome dude as he enters the limbo church on his new working limbo legs, all smile. He sure deserved it.
There's a bit of a problem, there.

Well, whether you buy it or not (no need to answer that, we all know); Locke achieved that "awesomeness" due to his experience after killing someone, subsequent murder, and then after the Sideways Experience the Island gave him.

It's pretty clear that you just don't buy things about this show that other people do. Neither of us is going to convince the other otherwise. I'd suggest that be the end of all this, with one of us having one show more that we enjoy than the other, but, well, we'll see.

 

[brandonh83]

I really wish Birdie and Speeding would stop ruining Lost for me.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

I really wish Birdie and Speeding would stop ruining Lost for me.

I wish your Spidermun2 didn't get punched by the Phoenix.

(Only I can cram that many unrelated pop culture references into a single sentence.)

 

[dave is ok]

It's one thing to feature immoral or amoral characters (and those can be quite interesting indeed), it's another to make it look like that doesn't matter and portray them as great people.
Locke, in a faith relapse, kills a woman he never met by throwing a huge-ass knife in her back, but that has no lasting consequences at all. We just don't talk about that. Jack gets mad at the MiB for "disrespecting his memory by wearing his face", and we're reminded that Locke is an awesome dude as he enters the limbo church on his new working limbo legs, all smile. He sure deserved it.
There's a bit of a problem, there.

I remember reading that Terry O'Quinn even thought that was completely out of character for Locke and hated that scene. Here's the quote:

AP: You’ve had other disagreements with the writers.

O’Quinn: At the end of season three Locke throws a knife into Naomi’s back and I said, ‘This really hurts me, it’s so not typical and it’s so out of character and it seemed gratuitous.’ I made the biggest stink I ever made with (executive producers) Damon Lindelhof and Carlton Cuse and they said, ‘Look, Locke believes he was doing the right thing. His life was saved, he’s been told, he’s been instructed. He believes that this is the most dangerous person in the world right now and he does what he does. Do it.’ I said, ’Well, you know, if I stab her in the back couldn’t I at least shoot Jack in the knee or something?’

 

[Erigu]

Well, whether you buy it or not (no need to answer that, we all know); Locke achieved that "awesomeness" due to his experience after killing someone, subsequent murder, and then after the Sideways Experience the Island gave him.

You're right about that. That is to say: I don't buy it.
Naomi's death is simply forgotten.

I remember reading that Terry O'Quinn even thought that was completely out of character for Locke and hated that scene.

I can imagine that...

 

[brandonh83]

(Only I can cram that many unrelated pop culture references into a single sentence.)

I didn't get any of it, but I'm not necessarily ashamed to admit that.

 

[Solo]

’Well, you know, if I stab her in the back couldn’t I at least shoot Jack in the knee or something?’

Bwuahahaha

You're my boy forever, Terry!

 

[dave is ok]

After thinking through all the shitty things every Lost character did over the show's lifespan, I've come full circle. Lost is genius as far as mentally conditioning the viewer goes.

They have completely horrible people on an island where they are constantly told that they are 'a good man' or a 'good person'- and then they add the stupid overblown hero music onto whatever despicable act they committing and everyone walks away thinking they're worthwhile and moral.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

After thinking through all the shitty things every Lost character did over the show's lifespan, I've come full circle. Lost is genius as far as mentally conditioning the viewer goes.

They have completely horrible people on an island where they are constantly told that they are 'a good man' or a 'good person'- and then they add the stupid overblown hero music onto whatever despicable act they committing and everyone walks away thinking they're worthwhile and moral.

Ah, there we go.

"Anyone who disagrees with me has been brainwashed."

Full circle indeed.

 

[Erigu]

Ah, there we go.
"Anyone who disagrees with me has been brainwashed."

Well, yeah, 'cause we just jumped to that conclusion without explaining or elaborating at all.
Coming from the same guy who thinks that "Pointless? Kate's character arc refutes this. Pretentious? See previous answer. Inconsistent? Shit, please see #1 again." is a perfectly fine argument that shouldn't be "summarily dismissed", that's amusing.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

Well, yeah, 'cause we just jumped to that conclusion without explaining or elaborating at all.
Coming from the same guy who thinks that "Pointless? Kate's character arc refutes this. Pretentious? See previous answer. Inconsistent? Shit, please see #1 again." is a perfectly fine argument that shouldn't be "summarily dismissed", that's amusing.

Continuing to link to my posts isn't going to convince me that her story arc wasn't narratively compelling.

Actually, I just went out of my way to explain to you that I'd acknowledged that neither of us was going to convince the other person as far as this continuing argument goes.

After that, you just going back to the same well just seems like more lame bullying.

 

[Erigu]

Continuing to link to my posts isn't going to convince me that her story arc wasn't narratively compelling.

Then again, that's not why I linked to those posts of yours...

After that, you just going back to the same well just seems like more lame bullying.

Right.

Anyway.

That thing about the conditioning the viewers were subjected to certainly is my biggest beef regarding the show.
The same series that prided itself of being a "thinking man's show" was actually discouraging critical thinking, and delivering a self-serving plea for blind faith over rationality.

"Yes, analyze the show. Discuss its tiniest details. Keep the discussion going. That's free advertisement."
Ooooh! This show makes me feel smarter! What a warm and fuzzy feeling!
But since that was just pretense, the writers obviously had to make a 180° turn, in the end:
"You do understand that only nerds care about all that stuff, right? Don't be that guy. It's all about luv, what you feel in your gut. Questions only lead to more questions. Let go."

That message was in the show itself, but also in the writers' interviews. And it was well received, judging by the amount of "questions only lead to more questions" and "learn to let go" psalms that were parroted in Lost discussions from then on.
Don't think too hard about what's actually going on: if the music tells you "heroic", it's heroic, if it tells you "sad", it's sad, if it tells you "heartwarming", it's heartwarming, if it tells you "epic", it's epic.
You can even see that right above: Locke shouldn't think too hard about whether or not murdering Naomi is moral or makes sense, he should simply do as instructed... and the same goes for Terry O'Quinn. And if that little episode is never mentioned again on the show, that means you, the audience, should just forget about it. It doesn't matter. The show tells you that Locke is an awesome guy, don't question it.

I find that somewhat unsavory.

 

[Iceman]

wait.. wait.. are you guys missing the fact that Locke was manipulated the whole time? And that as a plot device his entire development was there as a jumping off point for Jack?

How many times has this been discussed? Locke was pathetic.. heroic, yes, in his defiance and persistence in the face of all his obstacles, but forever subject to manipulation by others (his mother, his father, the man in black/smoke monster). Because he was convinced that he was special he was willing to do whatever it took to go further down the path of acceptance, praise and destiny.

The others championed him as their new leader (an idea concocted by the man in black, posing as jacob), and in order to win that acceptance he felt he had to kill his father and eventually kill naomi.. to protect the island and the others.. to do his duty as their leader.

He was a sap. An awesome, inspiring sap? Absolutely.

Jack took the genuine, empowering lessons of faith and destiny from Locke's life and married that to his attributes (fix everything, reason above all).. in order to make him complete, i.e. someone who was finally capable of making the decisions and taking the action to put an end to their prison sentence.

That's how I took it. On face value.. without having to read too deep into anything beyond what was delivered to us explicitly through dialog and action.

 

[Drealmcc0y]

Iceman just proved that the writing in this show is just abysmal.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

hat thing about the conditioning the viewers were subjected to certainly is my biggest beef regarding the show.
The same series that prided itself of being a "thinking man's show" was actually discouraging critical thinking, and delivering a self-serving plea for blind faith over rationality.

"Yes, analyze the show. Discuss its tiniest details. Keep the discussion going. That's free advertisement."
Ooooh! This show makes me feel smarter! What a warm and fuzzy feeling!
But since that was just pretense, the writers obviously had to make a 180° turn, in the end:
"You do understand that only nerds care about all that stuff, right? Don't be that guy. It's all about luv, what you feel in your gut. Questions only lead to more questions. Let go."

That message was in the show itself, but also in the writers' interviews. And it was well received, judging by the amount of "questions only lead to more questions" and "learn to let go" psalms that were parroted in Lost discussions from then on.
Don't think too hard about what's actually going on: if the music tells you "heroic", it's heroic, if it tells you "sad", it's sad, if it tells you "heartwarming", it's heartwarming, if it tells you "epic", it's epic.
You can even see that right above: Locke shouldn't think too hard about whether or not murdering Naomi is moral or makes sense, he should simply do as instructed... and the same goes for Terry O'Quinn. And if that little episode is never mentioned again on the show, that means you, the audience, should just forget about it. It doesn't matter. The show tells you that Locke is an awesome guy, don't question it.

I find that somewhat unsavory.

I don't mean this flippantly, but I feel like it kind of sucks to be you. Honestly. I'm kind of glad that my brain allows me to not only enjoy rich cultural experiences like Deadwood but also appreciate an obviously aiming lower piece of entertainment like Lost. Like, sure, what you're saying could all be perceived as accurate, but who gives a shit? All the pieces were there in the narrative for everything to work out to a conclusion. It might not have been satisfying for everyone, but I'm grateful that it was satisfying for me. It's one more awesome thing I can revisit and be entertained by, not some monolith that exists only to be incessantly derided.

I read your posts and I love my life.

 

[Erigu]

wait.. wait.. are you guys missing the fact that Locke was manipulated the whole time?

Well, er, the exact details are a bit "up in the air", shall we say, as it would seem Walt saved him from that grave and sent him to kill Naomi. What the fuck, Walt.

But okay, let's say he was being manipulated... So what?
He still killed that woman in cold blood. Isn't that something that you'd expect to see addressed at some point? Shouldn't he feel, I dunno, a bit bad about having been manipulated into murdering someone, later on? Like, when other people from the freighter show up and it turns out they're not vampires?
Well, no, that was just forgotten and never mentioned again. No biggie.
Oh.

he was convinced that he was special

Except when he was in one of his poorly-justified "that's all BS!" phases, that is...
Such stellar writing.

The others championed him as their new leader (an idea concocted by the man in black, posing as jacob)

Really? When did the MiB do that? And how?

in order to win that acceptance he felt he had to kill his father and eventually kill naomi..

"He felt"? He was told to do all that, anyway. The rest was never explained: we're probably supposed to think that whatever the reasons were, they were convincing enough for him.

He was a sap. An awesome, inspiring sap? Absolutely.

In fact, I'm practicing knife-throwing as I type. It's a bit messy.

Jack took the genuine, empowering lessons of faith and destiny from Locke's life and married that to his attributes (fix everything, reason above all).. in order to make him complete, i.e. someone who was finally capable of making the decisions and taking the action to put an end to their prison sentence.

Jack protected the heart of the island because he was told to do so by this weird (and frankly a bit suspicious) supernatural guy.
"I chose you because you were *ahem* lost, and I thought that would give you purpose (I must say I'm glad your Iraqi friend died earlier, because I'm not sure he would have bought that, considering how we met). And I made your plane crash on this island in order to -what else?- give you a choice. Which you must make, like, right now. And sorry about the delay, by the way, hope you didn't lose too many people in the meantime."
Cool, what do you want me to do?

And in the decision-making department... He decided to help the MiB send Desmond in that magic cave because he assumed that's why Jacob brought Desmond on the island in the first place (a bit a of a wild assumption, considering he just had a chance to talk with Jacob a few hours before, and the guy didn't say anything about Desmond nor seemed to have any clue as to how defeat the MiB), and it's a good thing the writers were on his side for that one.

But admittedly, Jack could be even worse back when he wasn't "complete".

I'm kind of glad that my brain allows me to not only enjoy rich cultural experiences like Deadwood but also appreciate an obviously aiming lower piece of entertainment like Lost.

Well, yeah, it's not like Lost ever pretended to be "deep", "complex", "thematically rich" or whatever. I probably just imagined that.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

Well, yeah, it's not like Lost ever pretended to be "deep", "complex", "thematically rich" or whatever. I probably just imagined that.

I don't think it ever pretended to be anything it wasn't. It was tonally consistent. It certainly never pretended to be on par with something like Deadwood.

 

[Erigu]

I don't think it ever pretended to be anything it wasn't.

Huh.

It was tonally consistent.

The show you just called a "lower piece of entertainment" set the tone with images of a plane crash and traumatized survivors with haunted faces.
Sounds like a drama to me, not a mindless action ride.
Of course, that's not to say there wasn't levity, action and so on, but c'mon...

 

[Montresor]

I've been playing the game Time Geeks: Find All on my iPhone and after ~~10 minutes of first level challenges I realized that the first level... is Lost-inspired. It's quite wonderful. =D

The game is like an electronic Where's Waldo. There are several challenges per level, and each challenge consists of "Find the flower pot in thirty seconds or less." It's not always a flower pot that you have to locate, but you get the drift.

Anyway, I was trying to find "the flower pot," when I noticed the plane in the image, and thought to myself "Heh, that sort of looks like Oceanic 815. And look, a dog that's kind of like Vincent. Neat. Oh well, that's just a coincidence." Then I noticed

Spoiler

the hatch, Otherville's security system, the black smoke monster, the temple, the hydrogen bomb, Henry Gale's balloon, the freighter's helicopter, the Dharma symbol, Roger Workman's van, and the priest's airplane

.

 

[Catalix]

Hey, they even got the UFOs too!


but what about the polar bears???

Spoiler

upper right, behind tree

 

[Drealmcc0y]

I think you can see the computer to the right of smokey

 

[Montresor]

I snagged that picture from a random google search but it's slightly different from what I'm seeing right on my iPhone. Here are two more pictures directly from my iPhone. There's tons of overlap in both pictures but the entire island doesn't fit on one screen on my phone.

 

[oatmeal]

Erigu, what TV show do you LIKE?

What long format, multi-season drama do you like?

You already posted your fun for children manga, but haven't touched on anything on TV, which is a completely different medium.

 

[Drealmcc0y]

why oatmeal... why...

 

[oatmeal]

Curiosity?

I just can't imagine another show standing up to his kind of scrutiny.

(EDIT)
What impresses someone like Erigu (other than the aforementioned childrens story)?

 

[WillyFive]

You choose to bring up that subplot in defense of Lost?! lol The robbery to get back a toy fucking aeroplane is one of the single dumbest things i have ever seen air in a tv drama. Holy shit it was hilarious. Lost may have better production values, but the writing is just as terrible as The Event and that's what matters most.

Making coherent and likable characters are part of writing as well, you know. The Event has nothing on Lost. No time in The Event you cared as much for their characters as you did caring for Charlie bracing for his predicted death or Desmond trying to find his wife.

I say that the Event and Lost are pretty much the same calibre, plot-wise.
You reply "Plot-wise? Yes. But Lost did it better and did it well."
... Wut?
Which is it? Same calibre or not? Do you agree or disagree?

Similar things happened (conspiracy theories, crazy stuff happening, characters persecuted and trying to find out why, mix of different genres), but they are not in the same quality.

You got me, there: I made it all up, indeed. All those quotes, those plotlines I mentioned? They were from a fan fiction of mine, actually.
Nobody noticed anything, until you showed up. Watching the show back to back gave you a far keener insight, and that's how you were able to tell.

Or maybe that's a tiny bit ridiculous.

Yes, exactly. Since you are watching things back to back, there is no one week or six month wait between episodes for you to go over the events in your mind and start to think "what if this is related to this, or what if that means something like this?".

To keep myself from going crazy after the cliffhangers, I watched the episodes alongside the respective GAF threads to see how people here reacted, and I noticed people talking about much more complicated things that I ever even noticed, like how this character is based on this real life person, or which real life mythology this statue represents.

I would never notice something like that watching it all back to back on Hulu. The most I was theorizing was if this next episode was about Locke or Desmond.

Well, the sky turning purple apparently mattered:

Damn you, Jack! Tom was about to spill the beans, and you ruined it! I'm pretty sure that wasn't yet another hilariously transparent attempt by the writers to indefinitely postpone an answer!
After all, Ben's slightly convoluted plan to grab Jack was the source of much drama in seasons 2 and 3!
... Wait, that's right: it started before the sky turned purple, didn't it? Hmm.
Ah, well, I'm sure Tom had a great explanation for that, but we'll never hear it because Dr. Shephard nicked an artery!

He was referring to the explosion, and that explosion was seen by people on the island as a purple light. It doesn't mean the color of the explosion was supposed to be a big plot point, just the thing that created it.

Now, now. Jacob's color was white, and his brother's was black. And like many things on the show, that was highly symbolic and so deep, but it would be quite long to explain...

Exactly. If one thing is symbolic, maybe everything is. And with enough time, you can give everything a meaning. Like the purple light.

Yeah, I keep forgetting that Ana Lucia was always supposed to die like that, for example. Maybe because the show made such a big deal about Jack and Ana Lucia meeting again (and they're both leaders of their respective groups, too!), maybe because I tend to expect newly introduced characters to have a purpose, maybe because of that orphan plot thread about building an army... If only I hadn't known a damn thing about storytelling!

You would have liked a new actor to come in to play the same character instead of just letting the character go? People didn't like the character, and rumors were created saying that the creators decided to not have her around, and they used the drunk driving incident as an excuse. At least, that's what Lostpedia said. They are the ones that also talked about the Jacob car, you know.

Well, yeah: he betrayed the good-looking main characters in order to be reunited with his son, and that's arguably worse than, say, becoming blinded by your thirst for revenge and killing an innocent man, or murdering your father-in-law in his sleep because you hate his guts.

And he was brought back to 'the light', just as the other characters were. Even Ben still had stuff to work on before he could move on.

Maybe some explanations as to what made Walt so special and interesting for the Others (until he was too old to be interesting anymore, that is). That would have been nice, seeing how a lot of drama stemmed from that, in the earlier seasons...

Maybe he was a candidate, but was narrowed down to other people, just like the other candidates. All the candidates were important until they were narrowed down to Jack.

Yes, and? Why did the Others need Aaron? It's not like they were stranded on the island and had to kidnap children to insure their group's survival over the years: they had a sub. They could recruit. They could give birth on mainland.

Sure, but the whole point was to fix that. People die for some mysterious reason, they wanted to fix that. That's why they brought in Juliet.

Some relevance, for starters? They really didn't matter much, in the end, did they?

To the Jacob storyline? They mattered as much as Oceanic 815, Ajira 316, the Elizabeth, the Kahana, Rousseau's expedition, the Army guys, and the Black Rock did. Subjects for candidacy to replace Jacob. Also, they acted as a source of conflict and mystery for the survivors.

Just because they didn't have relevance on Season 6 didn't mean the previous 4 seasons they were in didn't exist.

It is a ridiculous mess.

Apparently we disagree here on a matter of taste.

Pretty much, yeah.

Also here.

I'm still not sure what you're talking about...

1. Erigu: You mean there wasn't anything on Lost that was left unresolved?
2. Willy105: Yes, the relationship between Ben and Widmore and why Widmore was so important.

 

[oatmeal]

These multi-quote posts make my brain hurt.

 

[WillyFive]

These multi-quote posts make my brain hurt.

Sorry about that, but discussions can get big, and the alternative would be to write a wall of text with complete sentences.