Support NeoGAF

[WillyFive]

That doesn't quite solve the central issue: what would the conflict be?

....there would be a new one, I assume....like what tends to be done with new shows and stories.

I'm not saying it lacks realism, I'm saying it severely lacks internal consistency, and that's quite damaging to the show.

Behind the scenes, maybe. The show went fine with it.

That doesn't address the issue of the other passengers.

Of course not, why would it address them? They spent at least one scene addressing them, and that's as far as they were important to the plot.

Thanks for the bullshit excuse.
You could also put it this way: the show only works if you really don't think too hard about what's going on.

No, you can't put it that way at all. You can't think about what's going on if you can't take the whole story arc into account, because you are confused at a person's choice of words about him explaining a different story arc.

Freighter plot line? Season 4? Ben and Sayid's mainland adventures? The "war" against the Man in Black in the last season? No?

He was an important figure in the backstory of the show, just as Lex Luthor was in Superman 2. And just as important in the plot as him. The point was to defeat Zod, not deal with Luthor's antics. Like Superman 2, the story of the main characters occasionally crossed with his plans (like Desmond and that machine), but in the end; Ben killed Widmore, and Superman returned Luthor to the authorities as a comical afterthought as he took Lois home after having the battle of his life.

That's what they said

Problem solved then.

but then Widmore showed up in a sub anyway.

Later.

And it still doesn't tell us why they had to go back as soon as possible either. "Or God help us all" isn't that informative.

Because Jack realized of his mistake of leaving the island after what happened with Locke, and he went to Ben to help him get back to the island. Ben explained the island would only permit him to return if the Oceanic Six also came back with him, so they aimed to make the jump at the flight and point in time that Hawking determined would get them to the island. So they rushed to get the rest of Oceanic Six into the plane, which was not easy since one was in an insane asylum, one was around the world doing who-knows-what (but we know he was killing people), and both Sun and Kate hated him.

So if they were going to make that flight, they had to hurry, and he wanted to catch that flight because he did not want to see what other terrible things would happen if he did not return. All of this with Ben doing sneaky eyes (he killed Locke).

Indeed. But you were talking about fear.

Yes. He feared Jacob, which is why he obeyed him. He became angry of this once he learned more about him.

When?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VrKJGaNmTw

At 0:15, 1:58, and just in general across that scene before he realized he is not what he though he was. As he poured himself over Jacob, he was not angry, he was bewildered and fearful of what he was doing, with his great sense for revenge powering him to stand up to him, and gradually turning from a scared man, to disbelief, to being really hurt, and then literally killing him. And even then he looked scared over what he had done (4:00).

What does that have to do with fear?

Fear of what he would do if he didn't.

When did Ben become a punching bag because of Jacob? And again, what does that have to do with fear?

Seriously? For constantly obeying Jacob's orders without telling why (because he literally didn't know), he was constantly beat up by the crash survivors who thought he was lying. He had to fear Jacob more than the survivors if he was willing to put himself through that.

...
I really don't understand what you're saying, here. Sorry.

I was pointing out that the Man in Black didn't have much trouble sending some guy with a knife to Jacob a century earlier (and that shouldn't be surprising considering his vast array of abilities).
You were apparently trying to justify the Man in Black's actions over the years ("He wanted to get them on his side gradually by manipulating them, outright telling them what he wanted could have ruined his whole assassination plot."), but he really didn't need to come up with anything that complex and proved as much a century earlier with Richard.

Richard thought he was in hell. The rest of the people that came after knew better.

All MiB had to do was convince Richard that Jacob was the devil.

In the end, the Man in Black's second attempt was absurdly contrived and only succeeded because he got lucky: Jacob didn't defend himself this time around.

He already had his candidates to replace him on the way. He didn't have that back in 1867.

Not to the point of warning Ben/the leader about the Man in Black though. Whoops.

I know, isn't it great? It shows Richard also had some second thoughts.

Whah?

The reason why MiB couldn't kill Jacob (and vice versa) was because the previous keeper of the island (their fake mother) put a curse on them preventing them from hurting each other.

MiB's assassination attempt failing could have easily been proof of this for Jacob.

Yep. Nothing about him caring about the island, at that point.

Probably not, no.

It's "fringe at best" that all those other passengers were sacrificed by the good guys for the sake of some particularly nebulous imperative?
You can't just forget about the other passengers (of both crashes, really) like that. Not when you claim to be a drama. Not when you put your main protagonist on a "reluctant leader who has to take care of his herd" character arc for years. That's just shitty storytelling.

They had a funeral for the passengers of Oceanic 815 too, in Walkabout.

Into the realm of convenience magic. "A wizard did it."
Funny how they kept talking about "rules" though.

There were rules amongst the characters, which then there were stories that involved breaking those rules (such as when Ben's daughter was killed).

I'm talking about the genre, Willy105...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_drama

I think Lost is closer to a drama as you call it than sports television is.

See the rest of this discussion (and a bunch of others) for how nonsensical the characters' motivations and actions were.

At least I won the themes argument, I guess. gg

See, I can't tell when you're joking. Poe's law.

That must suck.

I was saying that trying to keep a mystery show going for as long as possible was risky. That's from the point of view of those who make said show, obviously. I don't know why you started talking about a viewer's perspective.

I didn't know why we were on a certain perspective instead of just general talk, but sure. The longer you go with a mystery show, the more filler you may end up doing. What was great with Lost was that they kept going and finishing small mysteries, but always suggested at a bigger mystery going on, so it kept the show from dragging (except during the first half of Season 3).

I'm talking about fantasy and sci-fi, here. You seem to be content with the show's "a wizard did it" cop outs and actually think that my rejecting those is akin to rejecting fantasy / sci-fi. See also above when you started talking about realism, as if that were the issue.

Wizards are usually featured in fantasy works (and sci-fi ones too like in Star Wars and Star Trek). If Wizards doing stuff is a cop out, then you are rejecting fantasy; since magic in general is what you'd call a cop out, since you can do anything with it and never be sure of what it's limits are (except when they say "I can't do that", despite sometimes doing something much more impressive before or after that).

Fantasy / sci-fi != "anything goes! weeee!"

Ideally, yes. It's why we have said genre, to separate it from stuff like Oliver Stone's Born on the Fourth of July.

 

[TheExodu5]

longest post ever

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

What was it?

Spoiler

Joker is telling his goons via video announcement how he got healthier from before, and he says something along the lines of it's might be better to not know, and then he goes on for a little bit ambiguously along those lines before ending it all with "And why did it all end in a church?" :lol

 

[Erigu]

....there would be a new one, I assume....like what tends to be done with new shows and stories.

I see you've thought really hard about this before asserting that the Lost universe was "ripe for exploration"...

Behind the scenes, maybe.

The lack of internal consistency was only "behind the scenes"? What the hell is that supposed to mean?

Of course not, why would it address them?

... Because that's the issue I put forward, and you were replying to my post? So one would kinda/sorta expect you to address it?

They spent at least one scene addressing them, and that's as far as they were important to the plot.

You mean, the scene where they showed them all dead?
And again, the issue would be that the good guys apparently didn't have a problem with endangering all those people's lives for some nebulous purpose, but you seem to be perfectly fine with that, so...

No, you can't put it that way at all. You can't think about what's going on if you can't take the whole story arc into account, because you are confused at a person's choice of words about him explaining a different story arc.

You do sound confused.
What you're doing isn't "taking the whole story into account". It's "forgetting/ignoring a whole bunch of contradictory elements".

He was an important figure in the backstory of the show

Huh. You called him a "boring background character that the writers themselves didn't seem to care a lot for", earlier.
And again, Widmore and his influence didn't stay in the background, far from it. Large parts of seasons 4 and 6 had to do with him. Funny how you're trying to minimize that...

Later.

Yeah. And was that "too late"?
Again, what was up with the urgency?

Because Jack realized of his mistake of leaving the island after what happened with Locke

Yeah? What happened? Locke told him that he saw Christian on the island?
Jack did as well, back in season 1. Did he just forget about that for three years?
And that's why he turned to booze and pills? Why he suddenly decided he had to go back?

See, the original reason ("very bad things" happened to Sawyer and the others because they left) would have worked a lot better, but the writers retconned it, and...

and he went to Ben to help him get back to the island.

Well, Ben went to him, actually.

Ben explained the island would only permit him to return if the Oceanic Six also came back with him

Walt and Aaron apparently don't count... And then, there would be Widmore and his sub, again. Fascinating "rules" that rarely seem to apply, if ever.

he did not want to see what other terrible things would happen if he did not return.

Hey, that part about the "very bad things" was retconned, man! Pay attention!

He feared Jacob, which is why he obeyed him.

Where does that come from?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VrKJGaNmTw

Not seeing it.

Fear of what he would do if he didn't.

Yeah? Didn't seem to bother him all that much when he made some shit up at the cabin for Locke, or when he went back and pretended that Jacob told him to attack the beach camp... And Jack wasn't on Jacob's list of people to kidnap, right?

Seriously? For constantly obeying Jacob's orders without telling why (because he literally didn't know), he was constantly beat up by the crash survivors who thought he was lying.

Well, he often was, wasn't he?
And you make it sound like Ben was merely following Jacob's instructions... See above. Ben did his own things and gave his own orders quite often.
Anyway, it's not like you can blame Jacob for those beatings. Ben probably would though, based on his Emmy scene on the last season!

He had to fear Jacob more than the survivors if he was willing to put himself through that.

... You don't think maybe he liked being the leader of the Others?

Richard thought he was in hell. The rest of the people that came after knew better.

Richard thought he was in hell in good part because he saw his dead wife.
Smokie could (among a bunch of other things) impersonate freaking dead people. You really think he couldn't have used that to manipulate somebody?

He already had his candidates to replace him on the way. He didn't have that back in 1867.

And that's a good reason to let Ben stab him, really?
Sure is a good thing the Man in Black turned him into ashes (somehow?), Ilana and then Hurley took those, and he had that convenient-if-completely-unexplained younger ghost version of himself! Of course, it would have been even better if said ghost child had showed up earlier (say, before Sayid, Sun and Jin's deaths!)... Ah, well.

I know, isn't it great?

If by "great", you mean "completely idiotic", sure. But that's what happens when you improvise a mystery show very poorly...

The reason why MiB couldn't kill Jacob (and vice versa) was because the previous keeper of the island (their fake mother) put a curse on them preventing them from hurting each other.

Oh. Don't think that was meant to be a "curse", but okay.
Note that they could hurt each other, too. The writers went with "a wizard (or witch) did it" in order to finally "justify" one of their rules, and still managed to fail at that. Impressive.

MiB's assassination attempt failing could have easily been proof of this for Jacob.

Jacob didn't die because he defended himself and kicked Richard's ass.
But let's entertain your amusing theory: if Jacob somehow reasoned that the ass-kicking powers he showed on that day had actually been granted to him by Mother's Magical Rule and his brother couldn't even indirectly kill him, why did he observe that the Man in Black found his loophole when he showed up with Ben in tow?

They had a funeral for the passengers of Oceanic 815 too, in Walkabout.

Yeah, back then (waaaaay back then), that used to matter.
But then, all the other survivors were massacred, and nobody gave a shit, not even Jack, "their leader".

There were rules amongst the characters, which then there were stories that involved breaking those rules (such as when Ben's daughter was killed).

Yeah, "he changed the rules!" -> "still, we can't kill each other!", "oh, wait, yes, I can kill you!"
The "rules" were brought up and forgotten whenever convenient. The plot was a lazy mess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drama
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_drama
I think Lost is closer to a drama as you call it than sports television is.

... I don't even know what you're trying to argue, now. That Lost is a TV drama? Yeah, and that was my point, actually. Thanks!
Now, would you argue the Indiana Jones movies are drama films?

At least I won the themes argument, I guess. gg

It's fascinating that you'd think that...

I didn't know why we were on a certain perspective instead of just general talk

It seems you're just not very good at this "comprehension" thing...

The longer you go with a mystery show, the more filler you may end up doing.

And if you improvise (and chances are you will, for a long TV show), you may very well write yourself into a corner.
Like Lost did very early on by piling up all kinds of random supernatural shit with no care nor foresight whatsoever.

Wizards are usually featured in fantasy works (and sci-fi ones too like in Star Wars and Star Trek). If Wizards doing stuff is a cop out, then you are rejecting fantasy

...
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AWizardDidIt

Ideally, yes. It's why we have said genre, to separate it from stuff like Oliver Stone's Born on the Fourth of July.

... Yeah? Okay. I dunno. Let's say that made sense. Fine.

 

[JoJoShabadoo]

Erigu... For someone who realizes how truly awful this show is, shouldn't you also realize how much time you're wasting debating all the flaws? I mean, you can sum up all your posts with "The writers made shit up on the fly"

 

[Erigu]

Erigu... For someone who realizes how truly awful this show is, shouldn't you also realize how much time you're wasting debating all the flaws?

Heh, I don't mind. It can be fun, and more criticism of Lost on the internet seems like a good thing to me...

I mean, you can sum up all your posts with "The writers made shit up on the fly"

Without any arguments?
(Besides, some authors are actually good at improvising.)

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

Erigu... For someone who realizes how truly awful this show is, shouldn't you also realize how much time you're wasting debating all the flaws? I mean, you can sum up all your posts with "The writers made shit up on the fly"

"And I hate them like poison."

 

[Drealmcc0y]

I almost named my third daughter "Evangeline", but I lost that coin toss.

If I ever have a daughter thats what I want to call her. Its a pretty great name, I think.

 

[Erigu]

"And I hate them like poison."

I like sci-fi and complex stories, and despise crass charlatans. That puts them in a bad spot.

 

[hyp3rlink]

LOST has out-of-the-box and genuine post-modern writing, which may not be appreciated through classical eyepiece of storytelling critique. I pity the fools who miss the forest for the trees and can't comprehend that things can be greater than the sum of their parts.

 

[Soulscribe]

I'm a complete certified LOST fanatic and I'm always surprised at how I don't really post in here at all. It's kind of a Pandora's Box situation, where I know if I invest any time in this thread the floodgates will just open and consume me, lol.

I'll just say that I fucking love this show.

 

[WillyFive]

I see you've thought really hard about this before asserting that the Lost universe was "ripe for exploration"...

How is it possibly not? After all, you said "anything goes". I'm not going to make things up to entertain you.

The lack of internal consistency was only "behind the scenes"? What the hell is that supposed to mean?

It was based on your comments about the writers having trouble with the story.

... Because that's the issue I put forward, and you were replying to my post? So one would kinda/sorta expect you to address it?

Yeah, you put it forward. You did. Other than that one scene that you thought didn't matter, the show didn't, as you said. How am I going to address it for the show? I'm not the TV show.

You mean, the scene where they showed them all dead?
And again, the issue would be that the good guys apparently didn't have a problem with endangering all those people's lives for some nebulous purpose, but you seem to be perfectly fine with that, so...

I was talking about the Hurley scene at the airport, but I guess there's that too.

You do sound confused.
What you're doing isn't "taking the whole story into account". It's "forgetting/ignoring a whole bunch of contradictory elements".

I'll take your word for it. You are confusing after all.

Huh. You called him a "boring background character that the writers themselves didn't seem to care a lot for", earlier.
And again, Widmore and his influence didn't stay in the background, far from it. Large parts of seasons 4 and 6 had to do with him. Funny how you're trying to minimize that...

If they care more about him, he wouldn't have been a boring backstory character that was disposed off as soon as the story started moving towards it's endgame.

Yeah. And was that "too late"?
Again, what was up with the urgency?

Because he wanted to get to the island, gather the whole group, and make the jump on the flight that was going to cross with the island. Less time, the better. The time flashes were getting increasingly deadly to the survivors, and Ben figured his purpose was to bring the escapees back to the island, so that he can keep the island intact in time.

He had only 70 hours to gather everyone, since that's when the island would return to be available, and Flight 316 was the best chance.

Yeah? What happened? Locke told him that he saw Christian on the island?
Jack did as well, back in season 1. Did he just forget about that for three years?
And that's why he turned to booze and pills? Why he suddenly decided he had to go back?
See, the original reason ("very bad things" happened to Sawyer and the others because they left) would have worked a lot better, but the writers retconned it, and...

Why is it a retcon, and not "in addition to...."?

Well, Ben went to him, actually.

That's fine.

Walt and Aaron apparently don't count... And then, there would be Widmore and his sub, again. Fascinating "rules" that rarely seem to apply, if ever.

Wasn't Walt let go in Season 2? He probably was no longer deemed a possible candidate. Same with Aaron, who was but a little kid, which Kate left with his grandmother.

Where does that come from?

What do you mean? He was very upset and refused to take Locke to him, and when he agreed, he sent him to a shed with an empty chair. Ben was as surprised as Locke was when it started moving. It was all over him when he asked to kill Jacob, and could not see why he had to do it, needing Lock to convince him to do it by using the stuff he has done to him against him.

Not seeing it.

Well, ok, I guess. Not everyone sees body language in the same way.

Yeah? Didn't seem to bother him all that much when he made some shit up at the cabin for Locke, or when he went back and pretended that Jacob told him to attack the beach camp... And Jack wasn't on Jacob's list of people to kidnap, right?

Ben is a liar, "that's what he does", so he was genuinely surprised when the cabin came to life. To make it worse for him, at the end of the day, Jacob didn't care about him.

Well, he often was, wasn't he?
And you make it sound like Ben was merely following Jacob's instructions... See above. Ben did his own things and gave his own orders quite often.
Anyway, it's not like you can blame Jacob for those beatings. Ben probably would though

Exactly.

... You don't think maybe he liked being the leader of the Others?

Is there a contradiction in there? He can't enjoy being superior to others while disliking being commanded by others?

Richard thought he was in hell in good part because he saw his dead wife.
Smokie could (among a bunch of other things) impersonate freaking dead people. You really think he couldn't have used that to manipulate somebody?

He didn't? He did exactly that when he impersonated Christian, Alex and Locke.

And that's a good reason to let Ben stab him, really?
Sure is a good thing the Man in Black turned him into ashes (somehow?), Ilana and then Hurley took those, and he had that convenient-if-completely-unexplained younger ghost version of himself! Of course, it would have been even better if said ghost child had showed up earlier (say, before Sayid, Sun and Jin's deaths!)... Ah, well.

It doesn't matter if it was a good reason, we learned it was the wrong one once we learned Locke was dead and MiB was impersonating him, but it was the one that Ben accepted.

And why can't someone who morphs be allowed to morph into a younger version of himself?

If by "great", you mean "completely idiotic", sure. But that's what happens when you improvise a mystery show very poorly...

How in the world is it idiotic? You're not making any sense. We want characters to have more than one dimension, that they have multiple interests and have the potential for internal conflict.

Oh. Don't think that was meant to be a "curse", but okay.
Note that they could hurt each other, too. The writers went with "a wizard (or witch) did it" in order to finally "justify" one of their rules, and still managed to fail at that. Impressive.

I'm not impressed. Your illogical spinning of anything that happens on the story as sign of idiocy is neither compelling or comprehensible.

Jacob didn't die because he defended himself and kicked Richard's ass.
But let's entertain your amusing theory: if Jacob somehow reasoned that the ass-kicking powers he showed on that day had actually been granted to him by Mother's Magical Rule and his brother couldn't even indirectly kill him, why did he observe that the Man in Black found his loophole when he showed up with Ben in tow?

Because Jacob accepted his death. He had candidates now, and wasn't going to fight like he did with Richard.

Yeah, back then (waaaaay back then), that used to matter.
But then, all the other survivors were massacred, and nobody gave a shit, not even Jack, "their leader".

Funerals were extremely common on Lost, even outside the Island.

And they weren't even isolated to the beginning of the show, the last one was from Season 6. That argument is ridiculous.

Yeah, "he changed the rules!" -> "still, we can't kill each other!", "oh, wait, yes, I can kill you!"
The "rules" were brought up and forgotten whenever convenient. The plot was a lazy mess.

Breaking the rules was part of the plot!

... I don't even know what you're trying to argue, now. That Lost is a TV drama? Yeah, and that was my point, actually. Thanks!
Now, would you argue the Indiana Jones movies are drama films?

You said Lost 'pretended' to be a drama, and I told you it was one, despite it's fantasy and sci-fi elements. Your point was not that Lost was a TV drama, it was the opposite. If that it was a TV drama really was your point, then you started yet another wild goose-chase.

It's fascinating that you'd think that...

Good for you, I guess.

It seems you're just not very good at this "comprehension" thing...

I'll take your word for it.

And if you improvise (and chances are you will, for a long TV show), you may very well write yourself into a corner.
Like Lost did very early on by piling up all kinds of random supernatural shit with no care nor foresight whatsoever.

That's the thing, it came out just fine.

...
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AWizardDidIt

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BellisariosMaxim

... Yeah? Okay. I dunno. Let's say that made sense. Fine.

It's what came to mind when thinking about something that is the opposite of sci-fi/fantasy.

 

[Erigu]

LOST has out-of-the-box and genuine post-modern writing, which may not be appreciated through classical eyepiece of storytelling critique. I pity the fools who miss the forest for the trees and can't comprehend that things can be greater than the sum of their parts.

Damn you, Poe's law!

How is it possibly not? After all, you said "anything goes".

When you put it like that... Yeah, I guess they could always write more nonsense, indeed!

I'm not going to make things up to entertain you.

Well, I was trying to get you to think a bit about it, but that doesn't seem to be working...

It was based on your comments about the writers having trouble with the story.

I was saying the show suffered because it wasn't internally consistent. The end result suffered. And you replied "behind the scenes, maybe". That makes no sense.

Yeah, you put it forward. You did. Other than that one scene that you thought didn't matter

You're still talking about that Hurley thing, really? Great job, Hurley! You guys are only responsible for a big pile of bodies when it could have been a bigger pile of bodies!

the show didn't, as you said. How am I going to address it for the show? I'm not the TV show.

Well, what is it you're doing, here? I thought you were trying to defend the show.

If they care more about him, he wouldn't have been a boring backstory character that was disposed off as soon as the story started moving towards it's endgame.

"As soon"? The second-to-last episode of the show? That's "soon"?
That being said, I do agree about the lack of care! Of course, that could be said of the entire cast, pretty much...

Less time, the better. The time flashes were getting increasingly deadly to the survivors

Locke fixed that when he left the island, remember.

Ben figured his purpose was to bring the escapees back to the island, so that he can keep the island intact in time.

Now you're just making shit up...

He had only 70 hours to gather everyone, since that's when the island would return to be available, and Flight 316 was the best chance.

And then Widmore showed up in a sub.

Why is it a retcon, and not "in addition to...."?

Because when Jack first talked about what "Bentham" told him, the idea was that "very bad things" were happening to Sawyer and the others, and it was "the Oceanic 6"'s fault for leaving, but when we finally got to see what had happened:
1) the "very bad things" would have been the time flashes, and Locke had already fixed that by turning the wheel,
2) the time flashes weren't the Oceanic 6's fault at all, but Ben's (dude didn't turn the wheel properly, apparently).
So when we got to see the actual conversation between "Bentham" and Jack, there was no mention of Jack and the others being responsible for all that, and that ended up contradicting Jack's earlier recount. Retcon. Unfortunately, that means Jack's motivations for going back went *poof* as well...

Wasn't Walt let go in Season 2?

So was Michael, and he was told that "the island wasn't done with him", so, y'know...
As usual, just replace "the island" with "the writers", and there you go... The writers didn't want Walt back (stupid growing kid), so he wasn't needed in-story for Hawking's voodoo magic. Same thing for Aaron, I imagine (stupid babies on set).
It's pretty easy to tell when the writers want to get rid of a character, as they often do so by cheerfully taking a dump on what they had established earlier.

Is there a contradiction in there? He can't enjoy being superior to others while disliking being commanded by others?

He sure can.
It's just that you were trying to demonstrate that Ben was afraid of Jacob because "why else would he go through all that trouble of leading the Others against our violent good guys?" Well, there you go: maybe he likes power. Maybe the show made that painfully obvious, too. So your demonstration is somewhat flawed.

He didn't? He did exactly that when he impersonated Christian, Alex and Locke.

Yeah, but instead of using his abilities to manipulate people into killing Jacob (you know, his objective), he showed them where to find water or told them to turn a wheel. Silly Smokie.
Why it took him three years to finally cut to the chase, that's a mystery. Just kidding, it really isn't: the writers simply hadn't thought of all that yet.

It doesn't matter if it was a good reason, we learned it was the wrong one once we learned Locke was dead and MiB was impersonating him, but it was the one that Ben accepted.

... That makes no sense to me, sorry.
The fact Jacob had brought candidates on the island was the wrong reason to let Ben stab him once we learned Locke was dead and... What??? And it was the reason Ben accepted? Whaaaat???

And why can't someone who morphs be allowed to morph into a younger version of himself?

Jacob morphs?
And never mind the how: why did he appear as a kid? He apparently had no problem appearing to Hurley as an adult.
Gratuitous, unexplained and ultimately pointless weird shit? In my Lost? No way!

How in the world is it idiotic?

The Man in Black is Jacob's enemy.
Richard is Jacob's ally, and knows the Man in Black as well as his ability to impersonate dead people.
Richard acts as an advisor to Ben.
Richard doesn't tell Ben about the Man in Black and his ability to impersonate dead people.

So, yeah. It's idiotic.

We want characters to have more than one dimension, that they have multiple interests and have the potential for internal conflict.

Er... Dude. That would basically make Richard a traitor. For years/decades. Have we seen the same show? Or are you just desperately grasping at straws?

Jacob accepted his death. He had candidates now, and wasn't going to fight like he did with Richard.

Why not? It's not like the show ever told us anything about, say, Jacob being tired of the job, for example. I mean, he then came back as a ghost to (finally) brief the Losties, so he might just as well have defended himself in the first place. Would have been a bit safer for everybody, too.

Funerals were extremely common on Lost, even outside the Island.
And they weren't even isolated to the beginning of the show, the last one was from Season 6. That argument is ridiculous.

You sure have a talent for missing the point (unless you're doing it on purpose, of course). I was talking about the other (mostly anonymous) crash survivors, there.

Breaking the rules was part of the plot!

Again, either you can't read or you're being intentionally obtuse...
Ben and Widmore not killing each other when they had the chance. Why would they start respecting the rules again, at that point?

You said Lost 'pretended' to be a drama, and I told you it was one, despite it's fantasy and sci-fi elements. Your point was not that Lost was a TV drama, it was the opposite.

It is supposed to be a drama, indeed. So it makes sense to judge it as a drama (and not so much to draw comparisons with Godzilla or Indiana Jones movies).
My point being that, on those terms, it's a failure of a drama, despite all its pretensions.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BellisariosMaxim

I have to wonder how successful Lost would have been, had the showrunners played that card from the beginning. 'Cause that certainly wasn't how they were selling the show...

It's what came to mind when thinking about something that is the opposite of sci-fi/fantasy.

I know the movie, thanks...

 

[Drealmcc0y]

So this is what it looks like when you look at this shit from the outside.

 

[WillyFive]

When you put it like that... Yeah, I guess they could always write more nonsense, indeed!

It would certainly make everyone happier, and give you something to tear apart

Well, I was trying to get you to think a bit about it, but that doesn't seem to be working...

I have done fan fiction for Nintendo games, Quantum Leap, and Airbender, but never really tried to get into Lost fanfiction. I was such invested into the story that adding stuff to it seems like heresy.

HOWEVER

When watching Across the Sea, I did think up an additional backstory that I liked:

The smoke monster would have been some Egyptian god, and he was banished by other Egyptian gods into the island, which they themselves created as a maximum security prison.

The mother of Jacob and MiB also dated back to ancient Egypt, she was just a commoner. But the Pharaoh of the time saw her and wanted to be with her. But he already had a queen, so it was forbidden. Of course, that did not stop him.

The woman refused, so in a very public event, he banished him to the Island, which at the time was just offshore of Cairo. The saw the island was cursed, so even though they tried to colonize it, they quickly abandoned it, and sent unwanted people to be banished there, setting parallels to how the gods did it.

And then Across the Sea took place, but the events of that episode would have been shorter, because I felt it dragged too long. Those events would have taken place in the first half of the episode, and it would be cool: we would see old Egypt at night, in it's full glory; and it will be full of mythological elements, such as the Pharaoh summoning some Egyptian gods (they will be designed in unique Lost fashion like the smoke monster, featuring their same general attributes such as morphing and having sound effects).

Not to mention what kind of amazing score Michael Giacchino can come up with scenes like those.

I was saying the show suffered because it wasn't internally consistent. The end result suffered. And you replied "behind the scenes, maybe". That makes no sense.

I said that because you point to something I don't think is bad as an example of what was ruined. So I tried to find some common ground.

You're still talking about that Hurley thing, really? Great job, Hurley! You guys are only responsible for a big pile of bodies when it could have been a bigger pile of bodies!

Hurray!

Well, what is it you're doing, here? I thought you were trying to defend the show.

I am, but your complaints go beyond what the show ever did. I will defend something the show did, but not what it did not. If we talk about how Brian Williams quit his job and dedicated his life to finding a man that his daughter, effectively canceling his show, and I end up defending him, I'll put out arguments defending him. But if he never did do that, and the murder never happened, how am I supposed to defend Brian Williams for something he didn't do? I can't access other people's imaginations.

Which is why we write it down as fanfiction, I guess.

"As soon"? The second-to-last episode of the show? That's "soon"?

Yes? Lost was a pretty big show.

Locke fixed that when he left the island, remember.

Oh yeah, you're right. It was not the time flashes.

It was the fact that they were stuck in 1974.

Now you're just making shit up...

Huh...you're right.

He did went on a wild ride across the world recruiting the people to return to the island, and I must suddenly started thinking about Locke and ended up writing that down.

And then Widmore showed up in a sub.

Yes, at a later time.

Because when Jack first talked about what "Bentham" told him, the idea was that "very bad things" were happening to Sawyer and the others, and it was "the Oceanic 6"'s fault for leaving, but when we finally got to see what had happened:
1) the "very bad things" would have been the time flashes, and Locke had already fixed that by turning the wheel,
2) the time flashes weren't the Oceanic 6's fault at all, but Ben's (dude didn't turn the wheel properly, apparently).
So when we got to see the actual conversation between "Bentham" and Jack, there was no mention of Jack and the others being responsible for all that, and that ended up contradicting Jack's earlier recount. Retcon. Unfortunately, that means Jack's motivations for going back went *poof* as well...

Disparities between what characters knew and what happened are retcons now? Especially after bad things did happen, and Locke had no way of knowing Ben did it?

And how did that erase Jack's motivation? You seem to have a problem on a show that revolves around it's characters not having the main picture as it's main hook.

So was Michael, and he was told that "the island wasn't done with him", so, y'know...
As usual, just replace "the island" with "the writers", and there you go... The writers didn't want Walt back (stupid growing kid), so he wasn't needed in-story for Hawking's voodoo magic. Same thing for Aaron, I imagine (stupid babies on set).
It's pretty easy to tell when the writers want to get rid of a character, as they often do so by cheerfully taking a dump on what they had established earlier.

Michael had sins for what he did, so his spirit ended up staying on the island as one of the whispers. Aaron was Kate's reason why she wasn't a candidate.

Of course, everything happens because of backstage stuff, writers are responsible for the story, and sometimes even that they don't have control over with other factors such as actors, directors, producers, or real life events (the rescue of Lilo from Lilo and Stitch was originally going to take place on a stolen passenger plane and it would maneuver through buildings). But the stuff is given an in-story explanation in the show, even if it was being put on a bus.

He sure can.
It's just that you were trying to demonstrate that Ben was afraid of Jacob because "why else would he go through all that trouble of leading the Others against our violent good guys?" Well, there you go: maybe he likes power. Maybe the show made that painfully obvious, too. So your demonstration is somewhat flawed.

Adding more reasons for his actions is helping my argument, not yours. I'm the one defending the show.

Yeah, but instead of using his abilities to manipulate people into killing Jacob (you know, his objective), he showed them where to find water or told them to turn a wheel. Silly Smokie.
Why it took him three years to finally cut to the chase, that's a mystery. Just kidding, it really isn't: the writers simply hadn't thought of all that yet.

"Three years" is misleading, since the characters were actually in the island for much less than that: Four months in 2004, and the short span of time between when they returned to the island and The End in 2007. The time in-between that was spent outside of the island, or traveling through various time periods. He couldn't use the people of the Temple or Dharma either, since they had methods of stopping his entry.

... That makes no sense to me, sorry.
The fact Jacob had brought candidates on the island was the wrong reason to let Ben stab him once we learned Locke was dead and... What??? And it was the reason Ben accepted? Whaaaat???

Ben accepted the reason the guy he thought was Locke told him. Then, we as the audience (and Ben) learned afterwards that it was not a good reason.

Jacob morphs?
And never mind the how: why did he appear as a kid? He apparently had no problem appearing to Hurley as an adult.
Gratuitous, unexplained and ultimately pointless weird shit? In my Lost? No way!

Jacob morphed into a younger version of himself, so yes. Jacob appeared as a kid to the MiB (his brother from his childhood, who he has just recently killed), which shows us various reasons: to taunt him, to make him feel guilty, and so on. It worked, since he smiled once MiB got upset about it and told Desmond to ignore him.

The Man in Black is Jacob's enemy.
Richard is Jacob's ally, and knows the Man in Black as well as his ability to impersonate dead people.
Richard acts as an advisor to Ben.
Richard doesn't tell Ben about the Man in Black and his ability to impersonate dead people.

So, yeah. It's idiotic.

I don't see the idiocy here. Why is it not signs of Richard also having his own motivations based on his past with both Jacob, Ben, and the Man in Black?

Er... Dude. That would basically make Richard a traitor. For years/decades. Have we seen the same show? Or are you just desperately grasping at straws?

Yes, I have seen this show. I like it too. You seem very upset of Richard being anything other than the same clueless guy he was in the 1800's?

Why not? It's not like the show ever told us anything about, say, Jacob being tired of the job, for example. I mean, he then came back as a ghost to (finally) brief the Losties, so he might just as well have defended himself in the first place. Would have been a bit safer for everybody, too.

His search for candidates alone indicates he planned to not be there forever.

You sure have a talent for missing the point (unless you're doing it on purpose, of course). I was talking about the other (mostly anonymous) crash survivors, there.

As we had one for Locke, there is no reason to think the others didn't have their own funeral sometime off-screen, despite the characters being in the island intentionally this time.

Again, either you can't read or you're being intentionally obtuse...
Ben and Widmore not killing each other when they had the chance. Why would they start respecting the rules again, at that point?

because one of them would already be dead

A rule to keep a certain someone from killing another certain someone kinda loses it's authority once the certain someone actually kills him.

It is supposed to be a drama, indeed. So it makes sense to judge it as a drama (and not so much to draw comparisons with Godzilla or Indiana Jones movies).
My point being that, on those terms, it's a failure of a drama, despite all its pretensions.

And my point was that a TV drama is many things, as far as being a reality show and a sports show. So comparisons to Godzilla and Indiana Jones would be a good dramatic work to compare to.

I have to wonder how successful Lost would have been, had the showrunners played that card from the beginning. 'Cause that certainly wasn't how they were selling the show...

They were selling a survival show (stranded on an island) turned mystery (where's the pilot, where are we, what is this?) with crazy sci-fi (hatch, unknown experiments) and fantasy (paraplegic walking again, monsters).

Unless you mean what ABC promoted, in which case I have no idea because I don't remember. I didn't watch Lost back then, I was watching Heroes.

I know the movie, thanks...

Alright.

 

[Erigu]

I said that because you point to something I don't think is bad as an example of what was ruined. So I tried to find some common ground.

By not making sense?

I will defend something the show did, but not what it did not.

The issue would be that the characters didn't seem to care about what would (and did) happen to the other passengers.
Your reply, basically: "but that's a negative! something they didn't do! so I won't comment."
Really? Should I rephrase that so they'd ignore the other passengers?
That's just a cop out, man.

Yes? Lost was a pretty big show.

And that's a pretty stupid retort.

Oh yeah, you're right. It was not the time flashes.
It was the fact that they were stuck in 1974.

How would Locke know that? He left.
Besides, Locke didn't say anything about that to Jack, did he?
And of course, Jack, Kate, etc seemed fine with leaving all those people behind for three years anyway (not sure being stuck on the island in 1974 would be much worse than being stuck on the island in 2007). Those characters care so much about each other, it's a delight!

No, the detail that apparently shook Jack to the core, during that conversation, was Locke's reference to Christian, like I said earlier. "MY FATHER CAN'T BE ON THE ISLAND YOU CRAZY OLD MAN HE'S DEAD! RAAAAAH! PIIILLS! BREAKDOWN!" Dude, chill. How is that news to you anyway?
And that's not what Jack said to Ben about that conversation, a few episodes earlier.
Retcon.

(And then, Christian appeared to Jack at the hospital. So there was that smoke detector, sure, but that would have to really be Christian, since Smokie was stuck on the island. Not a hallucination either, since Hurley told Jack about that "visit" earlier.
Why did Christian appear like that?
Guess we have to believe it was all part of The Plan: "I'll spook my son something good so he'll have a major breakdown and suddenly decide to go back to the island. Because the Man in Black needs to be destroyed, and he can help!"
Of course, the show would then tell us that Jack going back with Locke's body actually helped Smokie (in fact, not going to the island nor "inviting" people there just appears to be a fairly good idea overall), but never mind that!)

Yes, at a later time.

You're going in circles. Again, would it have been a problem if Jack and the others had showed up at that later time?

Disparities between what characters knew and what happened are retcons now?

Read again. It's a disparity between what Jack said Locke told him in that conversation, and the actual conversation as it's eventually shown.

And how did that erase Jack's motivation?

I explained all that already. Read again, and try paying attention.

Michael had sins for what he did, so his spirit ended up staying on the island as one of the whispers.

(And of course, there was nothing "sinful" about what Locke, Kate and Sawyer did, huh? Double-standards rule supreme!)

Michael first left the show along with Walt because the kid's actor grew up (so unexpected!) and killing kids off was apparently off the table (no "funny" dynamite scene? awww...).
Then, they briefly brought him back and killed him off for good (during that whole "the bad guys rigged their own ship with explosives as an insurance policy because that makes sense shut up" thing). Yeah, 'cause he couldn't die before that (???) but then, he could (???). As Christian (???) helpfully told him: "you can go, now".
Just not very far, apparently, because he was brought back again to explain the whispers. Never mind all those scenes where they were clearly associated with the Others: they were just dead people stuck on the island all along!

"Top tier storytelling!"

Aaron was Kate's reason why she wasn't a candidate.

Whereas Ji-yeon didn't count, apparently. Maybe it's a rule that it doesn't work if you're actually related to the kid? Those crazy rules!
(Of course, Ji-yeon just didn't seem to matter much overall, in the end, right?)

Or maybe Jin was the candidate, and like for Sawyer, the fact he had a kid didn't matter because he wasn't with her anyway? But then again, Jin killed himself by staying in that sub with his wife, despite Jack's apparent invulnerability to dynamite...

JACK: I just came from a lighthouse...where my name was etched in wood on a dial...I turned a mirror that somehow reflected the image of the house I grew up in. Jacob's lighthouse. He got Hurley to bring me out there because he wanted me to see what was reflected in that mirror. For some reason he wanted me to know that he had been watching me ever since I was a kid.
RICHARD: Why?
JACK: I have no idea why. But I'm willing to bet you that if Jacob went to that trouble, that he brought me to this island for a reason, and it's not blow up sitting here with you right now.
RICHARD: That's a pretty big risk you're taking Jack.
JACK: Yes.
RICHARD: What if you're wrong?
JACK: I'm not.

And he wasn't!
So... Er... Couldn't the exact same thing apply to the Kwons as well? I mean, especially if you consider they were reunited after some time travel shenanigans? That's a lot of shit to go through just to die there and orphan the kid, right? Too bad Jin didn't think of making that speech, maybe it would have helped!

(But then again, maybe not, because we couldn't quite have Jin, Sun and Sayid at that fire camp with Jacob, could we? Or Jacob wouldn't really be able to claim that he picked his candidates when their lives were shitty anyway.)

"Top tier storytelling!"

Of course, everything happens because of backstage stuff, writers are responsible for the story, and sometimes even that they don't have control over with other factors such as actors, directors, producers, or real life events

That's certainly understandable.
(Although in Walt's case, really...)

But the stuff is given an in-story explanation in the show

Just not a very good one.
Then again, even the other stuff got poor "explanations" (if any)... So I guess there is some consistency on that show after all, in a way!

Adding more reasons for his actions is helping my argument

No, it doesn't, since (once again), your argument was this: "For constantly obeying Jacob's orders without telling why (because he literally didn't know), he was constantly beat up by the crash survivors who thought he was lying. He had to fear Jacob more than the survivors if he was willing to put himself through that."
You were arguing that it had to be because he feared Jacob, when there would be another (and pretty damn obvious) reason: he was power-hungry and liked being the leader of the Others.
(Plus, we know he wasn't just obeying Jacob's orders, far from it.)
It was a poor argument.

"Three years" is misleading, since the characters were actually in the island for much less than that: Four months in 2004, and the short span of time between when they returned to the island and The End in 2007.

There were still other people to manipulate on the island during that time though.
In fact, I was being pretty generous by only counting from the beginning of the show, considering the guy had been trapped there for a couple of millennia already, at that point (and figured the "let's send some guy with a knife to Jacob" loophole a century ago... man, that took him a while as well, huh?).

He couldn't use the people of the Temple or Dharma either, since they had methods of stopping his entry.

Yeah? 'Cause it seemed like Dôgen and the Temple people set those defenses in a hurry when they learned about Jacob's death, actually. They weren't concerned about that, before?
Then again, the Others also had that unexplained Smoke Monster Summoning Device at DHARMA village...

"Top tier storytelling!"

Ben accepted the reason the guy he thought was Locke told him. Then, we as the audience (and Ben) learned afterwards that it was not a good reason.

1) Smokie's speech was idiotic, Locke-face or not.
2) We weren't talking about that anyway, but about why Jacob let Ben stab him.

Jacob morphed into a younger version of himself, so yes.

Let's go through that one again...

You: And why can't someone who morphs be allowed to morph into a younger version of himself?
Me: Jacob morphs?
You: Jacob morphed into a younger version of himself, so yes.

...
You sure there's not a bit of a problem, there?

Jacob appeared as a kid to the MiB (his brother from his childhood, who he has just recently killed), which shows us various reasons: to taunt him, to make him feel guilty, and so on. It worked, since he smiled once MiB got upset about it and told Desmond to ignore him.

Yeah, thanks Jacob: that clearly helped a lot. I mean, it was either that or explaining the whole deal to your candidates, but I guess there was no hurry on that side.
And it also makes sense that he would appear as a kid specifically. Because. I mean, they've known each other their entire lives anyway, but yeah: kid. Makes sense.

Or maybe it was just gratuitous, unexplained and ultimately pointless weird shit. You know. As usual. "Just got to put something in those final season episodes, man... We have little to no plot and 17 episodes!"

I don't see the idiocy here. Why is it not signs of Richard also having his own motivations based on his past with both Jacob, Ben, and the Man in Black?

Hm, I don't know, because it would make no fucking sense?
Was there anything in-between Richard's 19th century flashback and his time as Ben's advisor hinting at him having changed his mind? You do realize keeping that intel to himself would mean backstabbing the very people he was hired to protect, right? And trying to help them was his idea in the first place, really... Seems like it would be a pretty big deal.
I think it's obvious he didn't tell Ben anything because the writers hadn't thought of that yet. Would also explain why Richard was shocked when it was revealed that this resurrected Locke wasn't really Locke after all, despite Smokie having pulled the exact same trick on him with his wife.

But there is a point where Richard suddenly (and very briefly) switches to Smokie's side (for whatever reason), in season 6, yeah.
Richard sure was an unstable fellow, during that least season, huh? He went from going "fuck you, Smokie, I'm not going with you! also, let me down!" to hiding in the bushes and trying to warn people ("don't trust that guy, he's ev... shit, he's back! *runs away*") to being suicidal to claiming the island was Hell (okay, so he should really have known better by then, especially considering he'd actually left the island on occasions, but the episode would then cut to his 19th century self who actually believed that for a few hours so it makes sense shut up shut up) to going "hey, Smokie, you still hiring? I changed my mind!" and finally changing his changed mind minutes later.

(Then, he got superfast white hair, and was happy because the show had spent so much time establishing how hard immortality was treating him.)

His search for candidates alone indicates he planned to not be there forever.

Yeah: in case his brother killed him. I mean, that actually is what the guy said the first time (chronologically speaking) he mentioned a replacement...
Doesn't explain why he didn't defend himself.

As we had one for Locke, there is no reason to think the others didn't have their own funeral sometime off-screen

Besides, the Ajira people died off-screen to begin with, right? Haha.
Just saying it's "funny" how nobody gives a shit about them. Sawyer asked Widmore if he killed them. Widmore said he didn't. And we would never talk about them ever. Okay, then!

Again, it's pretty damn obvious the writers were unceremoniously getting rid of what they deemed dead weight. Sure, they're the ones who put those people there in the first place, but hey!

"Top tier storytelling!"

because one of them would already be dead
A rule to keep a certain someone from killing another certain someone kinda loses it's authority once the certain someone actually kills him.

... What?
Again, you're not making sense...

my point was that a TV drama is many things, as far as being a reality show and a sports show.

Er... Did you get that idea from the Wikipedia page you linked to earlier? Because it actually says "this excludes, for example, sports television, television news, reality show and game shows, stand-up comedy and variety shows", so...
... Did you confuse "to exclude" with "to include"?

They were selling a survival show (stranded on an island) turned mystery (where's the pilot, where are we, what is this?) with crazy sci-fi (hatch, unknown experiments) and fantasy (paraplegic walking again, monsters).

Okay, so you missed my point again, fine. I'm getting used to it.
What I meant was that, far from invoking Bellisario's maxim, the showrunners were actually encouraging viewers to examine the material carefully. Maybe they'll find hints! Because there totally is a plan, you guys!

 

[neoism]

Erigu so do you still hate this show.... wtf is with all the posts... DAMN

 

[brandonh83]

Erigu so do you still hate this show.... wtf is with all the posts... DAMN

yeah I'm still waiting for him to change his mind, after putting so much into it he's eventually going to snap, buy the Blu-ray box set and sleep with it every night.

 

[BenjaminBirdie]

Erigu so do you still hate this show.... wtf is with all the posts... DAMN

He will never stop until Cuse and Lindelof never do a show again and since you'll never know if they'll never do a show again until maybe they die of old age, no he will never stop.

It's why I finally threw in the towel.

 

[Erigu]

Erigu so do you still hate this show....

I don't hate the show: it's very amusing.

 

[WillyFive]

By not making sense?

Makes perfect sense to me. If I have to say it a hundred different ways until it makes sense to you, then I will.

The issue would be that the characters didn't seem to care about what would (and did) happen to the other passengers.
Your reply, basically: "but that's a negative! something they didn't do! so I won't comment."
Really? Should I rephrase that so they'd ignore the other passengers?
That's just a cop out, man.

The cop out is interpreting my reply as "A Negative? Impossible!".

My actual reply is that the inherent fringe consequences of a fringe plot don't matter to the plot the storyteller is saying.

For example, let's use a time travel story as an example. There are inherent trivialities to explaining how time travel works, but it's pointless to debate how it works when the point of the story is that they went back in time for something, not how the method they used to travel back in time works and what it's repercussions might be. A "Flux Capacitor" or "The String Theory" is all you need to get the point across, since the story revolves around something else.

Same thing with getting back to the island, "hijacking and crashing Ajira 316" is all the explanation that is needed to get the characters back to the island. Ignoring the story and going back and talking about what happened to the other passengers is an interesting discussion, but if you consider it as a reason to hate the story, then you are ruining it for yourself, and shouldn't expect others to agree with you.

Even Jack said "I don't even care about anyone else on the plane" on the Season 3 finale.

And that's a pretty stupid retort.

No it wasn't. Not all story arcs span the entire length show, even if the characters were introduced before. For example, the story arc if Jin and Sun having a baby wasn't present back when we were still on the story arc of Jin and Sun not being able to speak English.

How would Locke know that? He left.
Besides, Locke didn't say anything about that to Jack, did he?
And of course, Jack, Kate, etc seemed fine with leaving all those people behind for three years anyway (not sure being stuck on the island in 1974 would be much worse than being stuck on the island in 2007). Those characters care so much about each other, it's a delight!

No, the detail that apparently shook Jack to the core, during that conversation, was Locke's reference to Christian, like I said earlier. "MY FATHER CAN'T BE ON THE ISLAND YOU CRAZY OLD MAN HE'S DEAD! RAAAAAH! PIIILLS! BREAKDOWN!" Dude, chill. How is that news to you anyway?
And that's not what Jack said to Ben about that conversation, a few episodes earlier.
Retcon.

(And then, Christian appeared to Jack at the hospital. So there was that smoke detector, sure, but that would have to really be Christian, since Smokie was stuck on the island. Not a hallucination either, since Hurley told Jack about that "visit" earlier.
Why did Christian appear like that?
Guess we have to believe it was all part of The Plan: "I'll spook my son something good so he'll have a major breakdown and suddenly decide to go back to the island. Because the Man in Black needs to be destroyed, and he can help!"
Of course, the show would then tell us that Jack going back with Locke's body actually helped Smokie (in fact, not going to the island nor "inviting" people there just appears to be a fairly good idea overall), but never mind that!)

If they didn't go back to the island, then Jacob wouldn't find his candidate. He wants that candidate to replace him, even if it means opening up MiB to attack him.

You're going in circles. Again, would it have been a problem if Jack and the others had showed up at that later time?

Going in circles? I'm following you. The idea was that Jack and the others wanted to be there as soon as possible. Would it have been a problem? Who knows, since that is not what they did.

Read again. It's a disparity between what Jack said Locke told him in that conversation, and the actual conversation as it's eventually shown.

I explained all that already. Read again, and try paying attention.

You sure Locke knew the time flashes would stop if he turned the wheel?

(And of course, there was nothing "sinful" about what Locke, Kate and Sawyer did, huh? Double-standards rule supreme!)

Michael first left the show along with Walt because the kid's actor grew up (so unexpected!) and killing kids off was apparently off the table (no "funny" dynamite scene? awww...).
Then, they briefly brought him back and killed him off for good (during that whole "the bad guys rigged their own ship with explosives as an insurance policy because that makes sense shut up" thing). Yeah, 'cause he couldn't die before that (???) but then, he could (???). As Christian (???) helpfully told him: "you can go, now".
Just not very far, apparently, because he was brought back again to explain the whispers. Never mind all those scenes where they were clearly associated with the Others: they were just dead people stuck on the island all along!

"Top tier storytelling!"

This is insane. The only plot hole here was that Keamy's device would not have worked so deep underground, since cellphone signals didn't work either. But what you are talking about is pointing out random scenes and saying they are crazy. How are you supposed to like anything?

Whereas Ji-yeon didn't count, apparently. Maybe it's a rule that it doesn't work if you're actually related to the kid? Those crazy rules!
(Of course, Ji-yeon just didn't seem to matter much overall, in the end, right?)

Or maybe Jin was the candidate, and like for Sawyer, the fact he had a kid didn't matter because he wasn't with her anyway? But then again, Jin killed himself by staying in that sub with his wife, despite Jack's apparent invulnerability to dynamite...

And he wasn't!
So... Er... Couldn't the exact same thing apply to the Kwons as well? I mean, especially if you consider they were reunited after some time travel shenanigans? That's a lot of shit to go through just to die there and orphan the kid, right? Too bad Jin didn't think of making that speech, maybe it would have helped!

(But then again, maybe not, because we couldn't quite have Jin, Sun and Sayid at that fire camp with Jacob, could we? Or Jacob wouldn't really be able to claim that he picked his candidates when their lives were shitty anyway.)

"Top tier storytelling!"

Jin wanted to be with Sun when he died, even if it meant leaving his child behind. And in the end, Jack became the candidate (which he then resigned and gave it to Hurley).

That's certainly understandable.
(Although in Walt's case, really...) Just not a very good one.
Then again, even the other stuff got poor "explanations" (if any)... So I guess there is some consistency on that show after all, in a way!

Well, that's opinion (which you have made very public). Sorry you feel that way.

No, it doesn't, since (once again), your argument was this: "For constantly obeying Jacob's orders without telling why (because he literally didn't know), he was constantly beat up by the crash survivors who thought he was lying. He had to fear Jacob more than the survivors if he was willing to put himself through that."
You were arguing that it had to be because he feared Jacob, when there would be another (and pretty damn obvious) reason: he was power-hungry and liked being the leader of the Others.

(Plus, we know he wasn't just obeying Jacob's orders, far from it.)
It was a poor argument..

Fearing Jacob more than the survivors doesn't suddenly make it that he isn't a power hungry liar that liked being the leader of the Others.

There were still other people to manipulate on the island during that time though.
In fact, I was being pretty generous by only counting from the beginning of the show, considering the guy had been trapped there for a couple of millennia already, at that point (and figured the "let's send some guy with a knife to Jacob" loophole a century ago... man, that took him a while as well, huh?).

did you ever figure those didn't work either?

Yeah? 'Cause it seemed like Dôgen and the Temple people set those defenses in a hurry when they learned about Jacob's death, actually. They weren't concerned about that, before? Then again, the Others also had that unexplained Smoke Monster Summoning Device at DHARMA village..."Top tier storytelling!"

Same phenomenon seen in racing scenes in various other shows and movies, where there is a shot that shows the driver or pilot hitting the gas at full speed. Shouldn't he already have been going at full speed in a race?

Hardly a genuine complaint. The scene played out to raise tension for the scene. With Jacob dead, MiB was coming to the temple, presumably to get rid of the Others who would not go with him. And Ben did have a device that summoned the Man in Black. But it wasn't used a lot as the story moved on from that place.

1) Smokie's speech was idiotic, Locke-face or not.
2) We weren't talking about that anyway, but about why Jacob let Ben stab him.

Jacob accepted his death. He had candidates now, and wasn't going to fight like he did with Richard.

Let's go through that one again...

You: And why can't someone who morphs be allowed to morph into a younger version of himself?
Me: Jacob morphs?
You: Jacob morphed into a younger version of himself, so yes.

...
You sure there's not a bit of a problem, there?

No?

Yeah, thanks Jacob: that clearly helped a lot. I mean, it was either that or explaining the whole deal to your candidates, but I guess there was no hurry on that side.
And it also makes sense that he would appear as a kid specifically. Because. I mean, they've known each other their entire lives anyway, but yeah: kid. Makes sense.

Or maybe it was just gratuitous, unexplained and ultimately pointless weird shit. You know. As usual. "Just got to put something in those final season episodes, man... We have little to no plot and 17 episodes!"

Jacob and his brother were friends when they were kids.

Hm, I don't know, because it would make no fucking sense?
Was there anything in-between Richard's 19th century flashback and his time as Ben's advisor hinting at him having changed his mind? You do realize keeping that intel to himself would mean backstabbing the very people he was hired to protect, right? And trying to help them was his idea in the first place, really... Seems like it would be a pretty big deal.
I think it's obvious he didn't tell Ben anything because the writers hadn't thought of that yet. Would also explain why Richard was shocked when it was revealed that this resurrected Locke wasn't really Locke after all, despite Smokie having pulled the exact same trick on him with his wife.

But there is a point where Richard suddenly (and very briefly) switches to Smokie's side (for whatever reason), in season 6, yeah.
Richard sure was an unstable fellow, during that least season, huh? He went from going "fuck you, Smokie, I'm not going with you! also, let me down!" to hiding in the bushes and trying to warn people ("don't trust that guy, he's ev... shit, he's back! *runs away*") to being suicidal to claiming the island was Hell (okay, so he should really have known better by then, especially considering he'd actually left the island on occasions, but the episode would then cut to his 19th century self who actually believed that for a few hours so it makes sense shut up shut up) to going "hey, Smokie, you still hiring? I changed my mind!" and finally changing his changed mind minutes later.

(Then, he got superfast white hair, and was happy because the show had spent so much time establishing how hard immortality was treating him.)

Yes, he found himself in conflict with himself more than ever in Season 6 when everything started to change. It sucks that we start to learn about characters as soon as we pay attention to them.

Yeah: in case his brother killed him. I mean, that actually is what the guy said the first time (chronologically speaking) he mentioned a replacement...
Doesn't explain why he didn't defend himself.

He didn't have to. The Island would soon have it's new protector. Different from the 1800's, where he probably didn't; and his relationship with the MiB was not as developed as it was by now.

Besides, the Ajira people died off-screen to begin with, right? Haha.
Just saying it's "funny" how nobody gives a shit about them. Sawyer asked Widmore if he killed them. Widmore said he didn't. And we would never talk about them ever. Okay, then!

Again, it's pretty damn obvious the writers were unceremoniously getting rid of what they deemed dead weight. Sure, they're the ones who put those people there in the first place, but hey!

"Top tier storytelling!"[/quote]

Lost very much is Top Tier Storytelling. Watching most of today's new shows that replaced it makes it all the more obvious of what we lost.

It's great that you are getting some "funny" out of it, though. At least you are not bored.

... What?
Again, you're not making sense...

Rule: "Don't kill him."

*you kill him*

Obviously the rule is pretty pointless now.

Er... Did you get that idea from the Wikipedia page you linked to earlier? Because it actually says "this excludes, for example, sports television, television news, reality show and game shows, stand-up comedy and variety shows", so...
... Did you confuse "to exclude" with "to include"?

Ooh, nice! You actually got me there. Well done.

Okay, so you missed my point again, fine. I'm getting used to it.
What I meant was that, far from invoking Bellisario's maxim, the showrunners were actually encouraging viewers to examine the material carefully. Maybe they'll find hints! Because there totally is a plan, you guys!

There was certainly an incredible amount of detail, research and work that went into it. From names lifted from real life people who had similarities to the characters (from philosophers and psychologist), allusions to literature (like the Bible and other classic works), and more. It was an extremely geeky show, and even though it didn't explicitly relate to how the story will end, it increased the depth of the stories of the show, from the statues and hieroglyphs and comparative plot points.

When a new name was announced on Lost, you looked it up to see where it came from. You don't find yourself doing that for other shows often.

 

[Erigu]

Makes perfect sense to me.

It makes perfect sense to you that the lack of internal consistency on the show was only a problem behind the scenes.

the inherent fringe consequences of a fringe plot don't matter to the plot the storyteller is saying.
For example, let's use a time travel story as an example. There are inherent trivialities to explaining how time travel works, but it's pointless to debate how it works when the point of the story is that they went back in time for something, not how the method they used to travel back in time works and what it's repercussions might be. A "Flux Capacitor" or "The String Theory" is all you need to get the point across, since the story revolves around something else.

I don't see how any of this excuses the fact the main characters were willing to sacrifice a whole bunch of innocent lives for nebulous purposes, and the show was apparently perfectly fine with that.
You seem to be chalking that one up as a mere technicality, an insignificant detail, and I'm not sure how you manage to do that, especially for a drama that pretends to offer profound life lessons ("live together or die alone! abandon your friends for three years on a dangerous island! then, suddenly change your mind for no apparent reason and risk many strangers' lives in the process!")

Then again, I remember a recent discussion about Kate's murder of her father... Maybe the show has the same effect on its fans' moral compasses as the island has on regular compasses? Scary!

Even Jack said "I don't even care about anyone else on the plane" on the Season 3 finale.

Yeah, that was when that was just a dark fantasy of his. And it was fine, because it was treated as one, too. The show was showing us just how broken Jack was, with that admission of his.
But then it became an actual plan, and they all were okay with it, and... Ah, well, I explained myself already.

No it wasn't.

Yes, it really was?

You said Widmore was "soon" disposed off, when the guy was actually killed in the second-to-last episode. That's not "soon".
I point that out, and you argue back that "hey, Lost was a long show!"
Dude. That actually makes it even worse. Maths are hard!

Not all story arcs span the entire length show, even if the characters were introduced before. For example, the story arc if Jin and Sun having a baby wasn't present back when we were still on the story arc of Jin and Sun not being able to speak English.

I'm not sure what you're trying to do, here. We were talking about Widmore. The character.

If they didn't go back to the island, then Jacob wouldn't find his candidate.

Because Jacob was stuck on the island, right?

He wants that candidate to replace him, even if it means opening up MiB to attack him.

Again, when Jacob first talks about getting replaced, it's in case his brother manages to kill him. So that sounds like backwards logic, right there.

The idea was that Jack and the others wanted to be there as soon as possible. Would it have been a problem? Who knows, since that is not what they did.

So that's it? They wanted to be there as soon as possible, and who cares why? Who cares if there was no apparent reason? And let's not pause to wonder what would have happened otherwise either: that's not what they did, so end of story!
Well, gee.

I seem to recall that some of my "opponents" amusingly stated (but didn't quite elaborate, naturally) that the reason I thought the show was idiotic was that I couldn't think for myself. Were you one of them? 'Cause that'd be really funny.

You sure Locke knew the time flashes would stop if he turned the wheel?

Wasn't that the point?

This is insane. The only plot hole here was that Keamy's device would not have worked so deep underground, since cellphone signals didn't work either.

Because the "rigging your own ship with explosives" part made sense? Okay.

what you are talking about is pointing out random scenes and saying they are crazy.

And explaining why.
What you are not doing is proving me wrong.

How are you supposed to like anything?

Again with the implication that all of fiction is as nonsensical, silly and inconsistent as Lost?

Jin wanted to be with Sun when he died, even if it meant leaving his child behind.

What, you missed my point? I'm shocked!

And in the end, Jack became the candidate (which he then resigned and gave it to Hurley).

(I've seen the show, thanks)
First off, just a point of detail considering how "well" this discussion is going overall, but Jack wasn't the only candidate.
Then, sure, he (briefly) became the protector of the island in the end, but if that's the reason the dynamite didn't blow up in the Black Rock (yup: new rules, guys!), that would mean it was already decided at that point (by whom? I really shouldn't be asking questions...) that he'd be the one, and make the fire camp scene even sillier than it already is. Let's just hope it wasn't already decided before he came back to the island, huh? That'd be even worse!

Well, that's opinion

Yup, "just an opinion", never mind the arguments that come with it, right?

Fearing Jacob more than the survivors doesn't suddenly make it that he isn't a power hungry liar that liked being the leader of the Others.

Oh, my...

Let's try this one again:

1) You argued that Ben feared Jacob.
2) I wasn't so convinced and asked you to elaborate.
3) You came up with the argument "why else would he do all this shit if not out of fear of Jacob?"
4) I pointed out that there would be other reasons (him being power-hungry and enjoying his status of leader of the Others would be a very obvious one), so that argument is flawed.
5) "Why couldn't it be both?", you reply.
Dude. Where's your evidence that Ben feared Jacob, there? You had one argument, and it was flawed. So what do you have? Nothing but circular reasoning, once again...

Same phenomenon seen in racing scenes in various other shows and movies, where there is a shot that shows the driver or pilot hitting the gas at full speed. Shouldn't he already have been going at full speed in a race?

Yup, they aways go at full speed. Always.
Who knew racing was so simple?

Hardly a genuine complaint. The scene played out to raise tension for the scene.

And surely, there was no other way to generate tension than to show that, for some reason, those people weren't concerned about the Man in Black right before that...

With Jacob dead, MiB was coming to the temple, presumably to get rid of the Others who would not go with him.

Because back when Jacob was alive, the Man in Black wasn't violent? Or couldn't enter the temple because of some new rule we'd have to come up with?

And Ben did have a device that summoned the Man in Black. But it wasn't used a lot as the story moved on from that place.

So never mind the fact it made no sense in retrospect, right?

Jacob accepted his death. He had candidates now, and wasn't going to fight like he did with Richard.

Why not?
First off, they were just candidates, at that point. Good thing Jacob died in a fire (fitting fate, too, but the other characters could have joined him, really) and produced some magical ash that would allow him to come back long enough to enthrone a successor.
And then, call me silly, but I like it better when I know why a character chooses death over life, in a story. I think they call it "motivation". Yeah. Heard of it? It's this new thing that's catching on.

No?

Well, I'm not sure what you said exactly to get that tag, but it goes very well with your love for circular reasoning...

Jacob and his brother were friends when they were kids.

Again, why that age specifically when they've known each other their entire lives?
Not that it would be the biggest issue with those scenes, but you ignored the rest, so...

Yes, he found himself in conflict with himself more than ever in Season 6 when everything started to change.

It's just inconsistent writing that makes Richard look like a rambling lunatic.
More evidence that you can't tell the difference between "complex" and "messy"...

Rule: "Don't kill him."
*you kill him*
Obviously the rule is pretty pointless now.

Which is precisely why I asked you about that scene where Ben shows up in Widmore's room at night, on mainland...
If, like Ben said, Widmore "changed the rules" when he (actually Keamy) killed Alex, why are they suddenly following those rules once again in that scene by not trying to kill each other? Why do they care?

There was certainly an incredible amount of detail, research and work that went into it. From names lifted from real life people who had similarities to the characters (from philosophers and psychologist), allusions to literature (like the Bible and other classic works), and more.

And it was all so relevant, too.
Yup, lots of work, there. An "incredible amount". When they came up with the name "Jeremy Bentham", for example? Another philosopher? My mind was blown. I had no idea there were more philosophers. But lo and behold, there it was: another philosopher name. How do they do that? They must be geniuses.

When a new name was announced on Lost, you looked it up to see where it came from. You don't find yourself doing that for other shows often.

If you say so!

 

[hyp3rlink]

Anyone knows if Lord Darlton working on anything new? I don't think they'll be able to match the quality of LOST but am sure it'll be better than pretty much everything else on TV right now (except Breaking Bad, of course).

LOST was one of those once in a generation things where everything just clicked. Never seen a show that consumes 'haters' more than it is adored by the fans

 

[gdt]

Anyone knows if Lord Darlton working on anything new? I don't think they'll be able to match the quality of LOST but am sure it'll be better than pretty much everything else on TV right now (except Breaking Bad, of course).

LOST was one of those once in a generation things where everything just clicked. Never seen a show that consumes 'haters' more than it is adored by the fans

Damon is writing and producing the new Star Trek movie, and he wrote the new Ridley Scott movie (Prometheus/Alien prequel). He's probably got other stuff in the works.

I don't think we've heard what Carlton is working on next.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

Carlton has some civil War Era drama thing he's working on, and then he's also working on some musical thing with some country singer. I don't recall Damon working on a TV show yet, he's doing all those movies plus I think he sold a movie trilogy to Disney that they expect can rake in big bucks, IIRC

 

[WillyFive]

It makes perfect sense to you that the lack of internal consistency on the show was only a problem behind the scenes.

If it didn't become a problem on the show, then yes it was a problem from behind the scenes.

I don't see how any of this excuses the fact the main characters were willing to sacrifice a whole bunch of innocent lives for nebulous purposes, and the show was apparently perfectly fine with that.
You seem to be chalking that one up as a mere technicality, an insignificant detail, and I'm not sure how you manage to do that, especially for a drama that pretends to offer profound life lessons ("live together or die alone! abandon your friends for three years on a dangerous island! then, suddenly change your mind for no apparent reason and risk many strangers' lives in the process!")

Then again, I remember a recent discussion about Kate's murder of her father... Maybe the show has the same effect on its fans' moral compasses as the island has on regular compasses? Scary!

The show was fine with that because the characters believed it was worth it. And wasn't one of the reasons Jack was so upset about leaving was because of the rest of the people that were left behind?

Yes, it really was?

You said Widmore was "soon" disposed off, when the guy was actually killed in the second-to-last episode. That's not "soon".
I point that out, and you argue back that "hey, Lost was a long show!"
Dude. That actually makes it even worse. Maths are hard!

Widmore disposed of soon = Not a lot of time was spent on his demise. After setting up him and Ben were rivals, Ben stabbed him.

Lost was a long show = the scope of the story is very large, with Widmore being just a fraction of it.

I'm not sure what you're trying to do, here. We were talking about Widmore. The character.

Yes. Sun and Jin's different story arcs across the series was just an example.

Because Jacob was stuck on the island, right?

Jacob searched for his candidates outside the island, but he needed to get them to the island if they were going to replace him.

Again, when Jacob first talks about getting replaced, it's in case his brother manages to kill him. So that sounds like backwards logic, right there.

It's not that complicated. If Jacob is no longer the protector of the island, someone will have to take his place, otherwise the island will be left alone, leaving "the malevolent force that would destroy the world" free to escape.

So that's it? They wanted to be there as soon as possible, and who cares why? Who cares if there was no apparent reason? And let's not pause to wonder what would have happened otherwise either: that's not what they did, so end of story!
Well, gee.

I seem to recall that some of my "opponents" amusingly stated (but didn't quite elaborate, naturally) that the reason I thought the show was idiotic was that I couldn't think for myself. Were you one of them? 'Cause that'd be really funny.

But we know why. We saw how.

I don't think I was one of the people that started this whole thing with you, but I think that the reason you think the show is idiotic is not that you can't think for yourself, but that you can't enjoy the reason everyone else enjoyed Lost.

While everyone else saw fantastic storytelling, excellent and likable characters, amazing music, memorable scenes, and something to talk about; you saw it for it's technical aspects like a film school teacher. It's great that we go deep and see the mechanisms of the story and the writing and see what was done to carry the story, but not as a reason to hate the show, but as a reason to learn how it is made.

For example, the argument over how the characters had to be written off due to real life events (such as the kid growing up or actors not wanting to come back). Those are real things that happened, but they are bad things to criticize the show over, since they are a fact of production. The bad thing would be the opposite, keeping people in the show long after they were meant to be (like the entire cast of Heroes after Season 1), and even then it doesn't mean the show is bad for doing so.

Wasn't that the point?

Actually, the point was to bring the ones who left back, but I guess it works.

Because the "rigging your own ship with explosives" part made sense? Okay.

It was getting Ben or bust, apparently. Hardly nonsensical.

And explaining why.
What you are not doing is proving me wrong.

I was hoping I was, by explaining how they're not.

Again with the implication that all of fiction is as nonsensical, silly and inconsistent as Lost?

That's your implication, since I don't consider Lost to be as nonsensical, silly, and inconsistent as you.

What, you missed my point? I'm shocked!

Well, I thought your point was that you didn't understand the motivation about their parents leaving their child as they chose to die together in the boat.

And I answered that hey wanted to be together as they died after all they went through trying to find each other again.

(I've seen the show, thanks)
First off, just a point of detail considering how "well" this discussion is going overall, but Jack wasn't the only candidate.
Then, sure, he (briefly) became the protector of the island in the end, but if that's the reason the dynamite didn't blow up in the Black Rock (yup: new rules, guys!), that would mean it was already decided at that point (by whom? I really shouldn't be asking questions...) that he'd be the one, and make the fire camp scene even sillier than it already is. Let's just hope it wasn't already decided before he came back to the island, huh? That'd be even worse!

It is decided gradually as the candidates are narrowed down.

Yup, "just an opinion", never mind the arguments that come with it, right?

You have made those arguments very public, but it hasn't stopped me from trying to understand your opinions.

Oh, my...

Let's try this one again:

1) You argued that Ben feared Jacob.
2) I wasn't so convinced and asked you to elaborate.
3) You came up with the argument "why else would he do all this shit if not out of fear of Jacob?"
4) I pointed out that there would be other reasons (him being power-hungry and enjoying his status of leader of the Others would be a very obvious one), so that argument is flawed.
5) "Why couldn't it be both?", you reply.
Dude. Where's your evidence that Ben feared Jacob, there? You had one argument, and it was flawed. So what do you have? Nothing but circular reasoning, once again...

I gave you some evidence, but you "didn't see it". In the argument saying the only reason Ben did stuff because of Jacob, you proved me wrong by saying there were more reasons. That's fine with me, but I didn't see why it couldn't be both.

Yup, they aways go at full speed. Always.
Who knew racing was so simple?

Yeah, who knew characters would be so simple too.

Or couldn't enter the temple because of some new rule we'd have to come up with?

Most likely.

So never mind the fact it made no sense in retrospect, right?

If we knew more about it, it could have.

Why not?
First off, they were just candidates, at that point. Good thing Jacob died in a fire (fitting fate, too, but the other characters could have joined him, really) and produced some magical ash that would allow him to come back long enough to enthrone a successor.
And then, call me silly, but I like it better when I know why a character chooses death over life, in a story. I think they call it "motivation". Yeah. Heard of it? It's this new thing that's catching on.

Whatever, but I do have one complaint: If they killed off Jacob, it's dumb to still have him around for Season 6 (except for flashbacks, obviously).

Well, I'm not sure what you said exactly to get that tag, but it goes very well with your love for circular reasoning...

I got the tag because I defended the Sonic Advance games on one of the Sonic 4 threads. That was a big no no when everybody was extremely mad at Dimps (the developers of the Sonic Advance games and Sonic 4) for making Sonic 4 be very little like the Genesis games and more like the Advance games. I defended the game because the Advance games weren't bad games (they were actually great), but they were noticeably different than the old games, so they were mad a game called Sonic 4 was nothing like Sonic 1,2, and 3. The specific wording of it however was apparently because I don't use profanity.

However, I do thank you for not using my tag against me as many others would have done whenever I get into a hated conversation with them in matters we disagree with.

Again, why that age specifically when they've known each other their entire lives?
Not that it would be the biggest issue with those scenes, but you ignored the rest, so...

As the kids grew up, they became further apart.

It's just inconsistent writing that makes Richard look like a rambling lunatic.
More evidence that you can't tell the difference between "complex" and "messy"...

By all means, Richard was a rambling lunatic by Season 6. Everything changed for him, and he responded as followed.

I think the difference with complexity and a mess is how well organized everything is. Richard's story did not come off as a mess to me, it actually came off as a bit too simplistic when I watched it. Ab Aeterno was great, though.

Which is precisely why I asked you about that scene where Ben shows up in Widmore's room at night, on mainland...
If, like Ben said, Widmore "changed the rules" when he (actually Keamy) killed Alex, why are they suddenly following those rules once again in that scene by not trying to kill each other? Why do they care?

Habit? Not wanting to continue to break the rules? Ben did threaten Widmore by killing his daughter, though.

[qupte]And it was all so relevant, too.
Yup, lots of work, there. An "incredible amount". When they came up with the name "Jeremy Bentham", for example? Another philosopher? My mind was blown. I had no idea there were more philosophers. But lo and behold, there it was: another philosopher name. How do they do that? They must be geniuses.[/quote]

If that bothers you, you can always be content with other shows doing less.

If you say so!

No, it's true. It happened a couple of times in the Lost-GAF megathreads.

 

[Jill Sandwich]

^^^^^ Jesus fucking Christ

 

[Erigu]

If it didn't become a problem on the show, then yes it was a problem from behind the scenes.

It was a problem on the show (yeah, you didn't notice, I know), and I don't see how it could be a problem behind the scenes. You're not making sense.

The show was fine with that because the characters believed it was worth it.

That makes them criminally dangerous idiots, then. But hey, the show was fine with that, apparently...

And wasn't one of the reasons Jack was so upset about leaving was because of the rest of the people that were left behind?

Again, it was supposed to be (after three years though?), but that was retconned later on.

Widmore disposed of soon = Not a lot of time was spent on his demise.

I realize we've never agreed we would both use English in this discussion, but I thought that was a given.

After setting up him and Ben were rivals, Ben stabbed him.

I don't even know... We're still talking about Widmore, here, yes? So, er... "Soon" after they established Ben and Widmore were rivals (like, a couple of seasons later), Ben stabbed him. With a bullet.

Lost was a long show = the scope of the story is very large, with Widmore being just a fraction of it.

What does that have to do with "soon"?

Yes. Sun and Jin's different story arcs across the series was just an example.

An example that doesn't apply, yes.
Once again, that wasn't a waste of bytes at all, thanks.

Jacob searched for his candidates outside the island, but he needed to get them to the island if they were going to replace him.

But "they" were not going to replace him. Only one of them would. Why not just pick the one instead of bringing them all over (along with a bunch of non-candidate people too, 'cause hey why the fuck not)?

If Jacob is no longer the protector of the island, someone will have to take his place, otherwise the island will be left alone, leaving "the malevolent force that would destroy the world" free to escape.

And you don't think it would have been a good idea not to bring all those people if only one replacement was needed? Especially considering the replacement was needed in case Jacob got killed, and the Man in Black needed other people to pull that one off?

But we know why.

Funny how you still haven't managed to explain, then.

While everyone else saw fantastic storytelling, excellent and likable characters, amazing music, memorable scenes, and something to talk about; you saw it for it's technical aspects like a film school teacher.

Because only film school teachers care about things like the plot and the character's motivations being inconsistent / making no sense, right?

For example, the argument over how the characters had to be written off due to real life events (such as the kid growing up or actors not wanting to come back). Those are real things that happened, but they are bad things to criticize the show over, since they are a fact of production.

And that's a great example for you to pick, too, as I was particularly harsh regarding such cases, indeed:

You: Of course, everything happens because of backstage stuff, writers are responsible for the story, and sometimes even that they don't have control over with other factors such as actors, directors, producers, or real life events
Me: That's certainly understandable.

Oo-oo-ooh, boy! Take that, Darlton!

(But yeah, for Walt, that was kinda stupid, sorry. They knew time moved a lot slower on their show than in real life, and I would think they knew children grow up.)

Actually, the point was to bring the ones who left back

I just checked, and it would seem it was actually both:

LOCKE: The Orchid. That's where all this started. Maybe it's where it'll all stop.
SAWYER: That greenhouse is a long ways away.
LOCKE: You said you had a Zodiac raft back at the beach. We could take that, cut around the horn of the Island, be at the Orchid in half the time.
SAWYER: And let me guess. You know exactly what to do when we get there.
LOCKE: No, not exactly at all, but I know that Ben used it to leave the Island. And if I can do the same thing, I believe I can save us.
SAWYER: And how you gonna do that?
LOCKE: This is all happening because they left. I think it'll stop if I can bring them back.

Er... Which is it, Locke?
(And then, Locke finds the wheel "slipped off its axis", attempting to rotate forward but skipping backwards, as if stuck (which would certainly fit with Faraday's "skipping record" analogy)... Plus, turning the wheel did stop the flashes, in the end...)

Whichever the case may be, Locke didn't tell Jack they were at fault for leaving, despite what Jack later (actually in a previous episode) tells Ben.

It was getting Ben or bust, apparently. Hardly nonsensical.

What? Please elaborate.

Well, I thought your point was that you didn't understand the motivation about their parents leaving their child as they chose to die together in the boat.

Not at all. Read again?

It is decided gradually as the candidates are narrowed down.

Ha! As they die, you mean?

In the argument saying the only reason Ben did stuff because of Jacob, you proved me wrong by saying there were more reasons.

Ah. Good.

Most likely.

When you have to make up excuses for the show by coming up with rules and exceptions to those rules for every other weird, unexplained phenomenon the show throws at you (and there's a bunch of them), you're not dealing with "top tier storytelling"...

If we knew more about it, it could have.

Just like the outrigger shootout thing, huh? Surely, despite the appearances, there's an answer that makes perfect sense, but the writers didn't give it on the show nor in interviews because they're... er... shy or something. Yeah, that's it!

Whatever

Yeah, characters becoming suicidal for no apparent reason? Whatever.

As the kids grew up, they became further apart.

Of course, they had a couple of millennia to catch up... But hey, time flies by, on a deserted island.

By all means, Richard was a rambling lunatic by Season 6.

Indeed.

Ab Aeterno was great, though.

Not quite.

Habit? Not wanting to continue to break the rules?

Really, now...

If that bothers you, you can always be content with other shows doing less.

So you somehow managed to understand that I was annoyed by Lost doing "so much" work/research... Huh.

No, it's true. It happened a couple of times in the Lost-GAF megathreads.

Oh, wow.
Er... Dude. You don't have to convince me that people actually wondered where the names came from OMG. You said "you don't find yourself doing that for other shows often", when I (and many others) do that for other shows/works of fiction a whole fucking lot.

 

[bubnbob]

Spoiler

Joker is telling his goons via video announcement how he got healthier from before, and he says something along the lines of it's might be better to not know, and then he goes on for a little bit ambiguously along those lines before ending it all with "And why did it all end in a church?" :lol

One of the thugs randomly says "Did they ever explain what the island was?" as well

 

[krameriffic]

 

[WillyFive]

It was a problem on the show (yeah, you didn't notice, I know), and I don't see how it could be a problem behind the scenes. You're not making sense.

You said the story lacked internal consistency, which the writers would be to blame.

That makes them criminally dangerous idiots, then. But hey, the show was fine with that, apparently...

Apparently, yes it was.

Again, it was supposed to be (after three years though?), but that was retconned later on.

His depression and breakdown didn't happen overnight.

I realize we've never agreed we would both use English in this discussion, but I thought that was a given.

αστείος

But, yes, it wasn't a very ceremonial scene, as Lost tends to do with big events (like the boat floating away in S1, the call getting through in S3, the plane arriving in S4, the bomb in S5, and the entire final episode).

I don't even know... We're still talking about Widmore, here, yes? So, er... "Soon" after they established Ben and Widmore were rivals (like, a couple of seasons later), Ben stabbed him. With a bullet.

Oh yeah, he did shoot him, not stab him. I remembered a knife was used to slit someone's throat in that scene, and assumed that's the weapon that was used against Widmore. Mix that with images of Ben stabbing Keamy, and you have that.

What does that have to do with "soon"?

It was quick and fleeting.

An example that doesn't apply, yes.
Once again, that wasn't a waste of bytes at all, thanks.

If you say so.

But "they" were not going to replace him. Only one of them would. Why not just pick the one instead of bringing them all over (along with a bunch of non-candidate people too, 'cause hey why the fuck not)?

The final pick is decided gradually as the candidates are narrowed down.

And you don't think it would have been a good idea not to bring all those people if only one replacement was needed? Especially considering the replacement was needed in case Jacob got killed, and the Man in Black needed other people to pull that one off?

The one that would be chosen was not decided yet.

Funny how you still haven't managed to explain, then.

They went there for various reasons, including getting those who were left behind back (definitely a strong reason for Kate), to prevent worse things from happening to their lives, and because Jacob and/or Ben convinced them to come. You know, like on the show.

Because only film school teachers care about things like the plot and the character's motivations being inconsistent / making no sense, right?

No, because film teachers generally won't hate something like that just for that.

And that's a great example for you to pick, too, as I was particularly harsh regarding such cases, indeed:

You: Of course, everything happens because of backstage stuff, writers are responsible for the story, and sometimes even that they don't have control over with other factors such as actors, directors, producers, or real life events
Me: That's certainly understandable.

Oo-oo-ooh, boy! Take that, Darlton!

(But yeah, for Walt, that was kinda stupid, sorry. They knew time moved a lot slower on their show than in real life, and I would think they knew children grow up.)

Well, you know kids and those...um...hormones. Still, they wanted a kid in the story.

I just checked, and it would seem it was actually both:

Er... Which is it, Locke?
(And then, Locke finds the wheel "slipped off its axis", attempting to rotate forward but skipping backwards, as if stuck (which would certainly fit with Faraday's "skipping record" analogy)... Plus, turning the wheel did stop the flashes, in the end...)

Whichever the case may be, Locke didn't tell Jack they were at fault for leaving, despite what Jack later (actually in a previous episode) tells Ben.

If we assume they visited each other more than once, it still works. But if they only visited once, it's a continuity error/blooper.

What? Please elaborate.

Weren't those mercenaries in the Frigate there for Ben?

And by what Ben said about him, he didn't seem like a person well respected in the outside world. He seemed to be described as a criminal of sorts. If things went wrong, he probably had more to lose than Widmore's pay check.

Not at all. Read again?

Whereas Ji-yeon didn't count, apparently. Maybe it's a rule that it doesn't work if you're actually related to the kid? Those crazy rules!
(Of course, Ji-yeon just didn't seem to matter much overall, in the end, right?)

Or maybe Jin was the candidate, and like for Sawyer, the fact he had a kid didn't matter because he wasn't with her anyway? But then again, Jin killed himself by staying in that sub with his wife, despite Jack's apparent invulnerability to dynamite...

And he wasn't!
So... Er... Couldn't the exact same thing apply to the Kwons as well? I mean, especially if you consider they were reunited after some time travel shenanigans? That's a lot of shit to go through just to die there and orphan the kid, right? Too bad Jin didn't think of making that speech, maybe it would have helped!

(But then again, maybe not, because we couldn't quite have Jin, Sun and Sayid at that fire camp with Jacob, could we? Or Jacob wouldn't really be able to claim that he picked his candidates when their lives were shitty anyway.)

"Top tier storytelling!"

The only thing I can get from the rant was that you didn't understand the motivation about their parents leaving their child as they chose to die together in the boat. You come up with a response, then a response to your own response, until I can't even tell if you answered your own question or not.

Ha! As they die, you mean?

Not necessarily. Various simply left the island.

Ah. Good.

The show was deeper than I though.

When you have to make up excuses for the show by coming up with rules and exceptions to those rules for every other weird, unexplained phenomenon the show throws at you (and there's a bunch of them), you're not dealing with "top tier storytelling"...

Storytelling also deals with how the story is told, which is what made Lost top tier storytelling.

"That's the mark of a great storyteller, never to give away secrets in advance." - Ian McDiarmid

"I don't mind UFO's and ghost stories, it's just that I tend to give value to the storyteller rather than to the story itself." - Robert Stack

"You're either born a writer, a storyteller, or you're not." - John Milius​

Storytelling and writing are different things, because one is a performance. A good storyteller can make a boring story seem interesting, and even then it didn't stop Lost from being nominated for Best Writing at the Emmy's.

Just like the outrigger shootout thing, huh? Surely, despite the appearances, there's an answer that makes perfect sense, but the writers didn't give it on the show nor in interviews because they're... er... shy or something. Yeah, that's it!

Or because they have to finish the story by Season 6, meaning previously introduced plot lines have to be gone by the wayside or given a short ending.

Of course, they had a couple of millennia to catch up... But hey, time flies by, on a deserted island.

What if they didn't catch up? "Yeah, let's make friends with the monster that is living in your dead brother's body, and may be the reason that you have to protect the island so that he doesn't get out!"

Not quite.

Ab Aeterno was awesome. One of the best and most memorable of the show.

So you somehow managed to understand that I was annoyed by Lost doing "so much" work/research... Huh.

Yes, because you didn't find it very compelling.

Oh, wow.
Er... Dude. You don't have to convince me that people actually wondered where the names came from OMG. You said "you don't find yourself doing that for other shows often", when I (and many others) do that for other shows/works of fiction a whole fucking lot.

Alright then.

Actually, do you go to other threads around here? Which shows? I have only seen you on the Lost OT, and was wondering if you hung around any other TV show threads.

 

[Erigu]

You said the story lacked internal consistency, which the writers would be to blame.

And if the acting sucked, the actors would be to blame. Does that make it "only a problem behind the scenes"? Nope, it doesn't.
You're not making sense. And yet, you insist.

Apparently, yes it was.

The main characters are absolutely awful people, then.
Except they're obviously not meant to be, so it's the writing that's shitty (inconsistent).

His depression and breakdown didn't happen overnight.

I don't even know why you replied that, as I was talking about how they retconned what Locke told Jack.

But, yes, it wasn't a very ceremonial scene, as Lost tends to do with big events

Here again, I don't know what you're talking about.
I simply marvel at your insistence (here as well), considering you're still trying to defend your claim that Widmore was "disposed off as soon as the story started moving towards it's endgame" when the guy got killed off in the second-to-last episode of a 100+ episode TV show. The mind boggles.

The final pick is decided gradually as the candidates are narrowed down.

And again, "narrowed down" how? Oh, they die. Yeah.
(well, except for Kate, but then again: "still, Kate, if you want the job, that's cool, too!" ... oh, Jacob...)

While the way you describe the selection process certainly is amusing ("let's bring all the candidates on a dangerous island and see who survives!"), on the actual show, Jacob doesn't even "pick" his successor, in the end. He explains a successor is needed and asks them to choose. That's something they could have done off-island.

The one that would be chosen was not decided yet.

Any reason they couldn't decide off-island?

They went there for various reasons

Yeah, I addressed their (overall quite poor) motivations for going back already...
You have yet to explain why the sudden urgency.

No, because film teachers generally won't hate something like that just for that.

(And here I thought you were arguing I was acting like one!)
"Not just for that", really? The plot and the characters' motivations being inconsistent / making no sense? Not "just" for that? Those things kinda matter, you know...

Still, they wanted a kid in the story.

And still, they should have seen that one coming from the word go. Quite the impressive lack of foresight. Not that they'd need that shit for a years-long mystery show anyway, right?

If we assume they visited each other more than once, it still works. But if they only visited once, it's a continuity error/blooper.

It's even a bit more than that when you consider Locke really had no reason to believe Jack and the others were responsible for the time flashes anyway... And it's not like Michael and Walt caused any either...

Weren't those mercenaries in the Frigate there for Ben?
And by what Ben said about him, he didn't seem like a person well respected in the outside world. He seemed to be described as a criminal of sorts. If things went wrong, he probably had more to lose than Widmore's pay check.

How does any of that justify those mercenaries rigging their own ship with explosives?

The only thing I can get from the rant was that you didn't understand the motivation about their parents leaving their child as they chose to die together in the boat.

Yeah, well, that's not what I was getting at at all (although, since you mention it, it sure is funny how the writers apparently forgot about the kid and only shot an additional scene mentioning her as an afterthought).
I was pointing out that Jack's "reasoning" in that Black Rock scene, when he bet on the dynamite not blowing up, could just as well have applied to Jin and Sun, too. And yet, they died. So... Jack just got lucky?

Storytelling also deals with how the story is told

No shit.

"That's the mark of a great storyteller, never to give away secrets in advance." - Ian McDiarmid

That implies foresight though.

it didn't stop Lost from being nominated for Best Writing at the Emmy's.

And the Wire wasn't. Yeah.

Or because they have to finish the story by Season 6, meaning previously introduced plot lines have to be gone by the wayside or given a short ending.

1) They "have to be gone by the wayside"? That particular scene was in season 5 (i.e. fairly late in the game, and they'd known about their end date for a while at that point), and it's not like season 6 was absolutely chock-full of indispensable plot elements either.
2) You apparently didn't read very carefully before replying, so: why don't they simply answer that one in interviews?
Simple: because there's no answer. Never was.
But you can try at home: who would suddenly open fire on another outrigger so distant they can't even make out who's on it?

What if they didn't catch up? "Yeah, let's make friends with the monster that is living in your dead brother's body, and may be the reason that you have to protect the island so that he doesn't get out!"

Er... Season 5 finale?
They even have private jokes! Remember the balance scale, in that cave? Man, I'm sure I'd find that one hilarious, too, if it weren't so damn private!

Ab Aeterno was awesome. One of the best and most memorable of the show.

I laughed a lot, anyway.

Yes, because you didn't find it very compelling.

No: because I, too, have access to Google and Wikipedia.
You're easily impressed...

Alright, then.
Actually, do you go to other threads around here? Which shows?

Sure. I don't post much though, and when I do, it's mostly about Japanese shows.
Oh, hey: look at that! Musing about character names, too!

 

[planar1280]

Holy Crap we are still arguing about this after a year. Good Lord!

 

[Fry]

I never really understood what Erigu doesn't like about the show, since whenever he explains it, his posts are huge and I never read them.

 

[MrPliskin]

It's really unfortunate that no discussion among fans can happen in a fan thread without a certain someone pooping it up.

 

[planar1280]

I find it hilarious that Erigu has 677 posts in this thread, more than anyone in this thread and he hates the show.

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

Still pretty amazed at this

Erigu 677
Drealmcc0y 592
oatmeal 233

I guess he's making up for all the times he could've debated in the hundreds of other threads back when the show was on. Godspeed with all that.

 

[Deleted member 22576]

I seriously appreciated this. That was hilarious.

 

[Erigu]

Erigu has 677 posts in this thread, more than anyone in this thread and he hates the show.

Nah, it's hilarious.

 

[oatmeal]

Still pretty amazed at this

Erigu 677
Drealmcc0y 592
oatmeal 233

I guess he's making up for all the times he could've debated in the hundreds of other threads back when the show was on. Godspeed with all that.

233 (4 now)

Fuck yea.

I seriously appreciated this. That was hilarious.

Yeah, it's...perfect for him.

 

[WillyFive]

And if the acting sucked, the actors would be to blame. Does that make it "only a problem behind the scenes"? Nope, it doesn't.
You're not making sense. And yet, you insist.

Actors are not behind the scenes.

Acting direction is behind the scenes though, but that's something different, like actors in Sesame Street speaking in a way that is understandable to children.

But if the actors are the problem, then it's not behind the scenes, unless the director or editor can edit the scene in such a way that makes a bad actor do a good job.

The main characters are absolutely awful people, then.
Except they're obviously not meant to be, so it's the writing that's shitty (inconsistent).

We don't even know what killed the passengers. The plane could land and take off safely from the runway on the second island.

I don't even know why you replied that, as I was talking about how they retconned what Locke told Jack.

It was a reply to "Again, it was supposed to be (after three years though?)".

The retcon reply came afterwards when you reiterated the question again later, of which I said "If we assume they visited each other more than once, [the thing you say was retconned] still works. But if they only visited once, it's a continuity error/blooper." If it was intentional, it's a retcon.

Here again, I don't know what you're talking about.
I simply marvel at your insistence (here as well), considering you're still trying to defend your claim that Widmore was "disposed off as soon as the story started moving towards it's endgame" when the guy got killed off in the second-to-last episode of a 100+ episode TV show. The mind boggles.

One of the best things about Lost are it's cinematic qualities. When a big event happens on the show, the director presents it in a very different matter than your average scene; with full blown orchestral score, reaction shots from characters, sweeping camera angles, subdued sound effects, and even slow motion. These are played out with little to no dialogue, as they are supposed to convey the severity, emotion, or importance of a moment. Not all of this are requirements for those sequences, but they are examples of it's storytelling.

For example, check out the scene when the raft sails. Check out the scene of Charlie's death, when we found that the guys from the boat were not who they thought they were. Check out this scene when Hurley got the van running again, which was a big emotional moment for the characters.

Meanwhile, this is Widmore's death.

So you can see, Widmore's death was not much of a climax, it was more something to get out of the way to buildup to the finale.

And again, "narrowed down" how? Oh, they die. Yeah.
(well, except for Kate, but then again: "still, Kate, if you want the job, that's cool, too!" ... oh, Jacob...)

Yes, any of the candidates could have been chosen, and their names are crossed out for various reasons (like Kate being a mother (no longer being 'alone'), as well as Ben, Miles, Claire, which none of them died.) Of course, if you die, you will obviously no longer be a candidate. Because you're kinda dead.

While the way you describe the selection process certainly is amusing ("let's bring all the candidates on a dangerous island and see who survives!"), on the actual show, Jacob doesn't even "pick" his successor, in the end. He explains a successor is needed and asks them to choose. That's something they could have done off-island.

That dangerous island is what the job was for, and MiB said Jacob was responsible for bringing them back to the island. As what happened on the actual show, Jacob chose the candidates, but the candidates decided if they wanted to become the guy for the job, since Jacob gave them the option to choose.

Any reason they couldn't decide off-island?

Perhaps the events that were happening on the island and how the characters managed through it would be good indication of which one would be fit for the job, both for them and Jacob.

Jack surely wouldn't accept responsibility when he was trying to commit suicide, and Hurley surely wasn't going to help people in an insane asylum.

Yeah, I addressed their (overall quite poor) motivations for going back already...
You have yet to explain why the sudden urgency.

The characters were urgent to go to the island to save those who were left behind, because it was a better life for them there, and of course, the Island/Jacob/Ben/MiB wanted them all back.

(And here I thought you were arguing I was acting like one!)
"Not just for that", really? The plot and the characters' motivations being inconsistent / making no sense? Not "just" for that? Those things kinda matter, you know...

Sure, they matter. But my argument is that's not what's happening on Lost.

And still, they should have seen that one coming from the word go. Quite the impressive lack of foresight. Not that they'd need that shit for a years-long mystery show anyway, right?

The show had no set end date before the ending of Season 3 (when they decided it to end on Season 6, if I remember correctly). Most shows don't end up lasting more than half a season before being cancelled, especially expensive ones like Lost.

They wanted a kid in the story, so they put him there. They ended his story in S2, with later references to him later in the show.

How does any of that justify those mercenaries rigging their own ship with explosives?

It's persuasion for Keamy to get what he wants. It also allowed Season 4 to end with a bang.

Yeah, well, that's not what I was getting at at all (although, since you mention it, it sure is funny how the writers apparently forgot about the kid and only shot an additional scene mentioning her as an afterthought).
I was pointing out that Jack's "reasoning" in that Black Rock scene, when he bet on the dynamite not blowing up, could just as well have applied to Jin and Sun, too. And yet, they died. So... Jack just got lucky?

Probably. It was him transitioning from being a "Man of Science" to a "Man of Faith", trying to understand what is going on around him. That would make his failure at the sub as the point when he was proven wrong.

That implies foresight though.

The writers had no foresight whatsoever?

And the Wire wasn't. Yeah.

I get frustrated when shows I love get snubbed too.

1) They "have to be gone by the wayside"? That particular scene was in season 5 (i.e. fairly late in the game, and they'd known about their end date for a while at that point), and it's not like season 6 was absolutely chock-full of indispensable plot elements either.
2) You apparently didn't read very carefully before replying, so: why don't they simply answer that one in interviews?
Simple: because there's no answer. Never was.
But you can try at home: who would suddenly open fire on another outrigger so distant they can't even make out who's on it?

It was fairly late in the game, which explains why it went by the wayside after introducing it. Just because there might not have been an answer at the time it was dropped, it doesn't mean it would never have one if Season 6 was not the final season.

Season 6 was essentially a landing sequence for a plane. It showed stuff that had only been talked about in earlier seasons, got the characters together for the climax, and getting rid of the villains of the show. If it wasn't for the need to set up The End, then the season could have been about different stuff, because we wouldn't expect an ending.

One of my main complaints was that the show simply ended too soon, we could have gotten a lot more stories out of the show.

Er... Season 5 finale?
They even have private jokes! Remember the balance scale, in that cave? Man, I'm sure I'd find that one hilarious, too, if it weren't so damn private!

That doesn't mean they got along.

The Season 5 finale certainly didn't make it seem like they ever got along, with MiB being an annoyance to Jacob, and MiB promising Jacob he will kill him.

This is totally what comes to mind.

I laughed a lot, anyway.

:\

No: because I, too, have access to Google and Wikipedia.
You're easily impressed...

Well, I try to be nice.

Sure. I don't post much though, and when I do, it's mostly about Japanese shows.
Oh, hey: look at that! Musing about character names, too!

Awesome. But is it common amongst Lost's peers?

 

[Erigu]

Actors are not behind the scenes.

And how do you think one notices a lack of internal consistency? By going backstage? It's all on the screen.

We don't even know what killed the passengers.

Because who gives a fuck, right?

The plane could land and take off safely from the runway on the second island.

"Safely", huh?
And did any of the "good guys" ever mention that anyway? You'd think they'd tell Lapidus, at the very least, and yet he didn't know...

It was a reply to "Again, it was supposed to be (after three years though?)".
The retcon reply came afterwards

It was a reply to "Again, it was supposed to be (after three years though?), but that was retconned later on." So, yeah, I was talking about the retcon, there.

But yeah, you claimed Jack was so upset because of the people that were left behind, and there would also be that: "after three years though?"
I mean, yeah, when we got our first flashforwards, Jack seemed to feel anxious/guilty about "the very bad things that were happening to Sawyer and the others"... But then, we went back in time and saw that he didn't give a flying shit for the most part of those three years. We saw that conversation with Locke (one month before the Ajira flight, I believe?), and he didn't even ask what happened to those he left behind.
In fact, that whole episode had all the good guys tell Locke they didn't give a damn. Kate was particularly delightful:

LOCKE: Don't you care about them?
KATE: Have you ever been in love, John?
LOCKE: What?

Hahaha! Oh, right: this is Mainland Kate, Locke. I don't think you've met.

Our heroes.

check out the scene when the raft sails. Check out the scene of Charlie's death, when we found that the guys from the boat were not who they thought they were. Check out this scene when Hurley got the van running again, which was a big emotional moment for the characters.
Meanwhile, this is Widmore's death.

And how surprising that the good guys would often get more violins!
So that's how you can tell Widmore wasn't important? No loud music? Never mind the fact he was the main antagonist of season 4, and a main player during the "war" of the final season? Details?

So you can see, Widmore's death was not much of a climax, it was more something to get out of the way to buildup to the finale.

You totally justified the "soon" thing, too! 'Cause yes, we were talking about that, remember? I do.

any of the candidates could have been chosen, and their names are crossed out for various reasons (like Kate being a mother

(yeah, and like I said, that was awfully convincing, especially when Jacob said she could have the job anyway)
... and? What other reasons were we given, again?

Jacob chose the candidates, but the candidates decided if they wanted to become the guy for the job, since Jacob gave them the option to choose.

And again, couldn't they do that off-island?

Perhaps the events that were happening on the island and how the characters managed through it would be good indication of which one would be fit for the job, both for them and Jacob.

Jack detonated a nuke because he was heartbroken -> "Whoa! I'm so not crossing your name out!"

Jack surely wouldn't accept responsibility when he was trying to commit suicide, and Hurley surely wasn't going to help people in an insane asylum.

Whereas plays-with-dynamite Jack and hangs-out-with-all-those-lunatics Hurley are changed people and clearly ready...

The characters were urgent to go to the island to save those who were left behind

Not for three years. Considering all the shit that happened to them in just a few months when they were there, that's somewhat nonchalant.

because it was a better life for them there

... It was?

and of course, the Island/Jacob/Ben/MiB wanted them all back.

Or rather, the writers did. So the characters obeyed.

Most shows don't end up lasting more than half a season before being cancelled, especially expensive ones like Lost.

So... what are you arguing, there? They thought they'd get canceled early on anyway and that made it a good idea to introduce a character they wouldn't be able to keep (and make him important by giving him special powers, naturally!)? That's less idiotic, somehow?

They wanted a kid in the story, so they put him there. They ended his story in S2

More like they cut it short.

It's persuasion for Keamy to get what he wants.

It's their own ship.

It also allowed Season 4 to end with a bang.

Mostly this, don't you think?
Explosions! Can't end a Lost season without a big explosion!

Probably. It was him transitioning from being a "Man of Science" to a "Man of Faith", trying to understand what is going on around him.

Playing with dynamite. And surviving out of dumb luck.
Clearly, he was ready to become the Protector of the Island, indeed! So much character "growth"!

That would make his failure at the sub as the point when he was proven wrong.

Except the show makes it clear it was all Sawyer's fault: he doubted Jack-the-Messiah!

The writers had no foresight whatsoever?

Maybe a few episodes worth of it, tops. And even within that, the writing wasn't exactly stellar...

I get frustrated when shows I love get snubbed too.

Oh, I don't give a damn. The show got a full run, so it's all good.
Just saying the Emmys don't mean much.

It was fairly late in the game, which explains why it went by the wayside after introducing it.

No, it doesn't. On the contrary: the closer they get to the end date, the better you'd think they'd know how and when to resolve new mysteries.

Just because there might not have been an answer at the time it was dropped, it doesn't mean it would never have one if Season 6 was not the final season.

Again, just give it a try: who would suddenly open fire on another outrigger so distant they can't even make out who's on it?
It was obvious from the beginning that there was no answer and the writers were just throwing random shit at their audience, as usual.

The Season 5 finale certainly didn't make it seem like they ever got along, with MiB being an annoyance to Jacob, and MiB promising Jacob he will kill him.

So you think they avoided each other for almost two millennia before that scene? To the point where they still weren't familiar with each other's adult appearance? Really?

is it common amongst Lost's peers?

... Shitty shows?
Anyway, it certainly isn't uncommon for character names to be references to something.

 

[Fry]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjOhGrcm1vU

Just came across this scene... it makes me miss the show so much.

 

[Mengy]

Hey LOST fans, I just saw this commercial on TV and I then had to run to youtube to watch it again to see if I was right or not, and I'm still not entirely sure. Is this Desmond, or Henry Ian Cusick, doing a Lexus commercial:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoJLchtdn2Q

If it is, then I'm sad, because he deserves better than to be doing car ads.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

Wait a second. Isn't that also Penny with him in the commercial?


L O S T

 

[Cipherr]

Wait a second. Isn't that also Penny with him in the commercial?


L O S T

Naw

 

[oatmeal]

Are you sure that's Desmond?

It looks like him, but his voice (I'm sure he was doing an accent...but still) wasn't the same.

Oh well.

 

[Salmonax]

That ain't Desmond.

 

[gdt]

I was at work earlier, working with this girl named Katelyn. We're talking like we always do, and she starts telling me about how she dropped out of high school.

I start telling her: "Katelyn, you have to go back [to high school]"

Which of course quickly morphs into:

"Kate, we have to go back! We have to go baaaaaaaaaaaaaaccccccckkk!"

Over and over again.

I miss this show.

She didn't get it btw.

 

[Larson Conway]

Just dropping in to say...

ONCE UPON A TIME.

That is all.