Showing posts with label Lost untangled. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lost untangled. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Notes on Pop Culture: Jack Bauer's Last Hour, More on 'Lost's' 'The End' and Parenting Teens in Primetime
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
'Lost Untangled' Tackles 'Across the Sea' with Lots of Snark
For those who hated the Jacob-Man in Black centered episode of Lost with Allison Janney playing their Ben Linus-like mommy called, cleverly enough, "Mother," I think you’ll definitely appreciate the snark in this installment of Lost Untangled. LOVE the “knotty mommy hair” nickname, her elevated soap box and the “jungle juice” line.
By the way, while reading Emily Nussbaum's review of Lost's "Across the Sea" for New York Magazine, I came across this gem of a comment, representative of the portion of the audience who HATED this episode: ". . . [F]rom Stella MD, regarding the lack of a name for Smokey: 'I felt like I was watching that episode of Seinfeld where Jerry can't remember [Dolores'] name. 'Goodbye, Mother.' 'Goodbye ... you.'" (That was the episode where Jerry thought the woman's name might've been "Mulva.")
Over on the Chicago Tribune's web site, TV writer Maureen Ryan was really annoyed that the murderous "Mother" was brought on sans context and without the viewers being able to access her motivations and whether she was correct or paranoid or manipulative or evil or whatever. "A few hours before it ends, Lost introduces a character whose motivations and priorities only become more muddied over the course of the single episode in which she appears," Ryan wrote. ". . . A lot of what she said was basically the island version of, 'Because I said so.'"
And we all know how that goes over when we try that on kids.
By the way, while reading Emily Nussbaum's review of Lost's "Across the Sea" for New York Magazine, I came across this gem of a comment, representative of the portion of the audience who HATED this episode: ". . . [F]rom Stella MD, regarding the lack of a name for Smokey: 'I felt like I was watching that episode of Seinfeld where Jerry can't remember [Dolores'] name. 'Goodbye, Mother.' 'Goodbye ... you.'" (That was the episode where Jerry thought the woman's name might've been "Mulva.")
Over on the Chicago Tribune's web site, TV writer Maureen Ryan was really annoyed that the murderous "Mother" was brought on sans context and without the viewers being able to access her motivations and whether she was correct or paranoid or manipulative or evil or whatever. "A few hours before it ends, Lost introduces a character whose motivations and priorities only become more muddied over the course of the single episode in which she appears," Ryan wrote. ". . . A lot of what she said was basically the island version of, 'Because I said so.'"
And we all know how that goes over when we try that on kids.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
'Lost:' 'The Last Recruit'
Well, not every episode can be a homerun. "The Last Recruit" felt really rushed and superficial, as the “answer” to at least one outstanding question came too easily and didn’t jive with other things we’ve previously seen.
The Man in Black/Smoky Locke told Jack Shephard, in a matter of fact fashion, that he had used the body of Jack’s father Christian to run around the island after Oceanic 815 crashed. So Man in Black's a puppeteer who uses dead bodies at will to run around? What if there were no more bodies for him to inhabit?
Last week, Michael told Hurley that there were dead people who were “stuck” on the island, not counting the people whose bodies the Man in Black was using for fun. Where does that leave someone like Walt who was alive when he appeared to more than one person?
Why have people who did not die on the island appeared before our Losties? Like Ben's mother, who died while giving birth to him in the United States? Or Richard's wife who appeared to Hurley a few episodes ago but never set foot on the island when she was alive?
Aside from the questions about the appearances of the deceased, this warfare stuff, Widmore’s people sending bombs raining down on Man in Black and the people who are “with” him because they won’t give back “The Package” (Desmond who’s likely still alive because I don’t believe Sayid killed him), I'm not fond of this storyline. We've had plenty of wars with The Others and the Losties, with the freighter people and our Losties. It feels old.
The Jack-Sawyer face-off – where Jack got all wishy-washy about whether they should stay and Sawyer acted all keep-that-crazy-talk-to-yourself-or-get-the-hell-off-my-damn-boat – eh, it really did not move me either. Didn’t like this twist, even though it reminded me of the helicopter trip to the freighter where Sawyer jumped into the ocean as the copter was losing fuel, however Sawyer jumped to save the copter from crashing. Did Jack’s jumping from the boat also save our Losties in some way? Also, should we give any weight to Sawyer’s quip, “We’re done going back Kate?” (The Lost Untangled video below had a funny take on this.)
Things I did like from "The Last Recruit:"
Liked that there seems to be a reunion of sorts going on at the LA hospital in the sideways-flashing existence, with Jack being called away from the reading of his father’s will (where he learned Claire was his half-sister after Desmond manipulated her into going to his attorney Ilana's office which happened to be in the same building as the adoption agency) to operate on Locke’s back, while Sun was recovering from a gunshot wound (and her baby’s okay).
Was intrigued by the fact that Man in Black/Smoky Locke called the original John Locke “stupid” because he believed “he’d been brought here for a reason” and “pursued that belief until it got him killed.” “John Locke was not a believer Jack,” Smoky Locke said, “he was a sucker.”
But isn’t the reason why Jack abandoned the boat and returned to the island because Jack believed he’d been called back to the island for something, to finish something? Does that make Jack a sucker too?
The Sun-Jin reunion was sweet, brought tears to my eyes, but it was spoiled when the Widmore zombies raised their weapons a second time. (The whole bit with Sun losing her ability to speak English but suddenly regaining it when she saw Jin was unnecessary, messy madness. Again, I'm right on with what Dr. Chang says in Lost Untangled.)
Overall, I was seeking a little more depth to this episode coming on the heels of two really strong episodes. I wanted emotional resonance instead of the taking sides/“war”/”You’re with me now” thread which just seems like an excuse to have big explosions and gunfire.
The reason I was so drawn to the previous two episodes with Desmond and Hurley was because they seemed meaningful, touched on weighty issues like fate, destiny, free will and bonds between people. They'd started to draw larger issues and questions together as though they might've been slowly closing a larger loop. But then they dropped the string and went astray with the shallow “war” storyline between Widmore and Man in Black/Smoky Locke. If this is how we’re going to spend the last few hours of one of the most intriguing, maddening and clever television shows in history, I’m going to be peeved, I tell you that much.
What did you think of “The Last Recruit?”
Image credit: Mario Perez/ABC.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
'Lost's' Latest 'Untangled' Videos Give Wink & Nod to Fans
Y'all know that, despite all my complaining, I do love the show Lost, right? These days, I've been likening it to being in a longterm relationship. When you're in one, there are times when you get wildly irritated, enraged and disappointed, that's all balanced out by the times when you're made blissfully happy by, say, a kind gesture, a home cooked meal or, perhaps the airing a Ben Linus episode . . .
Anyway, one saving grace throughout this final season, when there's been so much pressure brought to bear to have everything tie together neatly, has been the kooky Lost Untangled videos ABC puts on the Lost web site hosted by Pierre Chang. They always seem to anticipate fans' complaints and handle them deftly, like the recent one for "The Package."
Like that snarky little bit about Sun using up too much paper when she wrote notes to Jack after she'd lost her ability to speak English (?!). I thought the exact same thing that Dr. Chang notes in the Untangled video, that perhaps she should write smaller because Staples doesn't deliver to the island.
Are you a fan of the Untangled videos? Did you like them better last year when they were done with action figures instead of puppet Chang?
Anyway, one saving grace throughout this final season, when there's been so much pressure brought to bear to have everything tie together neatly, has been the kooky Lost Untangled videos ABC puts on the Lost web site hosted by Pierre Chang. They always seem to anticipate fans' complaints and handle them deftly, like the recent one for "The Package."
Like that snarky little bit about Sun using up too much paper when she wrote notes to Jack after she'd lost her ability to speak English (?!). I thought the exact same thing that Dr. Chang notes in the Untangled video, that perhaps she should write smaller because Staples doesn't deliver to the island.
Are you a fan of the Untangled videos? Did you like them better last year when they were done with action figures instead of puppet Chang?
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
'Lost's' 'Ab Aeterno,' Otherwise Known as 'What Fresh Hell is This?'
Dorothy Parker’s famous line, “What fresh hell is this?” came to my mind immediately upon the conclusion of the most recent episode of Lost, “Ab Aeterno.”
The island’s hell. No it’s not. Richard’s dead. No he’s not. Isabella’s dead. Kind of. Well, she’s a ghost. Maybe. But she can only be seen by Hurley who has suddenly assumed powers held by Whoopi Goldberg in the movie Ghost and can talk to communicate with the dead. Oh, and Hurley can see the dead. Or at least Isabella. (Is Hurley a Miles 2.0?)
Don’t get me wrong, I like the Richard Alpert character. I’ve been patiently waiting for the writers to delve into his backstory and explain why he never ages (Jacob’s gift of eternal life), when he came to the island (1867) and why (crashed on island while on board the Black Rock where he was chained as a slave after being spared hanging for the accidental death of a man with whom he’d been scuffling). And ever since undead/Man in Black/Smoky Locke remarked that it was nice to see Richard out of his chains, I’ve been wondering why Richard was ever in chains to begin with because he always seemed like a decent enough guy.
I was pleased to obtain that information, to see that Richard also had an epic love which ended in a personal tragedy, like many of the other Losties . . . or, like many of the other Losties in the post-Jughead/post-crash world. As for the sideways-flashing Losties, I’ve got no real clue about the status of their love lives. Post-crash/post-Jughead Locke, for example, had lost Helen, the love of his life, but the uncrashed/sideways-flashing version of Locke was, last we saw, getting ready to marry Helen.
I saw a number of parallels between the way Richard now feels about Jacob (betrayed, let down) and my feelings about this final season. I’m trying really hard not to delve too deeply into all of these new developments (I so do not care about Zoe), not to look for loopholes and inconsistencies because, as I’ve said before, I’m (mostly) done with all of that . . . But I can't help myself . . . haven’t the Lost writers said that the island is not an afterlife or some form of limbo? Haven’t they said that or am I mistaken? The island can’t be hell or a place of reckoning where people go to redeem themselves, can it?
In “Ab Aeterno,” (which is Latin for “from the beginning of time”) Jacob told Richard that Jacob’s job was to make sure that the Man in Black remains on the island in order to keep him from unleashing hell on earth. We also know that there are six remaining “candidates” to potentially replace Jacob as the guardian to keep the Man in Black on the island to spare the world from his wrath.
But wait . . . in Richard’s flashback, didn’t the Man in Black hand Richard the same dagger that Dogen handed Sayid, and issue identical instructions: kill without allowing the man to talk? What in the heck does that mean? How does this all jive with ABC's "The Last Supper" photo where they posed Locke in the center in the Jesus-about-to-be-sacrificed-by-God-and-crucified position?
You know what else I keep getting stuck on? The fact that last season, Jack Shephard was hell-bent (pun intended) on corralling all his plane crash buddies together to go back to the island in order to “save” their friends because Widmore wanted to kill everyone on the island and take it over. The Ajira flight that Jack & Co. took to return to the island brought Ben, who killed Jacob, and it carried Locke’s body which was claimed by the Man in Black. So the whole, “We’ve got to go back,” wasn’t really about saving the Losties left behind but about trying to save humanity? And why is Widmore hanging out in a sub off shore and whose side is he on? Is he God and Jacob and the Man in Black are his Biblically warring sons?
No, no, no . . . not going to try to figure this all out. I'm just going to attempt to ride the final handful of episodes out without trying to work this out in my head because then I’ll end up making myself frustrated that the Lost lore doesn’t all add up, at least not to my satisfaction. However the Lost Untangled recap of “Ab Aeterno” below was hilarious. I like the way the people who write these videos think.
What did you think of “Ab Aeterno?” Of Richard’s backstory? Of the evolving final episode(s) arc about the Losties having to keep the Man in Black on the island in order to save the world from becoming a living hell?
Image credit: Mario Perez/ABC.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
'Lost' Gets All Sawyer-ish with 'Recon' Episode
So the bare-chested Sawyer (weird that the transported-from-the-1970s-Sawyer is bare-chested, no?) got an episode of his own.
Were there surprises in the new episode? In the sideways-flashing/uncrashed Sawyer’s life, he’s a detective whose partner is Miles. Sawyer was set up on a blind date with Charlotte (Daniel Faraday's daughter) and it went poorly after she snooped in his bureau drawer. There we learned that his dad STILL killed his mother and then himself after James’ cheating mother got conned (even though, as we know from the Locke sideways-flash, Locke was pondering inviting his “father” to his wedding). In fact, Sawyer, er, Jim Ford, was still trying to track down said con man, Anthony Cooper.
Is said con man Locke’s father? Is the con man someone else? What are we to make of the fact that Kate’s car crashed into Jim Ford’s? And, why in the world, in the post-crashed/post-Jughead world would Kate’s dress from her booty call in the cage with Sawyer have been left behind in the cage for Sawyer to find? Wasn’t she wearing that dress when she ran away while Jack was operating on Ben?
I’m trying not to read too deeply into all of this because, as I mentioned when I commented on the frustratingly boggling Locke episode a few weeks ago (still HATE the fact that the character histories we’ve talked about for years have been shelved, at least in the sideways-flashing lives), I’ve stopped trying to make this all make sense because the writers don’t have sufficient time to tie up the loose ends and make it seem reasonable. (If they do, I’ll write up a HUGE blog post saying how very wrong I was.) However in order to try to enjoy the remainder of this series, I’m going to have to put those irritations aside, like the writers did with the character histories they carefully created, and just roll with it.
As for the rest of the episode “Recon,” I engaged in more eye-rolling at the whole Charles Widmore/sub/armed Widmore henchmen thread. Yes, I’m intrigued by the overarching Widmore/Ben/Desmond/Penny story and how that factors into the Island’s lore, but – and I feel like I’ve been repeating myself a lot on this matter – but I’m growing weary of having yet another group of gun-toting people with vague motivations take more of the Losties hostage and leave behind a trail of dead bodies. I thought we were nearly done with this nonsense when Dogen and his sidekick were killed. But with only eight episodes left there’s not much hope that this unfortunately expanding circle of people is going to become smaller, more focused and more intriguing. It looks like it's just going to widen to encompass armies, like a dead post-Jughead Locke/Man in Black/Smoky army, a Widmore army and a loyal-to-Jacob army (which welcomes Ben, kind of, despite the fact that Ben killed Jacob)?
I’d be so much happier with more storylines like the one from “Dr. Linus” last week where we saw Ben become redeemed and where larger, more cerebral issues regarding destiny and fate were explored (Was Ben always going to be evil, regardless of what happened to him or did life's events make him that way? What role did his trip to the Temple when he was a mortally wounded child have on him?) But, alas, that doesn't seem to be the route the writers are heading.
What did you think of the Sawyer-centric episode? About him being a cop -- instead of a con man -- but still obsessed with hunting down the man who conned his mom? About the growing armies on the island?
Image credit: ABC.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
'Lost' Untangled Takes on 'Bad Man' Sayid & Why I Want More Ben Linus
*Warning, spoilers ahead from recent episode of Lost.*
Sure, he was a torturer for the Republican Guard during the first Gulf War, but aside from that little nasty detail, don't you kind of feel badly for Sayid Jarrah, the poor, heartsick, menancingly lethal Sayid? I do, despite his violent past. The latest Lost installment, "Sundown," focused on Sayid's struggles with coming to terms with that Republican Guard past where, under duress, he was forced to do some very bad things and therefore believed himself to be inherently evil.
In this episode, we got a glimpse of his uncrashed life in which Oceanic 815 landed safely at LAX. In this sideways flash, Sayid brought flowers to the love of his life, Nadia, only Nadia was married to his brother who'd gotten himself into trouble with the mob over some shady business loan. In order to protect his brother, Nadia (who has feelings for Sayid but he doesn't believe he's deserving of her affections) and his niece and nephew, Sayid took out the mob loan guys, whose leader was the evil freighter guy Martin Keamy from the island in the post-crash world who killed Ben's daughter Alex when Ben wouldn't surrender himself. So do Sayid's actions in this sideways flash, shooting the mob guys, make Sayid evil at heart, given that it was in defense and protection of loved ones? I'm not sure.
But what's clear as a bell is that the post-crash/post-Jughead Sayid -- who teamed up with undead Locke/not-Locke because Mr. Smoky promised Sayid that he'd get a chance to see Nadia again (she'd been killed in this version of Sayid's life) -- has decided to go all out bad, drowning the annoying Dogen (yes!) and then killing his scooby of a translator in the murky waters of that ridiculously fake-looking temple.
In both versions of Sayid's life, he's still dealing with that "I am a bad man," feeling and can't escape violence which seems to follow him wherever he goes.
On another matter: I've been attempting to be more positive and lighthearted about Lost since my tirade following the Locke-centered episode a few weeks ago, but please allow me this gripe: They are UNDER-USING Ben, much to my consternation. I care more about Ben than I do about Claire or Dogen or the irritating Other Others or Miles. Ben has been developed into such an amazing character that I've been waiting (im)patiently for him to get more air time. Instead, after being tricked by Smoky Locke into killing Jacob in last season's finale, Ben has been reduced to standing around, looking bug-eyed and confused, almost paralyzed by the fact that he's been rendered irrelevant by Smoky Locke.
In fact, I was considering starting a Twitter campaign -- using the hashtag #morebenlinus -- to lobby for more Ben, not that it would actually change the episodes that have already been written and shot, but at least it'll make me feel better. Then I saw the ABC preview for the next episode which features, wouldn't you know it, sideways flashing/uncrashed Ben as a high school teacher talking about Napoleon losing his power in exile on an island. This little glimpse made me smile:
If next week's episode is anything like I hope it will be, based on this little snippet, I'll be one happy gal next week.
In the meantime, enjoy the always snarky Lost Untangled video which sarcastically dissects "Sundown:'"
Thoughts on Sayid the Bad Man? On whether we need more Ben Linus?
Sure, he was a torturer for the Republican Guard during the first Gulf War, but aside from that little nasty detail, don't you kind of feel badly for Sayid Jarrah, the poor, heartsick, menancingly lethal Sayid? I do, despite his violent past. The latest Lost installment, "Sundown," focused on Sayid's struggles with coming to terms with that Republican Guard past where, under duress, he was forced to do some very bad things and therefore believed himself to be inherently evil.
In this episode, we got a glimpse of his uncrashed life in which Oceanic 815 landed safely at LAX. In this sideways flash, Sayid brought flowers to the love of his life, Nadia, only Nadia was married to his brother who'd gotten himself into trouble with the mob over some shady business loan. In order to protect his brother, Nadia (who has feelings for Sayid but he doesn't believe he's deserving of her affections) and his niece and nephew, Sayid took out the mob loan guys, whose leader was the evil freighter guy Martin Keamy from the island in the post-crash world who killed Ben's daughter Alex when Ben wouldn't surrender himself. So do Sayid's actions in this sideways flash, shooting the mob guys, make Sayid evil at heart, given that it was in defense and protection of loved ones? I'm not sure.
But what's clear as a bell is that the post-crash/post-Jughead Sayid -- who teamed up with undead Locke/not-Locke because Mr. Smoky promised Sayid that he'd get a chance to see Nadia again (she'd been killed in this version of Sayid's life) -- has decided to go all out bad, drowning the annoying Dogen (yes!) and then killing his scooby of a translator in the murky waters of that ridiculously fake-looking temple.
In both versions of Sayid's life, he's still dealing with that "I am a bad man," feeling and can't escape violence which seems to follow him wherever he goes.
On another matter: I've been attempting to be more positive and lighthearted about Lost since my tirade following the Locke-centered episode a few weeks ago, but please allow me this gripe: They are UNDER-USING Ben, much to my consternation. I care more about Ben than I do about Claire or Dogen or the irritating Other Others or Miles. Ben has been developed into such an amazing character that I've been waiting (im)patiently for him to get more air time. Instead, after being tricked by Smoky Locke into killing Jacob in last season's finale, Ben has been reduced to standing around, looking bug-eyed and confused, almost paralyzed by the fact that he's been rendered irrelevant by Smoky Locke.
In fact, I was considering starting a Twitter campaign -- using the hashtag #morebenlinus -- to lobby for more Ben, not that it would actually change the episodes that have already been written and shot, but at least it'll make me feel better. Then I saw the ABC preview for the next episode which features, wouldn't you know it, sideways flashing/uncrashed Ben as a high school teacher talking about Napoleon losing his power in exile on an island. This little glimpse made me smile:
If next week's episode is anything like I hope it will be, based on this little snippet, I'll be one happy gal next week.
In the meantime, enjoy the always snarky Lost Untangled video which sarcastically dissects "Sundown:'"
Thoughts on Sayid the Bad Man? On whether we need more Ben Linus?
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
'Lost's' 'Lighthouse' Episode and Why I've Decided to Just Go Along for the Ride
*Warning: Spoilers ahead from the recent episode of Lost*
I’ve made a decision which is going to make my life much easier: While watching the recent episode of Lost, called “Lighthouse,” I decided to stop trying so hard to figure it all out and just go with it, Zen-Namaste-Dharma style. Some may call this a cop-out, but (*deep centering breath*) I don’t care.
The turning point in my approach to watching this program occurred in the wee hours of the morning last week after I’d stayed up way too late in the wake of the Locke-centric “The Substitute” episode. I poured through several discs from my Lost DVD collection searching for clues to confirm what I thought I knew about Locke’s history before his fateful plane ride on Oceanic 815. When I toyed with caffeinating up at 1 a.m., I knew that things had gone too far.
I’m no longer going to parse every single statement, search for every single Easter egg, pause the TV and stare wide-eyed at the frozen image hoping to glean some insight. Nope. I’m not. I’m just going to enjoy Lost and not fret over the fact that I don’t have any freakin’ clue, for example, why the uncrashed Jack Shephard has a son, lives in a nice apartment and only sees his kid once a month, when the boy’s not living with his mom, who was not identified. I smiled when Jack told his kid David that he’d hooked up the cable on the TV in his bedroom so that he could watch the Red Sox. (Love that Jack’s a Sox fan.) Since I wasn’t so busy playing Lost detective, I was able to notice similarities between Matthew Fox’s days when he played Charlie Salinger on Party of Five and had a kid sister who was a music prodigy, like Jack Shephard’s son David. Sweet coincidence.
When Jacob decided to give Hurley marching orders because of all this “candidate” business, asked Hurley to write cryptic stuff on his arm and to speak authoritatively to the head of the Other Others, I didn’t let the confusion irritate me, just let it wash over me. (*feeling the Zen*)
I smirked when Hurley responded to ghost Jacob’s request that he try to convince Jack to accompany him on another quest by saying, “Did you ever try to get Jack to do something, it’s, like, impossible.” I derived pleasure from the first moments of levity since the season began when wry music was played as Hurley tried to be all 007-suave and convince Jack to come with him with his quip, “Be cool man, act natural.”
The armed, murderous, booby trap-setting, Rousseau-like, dark-hearted-Man-in-Black buddy Claire -- complete with the wild hair and the “I want my baby back” mission – was entertaining as well, as long as I tried not to think too hard about it. Didn’t even rise to the bait of the lighthouse imagery, a newfangled “wheel” (not the time travel-inducing donkey wheel) and freaky surveillance mirrors (pre-Jack-smash). Not gonna think too hard about it. Not. Gonna.
So I’m, essentially, going along with the ride. As Hurley, often referred to as the voice of the audience, said while he and post-crash/post-Jughead/“broken” Jack walked through the jungle together, “This is cool, dude, very old school . . . on a way to do something that we don’t quite understand. Good times.” Just like my newfound mindset toward watching Lost, the final season: Very cool, although I don’t quite understand. But that’s okay. Which made the latest Lost Untangled video all the more fun to watch. (Loved the line about Jacob being so mysterious.)
What do you think of Jack the Daddy? Of the lighthouse? Of the axe-wielding Claire?
I’ve made a decision which is going to make my life much easier: While watching the recent episode of Lost, called “Lighthouse,” I decided to stop trying so hard to figure it all out and just go with it, Zen-Namaste-Dharma style. Some may call this a cop-out, but (*deep centering breath*) I don’t care.
The turning point in my approach to watching this program occurred in the wee hours of the morning last week after I’d stayed up way too late in the wake of the Locke-centric “The Substitute” episode. I poured through several discs from my Lost DVD collection searching for clues to confirm what I thought I knew about Locke’s history before his fateful plane ride on Oceanic 815. When I toyed with caffeinating up at 1 a.m., I knew that things had gone too far.
I’m no longer going to parse every single statement, search for every single Easter egg, pause the TV and stare wide-eyed at the frozen image hoping to glean some insight. Nope. I’m not. I’m just going to enjoy Lost and not fret over the fact that I don’t have any freakin’ clue, for example, why the uncrashed Jack Shephard has a son, lives in a nice apartment and only sees his kid once a month, when the boy’s not living with his mom, who was not identified. I smiled when Jack told his kid David that he’d hooked up the cable on the TV in his bedroom so that he could watch the Red Sox. (Love that Jack’s a Sox fan.) Since I wasn’t so busy playing Lost detective, I was able to notice similarities between Matthew Fox’s days when he played Charlie Salinger on Party of Five and had a kid sister who was a music prodigy, like Jack Shephard’s son David. Sweet coincidence.
When Jacob decided to give Hurley marching orders because of all this “candidate” business, asked Hurley to write cryptic stuff on his arm and to speak authoritatively to the head of the Other Others, I didn’t let the confusion irritate me, just let it wash over me. (*feeling the Zen*)
I smirked when Hurley responded to ghost Jacob’s request that he try to convince Jack to accompany him on another quest by saying, “Did you ever try to get Jack to do something, it’s, like, impossible.” I derived pleasure from the first moments of levity since the season began when wry music was played as Hurley tried to be all 007-suave and convince Jack to come with him with his quip, “Be cool man, act natural.”
The armed, murderous, booby trap-setting, Rousseau-like, dark-hearted-Man-in-Black buddy Claire -- complete with the wild hair and the “I want my baby back” mission – was entertaining as well, as long as I tried not to think too hard about it. Didn’t even rise to the bait of the lighthouse imagery, a newfangled “wheel” (not the time travel-inducing donkey wheel) and freaky surveillance mirrors (pre-Jack-smash). Not gonna think too hard about it. Not. Gonna.
So I’m, essentially, going along with the ride. As Hurley, often referred to as the voice of the audience, said while he and post-crash/post-Jughead/“broken” Jack walked through the jungle together, “This is cool, dude, very old school . . . on a way to do something that we don’t quite understand. Good times.” Just like my newfound mindset toward watching Lost, the final season: Very cool, although I don’t quite understand. But that’s okay. Which made the latest Lost Untangled video all the more fun to watch. (Loved the line about Jacob being so mysterious.)
What do you think of Jack the Daddy? Of the lighthouse? Of the axe-wielding Claire?
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
'Lost Untangled:' The Substitute
*Warning: Spoilers ahead from the recent episode of Lost*
Lots of Lost fans are busy around them there internets saying that they're pleased with the most recent Locke-centric episode, "The Substitute." I'm not one of them.
I know I'm supposed to be embracing this whole sideways flash novelty -- otherwise known as the parallel reality comparing the uncrashed Losties' lives against the post-crash/post-Jughead Losties' existence on the island. I completely embraced the flashbacks in the early days, the revolutionary flashforwards introduced in the season three finale to awesome effect. I was even willing to suspend the plaguing feeling I got when I worked really hard to follow along with the time travel business which occurred last season. I've loved wading through the literary, Biblical and pop culture allusions and the various clues. I've paused the show to examine what was on screen, like the map on the Hatch's blast door that had pinned down Locke in the season two episode "Lockdown."
But the sideways flashes conflict with everything we've come to learn about the backstories of the Losties.
While I watched "The Substitute" with my spouse, another Lost fan, and saw that Locke got fired for deceiving his boss about his Australian walkabout (pretended he went on a business trip paid for by the company), that Locke was with and getting married to Helen and that he was considering inviting his "father" to their wedding, we were thunderstruck. Did none of the previous episodes we'd watched over the years have any meaning? Were they all for naught?
I dug out DVDs of previous seasons to confirm how wildly divergent these sideways flashes were from the history of Locke we'd been presented. Previous episodes showed that Locke told his obnoxious boss that he'd saved up vacation days and was going on the walkabout, about which his pinheaded boss mercilessly harassed him. The love of his life, Helen, had left him, even when he was down on his knees offering up a lifetime of wedded bliss, because of his obsession with his con man of a father. His father pushed him out of a high-rise window rendering him paralyzed when John threatened to expose him as a con artist. Just before leaving for Australia, John had found a woman named "Helen" on one of those pay-per-chat phone lines (typically used for, well, you know), had been regularly speaking with her for eight months, and asked her to accompany him on the walkabout, only to have her tell him that she couldn't go out with a customer.
Events in people's lives would obviously have changed if Oceanic 815 hadn't crashed on the island and if the Dharma Initiative was halted in the 1970s following the detonation of Jughead. But, seriously, how would all of these other things have changed and how, in the short time that's left until the series finale, can writers possibly make all of this seem logical, logical in the world of Lost, that is?
The Numbers -- which we now know correlate with numbers Jacob assigned to possible "candidates" to replace him to be protectors of the island (very cool twist) -- were always bad luck for Hurley. He thought they were cursed. He thought he was cursed. People around him got hurt and he attributed that to the Numbers and his bad luck. Look at poor Tricia Tanaka. How is it possible that by preventing the Oceanic crash on the island and changing the island's history, that, somehow, Hurley would be a successful businessman? That he'd be a different person?
I was on board with the let's-see-how-this-alternate-reality-of-uncrashed-Losties plays out. Found it interesting, seeing if their lives would've been better (or worse) if their plane had safely landed in LA. But having fundamental bedrock stories about these characters' backstories become so radically transformed, I just can't wrap my head around it. After years of carefully constructing these characters, to toss out everything we've known about them as if the past never happened -- at least not as we've been told that events had occurred -- makes me wonder if the rest of the future episodes are going to tick me off in the way "The Substitute" did.
But it wasn't all bad. I DID like, totally bought and was thoroughly entertained by the scene with Ben Linus as a history teacher complaining that his colleagues had left an empty coffee pot and dirty coffee filter in the coffee maker in the teachers' lounge. It made sense because his father would've never gone to the island had Jughead gone off and therefore, Ben would've lived an entirely differently life, as opposed to the Hurley's suddenly lucky storyline.
Are the writers going to try to create some forced storyline about Locke's dad that, because the island blew up, he somehow never became a con man, therefore he never conned Sawyer's mom so Sawyer's dad never killed her and then himself, that he never conned Locke out of a kidney and later pushed him out of a window rendering him paralyzed? So Locke got paralyzed in some other way?
I'm with Jorge Garcia, who plays Hurley, who, when informed about these new sideways flashes, told USA Today, "I was like, 'What?' It's a lot to swallow.'" And feel similarly to a Boston Globe TV critic who said, "I'm enjoying this season, but only when I'm able to let go of that gnawing, and very human, hunger for logic and sense."
I really hope I'm wrong. I hope it's all going to work out in the end. Guess that depends on whether I'm a fan with faith or a fan who's become jaded because she fears she's being taken down a rabbit hole.
Lots of Lost fans are busy around them there internets saying that they're pleased with the most recent Locke-centric episode, "The Substitute." I'm not one of them.
I know I'm supposed to be embracing this whole sideways flash novelty -- otherwise known as the parallel reality comparing the uncrashed Losties' lives against the post-crash/post-Jughead Losties' existence on the island. I completely embraced the flashbacks in the early days, the revolutionary flashforwards introduced in the season three finale to awesome effect. I was even willing to suspend the plaguing feeling I got when I worked really hard to follow along with the time travel business which occurred last season. I've loved wading through the literary, Biblical and pop culture allusions and the various clues. I've paused the show to examine what was on screen, like the map on the Hatch's blast door that had pinned down Locke in the season two episode "Lockdown."
But the sideways flashes conflict with everything we've come to learn about the backstories of the Losties.
While I watched "The Substitute" with my spouse, another Lost fan, and saw that Locke got fired for deceiving his boss about his Australian walkabout (pretended he went on a business trip paid for by the company), that Locke was with and getting married to Helen and that he was considering inviting his "father" to their wedding, we were thunderstruck. Did none of the previous episodes we'd watched over the years have any meaning? Were they all for naught?
I dug out DVDs of previous seasons to confirm how wildly divergent these sideways flashes were from the history of Locke we'd been presented. Previous episodes showed that Locke told his obnoxious boss that he'd saved up vacation days and was going on the walkabout, about which his pinheaded boss mercilessly harassed him. The love of his life, Helen, had left him, even when he was down on his knees offering up a lifetime of wedded bliss, because of his obsession with his con man of a father. His father pushed him out of a high-rise window rendering him paralyzed when John threatened to expose him as a con artist. Just before leaving for Australia, John had found a woman named "Helen" on one of those pay-per-chat phone lines (typically used for, well, you know), had been regularly speaking with her for eight months, and asked her to accompany him on the walkabout, only to have her tell him that she couldn't go out with a customer.
Events in people's lives would obviously have changed if Oceanic 815 hadn't crashed on the island and if the Dharma Initiative was halted in the 1970s following the detonation of Jughead. But, seriously, how would all of these other things have changed and how, in the short time that's left until the series finale, can writers possibly make all of this seem logical, logical in the world of Lost, that is?
The Numbers -- which we now know correlate with numbers Jacob assigned to possible "candidates" to replace him to be protectors of the island (very cool twist) -- were always bad luck for Hurley. He thought they were cursed. He thought he was cursed. People around him got hurt and he attributed that to the Numbers and his bad luck. Look at poor Tricia Tanaka. How is it possible that by preventing the Oceanic crash on the island and changing the island's history, that, somehow, Hurley would be a successful businessman? That he'd be a different person?
I was on board with the let's-see-how-this-alternate-reality-of-uncrashed-Losties plays out. Found it interesting, seeing if their lives would've been better (or worse) if their plane had safely landed in LA. But having fundamental bedrock stories about these characters' backstories become so radically transformed, I just can't wrap my head around it. After years of carefully constructing these characters, to toss out everything we've known about them as if the past never happened -- at least not as we've been told that events had occurred -- makes me wonder if the rest of the future episodes are going to tick me off in the way "The Substitute" did.
But it wasn't all bad. I DID like, totally bought and was thoroughly entertained by the scene with Ben Linus as a history teacher complaining that his colleagues had left an empty coffee pot and dirty coffee filter in the coffee maker in the teachers' lounge. It made sense because his father would've never gone to the island had Jughead gone off and therefore, Ben would've lived an entirely differently life, as opposed to the Hurley's suddenly lucky storyline.
Are the writers going to try to create some forced storyline about Locke's dad that, because the island blew up, he somehow never became a con man, therefore he never conned Sawyer's mom so Sawyer's dad never killed her and then himself, that he never conned Locke out of a kidney and later pushed him out of a window rendering him paralyzed? So Locke got paralyzed in some other way?
I'm with Jorge Garcia, who plays Hurley, who, when informed about these new sideways flashes, told USA Today, "I was like, 'What?' It's a lot to swallow.'" And feel similarly to a Boston Globe TV critic who said, "I'm enjoying this season, but only when I'm able to let go of that gnawing, and very human, hunger for logic and sense."
I really hope I'm wrong. I hope it's all going to work out in the end. Guess that depends on whether I'm a fan with faith or a fan who's become jaded because she fears she's being taken down a rabbit hole.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
'Lost:' What Kate Does
*Warning, spoilers ahead from the recent episode of Lost, "What Kate Does."*
Temple. *yawn*
More "Others." (Or, as Sawyer said in the Lost Untangled video above, "Mother Others.") *rolling my eyes*
More "Others" with guns who try to save/kill/confound our Losties while detaining them and, occasionally torturing them, this time with a hot piece of metal and electric currents. *pulling hair out*
Undead Sayid's been "claimed," otherwise known as "infected" with what the crazy French chick, Danielle Rousseau, was screaming about in season one. *areyoufreakinkiddinme*
I truly hope that Lost's team of scribes tie the Man in Black/Jacob thing into a sweet little bow by mid-May when this series concludes. But I'm losing faith that they will. While I'm hoping and waiting for the show to be as deeply thoughtful and character-centric as it used to be and could still be (if it focused on the intriguing parallel time continuums and examined the impact of one's actions on others and how one's true character manifests itself no matter the circumstances, all great topics), right now Lost is overstuffing the sandwich here and I'm losing my appetite.
At this point in the saga, I have zero patience to try and figure out what's up with some new Ben-Linus-wannabe-head-Other honcho. I don't want to get to know a whole new set of Others. I've had it with Others. There are plenty of other things to do with Lost's remaining hours, like seeing how this whole uncrashed Kate versus the post-crash/post-Jughead/still-on-the-island Kate situation play out. That, to me, is interesting. All those Other Others, Dogen and Lennon and the annoying gnat who Kate smacked around in the jungle, I couldn't care a whit about them. Want them to be attacked by the Smoke Monster. Go the way of Nikki and Paulo. Pronto. Ditto for Jacob's bodyguards who are on the other side of the island with Richard and Sun and Lapidus.
I do want to see what happens with Sun and Jin, Richard and Ben, Jack and Kate, and the undead John "Smoky" Locke. And what ever happened to Charles Whidmore and Eloise Hawking? The writers got us all invested in them and now I want to know how they factor into the equation. Dare I even inquire about Christian?
What I adored about the first few seasons of Lost was its rich development of character, relationships and its overall examination of what motivates people. When Lost veered into the realm of time travel last season, I was initially annoyed because it -- along with Daniel Faraday -- was confusing, but hung in there because I felt as though the series was still rooted in building and exploring character. What's been going on now with this temple and Dogen & Co., it's just taking up valuable time and is, frankly, irritating.
What say you Lost fans? What do you make of the new Other Others and all this Man in Black stuff? Do you think I'm being premature in my irritation and concerns and that I should just give it some more time?
Temple. *yawn*
More "Others." (Or, as Sawyer said in the Lost Untangled video above, "Mother Others.") *rolling my eyes*
More "Others" with guns who try to save/kill/confound our Losties while detaining them and, occasionally torturing them, this time with a hot piece of metal and electric currents. *pulling hair out*
Undead Sayid's been "claimed," otherwise known as "infected" with what the crazy French chick, Danielle Rousseau, was screaming about in season one. *areyoufreakinkiddinme*
I truly hope that Lost's team of scribes tie the Man in Black/Jacob thing into a sweet little bow by mid-May when this series concludes. But I'm losing faith that they will. While I'm hoping and waiting for the show to be as deeply thoughtful and character-centric as it used to be and could still be (if it focused on the intriguing parallel time continuums and examined the impact of one's actions on others and how one's true character manifests itself no matter the circumstances, all great topics), right now Lost is overstuffing the sandwich here and I'm losing my appetite.
At this point in the saga, I have zero patience to try and figure out what's up with some new Ben-Linus-wannabe-head-Other honcho. I don't want to get to know a whole new set of Others. I've had it with Others. There are plenty of other things to do with Lost's remaining hours, like seeing how this whole uncrashed Kate versus the post-crash/post-Jughead/still-on-the-island Kate situation play out. That, to me, is interesting. All those Other Others, Dogen and Lennon and the annoying gnat who Kate smacked around in the jungle, I couldn't care a whit about them. Want them to be attacked by the Smoke Monster. Go the way of Nikki and Paulo. Pronto. Ditto for Jacob's bodyguards who are on the other side of the island with Richard and Sun and Lapidus.
I do want to see what happens with Sun and Jin, Richard and Ben, Jack and Kate, and the undead John "Smoky" Locke. And what ever happened to Charles Whidmore and Eloise Hawking? The writers got us all invested in them and now I want to know how they factor into the equation. Dare I even inquire about Christian?
What I adored about the first few seasons of Lost was its rich development of character, relationships and its overall examination of what motivates people. When Lost veered into the realm of time travel last season, I was initially annoyed because it -- along with Daniel Faraday -- was confusing, but hung in there because I felt as though the series was still rooted in building and exploring character. What's been going on now with this temple and Dogen & Co., it's just taking up valuable time and is, frankly, irritating.
What say you Lost fans? What do you make of the new Other Others and all this Man in Black stuff? Do you think I'm being premature in my irritation and concerns and that I should just give it some more time?
Thursday, February 4, 2010
'Lost:' Comparing Jack's Plane Rides, Plus New 'Lost Untangled' Video
*Warning, spoilers ahead from the recent episode of Lost.*
I wasn't on the internet late Tuesday through yesterday -- pressing family matter -- therefore I haven't yet been able to weigh in on the first episode of the final season of Lost. I'm going to echo what Grey's Anatomy creator Shonda Rhimes wrote on Twitter today, "Saw LOST twice. Am very confused. Am happy about the chance to be confused over LOST again."
Well, I've only seen the premiere but a single time, however I'm planning on watching it a second time with The Spouse when he's available. And I too, like Rhimes, am very happy to be once again scratching my head trying to figure out what the heck's going on on Lost.
Some reactions:
I wasn't on the internet late Tuesday through yesterday -- pressing family matter -- therefore I haven't yet been able to weigh in on the first episode of the final season of Lost. I'm going to echo what Grey's Anatomy creator Shonda Rhimes wrote on Twitter today, "Saw LOST twice. Am very confused. Am happy about the chance to be confused over LOST again."
Well, I've only seen the premiere but a single time, however I'm planning on watching it a second time with The Spouse when he's available. And I too, like Rhimes, am very happy to be once again scratching my head trying to figure out what the heck's going on on Lost.
Some reactions:
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
A Few Questions About '24's' Eighth Day
I'm willing to suspend all manner of belief for the sake of enjoying a creative product (it's kind of necessary when you're a fan of Lost), but I had a bit of trouble doing so with the recent fifth hour of Jack Bauer's eighth bad day, where Jack, disappointingly, spent most of that hour sitting in a car while Renee "I'm just getting started" Walker did all of the legwork. Kind of unusual for our favorite, butt-kicking super-agent granddad, don't ya think?
Anyway, onto my questions about this season's 24 (in no particular order):
Am I sensing a trend here . . . that when a character on 24 wants to go someplace -- even though this season is set in New York City -- that it only takes 10 minutes to get anywhere? In Manhattan? It took President Omar Hassan (of the "Islamic Republic of Kamistan," otherwise known as Iran) "10 minutes" to go from CTU to the UN (seemed like less than that). It took Sark, wait, I mean the blonde son of the Russian mobster guy whose younger son has radiation poisoning, mere minutes to haul his brother to a doctor's office after fleeing the Russian mobster's lair. And it seemed like a breeze for Dana/Jenny Walsh to go from CTU to her apartment so she could be extorted/threatened by her former boyfriend. Can it really be that easy to get around Manhattan these days, particularly after there was an assassination attempt on a foreign leader and the U.S. president is in town? Maybe there are secret CTU-only tunnels under New York City that we're not aware of. That must be it.
As a faithful 24 viewer, I'm finding it hard to buy into the notion that Renee, who was a by-the-books FBI gal last season, had previously worked undercover with a ruthless Russian crime syndicate and now -- post-nervious breakdown -- seems to have no problems with severing a guy's thumb. Maybe she and Jack should have a "Who Can Torture a Suspect Better" contest. She'd probably win, even though Jack did sink a fire axe into a guy's chest a few hours ago.
Another eyebrow-raising moment: Given the fact that Chloe O'Brian was able to track down the name of some random, crooked Mexican politician who runs a particular hotel in less than a minute, it seems, what's the word, uh, insane to assert that CTU never figured out that they've employed a former convict as a data analyst . . . unless, of course, they do as good a job of vetting potential hires as the real TSA does in stopping a guy with a one-way ticket to Detroit who had no luggage, whose dad warned government officials that he'd become radicalized and hid a bomb in their underpants.
Ah, but what's 24 without its zany moments and Chloe's snarl to lighten the mood?
In the meantime, Fox is demonstrating that it has a sense of humor about its super-serious terrorism drama. Mirroring a move ABC made with super-serious Lost, they've started posting humorous recap videos. The 24 version uses a cartoon narrator who makes quirky observations as he tells us what's happened on the recent episode. Mildly amusing. I like the Lost: Untangled videos with the action figures better.
Image credit: Fox.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
'Lost:' All Five Seasons in 8 Minutes 15 Seconds
Feeling like you're not quite ready for Lost's new season and perhaps could use a little refresher before the final season premieres next month? ABC has created a video which rapidly (and humorously) summarizes the head-scratching insanity that is Lost. It's not as clever as the quirky, action figure fueled Lost Untangled videos ABC wound up creating last season when all that time traveling business got brain-numbingly confusing and people started to complain, but it does its job of providing a CliffNotes recap for the award-winning series reasonably well.
However if you have never seen Lost before -- what the heck are you waiting for? -- don't watch this video. I strongly recommend that you start with season one episode one. It'll be a much better experience that way.
However if you have never seen Lost before -- what the heck are you waiting for? -- don't watch this video. I strongly recommend that you start with season one episode one. It'll be a much better experience that way.
Friday, June 5, 2009
'Lost Untangled:' The Long-Awaited Satirical Explainer for the Season Finale
I now understand why we've had to wait weeks for ABC to finally release the season's last Lost Untangled video online. They've apparently decided that the low-keyed, low-tech use of plastic action figures, cardboard character cut-outs and goofy voices was insufficient. They had to go with some "special effects" (i.e. -- fires and explosions). And add music.
While the season finale version of Lost Untangled did contain a few amusing moments, it wasn't as funny or clever as the bulk of the Lost Untangled videos we've seen throughout the year. The best part about them was the fact that they were so low-tech and silly, explaining the twisty, off-kilter Lost plots succinctly while simultaneously entertaining us with shtick. The gentle-mocking-while-explaining technique was effective. However this Lost Untangled finale -- with its own music and a dancing statue -- simply didn't do it for me, though seeing the Locke action figure inside the box and showing Phil getting killed, twice, did make me chuckle. (Link to the video here.)
What do you think of the season finale wrap-up?
While the season finale version of Lost Untangled did contain a few amusing moments, it wasn't as funny or clever as the bulk of the Lost Untangled videos we've seen throughout the year. The best part about them was the fact that they were so low-tech and silly, explaining the twisty, off-kilter Lost plots succinctly while simultaneously entertaining us with shtick. The gentle-mocking-while-explaining technique was effective. However this Lost Untangled finale -- with its own music and a dancing statue -- simply didn't do it for me, though seeing the Locke action figure inside the box and showing Phil getting killed, twice, did make me chuckle. (Link to the video here.)
What do you think of the season finale wrap-up?
Thursday, May 7, 2009
'Lost' Untangled: Follow the Leader
*Warning, spoilers from the recent episode of Lost ahead*
The new Lost episode -- "Follow the Leader" -- was one of those head-scratchers that made me feel confused and clueless, even though I've seen every episode of this show -- multiple times -- and frequent blogs with vigorous Lost fan bases.
Maybe I was tired when I was watching. There ARE two Boston teams in sports playoffs (Celtics, Bruins), plus I was also trying to simultaneously watch the Red Sox. I was also cranky, had a precariously low level of caffeine in my system and truly wasn't in the mood to be required to think this hard.
Now that I've had time to think about the episode, I'm trying to make sense of it. Let me get this straight:
-- Jack wants to carry on dead Daniel's work as outlined in Daniel's notebook which was given to Daniel by his mother who wound up killing him. Jack thinks that by blowing up "Jughead" (the hydrogen bomb buried under Dharmaville -- maybe THAT'S why women couldn't bear children), he'll be restoring the natural order to their lives, putting everything where it should be. The original Oceanic 815 crash will not happen in 2004 because the pent-up electromagnetic energy on the island will have already been released due to the bomb's detonation.
As I pondered this, I kept thinking of the phrase, "Dead is dead." If Jack, Kate, Eloise, Charles W., Hurley, Sayid, Sawyer/LaFleur, Kate, Miles and Juliet are all blown up how could they still be living in the future? Say only a couple of them are blown up, like Jack and Sayid if they happen to be close to the bomb. They'd be dead. They wouldn't be able to be on the plane in the future would they? Unless of course the island heals them, post-blast . . . Could they possibly head off the construction of The Swan and the infamous button?
-- Kate now thinks Jack's a suicidal maniac and prefers to face the Dharma mania to Jack's . . . and winds up on the sub that's evacuating the women and children off the island, along with Sawyer (who, circa 1977, wants to invest in Microsoft and become rich) and Juliet (who's less than thrilled that Kate has joined them). However ABC ruined the suspense for next week by showing a clip of Sawyer back on the island so we know their time on the sub plotting to relaunch their lives is short-lived.
-- Locke impersonates Moses by leading his tribe of followers down an island beach in search of "Jacob," after having provided them with fresh meat (in the form of a freshly killed, sacrificial boar). He tells them that when he finds Jacob -- who asked Locke to help him during last season -- he plans on killing him. Huh? Is Jacob alive and needs to be killed (like Locke "needed" to be killed by Ben) in order to live forever? Is Christian -- whose last name IS Shepherd -- Jacob, or are they separate?
-- There's been a large amount of chatter online speculating about whether Richard Alpert first came to the island on that Black Rock ship that crashed on the island (Richard was working on a ship in a bottle) or is some kind of ancient Egyptian (hence his eyeliner and the hieroglyphics in the Temple) who has been resurrected (hence he never ages). What really threw me during the last episode was that Richard, who always seemed so self-assured, seemed baffled when Locke told him to go meet a time-traveling version of Locke and assist with removing a bullet from his thigh. When Richard asked Locke how he knew that the time-traveling Locke would would be there, Locke replied that the island told him.
-- Which brings us to the question is "the island" Jacob? Does the island have its own spirit and intentions separate and distinct from Jacob and from Christian, who seems to be playing a pivotal role in guiding the time traveling Losties, like giving Sun the photo of the 1977 Dharma recruits?
The ONLY thing that's clear -- other than the fact that Miles' daddy didn't really leave Miles and his mother but was seeking to protect them, hence his picking a fight to make his wife leave -- is that "The Incident" will likely be the focus of the season finale next week, which will likely leave us on a life or death cliffhanger.
Meanwhile, the latest Lost Untangled video (link here) made me laugh with the comical images of Jack & Co. swimming through the tunnels, Sayid's "I am not a killer" line and Locke's grandiose presentation of the dead boar.
What did you think of the latest installment? What are you hoping to see in the season finale?
The new Lost episode -- "Follow the Leader" -- was one of those head-scratchers that made me feel confused and clueless, even though I've seen every episode of this show -- multiple times -- and frequent blogs with vigorous Lost fan bases.
Maybe I was tired when I was watching. There ARE two Boston teams in sports playoffs (Celtics, Bruins), plus I was also trying to simultaneously watch the Red Sox. I was also cranky, had a precariously low level of caffeine in my system and truly wasn't in the mood to be required to think this hard.
Now that I've had time to think about the episode, I'm trying to make sense of it. Let me get this straight:
-- Jack wants to carry on dead Daniel's work as outlined in Daniel's notebook which was given to Daniel by his mother who wound up killing him. Jack thinks that by blowing up "Jughead" (the hydrogen bomb buried under Dharmaville -- maybe THAT'S why women couldn't bear children), he'll be restoring the natural order to their lives, putting everything where it should be. The original Oceanic 815 crash will not happen in 2004 because the pent-up electromagnetic energy on the island will have already been released due to the bomb's detonation.
As I pondered this, I kept thinking of the phrase, "Dead is dead." If Jack, Kate, Eloise, Charles W., Hurley, Sayid, Sawyer/LaFleur, Kate, Miles and Juliet are all blown up how could they still be living in the future? Say only a couple of them are blown up, like Jack and Sayid if they happen to be close to the bomb. They'd be dead. They wouldn't be able to be on the plane in the future would they? Unless of course the island heals them, post-blast . . . Could they possibly head off the construction of The Swan and the infamous button?
-- Kate now thinks Jack's a suicidal maniac and prefers to face the Dharma mania to Jack's . . . and winds up on the sub that's evacuating the women and children off the island, along with Sawyer (who, circa 1977, wants to invest in Microsoft and become rich) and Juliet (who's less than thrilled that Kate has joined them). However ABC ruined the suspense for next week by showing a clip of Sawyer back on the island so we know their time on the sub plotting to relaunch their lives is short-lived.
-- Locke impersonates Moses by leading his tribe of followers down an island beach in search of "Jacob," after having provided them with fresh meat (in the form of a freshly killed, sacrificial boar). He tells them that when he finds Jacob -- who asked Locke to help him during last season -- he plans on killing him. Huh? Is Jacob alive and needs to be killed (like Locke "needed" to be killed by Ben) in order to live forever? Is Christian -- whose last name IS Shepherd -- Jacob, or are they separate?
-- There's been a large amount of chatter online speculating about whether Richard Alpert first came to the island on that Black Rock ship that crashed on the island (Richard was working on a ship in a bottle) or is some kind of ancient Egyptian (hence his eyeliner and the hieroglyphics in the Temple) who has been resurrected (hence he never ages). What really threw me during the last episode was that Richard, who always seemed so self-assured, seemed baffled when Locke told him to go meet a time-traveling version of Locke and assist with removing a bullet from his thigh. When Richard asked Locke how he knew that the time-traveling Locke would would be there, Locke replied that the island told him.
-- Which brings us to the question is "the island" Jacob? Does the island have its own spirit and intentions separate and distinct from Jacob and from Christian, who seems to be playing a pivotal role in guiding the time traveling Losties, like giving Sun the photo of the 1977 Dharma recruits?
The ONLY thing that's clear -- other than the fact that Miles' daddy didn't really leave Miles and his mother but was seeking to protect them, hence his picking a fight to make his wife leave -- is that "The Incident" will likely be the focus of the season finale next week, which will likely leave us on a life or death cliffhanger.
Meanwhile, the latest Lost Untangled video (link here) made me laugh with the comical images of Jack & Co. swimming through the tunnels, Sayid's "I am not a killer" line and Locke's grandiose presentation of the dead boar.
What did you think of the latest installment? What are you hoping to see in the season finale?
Thursday, April 30, 2009
'Lost Untangled:' The Variable
*Warning, spoilers ahead from the recent episode of Lost*
I KNEW IT!
That's what I shouted last night when The Spouse and I were watching Lost and Daniel Faraday recanted his "whatever happened, happened" theory by saying he'd forgotten that there are variables, like, um, our Losties who (*drum roll*) CAN change the future. Say it with me brothers and sisters, "Yes we can!" (Actually, yes THEY can, as neither you nor I are Lost characters . . . details, details.)
After watching "Whatever Happened, Happened" a few weeks ago, I had a huge argument with The Spouse (who subscribed to the "whatever happened, happened" school of thought) over the notion that nothing the Losties did in 1977 would change the future. "How can that be?" I argued. "What the hell's the point of any of it if they cannot change the future? If there wasn't the possibility of change?" I saw that idea as a huge downer and refused to believe that that was the big-picture conceit driving the last quarter of the series' episodes. The Lost creators, I firmly believe, are optimists at heart.
Last night I was vindicated. And I wasn't big about it either. I paused the TV, shouted (I shouted a lot last night), "I KNEW IT!" and solicited a high-five from The Spouse.
Then, at the end of the episode, he completely burst my bubble by suggesting that if the Losties were indeed able to follow through with Faraday's plan -- rid the Swan/Hatch area of its electromagnetic energy by detonating the hydrogen bomb -- that the Oceanic flight would crash anyway in 2004, all the people would die and their bodies would be left at the bottom of the ocean. "End a series with everyone dead?" I said. "Are you insane? No way!"
My Spouse's dire prediction notwithstanding, I still had a problem with what Faraday said to Jack Shephard, that Faraday's mother was wrong when she told Jack and the other Losties that it was their destiny to return to the island, that they HAD to go back. Given the heavy-handed Jesus/Christian/Locke references earlier this season, you cannot tell me that there was no reason for Jack, Kate, et al to return to the island. If it was all a ruse, that would really, really suck. I have very high standards for how I want the writers to resolve all these loose ends and will be severely disappointed if they're not met.
While I'm building up incredibly high hopes for the Lost storyline, the ABC folks behind Lost Untangled released their latest video featuring Faraday as the deliverer of bad news. As with most of these videos (link here), this one was funny, particularly when it said Jack was "punk'd" by Faraday's mother (which I sincerely hope is incorrect).
I KNEW IT!
That's what I shouted last night when The Spouse and I were watching Lost and Daniel Faraday recanted his "whatever happened, happened" theory by saying he'd forgotten that there are variables, like, um, our Losties who (*drum roll*) CAN change the future. Say it with me brothers and sisters, "Yes we can!" (Actually, yes THEY can, as neither you nor I are Lost characters . . . details, details.)
After watching "Whatever Happened, Happened" a few weeks ago, I had a huge argument with The Spouse (who subscribed to the "whatever happened, happened" school of thought) over the notion that nothing the Losties did in 1977 would change the future. "How can that be?" I argued. "What the hell's the point of any of it if they cannot change the future? If there wasn't the possibility of change?" I saw that idea as a huge downer and refused to believe that that was the big-picture conceit driving the last quarter of the series' episodes. The Lost creators, I firmly believe, are optimists at heart.
Last night I was vindicated. And I wasn't big about it either. I paused the TV, shouted (I shouted a lot last night), "I KNEW IT!" and solicited a high-five from The Spouse.
Then, at the end of the episode, he completely burst my bubble by suggesting that if the Losties were indeed able to follow through with Faraday's plan -- rid the Swan/Hatch area of its electromagnetic energy by detonating the hydrogen bomb -- that the Oceanic flight would crash anyway in 2004, all the people would die and their bodies would be left at the bottom of the ocean. "End a series with everyone dead?" I said. "Are you insane? No way!"
My Spouse's dire prediction notwithstanding, I still had a problem with what Faraday said to Jack Shephard, that Faraday's mother was wrong when she told Jack and the other Losties that it was their destiny to return to the island, that they HAD to go back. Given the heavy-handed Jesus/Christian/Locke references earlier this season, you cannot tell me that there was no reason for Jack, Kate, et al to return to the island. If it was all a ruse, that would really, really suck. I have very high standards for how I want the writers to resolve all these loose ends and will be severely disappointed if they're not met.
While I'm building up incredibly high hopes for the Lost storyline, the ABC folks behind Lost Untangled released their latest video featuring Faraday as the deliverer of bad news. As with most of these videos (link here), this one was funny, particularly when it said Jack was "punk'd" by Faraday's mother (which I sincerely hope is incorrect).
Thursday, April 23, 2009
So-So 'Lost' Clip Show But Amusing Jorge Garcia Interview
Last night's Lost clip show was clearly an attempt to camouflage the time travel/can-you-change-the-future?/sci-fi geekness that has been extremely pronounced this season, so pronounced that ABC felt it necessary to create new Lost Untangled videos each week to explain what you saw on the show. The clips focused almost exclusively on the relationships between characters and de-emphasized the more confusing aspects of the show as it has unfolded this season, such as whether the arrival of the Oceanic 6 on the island in 1977 will change future events, what impact saving Kid Ben had or didn't have, etc.
Not that I dislike the relationship emphasis mind you -- in fact that's one of the things of which I'm most fond -- but I felt like the so-called "new" episode last night was a naked attempt to lure new viewers into the last few installments by saying, "Yeah, what you've heard about Lost being complicated and all geeked out with this time travel and killer/judgmental black smoke. Not so much."
Anyway . . . earlier this week while reading the web site Jezebel, I came across this clip of Jorge Garcia (Hurley) being interviewed on the Bonnie Hunt Show (a program I've never watched, though not due to any antipathy for the host). The funniest part about it was when Garcia mentioned that he cannot look at Matthew Fox (Jack) during serious scenes or they'll both crack up. (Link to the video here.)
Tangential note: The Boston Globe's Joanna Weiss cracked me up yesterday. When making her TV recommendations for Wednesday night viewing, she wrote of Lost: "A 'retrospective,' which means a 'clip show.' Which means another week before we learn what Sawyer did to Jimmy Barrett." For those of you not in the loop, Jimmy Barrett is a Mad Men character played by Patrick Fischler, who plays Phil on Lost, an inside joke for fans of Lost and Mad Men, of which I am one.
Not that I dislike the relationship emphasis mind you -- in fact that's one of the things of which I'm most fond -- but I felt like the so-called "new" episode last night was a naked attempt to lure new viewers into the last few installments by saying, "Yeah, what you've heard about Lost being complicated and all geeked out with this time travel and killer/judgmental black smoke. Not so much."
Anyway . . . earlier this week while reading the web site Jezebel, I came across this clip of Jorge Garcia (Hurley) being interviewed on the Bonnie Hunt Show (a program I've never watched, though not due to any antipathy for the host). The funniest part about it was when Garcia mentioned that he cannot look at Matthew Fox (Jack) during serious scenes or they'll both crack up. (Link to the video here.)
Tangential note: The Boston Globe's Joanna Weiss cracked me up yesterday. When making her TV recommendations for Wednesday night viewing, she wrote of Lost: "A 'retrospective,' which means a 'clip show.' Which means another week before we learn what Sawyer did to Jimmy Barrett." For those of you not in the loop, Jimmy Barrett is a Mad Men character played by Patrick Fischler, who plays Phil on Lost, an inside joke for fans of Lost and Mad Men, of which I am one.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
'Lost Untangled:' Some Like It Hoth
I adored Star Wars films when I was a kid. I flocked to the theaters with fellow Gen Xers when the three original films were re-released in the mid-90s to gin up excitement about the three new prequels.
But I'm not so much a fan of mixing the simplistic fun of Star Wars with the dense, intelligent, symbol-heavy opus that is Lost. Starting with the silly title of this latest Lost episode, I think the writers went a bit too far with the deluge of Star Wars references. If writers wanted Hurley to mention Star Wars once, maybe twice, I could deal with that, because there's a quirky beauty to Hurley. However I think they went too far with the Luke-Darth thing to the point that it almost felt forced, although the bit about Hurley writing the script for The Empire Strikes Back before the actual screenwriters got to it was mildly amusing.
That being said, there was one "oh my God" moment. Maybe two:
1) Learning that Miles' father is Dr. Pierre Chang/Marvin Candle/He of the creepy Dharma videos and love for white rabbits. (Miles got to see his own father fawning over his 3-month-old self.)
2) Daniel Faraday left the island and then returned. (Where did he go? And what's up with the new black Dharma jumpsuits?)
The number 316 got a long screenshot during this episode, this time on the microwave oven inside the apartment a young Miles and his mother were thinking of renting. Remember that the number 316 was also the name of the best episode thus far this season -- the episode where our Losties' return to the island on a flight numbered 316. Plus there was the Biblical reference from that same episode to John: 316, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
In "Some Like It Hoth," yet another in a string of soured/strained/difficult relationships with someone's father was invoked, this time with Miles and Dr. Dharma. Hurley spent a good chunk of time repeatedly urging Miles to communicate with his dad because Hurley said a lack of communication was what led to the tragic outcome of the Luke Skywalker/Darth Vader relationship.
We also got a glimpse of what will be The Hatch/The Swan and its 108-minute computer keystroke requirement, along with Hurley's numbers being punched into a Hatch door. Why those particular numbers? Still don't have a clue.
Thoughts on "Some Like It Hoth?" ABC's Lost Untangled staff had some fun with the Star Wars/I-see-dead-people themes from this week. (Link to video here.)
But I'm not so much a fan of mixing the simplistic fun of Star Wars with the dense, intelligent, symbol-heavy opus that is Lost. Starting with the silly title of this latest Lost episode, I think the writers went a bit too far with the deluge of Star Wars references. If writers wanted Hurley to mention Star Wars once, maybe twice, I could deal with that, because there's a quirky beauty to Hurley. However I think they went too far with the Luke-Darth thing to the point that it almost felt forced, although the bit about Hurley writing the script for The Empire Strikes Back before the actual screenwriters got to it was mildly amusing.
That being said, there was one "oh my God" moment. Maybe two:
1) Learning that Miles' father is Dr. Pierre Chang/Marvin Candle/He of the creepy Dharma videos and love for white rabbits. (Miles got to see his own father fawning over his 3-month-old self.)
2) Daniel Faraday left the island and then returned. (Where did he go? And what's up with the new black Dharma jumpsuits?)
The number 316 got a long screenshot during this episode, this time on the microwave oven inside the apartment a young Miles and his mother were thinking of renting. Remember that the number 316 was also the name of the best episode thus far this season -- the episode where our Losties' return to the island on a flight numbered 316. Plus there was the Biblical reference from that same episode to John: 316, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
In "Some Like It Hoth," yet another in a string of soured/strained/difficult relationships with someone's father was invoked, this time with Miles and Dr. Dharma. Hurley spent a good chunk of time repeatedly urging Miles to communicate with his dad because Hurley said a lack of communication was what led to the tragic outcome of the Luke Skywalker/Darth Vader relationship.
We also got a glimpse of what will be The Hatch/The Swan and its 108-minute computer keystroke requirement, along with Hurley's numbers being punched into a Hatch door. Why those particular numbers? Still don't have a clue.
Thoughts on "Some Like It Hoth?" ABC's Lost Untangled staff had some fun with the Star Wars/I-see-dead-people themes from this week. (Link to video here.)
Thursday, April 9, 2009
'Lost Untangled:' Dead is Dead
*Spoilers from recent Lost episode*
Maybe I've been spoiled by all the Lost goodness that's been aired in the past few weeks. What with time travel, Kid Ben getting shot and my head hurting from trying to figure out what everything means, I've come to expect to be absolutely thrilled by the time a new episode concludes. Not so much with this last one.
It's not that the fact that the episode, "Dead is Dead" was Ben-centric that turned me off. I love Ben Linus. He's one of TV's great villains. Manipulative. Ruthless. Unpredictable. Who could've seen coming him killing an already suicidal John Locke? Or shooting Cesar after convincing him that Locke was a potentially violent loon? Brilliance.
Yet I found myself not really caring what happened to Ben when the kid-loving character was preparing to be judged by the "smoke monster" in an Indiana Jones-like temple complete with hieroglyphics of some sort for which, no doubt, Lost fans will seek out a translation soon if they haven't already (on the Pop Candy blog, some commenters are suggesting that the carvings referenced some sort of god of the dead or of the underworld or souls). Ben wasn't going to die. Not yet anyway. He's too central as the only, long standing villain. Who could replace him and wear the series' big black hat? Charles Widmore? Richard Alpert? No one really could fill Ben's shoes, therefore I didn't expect anything to happen to happen to him in the belly of the temple.
I found Kid Ben compelling because he was just that, a kid who could've been influenced and changed, drawn away from his potential, future evil ways, or at least we could try to understand how and why Ben became sinister. Adult Ben -- who didn't really repent because he believes that the island trumps everything and is the excuse for everything he does -- isn't going to change at this point. Learning that Ben spared Rousseau from death years ago when he kidnapped her baby didn't alter how I feel about him. Seeing Ben pushing cute little girl Alex on a swingset while he was sporting an atrocious hairdo was only mildly interesting.
I did, however, find intrigue in how and why Widmore was banished from the island, in what the "new" plane crash survivors are arming themselves for and in the clearly Jesus-like resurrection of Locke, on the island where previously those who were dead stayed dead.
Meanwhile, ABC's new Lost Untangled video is very funny this week. I love the Locke voice. Quirkiest bit: "Precious Moments with Ben Linus."
Your thoughts on "Dead is Dead?"
Maybe I've been spoiled by all the Lost goodness that's been aired in the past few weeks. What with time travel, Kid Ben getting shot and my head hurting from trying to figure out what everything means, I've come to expect to be absolutely thrilled by the time a new episode concludes. Not so much with this last one.
It's not that the fact that the episode, "Dead is Dead" was Ben-centric that turned me off. I love Ben Linus. He's one of TV's great villains. Manipulative. Ruthless. Unpredictable. Who could've seen coming him killing an already suicidal John Locke? Or shooting Cesar after convincing him that Locke was a potentially violent loon? Brilliance.
Yet I found myself not really caring what happened to Ben when the kid-loving character was preparing to be judged by the "smoke monster" in an Indiana Jones-like temple complete with hieroglyphics of some sort for which, no doubt, Lost fans will seek out a translation soon if they haven't already (on the Pop Candy blog, some commenters are suggesting that the carvings referenced some sort of god of the dead or of the underworld or souls). Ben wasn't going to die. Not yet anyway. He's too central as the only, long standing villain. Who could replace him and wear the series' big black hat? Charles Widmore? Richard Alpert? No one really could fill Ben's shoes, therefore I didn't expect anything to happen to happen to him in the belly of the temple.
I found Kid Ben compelling because he was just that, a kid who could've been influenced and changed, drawn away from his potential, future evil ways, or at least we could try to understand how and why Ben became sinister. Adult Ben -- who didn't really repent because he believes that the island trumps everything and is the excuse for everything he does -- isn't going to change at this point. Learning that Ben spared Rousseau from death years ago when he kidnapped her baby didn't alter how I feel about him. Seeing Ben pushing cute little girl Alex on a swingset while he was sporting an atrocious hairdo was only mildly interesting.
I did, however, find intrigue in how and why Widmore was banished from the island, in what the "new" plane crash survivors are arming themselves for and in the clearly Jesus-like resurrection of Locke, on the island where previously those who were dead stayed dead.
Meanwhile, ABC's new Lost Untangled video is very funny this week. I love the Locke voice. Quirkiest bit: "Precious Moments with Ben Linus."
Your thoughts on "Dead is Dead?"
Thursday, April 2, 2009
'Lost' Untangled: Whatever Happened, Happened
*Spoilers from recent Lost episode ahead*
I don't care what the title of this episode is. I cannot buy into the notion that nothing that our favorite time travelin' Losties do will in any way change the future. If that's the case, that they can't change anything, then why was it so damned important for the Oceanic 6 (or most of them) to return to the island and, as best as possible, replicate the circumstances around their original crash? If them returning to the island wouldn't change the future, won't save anyone (which was the stated reason for returning) why do it? Why do anything?
A version of the Miles-Hurley conversation went on in my house last night when I paused the DVR and debated my husband, with him playing the role of Miles and me playing the role of the mental patient, Hurley. (Not the best character to be emulating, I know.) Maybe I'm being naive here, but I can't believe that nothing the time travelers do will have any impact on the future. If "whatever happened, happened" then there's no point to anything they do. Taking away the possibility of trying to help prevent bad things from happening in the future (like preventing The Purge and Ben's genocidal ascension) changes the dramatic frame of reference. And not in a good way.
When I wasn't arguing the impact/non-impact of our time travelers' actions with my spouse, I was sniffling while watching Kate's storyline unfold which explained that Kate had befriended Sawyer's baby mama off-island and that Kate had given Aaron to his grandmother before she returned to the island. I always wondered why she never told Aaron's grandmother about the child. One could argue that Kate couldn't tell Claire's mother the truth for fear that the intricate lies that the Oceanic 6 had contrived would unravel. But if Kate was willing to come clean to Sawyer's ex-gal pal, why not with Aaron's grandmother with whom some kind of a deal could potentially have been struck, particularly given the fact that Jack is Aaron's uncle.
The argument that Kate needed to keep Aaron in order to fill a void in her heart, well, I didn't really find that convincing. Don't know exactly why. And the idea that she returned to the island to find Claire? That suggestion left me flat as well. However the scenes where Kate lost Aaron in the supermarket and when she left him with his grandmother . . . tears. Tears and sniffling.
On the Jack-won't-save-Kid-Ben front: While pulling out my season two DVDs to see how Ben/Henry Gale reacted when he saw Sayid for the "first" time provided me no satisfaction, I was reminded that not only did Jack save Ben when he operated on his spinal tumor in season three, but he also saved him in season two when he successfully removed the arrow that Danielle Rousseau had shot through Ben's shoulder while saying over and over again to Sayid, "He's one of Them. He's one of Them."
Finally, the scene with Richard Alpert saying he could save the grievously wounded Kid Ben if he took him into the smoke monster's temple although Ben would lose all his innocence . . . that one I'm still trying to process. Need more caffeine to figure that one out, but I did have this thought: While everyone's blaming Jack for failing to save Kid Ben, had Kate not brought Kid Ben to Alpert, Kid Ben could've died with an innocent soul rather than grown up to be a soulless monster.
Meanwhile, the ABC folks released their latest Lost Untangled video and have added a few new touches: The original Losties who've time traveled are now wearing giant Dharma badges and tent-like jumpsuits. Additionally, the video makers inserted moving lips into character photos when mocking a conversation. I'm not a fan of the cartoonish lip bit. Reminds me of something from Conan O'Brien. These Lost Untangled videos are great when they're action figure/cardboard cut-out based. Much funnier.
I don't care what the title of this episode is. I cannot buy into the notion that nothing that our favorite time travelin' Losties do will in any way change the future. If that's the case, that they can't change anything, then why was it so damned important for the Oceanic 6 (or most of them) to return to the island and, as best as possible, replicate the circumstances around their original crash? If them returning to the island wouldn't change the future, won't save anyone (which was the stated reason for returning) why do it? Why do anything?
A version of the Miles-Hurley conversation went on in my house last night when I paused the DVR and debated my husband, with him playing the role of Miles and me playing the role of the mental patient, Hurley. (Not the best character to be emulating, I know.) Maybe I'm being naive here, but I can't believe that nothing the time travelers do will have any impact on the future. If "whatever happened, happened" then there's no point to anything they do. Taking away the possibility of trying to help prevent bad things from happening in the future (like preventing The Purge and Ben's genocidal ascension) changes the dramatic frame of reference. And not in a good way.
When I wasn't arguing the impact/non-impact of our time travelers' actions with my spouse, I was sniffling while watching Kate's storyline unfold which explained that Kate had befriended Sawyer's baby mama off-island and that Kate had given Aaron to his grandmother before she returned to the island. I always wondered why she never told Aaron's grandmother about the child. One could argue that Kate couldn't tell Claire's mother the truth for fear that the intricate lies that the Oceanic 6 had contrived would unravel. But if Kate was willing to come clean to Sawyer's ex-gal pal, why not with Aaron's grandmother with whom some kind of a deal could potentially have been struck, particularly given the fact that Jack is Aaron's uncle.
The argument that Kate needed to keep Aaron in order to fill a void in her heart, well, I didn't really find that convincing. Don't know exactly why. And the idea that she returned to the island to find Claire? That suggestion left me flat as well. However the scenes where Kate lost Aaron in the supermarket and when she left him with his grandmother . . . tears. Tears and sniffling.
On the Jack-won't-save-Kid-Ben front: While pulling out my season two DVDs to see how Ben/Henry Gale reacted when he saw Sayid for the "first" time provided me no satisfaction, I was reminded that not only did Jack save Ben when he operated on his spinal tumor in season three, but he also saved him in season two when he successfully removed the arrow that Danielle Rousseau had shot through Ben's shoulder while saying over and over again to Sayid, "He's one of Them. He's one of Them."
Finally, the scene with Richard Alpert saying he could save the grievously wounded Kid Ben if he took him into the smoke monster's temple although Ben would lose all his innocence . . . that one I'm still trying to process. Need more caffeine to figure that one out, but I did have this thought: While everyone's blaming Jack for failing to save Kid Ben, had Kate not brought Kid Ben to Alpert, Kid Ben could've died with an innocent soul rather than grown up to be a soulless monster.
Meanwhile, the ABC folks released their latest Lost Untangled video and have added a few new touches: The original Losties who've time traveled are now wearing giant Dharma badges and tent-like jumpsuits. Additionally, the video makers inserted moving lips into character photos when mocking a conversation. I'm not a fan of the cartoonish lip bit. Reminds me of something from Conan O'Brien. These Lost Untangled videos are great when they're action figure/cardboard cut-out based. Much funnier.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)