# Lost 3/21/2007 "The Man from Tallahassee" (spoilers)



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

This is going to be a lot more complicated than we thought..


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Watching from the hospital, and I missed a bunch..

Anyone wanna describe what happened when they hid in the closet? I missed something else too - not sure what.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> Watching from the hospital, and I missed a bunch..
> 
> Anyone wanna describe what happened when they hid in the closet? I missed something else too - not sure what.


You don't have a TiVo?


----------



## billboard_NE (May 18, 2005)

Lost is back....

The first two years I would watch live (couldn't wait). Then the third season most of the time I would watch a day or two later. Looks like I am back to watching live.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

jkeegan said:


> Watching from the hospital, and I missed a bunch..
> 
> Anyone wanna describe what happened when they hid in the closet? I missed something else too - not sure what.


Mr. Friendly called Kate and Sayid by their last names. (we knew they knew those) He reported they were captured.

They hinted at what we soon learned... that Jack was leaving via sub in the morning.

Ben told Mr. F to "bring me the man from Tallahassee". (presumably Locke's father?)

WOW, Lost is back!!!


----------



## bqmeister (May 13, 2006)

Wow.

Freaky.


----------



## nKhona (Apr 7, 2005)

Wow...just wow.

Can't wait to see how they got Locke's father onto the island.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

billboard_NE said:


> Lost is back....
> 
> The first two years I would watch live (couldn't wait). Then the third season most of the time I would watch a day or two later. Looks like I am back to watching live.


Ditto.

That was awesome. Every step of the way (pun intended) from Jack playing the piano to the final moments. Every line, every nuance of the eyes and heads and how it all played out. Lost has been great this spring!

Let's see, other than the obvious wonder of the 8 story drop, things I liked....Jack playing the piano, Locke opening the hatch to the Sub and it being shot just as he opened the first Hatch, the Ben/Locke wheelchair reversal, the opening scene where it is shot so we think Locke is in the wheelchair getting disablity and then he stands up, lithe Kate wiggling around her chains, the photos of Alex on the wall, and Dad, oh Dad.

Yep. It was a great Lost episode. A 10.


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

:up: :up: :up:


----------



## modnar (Oct 15, 2000)

Yep, excellent episode!

Now, no one let Locke out of their sight again!


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

I liked when the guy was putting Locke into the wheelchair and he said "I don't want to hear about what you can't do"

That whole scene was painful though


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Best line for me: "We have two giant hamsters in wheels". Ben had some good ones in tonight. "We don't have a code for there is a man in the closet holding my daughter hostage, but I guess we should"


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I liked this episode but it was EXTREMELY predictable. I knew the instant john's dad was in the story that his dad would be the one to cripple him because he tried to "rescue" someone. I knew the "man from tallahassee" was his dad. I knew that john would blow up the sub as soon as we learned that jack was being sent home.

On the other hand, I did not predict any of the dialogue between ben and john, which was great.

So for that reason, I give this a big A. So Locke and Walt both are attuned to the big magic box somehow... eh?


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Anyone want to take a wager that Locke's Dad is "in" on the whole thing and is "acting" in that last scene........Maybe we get flashbacks for Locke's Dad now and find that he is connected to someone.....Widmore, Dharma, Hanson, Degroot......whomever.......

I thought the episode was going to end with the surprised look on Locke's face before the reveal.

The wild-eyed geek in me wanted to see something with a number 47 on it when Locke opened the door......... 

What a great episode!!!!!


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

jlb said:


> The wild-eyed geek in me wanted to see something with a number 47 on it when Locke opened the door.........


Apparently I'm going to need to be hit over the head with this one.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Assuming that Locke's dad is "the man from Tallahassee"... I seem to recall a reference to Tallahassee in a Sawyer flashback... I think. 
Can you imagine Sawyer finding out that his arch enemy is in a metal box on the island, ripe for all kinds of payback? I wonder if Locke and Sawyer will be arguing over who gets to kill him?


----------



## Mike Farrington (Nov 16, 2000)

For some reason I can't imagine Locke's father being in on the DHARMA thing. He seems too evil, and show far DHARMA hasn't been shown to be "that" evil. So, did a big magic box produce Locke's father? Or did they pre-kidnap him knowing they would need him someday to deal with Locke?


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I thought sawyer already killed his arch enemy?!!


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

betts4 said:


> Assuming that Locke's dad is "the man from Tallahassee"... I seem to recall a reference to Tallahassee in a Sawyer flashback... I think.
> Can you imagine Sawyer finding out that his arch enemy is in a metal box on the island, ripe for all kinds of payback? I wonder if Locke and Sawyer will be arguing over who gets to kill him?


For some reason I was thinking the Tallahassee thing was in a Kate flashback. She was buying a ticket to go there or something before she got caught.


----------



## modnar (Oct 15, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> I thought sawyer already killed his arch enemy?!!


If I remember it correctly, he killed who he *thought* was his arch enemy (the real Sawyer, I think), but it ended up just being a scam to get him to kill someone else.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

stalemate said:


> For some reason I was thinking the Tallahassee thing was in a Kate flashback. She was buying a ticket to go there or something before she got caught.


I remember that reference but thought that it was maybe just another way to connect them all.

So Sawyers a con man, Lockes Dad is a con man, Kate has run some cons....

So many connections, so little time.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I love Tivo and the replay. Over and over. Really good writing for this episode!


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

betts4 said:


> I remember that reference but thought that it was maybe just another way to connect them all.
> 
> So Sawyers a con man, Lockes Dad is a con man, Kate has run some cons....
> 
> So many connections, so little time.


Lostpedia lists 2 references for Tallahassee:


Kate was buying a ticket to Tallahassee when apprehended by U.S. Marshal Edward Mars, who describes the city as nothing but "strip malls and Waffle Houses." 
Sawyer implied to Jack that he contracted a communicable disease in Tallahassee ("Let's say something was burnin' and it wasn't from the sunshine.").

EDIT: Ha, I just realized I actually lived in Tallahassee when the episode with the Kate flashback aired. That must be why it stood out to me.


----------



## vikingguy (Aug 12, 2005)

I always have said the locke episodes are the best and this one delievered big time. This half of the season is really kicking ass I am really ejoying it. Maybe the lost writers felt pressure from hero's and turned it up a few notches. Locke flying out the window was a holy **** moment. I do admit I did not see it coming with his father in the room that knocked my socks off damn. I can't wait for jack and locke confrontation I can't imagine jack is very happy with locke. A+ episode between this and friday night lights it was one hell of a night of TV.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

You know, I was so captivated by the episode, I just now realized we didn't see most of the main cast. 

I was sitting here thinking of other thoughts to post and was trying to remember what was happening on the other side of the island. finally it hit me, Oh yeah, we didn't see anything from the rest of the group. 

Locke and Ben. A much more interesting duo than Jack and Juliet.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Great episode.

Noticed the scotch bottle (although I can't remember the name at the moment), same as Widmore's.

The scene between Jack and Kate at the pool table was really good.

This is the third episode in a row that I've wanted someone to punch Locke in the face. I think his character is getting more complex again, and that is great, but the characters there actually in the situation should want to smack him hard.


----------



## jpicard (Oct 26, 2004)

Did anyone notice the rose tattoo on Jack's left forearm right after Locke was looking through the binoculars at Jack shaking hands with Ben on the front porch of the cabin? Was that just a goof by production failing to cover up the actor's real life tattoo? Why would they even do that, if they haven't made an effort to cover the other one on his shoulder which would have been easier to cover up anyway, when in fact they wrote that one into the story line?


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

betts4 said:


> I remember that reference but thought that it was maybe just another way to connect them all.
> 
> So Sawyers a con man, Lockes Dad is a con man, Kate has run some cons....
> 
> So many connections, so little time.


You mean "so many *con*-nections."


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

jpicard said:


> Did anyone notice the rose tattoo on Jack's left forearm right after Locke was looking through the binoculars at Jack shaking hands with Ben on the front porch of the cabin? Was that just a goof by production failing to cover up the actor's real life tattoo? Why would they even do that, if they haven't made an effort to cover the other one on his shoulder which would have been easier to cover up anyway, when in fact they wrote that one into the story line?


I noticed the tattoo under his arm and wondered if it was a blooper or not. Want to see if we see it again.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

betts4 said:


> I noticed the tattoo under his arm and wondered if it was a blooper or not. Want to see if we see it again.


It showed up last week and got some discussion. See losteastereggs.blogspot.com, where they show that it was also shown in episode 1 of this season.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

jlb said:


> I thought the episode was going to end with the surprised look on Locke's face before the reveal.


I thought so too, and it would have PISSED ME OFF. Glad it didn't. 

Excellent episode.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

So...is there anyway we can tie in Locke's fall to the body that plummeted past Hurley's accountant's window in the first season episode, "Numbers?"


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

hefe said:


> So...is there anyway we can tie in Locke's fall to the body that plummeted past Hurley's accountant's window in the first season episode, "Numbers?"


. Well it IS possible they were in that building, I suppose...


----------



## Michael S (Jan 12, 2004)

I'm guessing that Lockes father got on island because I think he was on the same plane following John and John didn't know it. Because Ben did say he came from a metal box.


----------



## scottykempf (Dec 1, 2004)

You know, Lost will be really great when it is done and we can see the entire picture. We can get the DVD's, go back, and watch the whole story without interruptions. Unfortunately, watching it in real time week to week can get rather frustrating. I mean, the show can be great one week, bad the next, and the biggest problem is that we don't get to to see any of the motivations behind the character's actions. Sure, we keep watching for the plot, to get that nugget of information about the story that makes us keep coming back each week. But everything else is hidden, which is why we are scratching our heads and too often can't understand why no one talks to each other, or communicates any important information to each other. (I'm including communication between Ben's group and the Losties, as well as communication between the Losties.) Maybe I should just stop watching now and wait 2 years, then watch them when all is said and done. At least I won't be at the whim of the writers and have to wait through that hell called "summer break".


----------



## scottykempf (Dec 1, 2004)

Best line of the night=
Locke: "I'd say that that box better be big enough to imagine yourself another sub." LOL


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

[Hurley]
Woah!
Dude! I did not see that coming.
[/Hurley]

I suspected that Locke's father was somehow responsible for his being crippled but I didn't imagine that he threw John out an eight story window.

I felt for Locke, especially in the hospital scene but I also wanted to smack him for blowing up the sub.
Does that make sense?

Also Saydi planting the seeds with Alex about her mother.....


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

This was LOST at it's best. Unfortunately it hasn't been this good in a long long time and most of the audience has split. Too bad-This and Desmond's episode were top notch.


----------



## MNoelH (Mar 17, 2005)

I have a question and please forgive me because I'm not good with the names of the characters.

When Jack came into the room to talk to Kate, it appeared that Tom (?), his escort, secretly motioned to Jack that he was being watched. It also seemed like they were in on something together and he was warning him to be careful when talking to Kate. Could he be in on something with Jack and Juliet?


----------



## brianp6621 (Nov 22, 1999)

This was GREAT Lost. I am so glad it is back to where it was at the beginning. I got into the show late and was enthralled while catching up and by the time I got to real time (right at the beginning of this season) I was already starting to feel ehh.. Well this totally restored it.

And I don't know about you, but if I were on the island, Locke wouldn't even be allowed anywhere near the latrine without a guard. That man is on a mission to blow up the island, one super important thing at a time.


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

spikedavis said:


> This was LOST at it's best. Unfortunately it hasn't been this good in a long long time and most of the audience has split.


Do you have any audience numbers that show that *most* of the viewers have gone? I thought that the numbers had dropped from last year, but I had no idea that it had lost most of it's viewers.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

JYoung said:


> [Hurley]
> Woah!
> Dude! I did not see that coming.
> [/Hurley]
> ...


I was waiting for some thugs - associates of Locke's father - to beat him up. I didn't think his father was actually going to do it himself  Excellent scene.



> I felt for Locke, especially in the hospital scene but I also wanted to smack him for blowing up the sub.
> Does that make sense?


That absolutely makes sense. Locke is one of the best characters because he is so flawed. You just want to smack him, but you can't because you feel sorry for him. The actor (I don't know his name) plays the part really well.

I agree with another poster who said that Ben and Locke make a great combination.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

scottykempf said:


> Best line of the night=
> Locke: "I'd say that that box better be big enough to imagine yourself another sub." LOL


 :up: :up: :up:


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

MNoelH said:


> I have a question and please forgive me because I'm not good with the names of the characters.
> 
> When Jack came into the room to talk to Kate, it appeared that Tom (?), his escort, secretly motioned to Jack that he was being watched. It also seemed like they were in on something together and he was warning him to be careful when talking to Kate. Could he be in on something with Jack and Juliet?


Tom is the person that many people refer to as Mr. Friendly. Something was definitely up with that comment/gesture he made to Jack. Just not sure what...


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

MNoelH said:


> I have a question and please forgive me because I'm not good with the names of the characters.
> 
> When Jack came into the room to talk to Kate, it appeared that Tom (?), his escort, secretly motioned to Jack that he was being watched. It also seemed like they were in on something together and he was warning him to be careful when talking to Kate. Could he be in on something with Jack and Juliet?


I am assuming that Juliet was leaving with Jack? That seemed obvious to me, but if nobody else mentioned it, maybe i'm wrong?

-smak-


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

JMikeD said:


> Do you have any audience numbers that show that *most* of the viewers have gone? I thought that the numbers had dropped from last year, but I had no idea that it had lost most of it's viewers.


Well, most would be 50%+1 viewers, so i'm sure it hasn't lost that many.

The numbers have dropped, but to me look pretty decent for the later 10 pm time slot.

It's still in the top 20, and in the top 10 in the key demographics.

-smak-


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

I don't see why Locke blew up the sub, just so he could stay on the island. I mean, he could just stay there even if everyone else was rescued. Also wasn't the thing about Jack's trip was that it was one way? That the return navigation was all f'd up? So the sub would have been gone anyway. I suppose rescue search parties could have found the Island again, maybe, but WTF.

There's also most likely some sort of air traffic, if not on, at least over the island, obviously, because of the food drops. It's not like the Sub was it; end of story.

I mean, I love 'splosions and all, but even for Locke it was WAY out there (as well as blowing up the communications station). All Locke accomplished was being stuck on the island with people who hate his freaking guts for blowing up their way off.

Also, who was the character who untied Locke at the end? Wasn't he in a flashback of some sort? I can't place him.

I guess I'm just not quite as enthused about the story as many are.  But I've probably enjoyed the season more on the whole more than many, the way it sounds.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Not bad... Not bad...

Just how many Others are there? New ones keep popping out of the woodwork like bad guys in a kung fu movie. 

Can a person really survive an 8 story (80+ feet?) fall? Was there something on the ground to break Locke's fall?


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Peter000 said:


> Also, who was the character who untied Locke at the end? Wasn't he in a flashback of some sort? I can't place him.


He recruited Juliet.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

betts4 said:


> "We don't have a code for there is a man in the closet holding my daughter hostage, but I guess we should"


My personal fav, :up: :up:

I was very pleased to both learn a lot, see changes, get a few curves, and all of a sudden, it was over, it felt like 15 minutes went by.

wow..

Diane


----------



## WmReehill (Nov 29, 2005)

Well, at least the producers are following form from earlier this season, right after the A+ Desmond episode came a D- Jack/tattoo show; and accoring to Lostpedia, they are following the A++ Locke episode with a Poochie/Mrs. Poochie episode. Way to kill the flow guys.

Hi Mary!


----------



## mask2343 (Jan 6, 2003)

Glad to see that half the posts are not LOST complaints anymore.

A+++ episode. But why is he called the man from Tallahassee? 

Obviously, Locke can teach Ben something about the island. But does his knowledge stem from the encounter in season 1 with "the monster" or with what happened to him in the hatch explosion. Did Locke go back in time and talk to the Oracle too?

I think we'll all be presently surprised by the Paulo/Nikki episode next week. According to the official podcast, it is supposed to be eye opening.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

Peter000 said:


> <snip>
> 
> Also, who was the character who untied Locke at the end? Wasn't he in a flashback of some sort? I can't place him.
> 
> <snip>


That was Bat Manuel! And yes, as has been answered, he is the one that recruited Juliet away from the research place where she worked for her ex-husband, in the episode where the ex stepped in front of a bus.



smak said:


> I am assuming that Juliet was leaving with Jack? That seemed obvious to me, but if nobody else mentioned it, maybe i'm wrong?
> 
> -smak-


When John was in the closet with Alex, the guy talking to Ben mentioned something about "Juliet & Jack tomorrow..." Then later we find out Jack is leaving in the morning. Plus Juliet said in an earlier episode that Ben was letting her leave. And in this episode she thanked Ben for keeping his promise. I assumed that meant she was leaving with Jack.



MNoelH said:


> I have a question and please forgive me because I'm not good with the names of the characters.
> 
> When Jack came into the room to talk to Kate, it appeared that Tom (?), his escort, secretly motioned to Jack that he was being watched. It also seemed like they were in on something together and he was warning him to be careful when talking to Kate. Could he be in on something with Jack and Juliet?


Yes, it appeared to me that Tom reminded Jack that he was being watched, so to watch what he said to Kate.


----------



## Vendikarr (Feb 24, 2004)

Was the lady cop at the end of the episode Ana Lucia's mother? She looked familiar to me, and I thought that was why.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Peter000 said:


> I don't see why Locke blew up the sub, just so he could stay on the island. I mean, he could just stay there even if everyone else was rescued. Also wasn't the thing about Jack's trip was that it was one way? That the return navigation was all f'd up? So the sub would have been gone anyway. I suppose rescue search parties could have found the Island again, maybe, but WTF.
> 
> There's also most likely some sort of air traffic, if not on, at least over the island, obviously, because of the food drops. It's not like the Sub was it; end of story.
> 
> ...


I am wondering if the sub could have even left. Ben at one point was saying how he didn't know what he was going to do and that Locke solved that. He said something like 'jack and juliet are expecting to leave in an hour and I was sure how to handle it, but you made that easy'. I will have to go back and watch it again to get the correct words and nuances, but my impression was that something was actually wrong with the sub and it wouldn't go either to 'home' or come back to the island.

The air traffic has stopped - since the Hatch exploded there has been no communications with outside.

I am pretty sure the 'beacon' or such that allows the Others to be found by the airplane was blown up. By Locke. Now, at the moment this means no more air drops of food. So, um, Ben, I know you have had a lot on your mind...but maybe you should start thinking about rations and conserving the food you have.


----------



## danplaysbass (Jul 19, 2004)

Back on track BABY!!

I would have been so upset if they didn't show the last scene with Locke's dad in the compound. I was afraid it would be a cliffhanger.


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

Maybe this means nothing but isn't anyone wondering why Locke was soaking wet when we see him walking back from planting the explosive on the sub? I mean, he didn't have to go in the water at all in order to get in/out of the sub, so why did he? He did say something about being in the Navy so my thought was he piloted the sub somewhere to hide it then swam back and blew up something else to make it look like he blew up the sub. What did he blow up? I don't know...I'm just here to offer seemingly ridicules theories until you realize "hey this is Lost isn't it!"


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

stalemate said:


> I liked when the guy was putting Locke into the wheelchair and he said "I don't want to hear about what you can't do"
> 
> That whole scene was painful though


Locke still had major facial bruises, so it had to be a short time after the fall -- why was he being lifted out of bed so soon?


----------



## golfnut-n-nh (Nov 30, 2004)

I would concur that this was one of the best episodes. I am surprised that there has not been any talk about Ben's statement that he was born on the island.

Assuming that Ben is 40ish, the island has been inhabited since the mid 60's. Has Ben seen the upside and the downside (his inability the walk) of the island?

Maybe the answer is in the metal box. No, that's Locke's father in the metal box!!


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

wprager said:


> Locke still had major facial bruises, so it had to be a short time after the fall -- why was he being lifted out of bed so soon?


They may not have come from the fall...the bruises may be from plastic/facial surgery because of the fall. If he broke his jaw or something (and it looked like he did have some head injury - or surgery) the bruises may be from the surgery to repair.

Crazywater, I too was wondering about the soaking wet Locke issue. It was a fleeting question that got pushed behind some of the other thing going on, but it does make you wonder.

Did he plant some C4 inside AND outside of the sub? Your theory is more twisted and Lost like though.


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

betts4 said:


> I am wondering if the sub could have even left. Ben at one point was saying how he didn't know what he was going to do and that Locke solved that. He said something like 'jack and juliet are expecting to leave in an hour and I was sure how to handle it, but you made that easy'. I will have to go back and watch it again to get the correct words and nuances, but my impression was that something was actually wrong with the sub and it wouldn't go either to 'home' or come back to the island.
> 
> The air traffic has stopped - since the Hatch exploded there has been no communications with outside.
> 
> I am pretty sure the 'beacon' or such that allows the Others to be found by the airplane was blown up. By Locke. Now, at the moment this means no more air drops of food. So, um, Ben, I know you have had a lot on your mind...but maybe you should start thinking about rations and conserving the food you have.


Ben did not want Jack or Julliete to leave, but being a "man of his word" he did not want to stop them. Locke blowing up the Sub will keep them from leaving, Ben's problem is solved.


----------



## danplaysbass (Jul 19, 2004)

crazywater said:


> Maybe this means nothing but isn't anyone wondering why Locke was soaking wet when we see him walking back from planting the explosive on the sub? I mean, he didn't have to go in the water at all in order to get in/out of the sub, so why did he? He did say something about being in the Navy so my thought was he piloted the sub somewhere to hide it then swam back and blew up something else to make it look like he blew up the sub. What did he blow up? I don't know...I'm just here to offer seemingly ridicules theories until you realize "hey this is Lost isn't it!"


You know, thats a good question. I was wondering that last night but it was late so I forgot about it.

Locke didn't say he was in the Navy. It was an offhanded remark to Ben when he told Locke that subs are hard to drive. Somehow I think the others would have known if Locke was in the Navy.

As for the sub, it would be pretty easy to tell from the debris whether he actually blew it or not. I guess we'll see.


----------



## Lee L (Oct 1, 2003)

I think Locke blew up the sub. I think he and Ben want the same thing, for everyone to stay on the island. Ben knows this and realizes he can use John to make that happen and Ben can still have kept his promise to Jack and Juliette. He is the winer all around. Well, other than the pesky problem about needing food drops so everyone who is stuck there can live.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

You know, it's still possible that Ben *is* Jacob. Seeing the "Mr. Soze" nickname jogged my memory of The Usual Suspects. Ben is a master manipulator, so he could have manipualted everyone into thinking that there is this "Jacob". Everything seems to be pointing to The Island being completely isolated, and Ben -- being born on the Island -- is being singled out. In a way, it almost seems unnecessary for there to be someone else.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

WOW! What an awesome episode!

I love the notion that Locke's father may be the "Real Sawyer".

And now, a bit of "Real World" Lost co-incidence...

I'm driving to work this morning, thinking about this great lost episode when, a very large bucket truck (cherry picker) with the following logo on it passes me going the other way: "M. C. Craney Tree Service"

Tongue in cheek reference to this guy?:










The Lost chain of co-incidence spills over into the real world!!


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

hefe said:


> So...is there anyway we can tie in Locke's fall to the body that plummeted past Hurley's accountant's window in the first season episode, "Numbers?"


Actually, now that I think about it, this isn't possible. Locke had been in the wheelchair for four years, but Hurley only won the Lottery about a year ago.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

mask2343 said:


> ...I think we'll all be presently surprised by the Paulo/Nikki episode next week. According to the official podcast, it is supposed to be eye opening.





WmReehill said:


> Well, at least the producers are following form from earlier this season, right after the A+ Desmond episode came a D- Jack/tattoo show; and accoring to Lostpedia, they are following the A++ Locke episode with a Poochie/Mrs. Poochie episode. Way to kill the flow guys.
> 
> Hi Mary!


Please don't refer to previews without spoilerizing. I know you're not revealing details, but some of us want to be completely surprised


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

crazywater said:


> Maybe this means nothing but isn't anyone wondering why Locke was soaking wet when we see him walking back from planting the explosive on the sub?...


The inside of an old sub is very humid.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

stalemate said:


> Apparently I'm going to need to be hit over the head with this one.


There have been little nods from JJ Abrams in Lost that harken back to Alias. 47 was a mysterious number that appeared in many places on Alias.


----------



## thedudeabides (Aug 7, 2003)

Great episode.

Here's a question: isn't there still a boat somewhere? What did Ben, Jack, etc. use to get back to the big island a few weeks ago at the end of Jack's flashback episode? I thought it was a boat, but maybe it was the sub???


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

mask2343 said:


> I think we'll all be presently surprised by the Paulo/Nikki episode next week. According to the official podcast, it is supposed to be eye opening.


They die horribly?

I can't wait!


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

thedudeabides said:


> Great episode.
> 
> Here's a question: isn't there still a boat somewhere? What did Ben, Jack, etc. use to get back to the big island a few weeks ago at the end of Jack's flashback episode? I thought it was a boat, but maybe it was the sub???


Clearly, it was a boat, not a sub


----------



## Lee L (Oct 1, 2003)

SOemthing else I forgot about. Does anyone know what song Jack was playing on the piano? My wife swears it was part of the love theme arrangement of Twin Peaks. I could hear similar chords, but without comparing them, I can;t be sure. Any other opinions.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

jlb said:


> There have been little nods from JJ Abrams in Lost that harken back to Alias. 47 was a mysterious number that appeared in many places on Alias.


Thanks, I needed that hit too. I didn't get it either. I never watched Alias, but maybe someday.....


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

mask2343 said:


> I think we'll all be presently surprised by the ******** episode next week. According to the official podcast, it is supposed to be eye opening.


How do you know it's a ******** episode?


----------



## Philly Bill (Oct 6, 2004)

spikedavis said:


> This was LOST at it's best. Unfortunately it hasn't been this good in a long long time and most of the audience has split.


Wow. I dont agree with this at all. I think just as many people discuss LOST as ever before.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

The magic box.
Reminds me of the classic "Forbidden Planet" where the extinct civilization of the Krell on Altair 4 had developed a machine that would allow the user to create ANYTHING that they could imagine.
There were unexpected consequences.

LOVED the episode


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

Bierboy said:


> Please don't refer to previews without spoilerizing. I know you're not revealing details, but some of us want to be completely surprised


Please don't quote preview spoilers.

You too, *philw* *1776*


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

You know....I was reading a thread over at 4815162342.com and someone hypothesized that maybe they have all gone back in time....

If we run with that, it might explain why Ben hasn't healed....He was born on the Island. He has no prior life pre-Island to go back to. With this theory, if they have all gone back in time, then it would explain why Locke can walk again.....


----------



## Philly Bill (Oct 6, 2004)

So.. maybe the magic box IS magic.  Then they can just wish themselves some food. Or a case of tequila or something. A couple bags of ice. Even some stale marshmellow peeps for easter. :up:

I wonder if it works in reverse though? Can you put something in and wish it away? Sort of like the transporter on Star Trek?

Yeah, I don't think the box is big enough to wish for a new sub (great line)... but who needs a sub if you can wish whatever you wanted?


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

betts4 said:


> Thanks, I needed that hit too. I didn't get it either. I never watched Alias, but maybe someday.....


Yo should check out this brief thread with other Lost/Alias Easter Eggs....

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=344416&highlight=lost+alias

Warning, some of the information could be spoilerish for Alias if you have not seen it yet.....


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I am still thinking about that fall thru the window and how it blew me away. I didn't think the paralysis was psychological (this theory was batted around in season one) but didn't think it was that incredible. I expected a car crash or gun shot from his hunting conning Dad. 

I also wonder if the bruises on Lockes face at the end of the episode were from Jack beating the crap out of him for blowing up the sub. Or maybe it was Juliet that beat him.


----------



## thedudeabides (Aug 7, 2003)

philw1776 said:


> Clearly, it was a boat, not a sub


OK, so it was a boat. Now that the sub is gone, why can't Jack and Juliet leave on the boat?

I'll try to answer my own question: if the boat is now the only way to get to the Hydra station (where Jack, Sawyer and Kate were being held), and if there is no way to get back to the island since communications are down (per Ben's statement to Locke), then I guess they can't afford to lose both the boat AND the sub. One is OK, but not both. Any thoughts?


----------



## supham (Jan 15, 2003)

If it takes a sub to get off the island...... where is Michele and Walt?


----------



## kdelande (Dec 17, 2001)

Vendikarr said:


> Was the lady cop at the end of the episode Ana Lucia's mother? She looked familiar to me, and I thought that was why.


She was the ADA's wife in Daybreak, if that helps.

KD


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

supham said:


> If it takes a sub to get off the island...... where is Michele and Walt?


Please, we can only hope that the writers have forgotten about those annoying characters. If I hear, "Waaaaallt! My BOY!" one more time...


----------



## kdelande (Dec 17, 2001)

betts4 said:


> I am wondering if the sub could have even left. Ben at one point was saying how he didn't know what he was going to do and that Locke solved that. He said something like 'jack and juliet are expecting to leave in an hour and I was sure how to handle it, but you made that easy'. I will have to go back and watch it again to get the correct words and nuances, but my impression was that something was actually wrong with the sub and it wouldn't go either to 'home' or come back to the island.


Nothing wrong with the sub, but with the beacon gone from the anomaly, the sub can't return once it has left.

KD


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

kdelande said:


> Nothing wrong with the sub, but with the beacon gone from the anomaly, the sub can't return once it has left.
> 
> KD


I just realized something awful!
Without the beacon, no more food drops.
No food drops, and we'll see an anorexic Hurley!


----------



## winks2 (Apr 28, 2006)

If Jack and Juliet were the only one's leaving the Island and no one would be able to return to the Island due to the destruction of the communication station. Doesn't that mean that either there were three leaving the Island (one being someone who can pilot the sub) or was Jack or Juliet to pilot it? Even if they made it back to the "real world" wouldn't their be an investigation as to where this Submarine came from that was piloted by someone other than a military group?


----------



## Bryanmc (Sep 5, 2000)

golfnut-n-nh said:


> I am surprised that there has not been any talk about Ben's statement that he was born on the island.


Probably because it was mentioned earlier in the season.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

Wow, three pages and nobody has speculated that its not really Locke's father at the end, and the magic box is just a box? Remember, Jack saw his dad, Hurley saw his imaginary friend, Mr. Echo saw his brother, and others saw a soaking wet Walt that wasn't real. Its just the Island showing people what they want: somehow Ben got the Island to whip up Locke's dad. Somehow, I don't think Locke will fall for it (even though he has never seen any of those people.)


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

When I heard about the "magic box" I had this joke in the back of my mind:

_A ******* family from the hills was visiting the city and they were in a mall for the first time in their lives. The father and son were strolling around while the wife shopped. They were amazed by almost everything they saw, but especially by two shiny, silver walls that could move apart and then slide back together again. The boy asked, "Paw, what's 'at?"

The father, never having seen an elevator, responded, "Son, I dunno. I ain't never seen anything like that in my whole life, I ain't got no idea'r what it is."

While the boy and his father were watching with amazement, a fat old lady in a wheel chair rolled up to the moving walls and pressed a button. The walls opened and the lady rolled between them into a small room. The walls closed and the boy and his father watched the small circular number above the walls light up sequentially. They continued to watch until it reached the last number and then the numbers began to light in the reverse order. Then the walls opened up again and a gorgeous, voluptuous 24 year-old blonde woman stepped out.

The father, not taking his eyes off the young woman, said quietly to his son, Boy, go git yer Momma.
_

:up: Awesome episode!


----------



## Chibbie (Jan 16, 2006)

stevieleej said:


> He really didn't even need to get into the sub to blow it up but they sure went to some trouble to show him walking around in it almost like he knew where he was going.


He probably wanted to make sure that there was no one (i.e. Jack and Juliet) in the sub before he blew it up.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

stevieleej said:


> There was no reason for him to be soaked. He really didn't even need to get into the sub to blow it up but they sure went to some trouble to show him walking around in it almost like he knew where he was going.
> 
> I'd go with the idea that he moved the sub. Swam back, and planted the explosives by the dock. Debris? Just like other issues on Lost - no one will look for it or talk about it.


I noticed that once Locke entered the sub, he seemed quite familiar with it. He immediately reached up and flipped "on" a light switch before proceeding to the engine room. I wouldn't know there would be a light switch by the roof.

I like the theory of Locke moving the sub then swimming to plant the C4 at the dock. The explosion didn't look or sound like a metal cylinder but more like a wooden dock. And I would've expected to see bubbles as the sub filled with water and sunk.

That Locke likes to blow things up -- blow 'em up REAL good!


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

WmReehill said:


> Well, at least the producers are following form from earlier this season, right after the A+ Desmond episode came a D- Jack/tattoo show; and accoring to Lostpedia, they are following the A++ Locke episode with a
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


Dude, spoilerize comments related to previews.

And may I suggest you not watch next week. Then you won't be let down.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> Can a person really survive an 8 story (80+ feet?) fall? Was there something on the ground to break Locke's fall?


It is possible, though it doesn't happen very often. Recently, there was a lot of press coverage about a skydiving instructor that fell 4,000 meters and survived with just a punctured lung and some bruises. A blackberry bush broke his fall. Here's a link to that story - and here's the video from his helmet cam.

Loved the episode tonight!

If the "magic box" can produce anything, they should wish for a new beacon (among other things).


----------



## Granny (Mar 29, 2005)

I liked the look on Locke's "father's" face. Hard to tell which one was more horrified.


----------



## thedudeabides (Aug 7, 2003)

stevieleej said:


> There was no reason for him to be soaked. He really didn't even need to get into the sub to blow it up but they sure went to some trouble to show him walking around in it almost like he knew where he was going.
> 
> I'd go with the idea that he moved the sub. Swam back, and planted the explosives by the dock. Debris? Just like other issues on Lost - no one will look for it or talk about it.


He was wet because its hot and sweaty down there. The sub is gone. Get over it.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

jpicard said:


> Did anyone notice the rose tattoo on Jack's left forearm right after Locke was looking through the binoculars at Jack shaking hands with Ben on the front porch of the cabin? Was that just a goof by production failing to cover up the actor's real life tattoo? Why would they even do that, if they haven't made an effort to cover the other one on his shoulder which would have been easier to cover up anyway, when in fact they wrote that one into the story line?


The sub's name was Christina Rose. Duh!


----------



## thedudeabides (Aug 7, 2003)

Philosofy said:


> Wow, three pages and nobody has speculated that its not really Locke's father at the end, and the magic box is just a box? Remember, Jack saw his dad, Hurley saw his imaginary friend, Mr. Echo saw his brother, and others saw a soaking wet Walt that wasn't real. Its just the Island showing people what they want: somehow Ben got the Island to whip up Locke's dad. Somehow, I don't think Locke will fall for it (even though he has never seen any of those people.)


I totally agree. My first reaction was "no way this dude is real. Its the island." But, you never know, so I'm keeping an open mind.


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

cheesesteak said:


> Can a person really survive an 8 story (80+ feet?) fall? Was there something on the ground to break Locke's fall?


well, i think he did land on grass... and it's unlikely, but definitely not out of the realm of possibility. Though, you would expect them to be a vegetable of some sort, with all the unavoidable head trauma. but even that is not totally implausable. The thing with the human body and injuries, you can perform the same manuever 10 times, and you might get 10 different injuries. there are no absolutes when it comes to the human body. even when someone is dead, there is the .05% chance they miraculously come back to life.



wprager said:


> Locke still had major facial bruises, so it had to be a short time after the fall -- why was he being lifted out of bed so soon?


there was nothing techincally right about that scene. i think the scene implied it took place within 2 months of the accident. with the facial bruising, and the police talking to him... it makes sense. physically, and physiologically, he was completely off that timeline.

if he was paraplegic, 2 months out, he would be immobilized in some kind of plastic flakjacket, not kicking back in bed like he was. He would need a catheter of some kind, cuz his bladder control would be whacked. He might be in an ICU, with plenty of IV's. let's assume he's past the initial critical stages, and he's more stable... he would need PT, he wouldn't be able to sit up on his own, as he would lose some trunk control. focus would be on bed mobility(rolling and learning how to scoot in bed with only upper body), sitting up, upper extremity strengthening, and dealing with spasticity issues.

And NEVER, in a gazillion years, no matter who you talk to, would ANYBODY EVER pick up a patient like that, by themselves, to do a dependent assist transfer. i dont know if the dude was PT(physical therapy) or nursing... if he was nursing, nurses are too lazy to even think about getting someone out of bed (inside PT joke, need to find a nurse? look in the break room) and if he was PT, he would be fired on the spot and never find work again. Besides, PT would be more focused on TEACHING him how to get into a wheelchair. if they just wanted him to sit up, it would be at the edge of bed, probably wouldn't be able to take more than 5 minutes without puking due to dizziness. but if it were a max assist transfer, it would be minimum 2 people, maybe 3... but if they are max assist, we wouldn't put them in a wheelchair anyways.

But, let's say this is our plan... and we decide to pick him up... for a paralyzed guy, he had pretty good strength... 
as he is being lifted and carried, you see lOcke holding up his legs in the air... they should be flaccid, limp. and then when the PT put him down in the chair, and was putting down the footrests, you see Locke hold up his feet while he puts the footrests down. totally off. they should be dangling, and the PT would need to hold the feet out of the way so he doesn't bang them against the metal.

Anyways... that's how the mind of a physical therapist works when they see that scene, or any scene involving PT. My wife (we are both PT's) noticed right away as well, Locke's amazing strength post paralysis.

Good ep.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

Possible production error: the contents of the fridge at Ben's place are different each time he opens the door.

So do they refer to the plane as "metal box"? I kinda like that theory.

Also, Locke looks hideously funny with that red fuzz on his skull. Makes me think of Trump going through the last stages of baldness.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

My wife and I both expected Jack to rip off his face mask "MI-style" and reveal it's not him throughout the episode - mainly during "Jack"/Kate scenes.

Anybody else had this feeling?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

RE: the sub and Locke's familiarity...

He plays wargames. Regularly. At least on paper, he'd likely be familiar with all sorts of submarines. And like Hurley, who's "somewhat of a warrior", he's a commander in the Navy.

Locke's "father" did make me curious though. Do con men actually refer to themselves as con men? "I'm a con man". I would think they'd have clever euphemisms for it, like, "I always work the angles", or even call themselves grifters. "I'm a con man?" That just seems odd to me.

All that said, I loved, loved, LOVED this episode. Has there been a bad Locke-centric episode?

Greg


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

I can't tell from reading the comments here. Does everyone believe this man to be Locke's real father or is that just an easy way to refer to him?

I was under the impression that he was not really his father that was just part of the kidney con.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> Can a person really survive an 8 story (80+ feet?) fall? Was there something on the ground to break Locke's fall?


Well, that was really only the 2nd longest fall Locke has survived, so I'm thinking it's not that big a deal.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

gchance said:


> Locke's "father" did make me curious though. Do con men actually refer to themselves as con men? "I'm a con man". I would think they'd have clever euphemisms for it, like, "I always work the angles", or even call themselves grifters. "I'm a con man?" That just seems odd to me.


I think that was probably more for the benefit of the audience. We know of Sawyer as a con man, not a grifter. There may be viewers who don't know what a grifter is and wouldn't relate it to Sawyer. I'm pretty sure, by revealing that he's a con man, in those terms, that we're supposed to realize there is some connection with Sawyer, probably that he is the "real Saywer," as has been speculated.


----------



## goblue97 (May 12, 2005)

stalemate said:


> I can't tell from reading the comments here. Does everyone believe this man to be Locke's real father or is that just an easy way to refer to him?
> 
> I was under the impression that he was not really his father that was just part of the kidney con.


I've been wondering the same thing but I wasn't about to admit it (until now of course).


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

danterner said:


> <snip>
> 
> If the "magic box" can produce anything, they should wish for a new beacon (among other things).


At first glance I thought you said they should wish for bacon!



DUDE_NJX said:


> The sub's name was Christina Rose. Duh!


And maybe Haywire was friends with Hurley from the Asylum!


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

I think he really is his father: that's why the kidney matched. And I also think Locke's dad is the guy that conned Sawyer's mother.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

When Locke went to go confront his dad, for some reason I started thinking that whatever was going on that Locke's dad and this woman he was going to marry were both working a con. Maybe her son...for whatever reason. Especially when he was like, "there's the phone. call her." I was thinking, yeah, she has to be in on it too. Then out of nowhere WHAM! I totally wasn't expecting that!

I thought the detective in Locke's hospital room was AL's mother.

I also think that whatever they might keep in that "magic box" might take on the form of black smoke when it gets out. A magic box that lets you see whatever you want to see seems strangely similar to the black smoke that's been hovering around the island.


----------



## tanstaafl (Oct 22, 2002)

Something that just occurred to me, and forgive me if someone has come up with this before.

We have wondered how anyone managed to survive the initial crash at all, much less survive with at most minor injuries.

Suppose they didn't exactly. These people "survived" in that they didn't die instantly on impact, but they were all still injured. Badly. Badly enough that they would have died in a few minutes at most.

Except the Island healed them. All of them. Just like it healed Locke.

Yeah, the Marshal was injured and died but he had an actual piece of metal stuck in him. Maybe that was beyond what the Island could deal with.

As for the people who have been injured and killed since then, maybe it only heals injuries that exist when you arrive, not injuries sustained once there. That would explain why it didn't heal Ben.

I dunno. Just speculating here...


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

You really shouldn't be allowed to introduce a "magic box" into a series. It potentially gives the writers carte blanche to pull ridiculousness out of their armpits and say "The magic box did it!"


----------



## Fraser+Dief (Nov 18, 2005)

betts4 said:


> So Sawyers a con man, Lockes Dad is a con man, Kate has run some cons....


I think it's pretty clear that Locke's dad is going to connect back to Sawyer, either as the guy who conned his mother, or as his dad.

There's probably only 5 dads combined for *everyone* on the Island. 



stalemate said:


> I liked when the guy was putting Locke into the wheelchair and he said "I don't want to hear about what you can't do"
> 
> That whole scene was painful though


Yup. It's why Locke is still my favourite character. He's been through so much #$%^ in his life, that I don't care what he does. He deserves a little something to happen for him.


----------



## scottykempf (Dec 1, 2004)

Oh, Oh, I know. We can have a magic box that when you open it, the thing that you imagined is inside it. And there could be this magic turtle........... LOL


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

tanstaafl said:


> Something that just occurred to me, and forgive me if someone has come up with this before.
> 
> We have wondered how anyone managed to survive the initial crash at all, much less survive with at most minor injuries.
> 
> ...


I like this theory, ,except that Jack had a huge wound of some sorts when he woke up and Kate had to stitch it up for him. Locke also had a pretty big gash across his eye and you can still see the scar from that.


----------



## tivoboyjr (Apr 28, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> I thought the detective in Locke's hospital room was AL's mother.


I thought so, too, but did some digging, and it isn't the same person.

Detective Mason was played by Marlene Forte:
http://www.tv.com/lost/the-man-from-tallahassee/episode/939529/cast.html

AnaLu's mom, Captain Teresa Cortez, was played by Rachel Ticotin:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001797/


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> You really shouldn't be allowed to introduce a "magic box" into a series. It potentially gives the writers carte blanche to pull ridiculousness out of their armpits and say "The magic box did it!"


Ever watched Alias? I stopped watching when I realized that at any time they could bring a dead character back to life and say "Oh, they weren't really dead, someone was impersonating them and that impersonator is dead."


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

unicorngoddess said:


> I like this theory, ,except that Jack had a huge wound of some sorts when he woke up and Kate had to stitch it up for him. Locke also had a pretty big gash across his eye and you can still see the scar from that.


There was also the guy that got sucked into the fan thing of the plane, and others that had visible damages as you watch Jack run amongst them.

And they wouldn't/shouldn't even have survived crashing from 40,000 feet - this has been said before.


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

hefe said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by cheesesteak
> Can a person really survive an 8 story (80+ feet?) fall? Was there something on the ground to break Locke's fall?
> 
> Well, that was really only the 2nd longest fall Locke has survived, so I'm thinking it's not that big a deal.


well, the plane crash falling from 40000 ft and surviving has been attributed to the "island forces".

Locke's fall was pre-island, and if you apply real world physics and physiology, he should be dead, or at best, in a full body cast.

legitimate question.... if you take away the fact "it's just a tv show"

EDIT TO ADD: just NOW seeing the winky... heh, heh...


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Didn't Ben mention the "magic box" as Locke was rooting through the fridge? A fridge can be like a magic box. You open the door and PRESTO! There's some chicken! Then you open it again and there's beer! Maybe next time there'll be pie!

And as far as intellectualizing about surviving an 8-storey fall, there was a guy recently who was running down a stairwell at a hotel and smashed through the 16th storey window and landed on a 2nd-floor awning and survived.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Philosofy said:


> I think he really is his father: that's why the kidney matched. And I also think Locke's dad is the guy that conned Sawyer's mother.


Taking this a step further: Now that we know Locke's dad is a cold-blooded murderer (and has killed for the very reason that a con is turning bad), it's possible (rank speculation I know) that if he is TRS, *he* killed little Jimmy Ford's parents and made it look like a murder-suicide.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

jlb said:


> You know....I was reading a thread over at 4815162342.com and someone hypothesized that maybe they have all gone back in time....
> 
> If we run with that, it might explain why Ben hasn't healed....He was born on the Island. He has no prior life pre-Island to go back to. With this theory, if they have all gone back in time, then it would explain why Locke can walk again.....


Interesting theory, but then wouldn't Claire have no longer been pregnant? I've believed since Desmond's first appearance at the beginning of season 2, however, that time is not what it seems on the island.


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

betts4 said:


> I remember that reference but thought that it was maybe just another way to connect them all.
> 
> So Sawyers a con man, Lockes Dad is a con man, Kate has run some cons....


The writers are con men. 

Sorry, I have to disagree with the general consensus; I'm finding this season is beginning to seem a bit ridiculous.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Another theory about the end of the show: That really is Locke's dad (not hallucination), he is one of the big dogs running the whole island (along with Widmore, as has been speculated before), and he's just acting scared to get to Locke somehow.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Peter000 said:


> I don't see why Locke blew up the sub, just so he could stay on the island. I mean, he could just stay there even if everyone else was rescued. Also wasn't the thing about Jack's trip was that it was one way? That the return navigation was all f'd up? So the sub would have been gone anyway. I suppose rescue search parties could have found the Island again, maybe, but WTF.
> 
> There's also most likely some sort of air traffic, if not on, at least over the island, obviously, because of the food drops. It's not like the Sub was it; end of story.
> 
> I mean, I love 'splosions and all, but even for Locke it was WAY out there (as well as blowing up the communications station). All Locke accomplished was being stuck on the island with people who hate his freaking guts for blowing up their way off.


Just a theory, but maybe it's because Ben "admitted" to Locke that the submarine was how he controlled the others. If Jack left on the sub, even if it never returned, the possibility would still be there, thus allowing Ben to maintain control. Locke would think it critical to publicly destroy the sub if he hopes to undercut Ben's control. Of course, based on what we later learned, this might be exaclty what Ben intended, and his "admission" was probably just BS.

Another possible explanation is that Locke did not really destroy the sub, as has been mentioned in other posts.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

bruinfan said:


> well, the plane crash falling from 40000 ft and surviving has been attributed to the "island forces".
> 
> Locke's fall was pre-island, and if you apply real world physics and physiology, he should be dead, or at best, in a full body cast.
> 
> ...


Yes, don't forget Mr. Winky. 

And don't oversell the fall from the plane...there's no way that plane was at 40,000 feet.


----------



## lordargent (Nov 12, 2002)

tanstaafl said:


> Except the Island healed them. All of them. Just like it healed Locke.


So, who is going to be the new Kai?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

markz said:


> > Originally Posted by *danterner*
> > <snip>
> >
> > If the "magic box" can produce anything, they should wish for a new beacon (among other things).
> ...


Ooh - bacon! Great idea! I'd definitely list that in the "among other things" catch-all. In fact, now my mind is spinning as I think about all the steps they could take with the magic box...

Step One: Cut a hole in the box...


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

I thought the "magic box" was a metaphor. The question is if you could have anything you want....The answer expected was "I'd like to put my hands around the neck of the SOB who put me in my wheelchair"


----------



## mask2343 (Jan 6, 2003)

Facts we ALL have to accept:

-The sub is gone.

-It IS Locke's dad (which is why the kidney matched)

-Paulo and Nikki are probably here to stay

-If you're gonna read these boards, your gonna find out about the previews. 

But seriously, when has LOST ever shown us something then later told us it wasn't what we thought. I'm trying to understand why everyone always thinks stuff like "the sub isn't blown up" or "Boone isn't really dead". The only real surprise like that was Ben being the leader of the others. This show is more of a "don't show them much and let them speculate" approach.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

mask2343 said:


> Facts we ALL have to accept:
> 
> -The sub is gone.


Perhaps, but I rewatched that scene, and it does seem a little odd.

Locke is indeed dripping wet when they find him. He is completely soaked, not just pit-stained like from sweat, but soaked from head to toe. When he enters the sub, he is completely dry.

And the angle they show the explosion from hides where the sub is behind Locke's head. You never see the sub blow up.

Now, it may be something other than Locke moved the sub, and maybe we have a huge continuity error, but something is strange there.


----------



## mask2343 (Jan 6, 2003)

The sub is gone.


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

mask2343 said:


> Facts we ALL have to accept:
> 
> -It IS Locke's dad (which is why the kidney matched)


I'm no doctor, but isn't it possible to receive a kidney transplant from someone who is not your biological father?

I'm willing to go along with it being Locke's real dad but I'm going to need something more than the kidney to go on.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

I've been wrong before but I think Locke being wet is being made too big of a deal out of. He was UNDERWATER, and ON A DOCK. They probably just cut a scene where he planted the explosives on the hull or swam out to something or tried to hide under the dock or something.


----------



## mask2343 (Jan 6, 2003)

stalemate said:


> I'm no doctor, but isn't it possible to receive a kidney transplant from someone who is not your biological father?
> 
> I'm willing to go along with it being Locke's real dad but I'm going to need something more than the kidney to go on.


He sought his REAL son out because there is a better than average chance that he is a match. It wasn't some con man knocking on random people's door claiming that they are their father and hoping that they are a match for a kidney.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

mask2343 said:


> The sub is gone.


Perhaps, but doesn't it seem possible that there is something else going on there? There must have been something he did that we didn't see.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

cwoody222 said:


> I've been wrong before but I think Locke being wet is being made too big of a deal out of. He was UNDERWATER, and ON A DOCK. They probably just cut a scene where he planted the explosives on the hull or swam out to something or tried to hide under the dock or something.


That could very well be.

But...

What fun is that?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

mask2343 said:


> He sought his REAL son out because there is a better than average chance that he is a match. It wasn't some con man knocking on random people's door claiming that they are their father and hoping that they are a match for a kidney.


If he really wasn't Locke's father, he would have sold the kidney.


----------



## mask2343 (Jan 6, 2003)

You all really have to listen to the Official podcast. The producers always make fun of the fans who look into everything like us.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

I, too, think something's up with the sub. I never noticed that Locke was soaked though. But, as the scenes played out in front of me, and after Alex flat out told him he was being played I started thinking: Locke needs to think to do something COMPLETELY unexpected. I guess we'll have to wait and see though.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

mask2343 said:


> You all really have to listen to the Official podcast. The producers always make fun of the fans who look into everything like us.


I do. I listen to every one. Haven't gotten to this week's yet.

They also admit to putting in easter eggs for people to find. It's all in fun.


----------



## Magister (Oct 17, 2004)

mask2343 said:


> Facts we ALL have to accept:
> snip


Agreed...

I will conceed I was suprised to see his 'dad' in there. Loved the episode..


----------



## lonwolf615 (May 19, 2004)

bruinfan: great post. This being Lost, one has to wonder if all you mention could really be the result of careless writing, or could it have been done deliberately? That opens up a whole 'nother can o worms though... 
After reading your post, I can't help thinking the whole hospital scene is more important than it first seems.


----------



## mask2343 (Jan 6, 2003)

hefe said:


> I do. I listen to every one. Haven't gotten to this week's yet.
> 
> They also admit to putting in easter eggs for people to find. It's all in fun.


Easter eggs are fun but don't change the plot. Things like the numbers or the connections between characters.

Speculating on whether obvious scenes and plots are tricking us gets as tiresome as complaining about spoilers.


----------



## Lee L (Oct 1, 2003)

mask2343 said:


> You all really have to listen to the Official podcast. The producers always make fun of the fans who look into everything like us.


Hey, its their own darn fault for making a show so complex.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

goblue97 said:


> I've been wondering the same thing but I wasn't about to admit it (until now of course).


Me three.


----------



## mask2343 (Jan 6, 2003)

lonwolf615 said:


> After reading your post, I can't help thinking the whole hospital scene is more important than it first seems.


My take on the hospital scene is to show us how TERRIBLE life in a wheelchair would be for Locke. Once he sat down once, he'd have to be in it for the rest of his life and he knew this. THIS is the main reason he blew up the sub. So he didn't have to go back to the wheelchair.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

hefe said:


> ...There must have been something he did that we didn't see.


There's ALWAYS something someone did that we didn't see on Lost.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

skanter said:


> The writers are con men.
> 
> Sorry, I have to disagree with the general consensus; I'm finding this season is beginning to seem a bit ridiculous.


And yet, you agree with "An Inconvenient Truth"


----------



## mitkraft (Feb 21, 2003)

JYoung said:


> I suspected that Locke's father was somehow responsible for his being crippled but I didn't imagine that he threw John out an eight story window.


This is an opinion I just don't understand. I've seen other's also say they didn't think he'd kill him locke himself. But this is a man who pretty much STOLE a KIDNEY from somebody he otherwise wanted nothing to do with. Do people really think there is THAT much gap between someone who would do that and someone who would kill somebody with their own hands to save their butt? Because, in my mind anyways, once he stole Locke's kidney I believed he was capable of just about any kind of evil. I saw the push out the window coming the instant they framed the fist scene with Locke and the window.

Well in response to



mask2343 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I think we'll all be presently surprised by the Paulo/Nikki episode next week. According to the official podcast, it is supposed to be eye opening.


I say:



Spoiler



I heard something in the previews that made me believe there were some traitors or others in with the beach group. That combined with the hint that Paolo and Nikki are next weeks focus and with what I've heard hinted at from podcasts (that they will be important) I'm betting that they are traitors. They are going to turn out to be others or darma or both.





betts4 said:


> The air traffic has stopped - since the Hatch exploded there has been no communications with outside.
> 
> I am pretty sure the 'beacon' or such that allows the Others to be found by the airplane was blown up.


Everybody seems to have latched on to this. Is this something that was said in the show or by the produces or is it purely speculation? If not, I'm going to go on record and say that I don't believe the air traffic (i.e. airplanes and food drops) has stopped. I bet they are still comming and probably don't need a beacon from the island. Also don't forget about the radio tower that was originally broadcasting the numbers. I don't think they've found that one have they? Or am I forgetting a major plot point? The radio tower with the numbers and the communications building can't be the same because Rousseau said she'd never been to the communications building but she's the one who put the distress call on the tower that was originally broadcasting the numbers.



crazywater said:


> Maybe this means nothing but isn't anyone wondering why Locke was soaking wet when we see him walking back from planting the explosive on the sub?


I just thought it was because he put the C4 on the outside. He swam over to it and attached it to the hull. If it's remote controlled then maybe it wouldn't read through the hull. If it was timer or something, maybe he didn't want to risk not being able to get out of the sub fast enough.



cheesesteak said:


> You really shouldn't be allowed to introduce a "magic box" into a series. It potentially gives the writers carte blanche to pull ridiculousness out of their armpits and say "The magic box did it!"


Maybe it isn't really a magic box. Maybe that was just a euphemism Ben was using since he was going to produce Locke's father. One can hope.



mqpickles said:


> Taking this a step further: Now that we know Locke's dad is a cold-blooded murderer (and has killed for the very reason that a con is turning bad), it's possible (rank speculation I know) that if he is TRS, *he* killed little Jimmy Ford's parents and made it look like a murder-suicide.


I think its highly probable that Lockes father is the real Sawyer, but there is no good reason to make him the killer of sawyers dad and mom. Not to mention given the way we saw it from Sawyer's eyes (under the bed) its pretty sure that it was a murder suicide. Remember, Sawyer was under the bed when his dad sat on it and shot himself.



mask2343 said:


> Facts we ALL have to accept:
> 
> ..........
> 
> -If you're gonna read these boards, your gonna find out about the previews.


I think if we ALL HAD TO ACCEPT IT then there wouldn't be a rule saying to spoiler anything not in the current and prior episodes. I really hate it when people who don't care so much if they are spoiled try to tell everyone else that they just need to "Accept it" when its clearly one of the rules of the forum.


----------



## lonwolf615 (May 19, 2004)

mask2343 said:


> My take on the hospital scene is to show us how TERRIBLE life in a wheelchair would be for Locke. Once he sat down once, he'd have to be in it for the rest of his life and he knew this. THIS is the main reason he blew up the sub. So he didn't have to go back to the wheelchair.


Thats how I took it at first, but after reading bruinfan...its hard to believe they overlooked the part about his legs.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

mitkraft said:


> I think if we ALL HAD TO ACCEPT IT then there wouldn't be a rule saying to spoiler anything not in the current and prior episodes.


It reminds me of 24.



Spoiler



When Tony Almeida died, nobody believed it to be true (I was one of those). The following week when they showed him being zipped into a body bag, that settled that.



Of course, this being Lost, I'm sure there are still those waiting for



Spoiler



Ethan to rise from the grave.



Greg


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Bierboy said:


> There's ALWAYS something someone did that we didn't see on Lost.


You know what I mean.


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

betts4 said:


> They may not have come from the fall...the bruises may be from plastic/facial surgery because of the fall. If he broke his jaw or something (and it looked like he did have some head injury - or surgery) the bruises may be from the surgery to repair.
> 
> Crazywater, I too was wondering about the soaking wet Locke issue. It was a fleeting question that got pushed behind some of the other thing going on, but it does make you wonder.
> 
> Did he plant some C4 inside AND outside of the sub? Your theory is more twisted and Lost like though.


Thank you, that was the dynamic I was shooting for...Everything on this show has a reason so I think the fact that he was soaking wet probably means something.


----------



## tivoboyjr (Apr 28, 2003)

mitkraft said:


> I think if we ALL HAD TO ACCEPT IT then there wouldn't be a rule saying to spoiler anything not in the current and prior episodes. I really hate it when people who don't care so much if they are spoiled try to tell everyone else that they just need to "Accept it" when its clearly one of the rules of the forum.


I don't really get having to spoilerize previews, because they are shown on TV right along with the current episode. Are there really people who watch the current ep but don't watch the previews for next week? To me, spoilers are for info that comes from other sources and is not readily available to or viewable by those who just watch the show on TV and don't scour the web for spoilers. Rules are rules, however, and I abide by them. Just sayin', though.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

tivoboyjr said:


> I don't really get having to spoilerize previews, because they are shown on TV right along with the current episode. Are there really people who watch the current ep but don't watch the previews for next week? To me, spoilers are for info that comes from other sources and is not readily available to or viewable by those who just watch the show on TV and don't scour the web for spoilers. Rules are rules, however, and I abide by them. Just sayin', though.


You're being logical. And correct.

The rules are neither.

(This is a battle I fought back before they had the rule, and it still boggles my mind that people think something that is broadcast as part of the show should not be considered part of the show. It's people like that that got Studio 60 and Arrested development canceled! )


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

tivoboyjr said:


> Are there really people who watch the current ep but don't watch the previews for next week?


Yes


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

thedudeabides said:


> He was wet because its hot and sweaty down there. The sub is gone. Get over it.


Ah...there's sweat and there's soaking wet...He was soaking wet, water dripping from his hair, shirt, pants. I suggest you "get over it". Everyone's entitled to a theory...


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> You're being logical. And correct.
> 
> The rules are neither.
> 
> (This is a battle I fought back before they had the rule, and it still boggles my mind that people think something that is broadcast as part of the show should not be considered part of the show. It's people like that that got Studio 60 and Arrested development canceled! )


They're not part of the show, IMO. The show is made by a specific creative team consisting of writers and producers, etc. The previews and promos are made by a promotions department at ABC separate from those working on the show. As such, I consider them different, and although usually I do watch them, I totally understand why some don't. And I wish I hadn't watched it last night.

And wait...is Studio 60 canceled?


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

cwoody222 said:


> I've been wrong before but I think Locke being wet is being made too big of a deal out of. He was UNDERWATER, and ON A DOCK. They probably just cut a scene where he planted the explosives on the hull or swam out to something or tried to hide under the dock or something.


When we last see Locke he is dry and in the sub searching it...the next time we see him he is walking on the dock, making no effort at all to hide, which also odd especially since he knew that the explosion was about to happen...


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

tivoboyjr said:


> I don't really get having to spoilerize previews, because they are shown on TV right along with the current episode. Are there really people who watch the current ep but don't watch the previews for next week? To me, spoilers are for info that comes from other sources and is not readily available to or viewable by those who just watch the show on TV and don't scour the web for spoilers. Rules are rules, however, and I abide by them. Just sayin', though.


In other forums, I don't think this is much of a problem. But because this is a TIVO forum we ALL have accept that everyone watches their shows their way. If this means you fast forward all commercials and don't watch any previews, then anything anyone else would see in a preview is technically a spoiler for them. And if you just stop watching once that final *LOST* logo pops up on the screen, then not only do you not know about the bad robot, but you're chosing not to watch previews for next week's Lost. Why stick around for the previews if you have a dozen recordings backed up on your Tivo that need to be watched?

So, while I agree that these rules aren't typical discussion group rules, they are probably necissary for a tivo discussion forum.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

lonwolf615 said:


> Thats how I took it at first, but after reading bruinfan...its hard to believe they overlooked the part about his legs.


Bruinfan's post was very convincing, but has it ever definitively been said that the flashbacks we see are objectively narrated? Isn't it possible (even likely) that the flashbacks are told from the viewpoint of the character whose flashback it is? When we watch the interaction at the hospital, in that case we'd be seeing not necessarily what literally happened, but rather Locke's recollection of what happened. This "unreliable narrator" could explain away some of how the nurse was lifting/positioning, etc.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Maybe Locke placed the C4 inside and on the outside of the sub. Then he fell. In the water.

How does Locke know how to detonate C4?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Okay - one truly bizarre passing thought that I'll throw out here:

Can we be sure that the dripping wet Locke that we saw at the end of the episode is really Locke, and not a manifestation of the smoke monster? Recall that a while back there were appearances by dripping wet Walt? Maybe we're dealing with the same thing here, and there is no inconsistency. The real Locke is elsewhere, dry. What we saw, dripping wet, isn't him.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hefe said:


> They're not part of the show, IMO. The show is made by a specific creative team consisting of writers and producers, etc. The previews and promos are made by a promotions department at ABC separate from those working on the show. As such, I consider them different, and although usually I do watch them, I totally understand why some don't. And I wish I hadn't watched it last night.


Well, this is America, and I will fight to the death for your right to be so wrong!


----------



## danieljanderson (Nov 19, 2002)

Locke heals.
Maybe Locke is Claire's real dad........

Never mind. Wrong show.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

tivoboyjr said:


> I don't really get having to spoilerize previews, because they are shown on TV right along with the current episode. Are there really people who watch the current ep but don't watch the previews for next week?...


Yes, there are, and I am one of them. As soon as a show is done BEFORE the previews, I hit my NPL button, and it pops up the Do You Want To Delete option. I either delete it or just go to live TV or another show or shut it off. I prefer to be completely entertained the next show and not just partly entertained


----------



## 420s (Feb 22, 2007)

unicorngoddess said:


> ... then not only do you not know about the bad robot...


  :up: :up: LOL I love when it goes "Bad Robot". Almost as much as when the show ends with the "Thump" and LOST shows up.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

mitkraft said:


> This is an opinion I just don't understand. I've seen other's also say they didn't think he'd kill him locke himself. But this is a man who pretty much STOLE a KIDNEY from somebody he otherwise wanted nothing to do with. Do people really think there is THAT much gap between someone who would do that and someone who would kill somebody with their own hands to save their butt? Because, in my mind anyways, once he stole Locke's kidney I believed he was capable of just about any kind of evil. I saw the push out the window coming the instant they framed the fist scene with Locke and the window.


I and I'm guessing others fell that *it is* something of a leap from conning a kidney from your son to attempted murder of said son.

After all, it's not like Daddy dearest left John in a cheap hotel bathtub packed with ice.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

mask2343 said:


> But seriously, when has LOST ever shown us something then later told us it wasn't what we thought.


I can think of at least one occasion: how about, at the conclusion of "Walkabout," the reveal that Locke was wheelchair-bound prior to the plane crash? Or is that not what you mean?


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

If the previews were really part of the episode, then they would be included at the end of each episode on the DVD sets. They are not.

Case closed.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

scooterboy said:


> If the previews were really part of the episode, then they would be included at the end of each episode on the DVD sets. They are not.
> 
> Case closed.


If the previews were really not part of the broadcast, then they would not be part of the broadcast. They are. And since the thread title specifies this particular broadcast, there ya go.

I like my case better!


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

There has to be something to Locke being wet. I think the sub is still gone but it was very odd and definitely something I noticed as soon as it aired. If he was dry going in, he should be dry going out.

If he was just going to put the C4 on the outside, he wouldn't have bothered going inside at all...


----------



## acej80 (Jan 19, 2003)

lew said:


> I thought the "magic box" was a metaphor. The question is if you could have anything you want....The answer expected was "I'd like to put my hands around the neck of the SOB who put me in my wheelchair"


I was trying to find the right words to say exactly this. Can't agree more! :up:


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

Well, 176 posts, and only one mention that Locke's dad, just before he pitches Locke out the window takes a big drink from a McKutchen (spelling) whisky bottle. For being $100,000 bottle of Scotch, there sure are a lot of them around on this show. One would think that they might be in short supply.

I think the best line of the show was right after Ben said something really profound (forgot the exact quote) and he expected something equally profound out of Locke, but what Locke said was, "Got anything to eat around here?" Completely derailed the whole emotional impact of the moment.

Ben is really a manipulative so-and-so. Did anyone else notice that when Jack asked Ben to release his friends (Sayid and Kate) Ben replied, "Okay. When you leave the island, I'll release them." This was after he knew for sure that Locke was going to blow the sub. He has no intention of releasing anyone I expect. It is just a weasely reply to make him look like the good guy, when he is the bad guy, despite what he told Michael.

Locke's trail is littered with a lot of storm damage.

At the very beginning of the show, we see Ben telling Ethan and the guy Anna Lucia killed to go after the two groups and have lists prepared. Knowing how many of his people would die because of this event, and their involvement in it, wouldn't he have been better off ignoring them completely? Well, except for his spinal tumor of course.

All his life everyone Locke has ever know has taken from him. The island has now given him the use of his legs back. In his mind, he isn't damaging the island, he is protecting it.

When the C4 goes off, Jack looks really, REALLY mad at Locke.

Rousseau sees her daughter, at a distance, but she know she has the right girl.

Ben calls the event an anomaly (when Desmond turned the key) but he, Ben, doesn't take any credit for the anomaly, does he? It was Ben that put the doubt into Locke's mind by saying the bunker was a joke, and that he never pressed the button that one time. He obviously did, and Locke must know that he did because of what happened when Locke didn't. Ben was more responsible than Locke was for the Swan hatch being deactivated, and the "anomaly" as he called it. Knocking out the communications and beacons was Ben's fault.


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

I am still of the mind that there is some kind of time shift going on. Or they are re-living things over and over until they get it right. Desmond somehow tapped into the other cycles of time or now has memories of the past times the same events happened.

The others know so much about them because they have been through all of this before, they may even be desendants of the losties from one of the other time cycles.

They take the children because the children are eventually the parents of the others or the others themselves. Something like that...


----------



## WinBear (Aug 24, 2000)

They really made a point of making Alex up to look like Danielle more than ever before.


----------



## TR7spyder (Feb 28, 2006)

Church AV Guy said:


> Ben calls the event an anomaly (when Desmond turned the key) but he, Ben, doesn't take any credit for the anomaly, does he? It was Ben that put the doubt into Locke's mind by saying the bunker was a joke, and that he never pressed the button that one time. He obviously did, and Locke must know that he did because of what happened when Locke didn't. Ben was more responsible than Locke was for the Swan hatch being deactivated, and the "anomaly" as he called it. Knocking out the communications and beacons was Ben's fault.


I am glad someone finally brought this up! Why did Ben wanted to cause the "anomaly"? How did he know that Desmond was going to turn the key on time? What would have happened had Desmond not done it (it seemed like a last moment thing)?

If we belive what Russian had told them (he claimed most of it was true) in the previous episode, the "others" are NOT Darma people. Why do they have Darma food in the fridge? And if food drops had stopped, they do not seem to worry about starvation...

Also, Ben's claims of "loosing control" over his people seems a bit odd for para-military group, where people freely kill themselves not to be captured. 

I also found it funny that they used a sub. Yes it is undetectable, but it isn't the most efficient way to travel over the seas, especially when you do it with a bunch of civilians.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

It seems like the Others' lives were really messed up by the "anomaly," and yet they did very little to stop it. As someone said, Ben was as responsible as anyone for it happening. Why was something this important left to Desmond for years, and then to the Losties, who had no reason to believe it was real? Ben seems to be aware that his people will be upset by being stranded with no options, yet he seems to want it that way. I makes no sense. 

If Locke brought his father to the island with his thoughts plus island magic, was that the same thing as Walt and the polar bear from the comic book? or Kate's horse? Dave? Jack's Dad? Are these illusions? Sawyer saw Kate's horse, but no one ever saw it again after that. Was Jack's Dad brought back from the dead? I don't remember if Dave is still alive or not. These seem like illusions made from black smoke, but Locke's dad looks pretty real, and it's hard to tie up an illusion. 

I don't think the box is literal. You just have to trust the writers that they know where they're going and the explanations won't be too out there. Meanwhile, the ride is very entertaining. :up:


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> It's people like that that got Studio 60 and Arrested development canceled! )


What, where?! And when???! I'm still kinda hoping, ya know?

Plus shouldn't it be spoilerized?


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

stalemate said:


> I'm no doctor, but isn't it possible to receive a kidney transplant from someone who is not your biological father?
> 
> I'm willing to go along with it being Locke's real dad but I'm going to need something more than the kidney to go on.


it's possible, but it's difficult... you have to go on a waiting list a mile long, then, you have to have a match, which is not an easy thing to do. Biological relative donors have a much higher chance of matching. Not all relatives match, however.

and another thing... when you are put on the donor list, you are prioritized by how close you are to dying... so once you reach the critical stage that puts you first in line, you may die waiting for a match. It's much easier to convince a relative to donate a kidney. If someone is desperate enough, they could go looking for a long lost relative.

of course, just because they were a match doesn't prove kinship. 


lonwolf615 said:


> bruinfan: great post. This being Lost, one has to wonder if all you mention could really be the result of careless writing, or could it have been done deliberately? That opens up a whole 'nother can o worms though...
> After reading your post, I can't help thinking the whole hospital scene is more important than it first seems


really? i figured the locke paralyzed goof was bad/ignorant acting. it's hard to act paralyzed if you've never worked with quad/paraplegics. and the other stuff... I figured it was bad technical advising... if they had a PT tech advisor at all. Physical Therapy is ALWAYS portrayed inaccurately. Usually cuz if they did it right, it kills the flow of the story.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> I prefer to be completely entertained the next show and not just partly entertained


That's an opinion. I watch previews, read spoilers, sometimes even read this thread before watching the episode. I never feel disappointed or cheated. In fact, sometimes it's a bit of a thrill to secretly know what will happen (I also know that more often than not it's not what I think it is, even though it is what I saw/heard). I really feel for the spoilerphobes because I think they really are missing out on life if they think that 5 seconds out of a 43 minute show will have any noticeable effect on their enjoyment.

On a related note, some people are so paranoid about being slammed for spoiling, that they end up spoilerizing things that need not be spoiled -- like theories about what may lie in the future. It gets truly bizarre, sometimes, and I almost wish there was a personal setting to always show spoilers.


----------



## super dave (Oct 1, 2002)

Church AV Guy said:


> Well, 176 posts, and only one mention that Locke's dad, just before he pitches Locke out the window takes a big drink from a McKutchen (spelling) whisky bottle. For being $100,000 bottle of Scotch, there sure are a lot of them around on this show. One would think that they might be in short supply.












This one is $649.98, but the 10YO is only $30.
I am going to have to try some and see what the hub bub is about.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> If the previews were really not part of the broadcast, then they would not be part of the broadcast. They are. And since the thread title specifies this particular broadcast, there ya go.
> 
> I like my case better!


You have every right to be wrong... 


wprager said:


> That's an opinion....


Yes, it's my opinion and you have every misguided right to disagree...


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

mitkraft said:


> I think its highly probable that Lockes father is the real Sawyer, but there is no good reason to make him the killer of sawyers dad and mom. Not to mention given the way we saw it from Sawyer's eyes (under the bed) its pretty sure that it was a murder suicide. Remember, Sawyer was under the bed when his dad sat on it and shot himself.


You're right. I totally misremembered that scene and was thinking James was upstairs and the shootings happened downstairs. (Must be thinking of another show or movie).

Too bad. I like the idea of Sawyer finding out his dad didn't do that.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

super dave said:


> This one is $649.98, but the 10YO is only $30.
> I am going to have to try some and see what the hub bub is about.


And along with that post about Lockes dad pouring some scotch is also the note that should be made....

He poured two drinks, took one himself (as did Penny's dad) and then pushed his son thru the window.


----------



## thedudeabides (Aug 7, 2003)

stellie93 said:


> It seems like the Others' lives were really messed up by the "anomaly," and yet they did very little to stop it. As someone said, Ben was as responsible as anyone for it happening. Why was something this important left to Desmond for years, and then to the Losties, who had no reason to believe it was real?


I think this a really important point that bears some future explanation. For whatever reason, Ben and the other Others did not appear to care about the Swan station or the button. Maybe they didn't know much about it. Maybe they didn't believe it. Maybe they didn't realize what would happen if the button wasn't pushed and the failsafe is not activated. Who knows. But clearly, Ben messes with Locke's head when he tells him he didn't puch the button, when we know he did. Why would he do it? I would hope that this question will be posed by Locke to Ben at some point in the near future.


----------



## TR7spyder (Feb 28, 2006)

> Maybe they didn't realize what would happen if the button wasn't pushed and the failsafe is not activated.


I know this isn't directly related to this week's show, but did they ever explain why they called it failsafe? Failsafe is typically an active design feature built into something, so that something fails in a safe manner. You are not supposed to *activate* it . That was more of a self-destruct mechanism.


----------



## tubsone (Apr 15, 2006)

billboard_NE said:


> Lost is back....
> 
> The first two years I would watch live (couldn't wait). Then the third season most of the time I would watch a day or two later. Looks like I am back to watching live.


LOST? Never went anywhere for the the real fans and it's still season 3.


----------



## tubsone (Apr 15, 2006)

That's it!.....It's clear they have made a time machine. Put me in the Time Travel group. They used time travel to get Locke's dad there and that's how they know everything about everybody. Well that's my guess anyways.


----------



## Bryanmc (Sep 5, 2000)

tivoboyjr said:


> Are there really people who watch the current ep but don't watch the previews for next week?


Absolutely.


----------



## brianp6621 (Nov 22, 1999)

Church AV Guy said:


> Well, 176 posts, and only one mention that Locke's dad, just before he pitches Locke out the window takes a big drink from a McKutchen (spelling) whisky bottle. For being $100,000 bottle of Scotch, there sure are a lot of them around on this show. One would think that they might be in short supply.


We talked about this when the Scotch originally made the appearance. We also know that the woman Locke's dad is conning was VERY rich, so it is conceivable that she bought the bottle for him (was that his place or hers). However, because of this episode and when we see the scotch in a local Aussie bar, I think it is more likely that it means that the original statement of the scotch being SUPER expensive was an exaggeration to make Jin feel worse.


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

brianp6621 said:


> to make Jin feel worse.


Desmond?


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

I noticed that in this episode, there was a very prominent "60" on the label on the front of the bottle of Scotch, leaving no doubt that it was the expensive stuff. The first time around (in the Desmond episode) we discussed the possibility that the bottle in the pub and in Sawyer's stash were younger versions. Someone did mention that the all of the labels in that episode were identical, but I don't remember the "60" being on them at all. Anyone have any good screen caps from the other episodes with the scotch?


----------



## tanstaafl (Oct 22, 2002)

TR7spyder said:


> I am glad someone finally brought this up! Why did Ben wanted to cause the "anomaly"? How did he know that Desmond was going to turn the key on time? What would have happened had Desmond not done it (it seemed like a last moment thing)?
> 
> If we belive what Russian had told them (he claimed most of it was true) in the previous episode, the "others" are NOT Darma people. Why do they have Darma food in the fridge? And if food drops had stopped, they do not seem to worry about starvation...


There were some comments about these from one of the recent podcasts...


Spoiler



They said that the only thing Mikhail really lied about was being part of Dharma; pretty much everything else he said was correct. They also said that the Others either were not aware of the Swan station or at best did not know much about what was going on there.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

stellie93 said:


> If Locke brought his father to the island with his thoughts plus island magic, was that the same thing as Walt and the polar bear from the comic book? or Kate's horse? *Dave?* Jack's Dad? Are these illusions? Sawyer saw Kate's horse, but no one ever saw it again after that. Was Jack's Dad brought back from the dead? *I don't remember if Dave is still alive or not. * These seem like illusions made from black smoke, but Locke's dad looks pretty real, and it's hard to tie up an illusion.


IIRC, even back in the "real" world, Dave was only a figment of Hurley's imagination. Am I remembering wrong?


----------



## Lee L (Oct 1, 2003)

TR7spyder said:


> I know this isn't directly related to this week's show, but did they ever explain why they called it failsafe? Failsafe is typically an active design feature built into something, so that something fails in a safe manner. You are not supposed to *activate* it . That was more of a self-destruct mechanism.


Sometimes failsafes cause minor breakage of on part of a machine in order to stop a much larger bad event from happening. Maybe whatever that would have happened was so bad that it had to be dealt with in that way.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

betts4 said:


> And along with that post about Lockes dad pouring some scotch is also the note that should be made....
> 
> He poured two drinks, took one himself (as did Penny's dad) and then pushed his son thru the window.


A slight nit:

Penny's dad did in fact take out two *glasses* but only poured any scotch into one, and then made his nasty dis at Desmond that he was unworthy to drink it.

Locke's dad did, indeed pour scotch into two glasses, but as you state, Locke never had a chance to drink any.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Related to the thread, yet not...

Take a look at the number of messages & pages created in Lost threads and what amount of time. The # of posts are seem to be directly proportional to the quality of the episodes.

Greg


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

Much better than the last few deucetacular episodes. Where the hell did that building get it's window glass? A human being might be able to dislodge it a little, but it sure as hell isn't going to shatter.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Figaro said:


> Where the hell did that building get it's window glass? A human being might be able to dislodge it a little, but it sure as hell isn't going to shatter.


Actually, it has happened in real life.
There is at least on verified case that happened in Toronto.


----------



## sushikitten (Jan 28, 2005)

I did not predict anything in that episode - but then again, I try not to think too far ahead because I like being surprised!!


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

I tried.. I'm on page 4 of the thread and it grew to six, and I have an open wordpad document with my post which has been sitting around for two days, and I need to reboot the laptop so I can copy baby pictures to post.. So possible smeeking ahead, and anyone wanting to complain about that will just have to give me a pass this time - I'm in a hospital. 

--

Watched it again today (yesterday, Thursday) via ABC's horrible, horrible web viewer.. I dunno if it was just a bad wireless connection here at the hospital, but the player didn't buffer _anything_.. It'd play for 3 seconds, then hang for 15, then play for 5 more, then hang for 30.. Horrible.

Anyway, _awesome_ episode.

Thoughts/observations:

1) Locke telling Ben that he's "cheating" clearly said to me that Locke fully believes he's now part of some _game_..

2) Ditto on the duplicate-looking-down-into-the-sub/hatch scene.. beautiful shot

3) I'm not here for Jack.. I'm here for the submarine..

4) The reason Locke blew up the sub instead of letting it go wasn't as much because he wanted to "just stay there", but was more because he thought everyone else was cheating.. Leaving the island, coming back, "playing" when you wanted to.. Locke thinks he's on some walkabout-like game and that everyone else is too.. It's more than just a simple game like Survivor - at least to Locke it is.. it's some significant, meaningful, game. This place is _special_, and the "others" having game rooms and houses makes it feel less-so to him. He wants others to play, because they must be players in the game, obviously - they're there.

5) Despite the fact that the 'others' on the island believe the beacon was destroyed and no one can find them, my memory of the two guys in the ice-laden listening station tells me someone will find a way in.

6) Couldn't remember if we've seen any food drops since the key was turned.. I believe not.

7) Glad to see they erased a few non-mysteries that some of us had conjured up: A) The guy who cut Locke down was the guy who recruited Juliette, so he's not part of a different group than they are.. (although we still don't know if they're dharma or not, I suppose).. B) Alex is clearly identified as Ben's daughter, even though it was clear enough in previous weeks too. (adopted daughter)

8) If Locke actually survived that fall, that's something else interesting that felt "supernatural" before coming to the island.

9) I don't believe "the box" is literally the box we saw Locke's father in.. Remember, Ben had to say "BRING me the man from Tallahassee" earlier, implying at the very least he was moved. I don't think anyone actually thought that room was the box, but just saying (we _have_ had arguments about whether Sun had an affair, which group was the survivors of the crash, etc.  )

10) I'm vaguely interested in how Locke got disability for being depressed. Was the therapy he was going to (that enabled him to get disability payments) the same therapy that we saw him go to w/Helen?


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> I tried.. I'm on page 4 of the thread and it grew to six, and I have an open wordpad document with my post which has been sitting around for two days, and I need to reboot the laptop so I can copy baby pictures to post.. So possible smeeking ahead, and anyone wanting to complain about that will just have to give me a pass this time - I'm in a hospital.


 You get new-daddy dispensation. One week only. 


jkeegan said:


> 4) The reason Locke blew up the sub instead of letting it go wasn't as much because he wanted to "just stay there", but was more because he thought everyone else was cheating.. Leaving the island, coming back, "playing" when you wanted to.. Locke thinks he's on some walkabout-like game and that everyone else is too.. It's more than just a simple game like Survivor - at least to Locke it is.. it's some significant, meaningful, game. This place is _special_, and the "others" having game rooms and houses makes it feel less-so to him. He wants others to play, because they must be players in the game, obviously - they're there.
> 
> 5) Despite the fact that the 'others' on the island believe the beacon was destroyed and no one can find them, my memory of the two guys in the ice-laden listening station tells me someone will find a way in.


Ben suggested in so many words that Locke was less interested in staying on the island than in making damned sure his dad would never find him and have a chance to clobber him again (emotionally or physically). I don't think Locke trusts the no-beacon situation and believes if someone left on the sub, they wouldn't need the beacon to find the island again.


jkeegan said:


> 10) I'm vaguely interested in how Locke got disability for being depressed. Was the therapy he was going to (that enabled him to get disability payments) the same therapy that we saw him go to w/Helen?


Probably.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

JYoung said:


> After all, it's not like Daddy dearest left John in a cheap hotel bathtub packed with ice.


Daddy doesn't seem like the type to risk his own safety on a hotel room cut-and-grab job. He'd definitely want a hospital, etc. and that's why he convinced John to donate voluntarily. Obviously he can't then drag him out of the hospital and dump him on the curb.



wprager said:


> On a related note, some people are so paranoid about being slammed for spoiling, that they end up spoilerizing things that need not be spoiled -- like theories about what may lie in the future.


Yeah... that's just dumb--or lazy. I can't believe anyone capable of watching and understanding TV shows like _Lost_ isn't capable of grasping the very simple rules for spoilerizing. And if someone gets in your face for something that's not against the forum rules, well... bonus! You get to lay down some righteous anger on their *sses and since when isn't _that_ a good time?!?!


----------



## Mike20878 (Jun 8, 2001)

getreal said:


> Didn't Ben mention the "magic box" as Locke was rooting through the fridge? A fridge can be like a magic box. You open the door and PRESTO! There's some chicken! Then you open it again and there's beer! Maybe next time there'll be pie!
> 
> And as far as intellectualizing about surviving an 8-storey fall, there was a guy recently who was running down a stairwell at a hotel and smashed through the 16th storey window and landed on a 2nd-floor awning and survived.


Did someone say chicken??


----------



## Mike Farrington (Nov 16, 2000)

betts4 said:


> And along with that post about Lockes dad pouring some scotch is also the note that should be made....
> 
> He poured two drinks, took one himself (as did Penny's dad) and then pushed his son thru the window.


I've seen it mentioned on another site as well that Locke's father poured a two drinks without offering one to Locke (like Penny's father did to Desmond). Its simply not true. Locke's father offered Locke the drink. Locke was too busy yelling, so his father set Locke's glass down, then grabbed his own from his other hand and drank from it.

I do think it would have been A LOT more interesting if he did pour two glasses and didn't even offer one to John.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Mike20878 said:


> Did someone say chicken??


Dude, you posted the wrong one. This one edited out the part where you see that he DOESN'T clean the cutting board between chicken and salad. Here it is unedited.






All for the sake of Lost understanding, of course.

Greg


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> If the previews were really not part of the broadcast, then they would not be part of the broadcast. They are. And since the thread title specifies this particular broadcast, there ya go.
> 
> I like my case better!


I never said the previews weren't part of the _broadcast_. I said they weren't part of the _episode_. All the commercials are part of the broadcast, too. Doesn't mean everyone needs to watch them!

And I can argue just as easily that the thread title specifies this particular _episode_, not this particular _broadcast_.

So there *you* go.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Actually, it has happened in real life.
> There is at least on verified case that happened in Toronto.


Was it at the CN Tower?


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

I can see myself shattering that!


----------



## pcguru83 (Jan 18, 2005)

Figaro said:


> Much better than the last few deucetacular episodes. Where the hell did that building get it's window glass? A human being might be able to dislodge it a little, but it sure as hell isn't going to shatter.


You obviously don't watch Mythbusters. 

Seriously though, they tested this with a glass pane (with negative pressure?) and it was indeed possible. They also referenced the afforementioned case in Toronto in that episode.


----------



## Ed Fisher (Nov 29, 2006)

stellie93 said:


> It seems like the Others' lives were really messed up by the "anomaly," and yet they did very little to stop it. As someone said, Ben was as responsible as anyone for it happening. Why was something this important left to Desmond for years, and then to the Losties, who had no reason to believe it was real? Ben seems to be aware that his people will be upset by being stranded with no options, yet he seems to want it that way. I makes no sense.
> 
> If Locke brought his father to the island with his thoughts plus island magic, was that the same thing as Walt and the polar bear from the comic book? or Kate's horse? Dave? Jack's Dad? Are these illusions? Sawyer saw Kate's horse, but no one ever saw it again after that. Was Jack's Dad brought back from the dead? I don't remember if Dave is still alive or not. These seem like illusions made from black smoke, but Locke's dad looks pretty real, and it's hard to tie up an illusion.
> 
> I don't think the box is literal. You just have to trust the writers that they know where they're going and the explanations won't be too out there. Meanwhile, the ride is very entertaining. :up:


All good points. How about this - at some point wouldn't you think all of the Losties would huddle up and explain EVERYTHING and ANYTHING going on to each other - all the oddities on the island, their pasts, etc - to try and figure out some connections? People are getting killed, but they dont want to say they had a bad marriage, drunk dad, or was a fugitive before?


----------



## Figaro (Nov 10, 2003)

pcguru83 said:


> You obviously don't watch Mythbusters.
> 
> Seriously though, they tested this with a glass pane (with negative pressure?) and it was indeed possible. They also referenced the afforementioned case in Toronto in that episode.


I do watch Mythbusters. Unfortunately all I can ever remember is what Kari was wearing.


----------



## brianp6621 (Nov 22, 1999)

stalemate said:


> Desmond?


Uh yeah, him too.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

I thought the last time Locke saw Ben was in the original hatch. At that time he thought his name was Henry. Yet straight away when Locke enters Ben's room he comfortably calls him Ben.
Did I miss something? Even if Kate returned to the Losties and said that Henry's real name was Ben, I'd sorta' think that Locke might still say something like "Henry, or Ben, or whatever your real name is, I didn't come for Jack, I came for the submarine!"

And then the following scene would be when he went to the fridge, there shoulda' been a submarine sandwich which Locke would gobble up.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

getreal said:


> I thought the last time Locke saw Ben was in the original hatch. At that time he thought his name was Henry. Yet straight away when Locke enters Ben's room he comfortably calls him Ben.
> Did I miss something? Even if Kate returned to the Losties and said that Henry's real name was Ben, I'd sorta' think that Locke might still say something like "Henry, or Ben, or whatever your real name is, I didn't come for Jack, I came for the submarine!"
> 
> And then the following scene would be when he went to the fridge, there shoulda' been a submarine sandwich which Locke would gobble up.


Nah, you didn't miss anything. I watched a bit of the first few episodes of the season last night because I was putting them onto DVD, and in those episodes, he was always referred to as "Benjamin", especially by Juliet. Writing mistake.

Greg


----------



## tivoboyjr (Apr 28, 2003)

Church AV Guy said:


> When the C4 goes off, Jack looks really, REALLY mad at Locke.


I don't really like how Locke has been turned into (or, maybe I should say has been revealed to be) an amiable screwup. I prefer the season one Locke, the guy who used to be in a wheelchair, but was transformed into the great hunter and communicator with the island. The whole thing with his father and his failures is a great story, but I liked him more before I knew so much about him.

As for Jack getting mad at him, the next time Locke blows something up, I am expecting Jack to say Laaa-OCKE!! As in the Skipper saying Gillli-GAN!! Jack just needs to get a captain's hat to whack him with while he says it.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

Wasn't it something like a 2 day walk to the Flame station and another 1-2 day walk to the Other's camp? More than enough time for Kate to fully describe the Others including the name of the leader.



getreal said:


> I thought the last time Locke saw Ben was in the original hatch. At that time he thought his name was Henry. Yet straight away when Locke enters Ben's room he comfortably calls him Ben.
> Did I miss something? Even if Kate returned to the Losties and said that Henry's real name was Ben, I'd sorta' think that Locke might still say something like "Henry, or Ben, or whatever your real name is, I didn't come for Jack, I came for the submarine!"
> 
> And then the following scene would be when he went to the fridge, there shoulda' been a submarine sandwich which Locke would gobble up.


----------



## Fraser+Dief (Nov 18, 2005)

So, you want to scuttle a sub. What do you do?

Put the C4 on the inside, and hope it blasts a big enough hole to reach the hull? How do you know how much distance there is or what is between the inner wall and the outer wall? Will it blast through to the water at all?

Or, you put it on the outside of the hull, figuring that whatever it blasts through, it's at least going in the right direction?

The reason Locke is wet is he chose B.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Fraser+Dief said:


> So, you want to scuttle a sub. What do you do?
> 
> Put the C4 on the inside, and hope it blasts a big enough hole to reach the hull? How do you know how much distance there is or what is between the inner wall and the outer wall? Will it blast through to the water at all?
> 
> ...


OK, I may be dense about explosives, but let's say that there wasn't enough C4 to breach the hull. Or you just weren't 100% sure. Would you do more damage by putting the explosive on the outside, or inside where all the equipment, electronics and supporting systems that make the sub operational would surely be destroyed?

And isn't there something more damaging to exploding inside a closed structure where all the force will be exerted against the container, rather than the outside where some of the blast force would be expended in a useless direction?

I could be wrong, I'm no Inigo Montoya on explosives.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

lew said:


> Wasn't it something like a 2 day walk to the Flame station and another 1-2 day walk to the Other's camp? More than enough time for Kate to fully describe the Others including the name of the leader.


Yeah, but why would she? We've established they never share information, no matter how small.

Greg


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

It seems as if the ban on sharing info has been temporarily lifted. Not only did Locke know Ben's name, he knew he was the big boss. And Kate must have told them all about her and Sawyer's get-away--she referred to Juliet as, "the one who helped us escape."

We know now that Ben's power is not absolute--he needs to keep his people happy to some extent. I wonder if Jacob is the real boss. He's probably watching all these videos of everything that goes on, and if he feels Ben is losing control, he'll annoint someone else as leader--Locke maybe?


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

tivoboyjr said:


> I don't really like how Locke has been turned into (or, maybe I should say has been revealed to be) an amiable screwup. I prefer the season one Locke, the guy who used to be in a wheelchair, but was transformed into the great hunter and communicator with the island. The whole thing with his father and his failures is a great story, but I liked him more before I knew so much about him.
> 
> As for Jack getting mad at him, the next time Locke blows something up, I am expecting Jack to say Laaa-OCKE!! As in the Skipper saying Gillli-GAN!! Jack just needs to get a captain's hat to whack him with while he says it.


I felt the same way a couple weeks ago (I was one who thought Locke didn't expect to blow up the Flame), but I've come full circle and now think there is some pretty sneaky method to Locke's madness.

I'm more intrigued than ever.


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

Fraser+Dief said:


> So, you want to scuttle a sub. What do you do?
> 
> Put the C4 on the inside, and hope it blasts a big enough hole to reach the hull? How do you know how much distance there is or what is between the inner wall and the outer wall? Will it blast through to the water at all?
> 
> ...


I reviewed the portion where Locke is walking back from planting the explosives and he is discovered by Jack, Juliet and the Others. There is moment during this sequence where his is on his knees with his hands up in the air surrendering, the man with the rifle to his left. The entire dock is visible behind Locke all the way to the end. It is crystal clear that there is no sub docked where we had previously seen it when Locke boards it.

Unless it is a continuity error by the Lost production crew, I am in the "he didn't blow up the sub" camp.

If he really did blow up the sub then why move the prop, just blow it up.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

It's possible he set the explosives and moved the sub away from the dock so that nobody would board it before the explosives went off. He knew Jack was scheduled to be on the sub shortly. That would explain why he was soaked. He had to swim back to shore.


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

PJO1966 said:


> It's possible he set the explosives and moved the sub away from the dock so that nobody would board it before the explosives went off. He knew Jack was scheduled to be on the sub shortly. That would explain why he was soaked. He had to swim back to shore.


I could believe that too....except the explosion was next to the dock.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

crazywater said:


> I could believe that too....except the explosion was next to the dock.


[devils advocate] Maybe he just submerged it so that nobody would board [/devil's advocate]


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Not to beat a dead horse on spoilers, but since it was discussed earlier in this thread (and I am VERY opinionated about it)...here's a quote from moderator Justapixel in the TV Talk rules --


> Previews of Next Week and other spoilers:
> Anything shown on the previews of next week is considered a spoiler on this forum, and must be tagged as such, using spoiler tags.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

getreal said:


> I thought the last time Locke saw Ben was in the original hatch. At that time he thought his name was Henry. Yet straight away when Locke enters Ben's room he comfortably calls him Ben.
> Did I miss something? Even if Kate returned to the Losties and said that Henry's real name was Ben, I'd sorta' think that Locke might still say something like "Henry, or Ben, or whatever your real name is, I didn't come for Jack, I came for the submarine!"
> 
> And then the following scene would be when he went to the fridge, there shoulda' been a submarine sandwich which Locke would gobble up.


I believe Kate referred to him as Ben when they met Mikhail, and Mikhail also said later that Ben wasn't the Great Leader. Clearly conversations have taken place, and they spent time walking (as mentioned).

But even if Locke wasn't paying much attention, come on, this is too easy. Kate says Jack did surgery on the leader, Ben, during which some woman helped her and Sawyer escape. Locke sees Ben in a wheelchair, shaking hands with Jack - 2 + 2 = 4.

Not to mention - which I will anyway - that Hurley saw Ben on the dock and probably told Locke that Ben was the leader. And as to Locke being unsure who Ben is, he mentions it during the episode when he tells Ben: "Now that I know who you really are."

There is no writing error here.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Delta13 said:


> I believe Kate referred to him as Ben when they met Mikhail, and Mikhail also said later that Ben wasn't the Great Leader. Clearly conversations have taken place, and they spent time walking (as mentioned).
> 
> But even if Locke wasn't paying much attention, come on, this is too easy. Kate says Jack did surgery on the leader, Ben, during which some woman helped her and Sawyer escape. Locke sees Ben in a wheelchair, shaking hands with Jack - 2 + 2 = 4.
> 
> ...


There are plenty of times when the information could have been given to Locke, probably by Kate. Ben was never introduced by his real name to Hurley though. They revealed Tom's name then, but not Ben.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

True enough for Ben's name, I just thought Hurley told Locke the guy in the hatch wound up being their leader. I could be hallucinating, of course. Or a victim of wishful I-wish-they-would-just-talk-and-share-dammit thinking ...


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Delta13 said:


> True enough for Ben's name, I just thought Hurley told Locke the guy in the hatch wound up being their leader. I could be hallucinating, of course. Or a victim of wishful I-wish-they-would-just-talk-and-share-dammit thinking ...


Well, that, he may have...


----------



## alltimesaresoon (Jul 28, 2006)

8 pages and not much play on the truly best line in the episode.

Jack telling Kate "i will come back for you" after telling her emphatically that she shouldn't have come back for him


----------



## alltimesaresoon (Jul 28, 2006)

1. go on the sub with Juliet, and try to come back from "home" to rescue Kate and the rest of the "good guys"
2. See juliet off, not get on the sub, and come back to take on Ben and free Kate
3. Other?


----------



## Mike Farrington (Nov 16, 2000)

crazywater said:


> I reviewed the portion where Locke is walking back from planting the explosives and he is discovered by Jack, Juliet and the Others. There is moment during this sequence where his is on his knees with his hands up in the air surrendering, the man with the rifle to his left. The entire dock is visible behind Locke all the way to the end. It is crystal clear that there is no sub docked where we had previously seen it when Locke boards it.
> 
> Unless it is a continuity error by the Lost production crew, I am in the "he didn't blow up the sub" camp.
> 
> If he really did blow up the sub then why move the prop, just blow it up.


Or they didn't want to damage the very expensive sub that they rented. You know how sub owners can be. They can be such a pain the ass when you want to detonate explosives near their sub. Cry babies.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Delta13 said:


> And as to Locke being unsure who Ben is, he mentions it during the episode when he tells Ben: "Now that I know who you really are."
> 
> There is no writing error here.


Really? I totally missed that line.

I think I'll rewatch the episode and look for sub/no sub by the dock when the fiery explosion happens.

BTW, if there was an explosion underwater, I would expect that there woulda' been a big burst of water and bubbles instead of fire, and the dock woulda' been blown apart where it was close to the blast, but not as much wood in flames unless the C4 was attached to the dock. Of course, I'm no explosives expert, or pyromaniac, or arsonist, so it's just my opinion/expectation. Take it for what it's worth. Free.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Ok.. Signs you watch too much Lost: you post something like this:

So, as I said over here, we watched Lost from the hospital this Wednesday because we gave birth to our new baby girl,
*Cara Elizabeth Keegan*
(sister to Emily and Alicia). Here's a picture:



(more pics here)

So when I took that pic, I thought she looked familiar, but I couldn't quite place it. At first she looked a bit like my cousin Michael, but the more I looked at it, the more I knew that face from somewhere.

Yep. I'm crazy. I think she looks like the psychic that told Claire that she had to take care of the baby herself:



But, I trust Laurie - I don't think she tracked down an actor from Lost and had a quick fling just to give us a Lost-related baby.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

She's much cuter than the psychic. Can we call her turniphead though


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Get some sleep, Jeff...you've Lost it.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Too funny, Jeff. But you can't disclaim her; she looks just like you.


----------



## BriGuy20 (Aug 4, 2005)

DUDE_NJX said:


> Possible production error: the contents of the fridge at Ben's place are different each time he opens the door.
> 
> So do they refer to the plane as "metal box"? I kinda like that theory.
> 
> Also, Locke looks hideously funny with that red fuzz on his skull. Makes me think of Trump going through the last stages of baldness.


Maybe Ben has a magic fridge too? Imagine chicken, you get chicken. 

EDIT: Smeeked. DAMN THESE 82 PAGE LOST THREADS!!!


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Over on the Lost Easter Eggs blog they pointed out that, when Locke is captured, he's without his backpack, which also hel Eko's "Jesus Stick". I find it very hard to believe that he would just leave it, and along with all the other clues given (Locke soaking wet, knows his way around a sub, explosion is dead-center instead of to the left of the dock, no sub visible when Locke comes back) leads me to that grassy knoll, I'm afraid.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

I have a nagging question that I can't find an answer to. Where exactly is this dock, anyway? From what I can tell, neither the blast door map nor the electrical map Sayid has shows access to a large body of water in the middle of the island.

And the picture of the village from the season opener is no help at all, though it might help on the locations of the sonic pylons:

LOSTPedia link of Otherville picture

It might also explain the "?" on the blast door map, seeing how it is surrounded by a circle ... hmm, pylons maybe?


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

Delta13 said:


> I have a nagging question that I can't find an answer to. Where exactly is this dock, anyway? From what I can tell, neither the blast door map nor the electrical map Sayid has shows access to a large body of water in the middle of the island.


I asked my daughter the same question. Aren't they in the middle of the island? Didn't it take a long time for Eathan to get to the losties when they crashed? I thought they said an hour at one point, which never made sense either.

If the other's houses were only an hour from the crash site, how is it they never came upon it while walking?


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

vikingguy said:


> Locke flying out the window was a holy **** moment. I do admit I did not see it coming with his father in the room that knocked my socks off damn.


I was sure we'd find out how he broke his back, and I was sure it was coming soon, and I was sure it'd have to do with the flashbacks with his dad, and yet when it actually happened I, too, was saying "holy ****". That's a hard thing to pull off, to surprise you with something you know perfectly well is coming. It wasn't that his dad did it, but when and how, that was a surprise.



gchance said:


> Locke's "father" did make me curious though. Do con men actually refer to themselves as con men? "I'm a con man". I would think they'd have clever euphemisms for it, like, "I always work the angles", or even call themselves grifters. "I'm a con man?" That just seems odd to me.


A con man will call himself a con man if it's in his best interest. In this case, he was trying to defuse Locke's indignation before there were cops or other complications, and a little "admission" (phrased in a way Locke would be sure to understand) can go a long way to trying to talk someone down.



cheesesteak said:


> You really shouldn't be allowed to introduce a "magic box" into a series. It potentially gives the writers carte blanche to pull ridiculousness out of their armpits and say "The magic box did it!"


Yeah, because heretofore they've been such models of restraint in that regard. 



hefe said:


> or inside where all the equipment, electronics and supporting systems that make the sub operational would surely be destroyed?
> 
> And isn't there something more damaging to exploding inside a closed structure where all the force will be exerted against the container, rather than the outside where some of the blast force would be expended in a useless direction?


Not to mention the possibility of putting it next to the fuel. (I seriously doubt that was a nuclear submarine, incidentally.)


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

I don't know if this has been discuseed in other episodes...

but don't you see now that all the main characters have daddy issues? 

obviously Jack & Claire and Locke.. 

But think about Kate, Sawyer, Sun, Hurley, Walt

I recall that Charlie's father didn't approve his career choice. 

i got nothing for sayid.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Delta13 said:


> I have a nagging question that I can't find an answer to. Where exactly is this dock, anyway? From what I can tell, neither the blast door map nor the electrical map Sayid has shows access to a large body of water in the middle of the island.
> 
> And the picture of the village from the season opener is no help at all, though it might help on the locations of the sonic pylons:
> 
> ...


There's no reason the shape of the island wouldn't allow them to be close to the shore. It wouldn't have to be anywhere close to the Lostie's beach. However, the thing that bothered me is that a dock like that seems that it wouldn't last long in any kind of storm.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

Cindy1230 said:


> I don't know if this has been discuseed in other episodes...
> 
> but don't you see now that all the main characters have daddy issues?
> 
> ...


Can we nominate the post for the "Ultimate Smeek" title?


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Cindy1230 said:


> I don't know if this has been discuseed in other episodes...
> 
> but don't you see now that all the main characters have daddy issues?
> 
> ...


Michael?
Jin has father-_in-law _ issues, but his daddy was a good guy. (They kind of present Jin and Sun as a single "character" sometimes.)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

mqpickles said:


> Jin has father-_in-law _ issues, but his daddy was a good guy. (They kind of present Jin and Sun as a single "character" sometimes.)


Yeah, but Jin was ashamed of his father, which to my mind qualifies as "Daddy issues."


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Delta13 said:


> I have a nagging question that I can't find an answer to. Where exactly is this dock, anyway? From what I can tell, neither the blast door map nor the electrical map Sayid has shows access to a large body of water in the middle of the island.


A large body of water in the middle of an island would be a swamp or a lake or a pond. What good is a submarine in a lake? It needs access to the ocean. Therefore the dock would be on a coast (i.e., edge of the island) -- not in the middle -- unless there was a peninsula where the body of water leads to open waters.


----------



## Mike20878 (Jun 8, 2001)

gchance said:


> Dude, you posted the wrong one. This one edited out the part where you see that he DOESN'T clean the cutting board between chicken and salad. Here it is unedited.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The one I originally had was removed from YouTube.


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

DUDE_NJX said:


> Can we nominate the post for the "Ultimate Smeek" title?


I don't get it...


----------



## balboa dave (Jan 19, 2004)

Cindy1230 said:


> I don't get it...


Season 1, Episode 11: "All the Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues."


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

devdogaz said:


> There's no reason the shape of the island wouldn't allow them to be close to the shore. It wouldn't have to be anywhere close to the Lostie's beach. However, the thing that bothered me is that a dock like that seems that it wouldn't last long in any kind of storm.


Have we seen a storm on this island yet? Kinda makes you wonder where it *really* is?


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

balboa dave said:


> Season 1, Episode 11: "All the Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues."


Unless she knows what smeeking  is, that still doesn't make much sense.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yeah, but Jin was ashamed of his father, which to my mind qualifies as "Daddy issues."


I'll buy that, although it's not the same as the rest. They all had issues with daddies on the jerk-sociopath spectrum. Jin's issue was his own problem, and he got over being ashamed of his dad before he got to the island; now he just has guilt about his prior shame. Still, not dad's fault.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Cindy1230 said:


> I don't get it...


Welcome, Cindy. This group can be a tough room.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

devdogaz said:


> There's no reason the shape of the island wouldn't allow them to be close to the shore. It wouldn't have to be anywhere close to the Lostie's beach. However, the thing that bothered me is that a dock like that seems that it wouldn't last long in any kind of storm.


I can easily envision an inland dock - in my mind, anyway. And their water access doesn't have to be anywhere near the Losties camp. I just have 2 problems: nothing on the maps seemingly, and those darn pylons.

The sub dock HAS to be within the pylon ring, or Locke couldn't have got there. But Sayid's map shows a complete ring, not cut off by a bay or water. Okay, so the sub, err, submerges under the ring to escape. But in a river? Hardly. But an inland dock helps with the storm problem you mentioned ...

And remember the Pearl station video? It said to use the Pala ferry to go back to the barracks. We thought it meant another island at the time, but it really has to mean using this sub dock. God help us if they have ANOTHER dock! 

Well, maybe another map will turn up before the end of Season 3 and explain all of this. When you look at the pulled-back shot of Otherville from S3E1 though, it's hard to figure where an inland dock might be hiding.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Didn't the map show two underground passages that go under the sonic fence? I know it wasn't shown to us, but Locke could have found one of these passages (remember that Alex was with him). The village is in-land and the pier can be on the shore. I don't see any problem with that.


----------



## NoThru22 (May 6, 2005)

tivoboyjr said:


> I don't really get having to spoilerize previews, because they are shown on TV right along with the current episode. Are there really people who watch the current ep but don't watch the previews for next week?





Rob Helmerichs said:


> (This is a battle I fought back before they had the rule, and it still boggles my mind that people think something that is broadcast as part of the show should not be considered part of the show. It's people like that that got Studio 60 and Arrested development canceled! )


I've really been itching to talk about this since I read these two posts. It's really cut and dry to me. Spoilers and preview _ruin_ entire episodes for a lot of people. A lot of the time a shocking moment will happen during the climax of the show, which takes place in the last ten minutes, that negates a good portion of the build-up the writers put into the show. One example is a third season episode of 24, that I will clarify in a spoiler tag. In the previous week's preview, they showed a moment from minute 59 (out of 60 for those who don't watch) of the following episode. The preceding 59 minutes of the show (or rather 43 with commercials) was debating whether they'd end up at that point. All the suspense and tension of those 59 minutes was completely ruined because I knew they'd end up there, and really, there was only a minute of entertaining television that week.

I've also seen some comedies/dramedies ruined because they show you the payoff to a joke they take all episode to setup in the preview. Imagine if they played the final joke of a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode in the preview. Marketing would if they could.

The fact that people argue whether they can post these spoilers in threads that are about the episodes is just disrespectful to the people that want to be surprised. I'm glad the rules forbid them from doing this.

Spoiler for third season episode of 24:


Spoiler



It was the episode where there terrorists demand that Chappelle be brought to that trainyard and shot. They showed him, at the trainyard, in minute 59 of the preview, with Jack holding the gun to his head. The bulk of the episode centered around the debate whether to even bring him to the trainyard, where they'd be open for ambush, but all that was rendered null and void by the preview.


And that's my rant.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

I wonder if the folks who avoid the previews of next week's episode are also loathe to watch movie trailers in theaters ...


----------



## lonwolf615 (May 19, 2004)

Its not even remotely the same thing, and I'm one who always watches the previews. 
A film trailer is trying to interest you in something you might otherwise not watch. Those who don't like tv previews already know they are going to watch the show and want to go into it with no preconceptions. Like I said, I'm not one of them but I can fully understand and respect their position. Whats hard to understand is why that bothers so many of us so much. Its not like spoilers are hard to do..


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

The equivalent in movie trailers would be zemeckis movie trailers, wherein he really believes that you should see the full plot of the movie in the trailer. I try to avoid those, although rarely do I know it's coming in advance.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

TAsunder said:


> The equivalent in movie trailers would be zemeckis movie trailers, wherein he really believes that you should see the full plot of the movie in the trailer. I try to avoid those, although rarely do I know it's coming in advance.


Funny you mention that. The first thing I thought of when the movie trailier analogy was made was the horrible previews for "What Lies Beneath" and "Castaway" which essentially gave away the enitire plots of both films.

I do agree with lonwolf that movie trailers and next week's previews are apples and oranges. For me, I generally watch the previews unless the show is known for giving away major surprises (I find this to be the case on 24 and The Shield). Some shows even use the previews to give some misdirection, which turns out to make the episode more surprising. I certainly understand, however, those who would rather have the creative folks behind a show determine the way the overall story is revealed as opposed to some schmuck in the marketing department.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I never knew that the previews weren't put together by the writers--you guys are so educational.  That makes a good point for not watching them, although I always have, and haven't been sorry too many times. Besides, some moron at work is gonna tell me what was in them anyhow if it's juicy. No spoilers there.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

wprager said:


> Have we seen a storm on this island yet? Kinda makes you wonder where it *really* is?


Umm, yeah. Bad things often happen in the rain. People get shot. (Ethan and Shannon, for instance.)


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Hunter Green said:


> Umm, yeah. Bad things often happen in the rain. People get shot. (Ethan and Shannon, for instance.)


I am well aware there has been rain. I was responding to another post talking about the pier being a little flimsy to survive in a storm. Has there been a tropical storm? Specifically on the ocean?


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

wprager said:


> Has there been a tropical storm? Specifically on the ocean?


Where else would they be?


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

stellie93 said:


> I never knew that the previews weren't put together by the writers--you guys are so educational.  That makes a good point for not watching them, although I always have, and haven't been sorry too many times. Besides, some moron at work is gonna tell me what was in them anyhow if it's juicy. No spoilers there.


If I remember, a few weeks ago the preview said that next week, three big questions would be answered. A day or so later, Lindelof said that he had NO idea what three BIG questions would be answered in that show. The networks assemble the previews, not the writers, directors or producers.

Some of the previews for various shows have been particularly tension deflating, as has been mentioned in the 24 preview, which was just as an example. Imagine going into a theater and seeing the following preview for an upcoming movie:

The Maltese Falcon, staring Humphrey Bogart, Mary Astor, Peter Lorre, and Sydney Greenstreet. The search for a priceless statue... the death of a private investigator, and imagine the looks on all their faces when they discover the status is a fake!

Don't you think that such a preview would, um, ruin the whole point of the movie?

And PLEASE, don't tell me that I needed to spoilerize the above. I draw the line at assuming a 1941 movie that has been on television innumerable times is not a secret to anyone.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

hefe said:


> Where else would they be?


Well, my original post was misunderstood, so I thought it prudent to leave little to interpretation.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Church AV Guy said:


> The Maltese Falcon, staring Humphrey Bogart, Mary Astor, Peter Lorre, and Sydney Greenstreet. The search for a priceless statue... the death of a private investigator, and imagine the looks on all their faces when they discover the status is a fake!


Or...

What is the secret of Soylent Green?
What is the secret of Soylent Green?
What is the secret of Soylent Green?
<show people going to their deaths>
Find out what the secret of Soylent Green is!

Oh wait, that one did happen. Hah, silly me.

Greg


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

Church AV Guy said:


> The Maltese Falcon, staring Humphrey Bogart, Mary Astor, Peter Lorre, and Sydney Greenstreet. The search for a priceless statue... the death of a private investigator, and imagine the looks on all their faces when they discover the status is a fake!
> 
> Don't you think that such a preview would, um, ruin the whole point of the movie?
> 
> And PLEASE, don't tell me that I needed to spoilerize the above. I draw the line at assuming a 1941 movie that has been on television innumerable times is not a secret to anyone.


I can honestly say that I must be the only adult in the USA who did not know that. You just ruined that movie for me.

EDIT: adding a smiley


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

philw1776 said:


> I can honestly say that I must be the only adult in the USA who did not know that. You just ruined that movie for me.


You're not the only one who has never seen it! Add me to the "you ruined it for me" list. Although, I don't think I can be upset given it is a 40 year old movie.

It is on my 100 movies to see before I die list. I just always seem to pick something else to watch.


----------



## mitkraft (Feb 21, 2003)

philw1776 said:


> I can honestly say that I must be the only adult in the USA who did not know that. You just ruined that movie for me.


Nah, you aren't the only one. I've never seen the movie either. But I'm with Church AV Guy, its a little extreeme to expect to have to spoiler a movie that old.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

I would think that most people haven't seen The Maltese Falcon, although on TCF the number who HAVE seen it is larger. Yes, I've seen it.

Most people, if a movie is over a certain age, they'll immediately discount it, no matter how much they're told it's a good movie. They say things like, "I don't like old movies." Shame, really.

Then again, those are probably the same people who, when you discuss a TV show or movie, and actually use your brain, will tell you that you have "too much time on your hands". It's funny, too, because people will say that HERE, on a forum designed for discussing TV shows & movies.

Greg


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

philw1776 said:


> I can honestly say that I must be the only adult in the USA who did not know that. You just ruined that movie for me.


I haven't seen it either, but I don't mind people posting spoilers like that. There has to be some type of statute of limitations on those types of things. There are certain spoiler type things that simply become part of the pop culture lexicon. I haven't seen "Citizen Kane" but I know what Rosebud is. I haven't seen "The Crying Game" but I know the big surprise there. I can't imagine anyone that doesn't know the surprise finish of "The Sixth Sense."


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

lodica1967 said:


> You're not the only one who has never seen it! Add me to the "you ruined it for me" list. Although, I don't think I can be upset given it is a 40 year old movie.
> 
> It is on my 100 movies to see before I die list. I just always seem to pick something else to watch.


+1. Agree to that the statute of limitations has long passed, and it's my own fault I never saw it before.

And, Greg, I do like old movies.


----------



## Mike Farrington (Nov 16, 2000)

lodica1967 said:


> It is on my 100 movies to see before I die list. I just always seem to pick something else to watch.


I think you're just afraid that if you actually watch all 100 movies, you'll drop dead immediately after watching #100.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

I meant to end my statement with a smiley.
I agree with those concerned about disclosing preview info even though I do watch them.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

My point was to support the view that previews, especially ones that are not carefully done, DO ruin the dramatic effect that the director was attempting to create. I had no intention of starting a rabbit trail.

For those who have not seen The Maltese Falcon, and didn't know the plot-point I revealed, I apologize. I figured something from 1941 was safe to use an example that most people would know and understand. I stole this example from JMS who used it in a Babylon-5 thread to describe this very thing. He said that HE had no say in what went into the preview spots, and one really disclosed a major plot element, which annoyed him greatly.

For those who don't think that they would like old movies, I highly recommend The Maltese Falcon, Casablanca, Citizen Kane, It's a Wonderful Life, and many others. They are MUCH better than many movies made today. I know all the plot elements of all these movies, but it doesn't stop me from watching and enjoying them over again.

I hope Locke quits destroying stuff. Are they all going to be prisoners now? "I am number two. Who is number one? You are number six. I am not a number, I am a free man!" I know al the plot points from this too, and I still love to watch it.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Church AV Guy said:


> My point was to support the view that previews, especially ones that are not carefully done, DO ruin the dramatic effect that the director was attempting to create. I had no intention of starting a rabbit trail.
> 
> For those who have not seen The Maltese Falcon, and didn't know the plot-point I revealed, I apologize. I figured something from 1941 was safe to use an example that most people would know and understand. I stole this example from JMS who used it in a Babylon-5 thread to describe this very thing. He said that HE had no say in what went into the preview spots, and one really disclosed a major plot element, which annoyed him greatly.


I wouldn't worry about it. Not only have I never seen it, I've never even heard of it. But I'm not bothered that you didn't spoilerize anything. Why? Because if I haven't seen this movie yet then chances are I'm not feeling a big urge to see it, so I'm not just going to randomly go out and rent it or something. Secondly, even if I were to accidently come across it while flipping through the channels or something, I doubt I'll remember anything you just said about the movie. Why? Because I didn't particularly care about it when you said it. It wouldn't be until the end when I go, hey...that sounds familar. Where have I heard that plot line before.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

devdogaz said:


> I haven't seen it either, but I don't mind people posting spoilers like that. There has to be some type of statute of limitations on those types of things. There are certain spoiler type things that simply become part of the pop culture lexicon. I haven't seen "Citizen Kane" but I know what Rosebud is. I haven't seen "The Crying Game" but I know the big surprise there. I can't imagine anyone that doesn't know the surprise finish of "The Sixth Sense."


While I agree with most people that there has to be a line somewhere, I don't see the harm in putting spoiler tags on anything that one feels may convey information that could ruin the fun for someone else. The quote above is the perfect example of a well thought out post and doesn't even use the tags.

My feeling is, if you are not sure, then tag it.

With all that said, if someone is reading a discussion about a show, than they shouldn't be mad if *anything* that was already aired regarding the show, is discussed.


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

Mike Farrington said:


> I think you're just afraid that if you actually watch all 100 movies, you'll drop dead immediately after watching #100.


Quit reading my subconscious, I hate it when you do that! 

Also, I just finally watched the God Father part one. What was that from, like the mid-70's?? I am definitely way behind on my movies, so know worries to the OPS(original poster spoiler).


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Re: "Maltese Falcon" (1941)


lodica1967 said:


> ... I don't think I can be upset given it is a 40 year old movie.
> 
> It is on my 100 movies to see before I die list. I just always seem to pick something else to watch.


Referring in 2007 to a movie made in 1941 as a 40 year old movie, I think your 100 movie count may actually mean 125 movies, or 75 movies. Pick a number ±25. 

Some movie trailers are done much better than others.
And some television previews are also done better than others.

Personally, I don't have a problem with people spoilerizing comments here, but although I try to avoid spoilers of shows I have yet to see and look forward to seeing, I also don't consider the Lost previews as spoilers, per se.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

getreal said:


> I wonder if the folks who avoid the previews of next week's episode are also loathe to watch movie trailers in theaters ...


I am one of the former and I sleep during previews in a movie theater...ask my wife.


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

getreal said:


> Re: "Maltese Falcon" (1941)
> Referring in 2007 to a movie made in 1941 as a 40 year old movie, I think your 100 movie count may actually mean 125 movies, or 75 movies. Pick a number ±25.
> 
> Some movie trailers are done much better than others.
> ...


Thought I typed 60!! My bad.... And you are so right, my 100 movie list isn't exactly 100. I am big on fuzzy math.


----------



## TRD_Dan (Oct 13, 2005)

hefe said:


> OK, I may be dense about explosives, but let's say that there wasn't enough C4 to breach the hull. Or you just weren't 100% sure. Would you do more damage by putting the explosive on the outside, or inside where all the equipment, electronics and supporting systems that make the sub operational would surely be destroyed?
> 
> And isn't there something more damaging to exploding inside a closed structure where all the force will be exerted against the container, rather than the outside where some of the blast force would be expended in a useless direction?
> 
> I could be wrong, I'm no Inigo Montoya on explosives.


My thoughts on this would be that the inside actually would have more free space for the explosion to expand. If it were mounted to the underside, the pressure from the water would hold the blast to the outside of the hull. Even if it wasn't enough to go completely through your sub would still have a nasty hangnail and a potential weak spot if you were to submerge.

Or maybe it's as simple as it rained at the end of the dock.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Is it too early to start the new episode thread? CTV-HD (Canada) is broadcasting it at 8PM (a full two hours before ABC -- how's *that* for spoiler? And back when S60 was still running it was on Monday nights. I have no idea how they managed to swing those deals (Lost airs at 8PM so they can run the Idol results show live


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

wprager said:


> Is it too early to start the new episode thread? CTV-HD (Canada) is broadcasting it at 8PM (a full two hours before ABC -- how's *that* for spoiler? And back when S60 was still running it was on Monday nights. I have no idea how they managed to swing those deals (Lost airs at 8PM so they can run the Idol results show live


Canada also airs the NBC soaps a whole day before the US airs it. I don't get that either.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

wprager said:


> Is it too early to start the new episode thread? CTV-HD (Canada) is broadcasting it at 8PM (a full two hours before ABC -- how's *that* for spoiler?


Whoa! Finally direct PROOF that LOST is about a time warp thingy!


----------



## JR99 (Apr 25, 2004)

You don't need explosives to sink/submerge a sub. All you need to do is open/close the right valves. What we saw was an explosion at the end of the dock, but the sub was originally beside the dock. 

Isn't it possible that Locke submerged the sub or moved it elsewhere, then had to swim to the surface/dock, thus leaving him soaked?


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

I just rewatched this episode (in syndication).

Was there ever an explanation for why and how Ben & co brought Locke's father to the island? It seems to me as it would have been quite an endeavor to do so, for an unclear payoff (from what I remember).

This is IMO one of the best in the series, maybe THE best, when it comes to the flashbacks.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

According to the official podcast, he was kidnapped, drugged, and brought by submarine.


----------

