# LOST - "What Kate Does" - 02/09/10



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

So there's Claire. And there is a darkness within her and Sayid. 

It was meh episode for me. I guess I had higher expectations. 

Few observations and questions-
-There was a season 2 episode entitled, "what kate did." 
-Ethan and his mom were evacuated from the island, right?
So he never went back, because the island sank.
-As soon as they started testing Sayid... i thought.. they are looking for smokey.


----------



## mattpol (Jul 23, 2003)

From Damon's unofficial Twitter (@DamonLindelof):

_*For those of you complaining of "filler." Seriously. PLEASE WATCH NCIS: LOS ANGELES. I promise not to hold it against you.*_


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

after defending the premiere, there is only one word for that episode.. craptacular.

only interesting thing is these others seem to be the same as bens others... though we kind of already knew that...


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

GDG76 said:


> after defending the premiere, there is only one word for that episode.. craptacular.
> 
> only interesting thing is these others seem to be the same as bens others... though we kind of already knew that...


Last season (or the one before it?) Ben even said that a group of others are up near "the temple" long before we knew what the temple was.


----------



## Squeak (May 12, 2000)

Claire's wig is AWFUL!

Maybe I am being spoiled-brat, but I was hoping that this season would be a lot more payoffs, and less obtuseness for obtuseness sake.

I get there has to be drama -- but does everything have to be talked around like it is still Season 2?


----------



## brermike (Jun 1, 2006)

I really enjoyed this episode. I thought it had a great mix of character and mythology. I was a bit worried that it was going to be lame since it was a Kate episode and that it followed the awesome premiere. I was pleasantly surprised. It had a real season-one vibe to it. Kate was back to kicking ass and not being driven by romance. Jack was back to taking charge and asking the right questions, which was refreshing. Very happy to see Island-Claire back, and that the infection/sickness has returned since being first mentioned back in season one. Sawyer's scene on the pier was heart-breaking and I'm glad they are letting him mourn, unlike Claire's reaction (or lack there of) when Charlie died. Anyway, I'm really enjoying the new season and can't wait to see what happens next!


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

brermike said:


> Anyway, I'm really enjoying the new season and can't wait to see what happens next!


Me, too. I'm just enjoying the story.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

JMikeD said:


> Me, too. I'm just enjoying the story.


Me three. I'm in no rush.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hefe said:


> Me three. I'm in no rush.


Four!


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

It seems that some weeks naysayers get in pretty quick and try to set the tone negatively about an episode. Why? You're welcome to watch and dislike and even post, but *why* post if you didn't like something? Where's the fun/joy/reward in that? The comments in this particular thread weren't even that bad, but it just reminds me of other times when it's been worse.

Anyway, I liked it. Too tired to post parts I liked tonight. May rewatch another day.

..Jeff


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

mattpol said:


> From Damon's unofficial Twitter (@DamonLindelof):
> 
> _*For those of you complaining of "filler." Seriously. PLEASE WATCH NCIS: LOS ANGELES. I promise not to hold it against you.*_


True this.

I'm loving this season. Tonight was even better than last week. We're getting mythology, back/side stories, Kate's redemption, (almost) Aaron, love, angst... and Hurley's the leader? Dude!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

brermike said:


> Sawyer's scene on the pier was heart-breaking...


The more I think about it, the more I think the series ends with Sawyer and Jack taking over the reunified island as the new Jacob and Not-Jacob.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Ok one thing before I go to bed..

I think that rather than expecting two separate timeline/universes to somehow merge, it's a far better story (and easier to explain) if one universe changes and becomes the other. It doesn't matter in what order they show us pieces.

And I think we actually already have a serious hint that there aren't two universes, but rather one that changed into the other: the picture frames changing in the first Miles flashback.

We saw him look at a photo, walk up some stairs, there's some maybe-purple light, he walks back down, and all of the photos change save one, and that photo's frame dramatically changes (actually making the photo seem more cheerful because of less shadows).

Thr universe changed, slightly, then. Yes we saw that change after the 815 flight would have happened, but we saw a change that happened there. I didn't get the feeling that we were supposed to believe that Miles walked into another universe upstairs.. He stayed there. The universe changed.

We're in for another flash to bring people far back. But that's another post.

Jeff sleep now.

..Jeff


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> The more I think about it, the more I think the series ends with Sawyer and Jack taking over the reunified island as the new Jacob and Not-Jacob.


It would make sense. They have that love/hate relationship.

Favorite lines -

"We'll be in the food court"

and

"remember that guy you hit with the butt of your gun, well I'm that guy".


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Four!


Five!



betts4 said:


> "remember that guy you hit with the butt of your gun, well I'm that guy".


Is he in _It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia_?

So does this episode make it more or less likely that Jacob is in Sayid? I think less likely, but I really don't think too hard when I watch. It just leads to mental pain.


----------



## renov (Jan 27, 2006)

uncdrew said:


> Five!
> 
> Is he in _It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia_?


Yes. It's Rob McElhenney he plays Mac.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Yeah, the dual realities took a seriously interesting hit when Ethan announced Aaron's name to Claire. Something's rotten in Otherland here, folks. Plus the original Oceanic folks look at each other like they're all having a case of deja vu. I don't know what's up, but the ride will end soon enough, so I guess make me Six.


----------



## pjenkins (Mar 8, 1999)

it's early, let them play out the story, jeesh!

that said, i thought it was a poor episode, i just don't get / buy the sawyer/juilet/kate storyline, never have i guess, i blame it on the audience


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Delta13 said:


> Yeah, the dual realities took a seriously interesting hit when Ethan announced Aaron's name to Claire. Something's rotten in Otherland here, folks. Plus the original Oceanic folks look at each other like they're all having a case of deja vu. I don't know what's up, but the ride will end soon enough, so I guess make me Six.


Claire announced it herself.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Seven.

So is Claire the new Rousseau?

And what's happening to Sayid the same thing that happened to young Ben when Ricardus took him to the spring?

And count me as one how like Sawyer's scene on the dock.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

jkeegan said:


> It seems that some weeks naysayers get in pretty quick and try to set the tone negatively about an episode. Why? You're welcome to watch and dislike and even post, but *why* post if you didn't like something? Where's the fun/joy/reward in that? The comments in this particular thread weren't even that bad, but it just reminds me of other times when it's been worse.


Why not? If someone feels strongly about something they say it; differing opinions are part of a discussion. One would probably get out of it whatever you got out of posting that.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Delta13 said:


> Yeah, the dual realities took a seriously interesting hit when Ethan announced Aaron's name to Claire.


Eh? Ethan didn't tell Claire Aaron's name. Claire said Aaron's name.

I like this episode, and I'm with Damon: NCIS is the next channel over. No delayed gratification or mental gymnastics required. We don't mind.

I have to admit, though, that I was having a hard time remembering some of the history between Sawyer and Kate referred to in this episode: I'd completely forgotten about the whole sub incident with Kate forcing them to come back, for example. I still only vaguely remember it.

I do enjoy all the "cameos" by bit characters, though: we've seen Artz many times, and a few others. I was half expecting one of the cops to be Anna-Lucia.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

So much for Sayid being Jacob reborn.

So what about Sayid's reaction to the "testing" made them think he was "infected"?

I do think it's cool that the sickness seems to be coming back into the story; maybe we will get an answer to that after all.

I think maybe the "good" and "bad" teams are going to begin to assemble; Flocke, Sawyer, Kate, Claire, Sayid(?) on the bad team; Jack, Hurley, Miles, Jin (?) on the good...


----------



## speaker city (Sep 28, 2005)

Anyone else think of The Drawing of the Three (The Dark Tower 2) in regards to the two separate time lines? Specifically, what happened to Jake and Roland after Jake


Spoiler



fell from the tracks and died


.

We know that JJ Abrams owns the rights to do any film adaptation of the Dark Tower, but from what I understand he doesn't really do any of the writing these days.

Anyways, I thought this ep was pretty weak. These people have seen smoke monsters and dead people walking around, but the still question stuff like Sayid coming back from the dead. It gets annoying.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

hefe said:


> Claire announced it herself.


Damn, I only heard Ethan say it. /"Nevermind"

(I'm still staying at six, though.)


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

I haven't seen this episode yet; my wife hasn't made it all the way through last week's. So I haven't looked at this thread; maybe this is being being discussed already:

Isn't the title tense (relative to the title of the earlier episode's "did") a big clue as to how this thing is going to wrap up?


----------



## laststarfighter (Feb 27, 2006)

I would have enjoyed this episode more if ABC didn't keep running that "the questions are over" promo all the time. It's like a big FU.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

How about Arzt doing his best Dustin Hoffman impression? "I'm walkin' here, I'm walkin' here!"


----------



## T-Wolves (Aug 22, 2000)

jkeegan said:


> ...I think that rather than expecting two separate timeline/universes to somehow merge, it's a far better story (and easier to explain) if one universe changes and becomes the other. ...


That was kinda my thought -- one universe (or maybe "the" universe) has begun course-correcting. Claire & Ethan & Kate (& soon Aaron) all gathered together. Jack and Locke have made a connection. I suppose Hurley & Sawyer will be next? Not sure about Charlie/Boone/etc.

Does that mean they will all end up on a plane together again headed back to Australia? Maybe Locke, able to walk again thanks to Jack, decides to take that walkabout with Jack as his guest? Maybe Kate decides to accompany Claire and Aaron back to Australia to avoid arrest? And similar plot twists for the rest of the Losties? And then some kind of anomaly "crashes" their plane over the Island?

Lindelof did say on Kimmel that "something" had inhabited Sayid. It will be interesting to learn more about this "infection." Is it related to Jacob/FakeLocke somehow, or something else altogether?

Loved Hurley's line to Sayid: "Are you a zombie?" A reference to the "Zombie Season" that Darlton joke about on the podcasts?

*8*


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

The Others told Jack to give the pill to Sayid because "if it came from us, he won't take it". Where is Sayid gonna think Jack got the pill from? The local Dharmacy?

What was the "prison break" the guy with the gun was referring to (before Kate hit him)?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Dnamertz said:


> The Others told Jack to give the pill to Sayid because "if it came from us, he won't take it". Where is Sayid gonna think Jack got the pill from? The local Dharmacy?


Of course Sayid would know that Jack got the pill from them, but as Sayid said, he trusts Jack, so if Jack thinks Sayid should take it, Sayid would take it.


Dnamertz said:


> What was the "prison break" the guy with the gun was referring to (before Kate hit him)?


I think it was when Kate and Sawyer were trapped in those cages on the other Island back in S3.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

I quite enjoyed the episode. Incidentally, the first episode of the series after the 2-hour premiere (considered episode 3) was Tabula Rosa, a Kate-centric one. If they were to follow the same pattern (going on my own speculation here), and given episode 4 was Walkabout, next week's should be Locke-centric...

A couple of my own observations:

- Ethan is going to give medication to Claire, as we were shown him to be doing after abducting her on-island. I'm surprised he didn't have a bit of deja vu like the Losties
- Loved the Rob McElhenney return, I recognized him right away, I remembered when he was on before
- Love, love, LOVE Hurley taking charge. The interchange between him and Jack was classic, both of them acknowledging that when Jack has private conversations usually it means Hurley's going to end up doing something he doesn't want to do
- Claire just "knowing" the baby's name is Aaron, Kate feeling deja vu over it
- The return of the "sickness", shrouded in mystery like everything else "trust us". At least Jack asked some questions and got some answers.
- The sickness also now begs the question, what exactly happened to Claire to require the treatment, and why was the water murky THEN?
- When Jack asked the one guy, "Who ARE you?" I sang, "We are the priests... of the temples... of Syrinx"
- Where did Sawyer get the ring he was going to give to Juliet?

That's all I have for now.

Greg


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

T-Wolves said:


> Lindelof did say on Kimmel that "something" had inhabited Sayid. It will be interesting to learn more about this "infection." Is it related to Jacob/FakeLocke somehow, or something else altogether?


It's something that Jacob set up.
He prevented Sayid from getting hit by that car.
He told Ilana to get Sayid and get him on the plane.
He told Hurley to take him to the temple.

So what is Jacob''s plan for Sayid?


----------



## Johnny Dancing (Sep 3, 2000)

I don't think there are two different universes going on. 

I think off the Island stuff that really happened (they're flashbacks) and the island stuff is after they all somehow through ended up on the island at the point of the explosion. For some yet to be explained reason they don't remember the off the island part. However, didn't Juilet say "it worked" before she died? So she remembered something.

I could be really off base as I have just been watching and not reading any message board analysis until just now. After this is all over, I'll get the complete box set and watch the entire show over a few months to better wrap my head around the entire story.

Those already complaining again about no answers and just more mystery, need sit back and enjoy the show because when the answers come, Lost will be over, and it will be a long time before another show comes along that can match it . It is pretty much is a 100 hour movie so every hour of it is not going to be blow you away reveals, some hours will be more Island mythology related and perhaps a little slower. 

For my hourly reveals I watch shows like Mentalist. Nice neat wrapped up episodes and easy on the brain.


----------



## hapdrastic (Mar 31, 2006)

I liked this episode, but didn't love it. It had interesting moments, but didn't really captivate me like last week. That said, I don't think it's "filler", but more of a set up episode for more things to come later in the season. Sometimes you need to set up the pins before you knock them down....


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Hmm. Since Sayid actually "died", does that mean the Holy Butt Whuppin' mentioned in the note from the ankh is now coming - whatever it is? Looking at Sayid all slumped and exhausted-looking after "coming back", I couldn't help but think of "Pet Sematary". 

And Dogen didn't say Claire was still infected by the darkness ... but it does make you wonder about the Christian role we saw last season all of a sudden.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

I wondered why the temple folks, who seemed intent on keeping their visitors within the temple, just let Kate and Jin go after Sawyer? It should have been more difficult for them to go, even though they sent two temple gunmen with them. 

I think next week will focus on the other side of the island with FLocke and Richard, and Sun and Lapidus and Ben.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

gchance said:


> A couple of my own observations:
> 
> - The sickness also now begs the question, what exactly happened to Claire to require the treatment, and why was the water murky THEN?
> 
> ...


I don't think either Claire or Sayid got the "sickness" from being in the water. We have no evidence that Claire was ever in the water, and I think the Temple people were trying to prevent Sayid from becoming infected by putting him in the water. It simply didn't work, which is why they were now trying to poison him.


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

Can you only become infected if you die? Can someone remind me what happened to Claire?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

mattpol said:


> From Damon's unofficial Twitter (@DamonLindelof):
> 
> _*For those of you complaining of "filler." Seriously. PLEASE WATCH NCIS: LOS ANGELES. I promise not to hold it against you.*_


I thought this was a d-bag tweet. People aren't allowed to criticize or have a different point of view without getting a smartass comment from the creator? It's one of the reasons I don't do much Twittering. People think they have to immediately retaliate against actual and perceived slights.

I was prepared to be frustrated when it looked like we were going to get another episode of violent Others who'd refuse to explain any of their strange actions. Then they started explaining to Jack, at least to some extent, what they were doing with Sayid.

How do you get infected? Do you have to get shot, drowned in holy water, die and then be resurrected? Sounds difficult to me.

I don't remember a lot of Lost small details. Jack has/had a sister on Craphole Island?


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> I don't remember a lot of Lost small details. Jack has/had a sister on Craphole Island?


Claire is Jack's half-sister.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> It seems that some weeks naysayers get in pretty quick and try to set the tone negatively about an episode. Why? You're welcome to watch and dislike and even post, but *why* post if you didn't like something? Where's the fun/joy/reward in that? The comments in this particular thread weren't even that bad, but it just reminds me of other times when it's been worse.


At this point we have invested a lot of time and are emotionally involved. If we are disappointed in an episode, what response would you suggest- that we stomp off over into a corner and sit silently leaving only the happy people to discuss the show?
It's going to get worse throughout this last season, not better.
Maybe you need to create a happy thread and a disappointed thread.

As far as my house, we were disappointed and are starting to give up. We're watching a clock tick off the hours left, knowing full well that we won't get answers to half of what we want. My husband is fully convinced that they are going to crap out on us and abruptly end it just like The Sopra


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

brermike said:


> I really enjoyed this episode. I thought it had a great mix of character and mythology. I was a bit worried that it was going to be lame since it was a Kate episode and that it followed the awesome premiere. I was pleasantly surprised. It had a real season-one vibe to it. Kate was back to kicking ass and not being driven by romance. Jack was back to taking charge and asking the right questions, which was refreshing. Very happy to see Island-Claire back, and that the infection/sickness has returned since being first mentioned back in season one. Sawyer's scene on the pier was heart-breaking and I'm glad they are letting him mourn, unlike Claire's reaction (or lack there of) when Charlie died. Anyway, I'm really enjoying the new season and can't wait to see what happens next!


Well put. All of it, but especially this.

Man, I love this show.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

getreal said:


> I wondered why the temple folks, who seemed intent on keeping their visitors within the temple, just let Kate and Jin go after Sawyer? It should have been more difficult for them to go, even though they sent two temple gunmen with them.


My impression is that for whatever reason (another List, perhaps?), the Templetons need all the Losties; if Sawyer isn't there, they're screwed, so why not take their best chance (Kate) at getting him back? If it works, it works, and if it doesn't, they were screwed anyway so what difference does it make?


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Is the house where the abortive adoptive woman lived (sorry for the pun) the same house that Kate lived in with Aaron?


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

Not a bad episode...somewhat lackluster but I'm will to take some bad with the good so to speak.

I'm still eager to watch every week to see how this giant puzzle all fits together!


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Cearbhaill said:


> My husband is fully convinced that they are going to crap out on us and abruptly end it just like The Sopra


Ha ha!


----------



## mmilton80 (Jul 28, 2005)

Happy to see Ethan (and is this the first time we have seen him go by Goodspeed?).

What did the others mean when they said that Jin was "one of them?" Is it the same them that Jacob referred to prior to being thrown into the fire? Will "they" finally break whatever cycle the island was in (back to the convo that MIB and Jacob had during the season 5 finale)? 

Did Christian infect Claire? I can't wait for a Claire centric episode.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> Is the house where the abortive adoptive woman lived (sorry for the pun) the same house that Kate lived in with Aaron?


Not at all...Kate lived in a McMansion in the suburbs.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Shakhari said:


> Claire is Jack's half-sister.


Jack doesn't know that, does he?


----------



## mmilton80 (Jul 28, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> Jack doesn't know that, does he?


Yes. He found out at his dad's funeral. Claire's mum told him.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

brermike said:


> I really enjoyed this episode. I thought it had a great mix of character and mythology. I was a bit worried that it was going to be lame since it was a Kate episode and that it followed the awesome premiere. I was pleasantly surprised. It had a real season-one vibe to it. Kate was back to kicking ass and not being driven by romance. Jack was back to taking charge and asking the right questions, which was refreshing. Very happy to see Island-Claire back, and that the infection/sickness has returned since being first mentioned back in season one. Sawyer's scene on the pier was heart-breaking and I'm glad they are letting him mourn, unlike Claire's reaction (or lack there of) when Charlie died. Anyway, I'm really enjoying the new season and can't wait to see what happens next!


This, exactly. I was happy to see Claire again. Cool that she is the new Rosseau.


----------



## BrandonRe (Jul 15, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Not at all...Kate lived in a McMansion in the suburbs.


Right. But as they were driving, I wondered if it would turn out to be the same house.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

9!

I enjoyed the ep, but was really disappointed that Sayid was such a wimp about being tortured. But then I thought about it and figured maybe that was a clue that he isn't really Sayid.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

I only have time for a few short comments, but..

1) It's good to see Claire alive and roughing it. I wouldn't call her the "new Rosseau" yet though, because Rosseau was actively fighting the "sickness" (by killing her entire team!), and Claire HAS the sickness. Rosseau would kill Claire if she were alive and had the chance.

Just realized when I was saying this that Rosseau also had electrocuted Sayid, wondering if he was sick.

Sayid being "claimed" is the strongest game reference yet. I think that at least some of the Oceanic flight members are all pieces in a game (maybe very similar to backgammon), they're the few that can actually change things (they ARE the variables that Faraday hoped they were, but they can't change things themselves - one of the two players (Jacob or MiB) has to make them move, and both sides obviously want as many of the people as they can possibly have/get.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Oh, and I thought it was implied that I was five, but ok, fine, ten.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

Shakhari said:


> Claire is Jack's half-sister.


Oh yeah. I forgot about that.

I was wondering what new character we were going to meet. I really don't pay that close attention.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> My impression is that for whatever reason (another List, perhaps?), the Templetons need all the Losties; if Sawyer isn't there, they're screwed, so why not take their best chance (Kate) at getting him back? If it works, it works, and if it doesn't, they were screwed anyway so what difference does it make?


Kinda like the airplane trips. Need the whole crew or it doesn't work.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Cearbhaill said:


> It's going to get worse throughout this last season, not better.
> 
> As far as my house, we were disappointed and are starting to give up. We're watching a clock tick off the hours left, knowing full well that we won't get answers to half of what we want. My husband is fully convinced that they are going to crap out on us and abruptly end it just like The Sopra


Have you watched for 5+ years? Have you enjoyed the ride? Then why do you & your wife think this final season, this culmination of the greatest story ever told on TV, will be anything less than amazing?

They are telling us their story. They can't just lay all the answers out on a neat little picnic blanket. It's told as an 18 hour long adventure, just as they've done in the past. There will be incredible episodes, and less than incredible ones--all seasons have their stars. But the journey will be one for the ages.

Have faith, brother.



Johnny Dancing said:


> Those already complaining again about no answers and just more mystery, need sit back and enjoy the show *because when the answers come, Lost will be over, and it will be a long time before another show comes along that can match it *. It is pretty much is a 100 hour movie so every hour of it is not going to be blow you away reveals, some hours will be more Island mythology related and perhaps a little slower.


Beautiful thought. So true. 



jkeegan said:


> Just realized when I was saying this that Rosseau also had electrocuted Sayid, wondering if he was sick.


Excellent catch! With every episode, I remember how much I don't remember.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

jkeegan said:


> I only have time for a few short comments, but..
> 
> Sayid being "claimed" is the strongest game reference yet. I think that at least some of the Oceanic flight members are all pieces in a game (maybe very similar to backgammon), they're the few that can actually change things (they ARE the variables that Faraday hoped they were, but they can't change things themselves - one of the two players (Jacob or MiB) has to make them move, and both sides obviously want as many of the people as they can possibly have/get.


Dude. That is just like, wow. I'm impressed, I really like this theory. :up:


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

I wonder if the fact that the adoptive parents had split is an indication that the psychic was still on his game in the flash sideways and that sending Claire to the US (even though the plane wouldn't crash) would cause her to have to keep the baby anyway?


----------



## lpamelaa (May 3, 2004)

Aaron seems destined to have a single mother, not matter which version. Claire, Kate, Grandma or adoptive mother dumped by husband!


----------



## acej80 (Jan 19, 2003)

jkeegan said:


> Just realized when I was saying this that Rosseau also had electrocuted Sayid, wondering if he was sick.


:up:, repeating what someone else already said, "great catch", I had forgotten about this.

What is the significance of the baseball? I'm confused by that one.

Was the guy that helped Kate remove the handcuffs, Kelvin Inman?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

acej80 said:


> What is the significance of the baseball? I'm confused by that one.


I wonder if it wasn't a gentle jibe at, well, us. "What is that?" "It's a baseball. Duh." 


acej80 said:


> Was the guy that helped Kate remove the handcuffs, Kelvin Inman?


No, it was Jeff Kober. Kelvin Inman was Clancy Brown.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

How did he react when ruesso electrocuted him? The same?


----------



## Queue (Apr 7, 2009)

I like how Sayid is now wearing all black like the MiB.

If they were trying to give Sayid poison why did it have to come from Jack?


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Queue said:


> If they were trying to give Sayid poison why did it have to come from Jack?


Because they figured that the chances of Sayid taking it were better if Jack vouched for it.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

MickeS said:


> Because they figured that the chances of Sayid taking it were better if Jack vouched for it.


They could have force fed him. It likely has something to do with the rules of the game, like the rule that Jacob and MIB can't kill each other. Ben and Widmore can't kill each other. Etc.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

I think they needed Sayid to chose to take the pill.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

Fool Me Twice said:


> They could have force fed him. It likely has something to do with the rules of the game, like the rule that Jacob and MIB can't kill each other. Ben and Widmore can't kill each other. Etc.


They said that it wouldn't work if Sayid didn't take it voluntarily. Not sure if we'll ever find out what that meant exactly. Other than since Sayid has now been "claimed", he is now a pawn in the game, and has to be the one to make the choice to take himself out of the game?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't think either Claire or Sayid got the "sickness" from being in the water. We have no evidence that Claire was ever in the water, and I think the Temple people were trying to prevent Sayid from becoming infected by putting him in the water. It simply didn't work, which is why they were now trying to poison him.





lodica1967 said:


> Can you only become infected if you die? Can someone remind me what happened to Claire?


Claire just disappeared. She was wandering the jungle with someone (I forget who), and the person came back and said she walked off and didn't come back.

When the "Jack working on Sayid" scene occurred, people here were comparing it to the one when Charlie died, but someone on another messageboard this morning pointed out something else. Jack gave up on Charlie and Kate pulled him back when he came to, and was also a bit out of it the rest of the episode. The question was then posed: was Charlie infected? His personality did change after, but I would argue it was for the better. It was an interesting speculation, anyway.

Here's Charlie's sequence: 






vertigo235 said:


> How did he react when ruesso electrocuted him? The same?


Like this: 




And honestly, I don't see much of a difference. In fact, looking at that clip, it appears that early on Rousseau assumes the same thing these guys did.

Greg


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I also don't understand all the grumbling about not getting answers. Did people expect that they'd lay everything out at the start of the season and then the final 16 episodes would be like the last half hour of "Return of the King," where it just wrapped up a bunch of happy endings? Of course they weren't going to do that. This is a mystery, and whether in a book, movie or TV show, you don't get the resolution to the mystery until the very end. That's how the author keeps the reader/viewer involved. 

At this point, I honestly don't care what happens. I trust the writers and I'm just enjoying whereever they're going to take me. I have no interest in speculating about what might happen. I have no interest in knowing the ending beforehand. I just want to watch and enjoy the show that the writers are presenting to me. They've earned that right after 5+ seasons of excellent TV.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

vertigo235 said:


> How did he react when ruesso electrocuted him? The same?





gchance said:


> Like this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Here's part of the transcript...



> *Episode 9 - Solitary*
> 
> SAYID [working on the music box]: And how did you come to be on this
> island, Danielle?
> ...


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

gchance said:


> Claire just disappeared. She was wandering the jungle with someone (I forget who), and the person came back and said she walked off and didn't come back.


Claire walked off with Christian Shephard in the middle of the night; her, Miles and Sawyer were camping in the jungle after fleeing the barracks because of the mercenary attack. Miles saw her walk off while Sawyer was asleep.

The last time we saw her was in the cabin with Christian when he told Locke to move the Island.


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

Cearbhaill said:


> At this point we have invested a lot of time and are emotionally involved. If we are disappointed in an episode, what response would you suggest- that we stomp off over into a corner and sit silently leaving only the happy people to discuss the show?
> It's going to get worse throughout this last season, not better.
> Maybe you need to create a happy thread and a disappointed thread.


:up:



Delta13 said:


> And Dogen didn't say Claire was still infected by the darkness ... but it does make you wonder about the Christian role we saw last season all of a sudden.


I thought of this too. I think Jacob always appears as Jacob and the MiB appears as whoever he wants to. Christian saying he speaks for Jacob is just the MiB being sneaky.



jkeegan said:


> Sayid being "claimed" is the strongest game reference yet. I think that at least some of the Oceanic flight members are all pieces in a game (maybe very similar to backgammon), they're the few that can actually change things (they ARE the variables that Faraday hoped they were, but they can't change things themselves - one of the two players (Jacob or MiB) has to make them move, and both sides obviously want as many of the people as they can possibly have/get.


+2. :up: Awesome.


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

I googled 'Dogen' but ended up finding the Lostpedia posting..
A few interesting tid bits-



> -Dōgen was the name of a prominent Japanese Buddhist philosopher, who founded the Soto Zen tradition. He was, for much of his life, the head of a monastery, Eihei-ji (which roughly translates to 'the temple of eternal peace').
> ("he has been referred to by Carlton Cuse as the "Temple Master")
> -The historical Dōgen died on September 22, 1253, the same calendar date as the original Oceanic Flight 815 crash.


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

Is this a goof?

On Claire's sonogram.. the date is 10/22/2004... Not 9/22 
I noticed the date when I watched,.. but after posting above and seeing the original crash date..
It made me look up the screen cap.

Link to photo

I take back that 'this was a meh episode' statement.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

Shaunnick said:


> Dude. That is just like, wow. I'm impressed, I really like this theory. :up:


Except that MIB's sole purpose (which he even said to Jacob on the beach) was simply to find the loophole and kill Jacob. Which he's now done.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

latrobe7 said:


> Claire walked off with Christian Shephard in the middle of the night; her, Miles and Sawyer were camping in the jungle after fleeing the barracks because of the mercenary attack. Miles saw her walk off while Sawyer was asleep.
> 
> The last time we saw her was in the cabin with Christian when he told Locke to move the Island.


Yeah, and if memory serves, she had a pretty wild look on her face when she was in the cabin. Maybe already infected at that time. Which begs the question, does the infection come from the water/healing process, or from somewhere else?

I would hope we'll get a Claire island flashback episode to see what she's been up to these past 3 years. I wonder if she was transported back to 1974 with the rest of the crew?


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

So if the date on the ultrasound is correct. Claire went into labor around the same time as she did on the island. Then why was she able to get on the plane?

(Sorry for the influx of posts. I'm in DC and been snowed in for 5 days, i have nothing to do but Lost research now.)


----------



## Necromancer2006 (Jan 26, 2008)

JYoung said:


> Seven.
> 
> So is Claire the new Rousseau?
> 
> And what's happening to Sayid the same thing that happened to young Ben when Ricardus took him to the spring?


It's like I'm talking to myself. What happened, happened - the players just may be different. All of this has happened before. Blackrock, Dharma, 815.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

uncdrew said:


> Except that MIB's sole purpose (which he even said to Jacob on the beach) was simply to find the loophole and kill Jacob. Which he's now done.


Did he say that was his _sole _purpose? Maybe it's a means to an end.


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

Cindy1230 said:


> So if the date on the ultrasound is correct. Claire went into labor around the same time as she did on the island. Then why was she able to get on the plane?
> 
> (Sorry for the influx of posts. I'm in DC and been snowed in for 5 days, i have nothing to do but Lost research now.)


My wife flew at 39 weeks last year (we had to go to Minneapolis at the last-minute for delivery due to a complication). Nobody from the ticket counter to security to flight attendants even asked her about it.

I had called NWA ahead of time just to make sure, but they had no policy on pregnant women flying.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

mmilton80 said:


> Yes. He found out at his dad's funeral. Claire's mum told him.


Except in the new timeline the body was lost so they have not yet had a funeral.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

hummingbird_206 said:


> 9!
> 
> I enjoyed the ep, but was really disappointed that Sayid was such a wimp about being tortured. But then I thought about it and figured maybe that was a clue that he isn't really Sayid.


When he came back and said they never even asked him any questions, it reminded me a little of Han Solo in Episode V.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

wprager said:


> Except in the new timeline the body was lost so they have not yet had a funeral.


Right, but the question was in reference to Jack in the '07 timeline.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

wprager said:


> Except in the new timeline the body was lost so they have not yet had a funeral.


But the new timeline doesn't matter to the timeline where Jack is in the Temple. In that timeline, he found out about Claire being his half-sister after he was rescued as part of the Oceanic Six, and since him being back on the Island and in the Temple is after that, presumably he knows who Dogen is referring to when he talks about Jack's sister.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Sorry, the timelines are confusing me


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

hummingbird_206 said:


> 9!
> 
> I enjoyed the ep, but was really disappointed that Sayid was such a wimp about being tortured. But then I thought about it and figured maybe that was a clue that he isn't really Sayid.


Yeah I agree. He's only been shot, bled out for several hours, drowned, died, came back to life and then taken straight to be tortured by electrocution and a red-hot branding iron. He really should be a lot tougher than that.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

uncdrew said:


> Except that MIB's sole purpose (which he even said to Jacob on the beach) was simply to find the loophole and kill Jacob. Which he's now done.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> Did he say that was his _sole _purpose? Maybe it's a means to an end.


Never said it was his sole purpose...


> GRAY-HAIRED MAN: Morning.
> 
> BLOND MAN: Mornin'.
> 
> ...


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

jking said:


> Yeah I agree. He's only been shot, bled out for several hours, drowned, died, came back to life and then taken straight to be tortured by electrocution and a red-hot branding iron. He really should be a lot tougher than that.


LOL!


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

So a 60 minute episode to give us basically 5 minutes worth of anything.

20 minutes to argue over what is in a pill. Could have been handled in 10 seconds and added nothing to the story.

The Kate/Claire hospital thing was only good for setting up the end scene.

I just feel this episode could have been wrapped up in 30 minutes easily and they could have spent 30 other minutes telling us something more useful.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I'm very intrigued by the idea that certain characters on the show (claimed/infected/sick characters) might have died and then been reanimated by island forces (Jacob/MiB) in furtherance of the game that the two of them are playing, and that this could be the explanation for reanimated Christian on the island, now Sayid, Claire, etc. It seems that there's so much that could tie into this line of thinking - (1) the whole emphasis on reincarnation last season (what was that anagram printed on the side of the dry cleaning van? Something that wound up spelling out 'reincarnation' right? ETA: found it - it was "Canton-Rainier"); (2) Ben's funny emphasis on the word 'living' last season when talking about how the freighter crew was going to come and kill "every _living_ thing" on the island; and more. And if there's something funky going on with life and death, then I wonder how that ties into childbirth/bringing new life to the island. If they're all pieces in a game (metaphorical or literal), then having children born on the island is a big no-no because that's tantamount to adding new pieces to the gameboard mid-game. Which is why Aaron's birth on the island was so significant; he could tip the scales and decide the game. Maybe once an individual has been claimed, they no longer age. What will Christian look like 500 years from now? Probably the same, if he's not a living human being in the first place. Maybe that's why Richard doesn't age - he's already been claimed.


----------



## rondotcom (Feb 13, 2005)

NatasNJ said:


> So a 60 minute episode to give us basically 5 minutes worth of anything.
> 
> 20 minutes to argue over what is in a pill. Could have been handled in 10 seconds and added nothing to the story.
> 
> ...


When someone is telling an elaborate joke, are you the one in the room who always says "Yeah, yeah, blah, blah, hurry up and get to the punchline?"

Or when someone is playong an exquisite violin solo, are you the one who says to the guy next to you. "You know that really would sound better if he played it a little faster?"

Let the grandmaster play his game. Let him show us how it's done.


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

NatasNJ said:


> So a 60 minute episode to give us basically 5 minutes worth of anything.
> 
> 20 minutes to argue over what is in a pill. Could have been handled in 10 seconds and added nothing to the story.
> 
> ...


It's all pieces in a puzzle. You can't watch ANY episode of Lost and judge as a waste of time until you see the whole season--you never know what scene or exchange will be important later. It's only episode two, I think people need to calm down a bit with the criticism.

So far I like this season much more than last season. I wasn't a fan of the time travel and if you want to talk about wasting time, that entire Dharma initiative story was 75% recycled from stuff we knew already. Still, that journey was important to the evolution of the characters, so it is what it is.

I'm actually really liking the alternate timeline too. I never considered what would have happened next had the plane landed, and it's interesting to see all these connections that are happening anyway. They did a good job at taking things in a different direction than expected. I had always assumed that if Kate landed LA that was the end of her, didn't consider she'd get away again. And Claire would hand her baby over... didn't think she'd keep it.

I just think it's cool to explore, and plus since this isn't the exact same time line, it's kind of new in the sense that you don't really know 100% of what's going on. I.E., maybe Kate did something different this time. Maybe Jack will fix Locke, why does Jin have tens of thousands of dollars in cash on him, where is Christian's body...

Not sure what's up with Claire and Sayid being "infected". It's still not clear if the Others are the good guys or the bad guys. If they are good, I hope that doesn't mean Sayid and Claire will become villians, although I'm already prepared for the idea that the castaways will end up on both sides.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

rondotcom said:


> When someone is telling an elaborate joke, are you the one in the room who always says "Yeah, yeah, blah, blah, hurry up and get to the punchline?"
> 
> Or when someone is playong an exquisite violin solo, are you the one who says to the guy next to you. "You know that really would sound better if he played it a little faster?"
> 
> Let the grandmaster play his game. Let him show us how it's done.


I would hardly compare Jack's constant WHINING with a exquisite violin solo but maybe that is just me.

And I would be MUCH more patient with the final payoff if I didn't have to watch 1/2 the junk episodes over Season 3-5. Or if Lost wouldn't just drop story lines or characters or questions and instead focus on other things that in my opinion are not nearly as interesting...

Plus I like to complain.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

mrdazzo7 said:


> You can't watch ANY episode of Lost and judge as a waste of time until you see the whole season--you never know what scene or exchange will be important later.


This is the part that bothers me the most. I can't remember all the previous episodes scenes to be able to tie EVERYTHING together and see the meaning. They pull you in so many directions and to try to understand it all is next to impossible on top of trying to recall each scene and how a future episode is genius cause it ties back into episode 12 from Season 2. WTF!


----------



## jhowell (Sep 19, 2006)

The water was cloudy and didn&#8217;t appear to work. So maybe it didn&#8217;t. Maybe it was an intentional distraction on the writer&#8217;s part and Sayid would have come back to life anyway. Perhaps Claire died in the explosion in the Dharma village and when we saw her after that she too had already returned to life. Claire seems to have taken on Rousseau&#8217;s personality. I can&#8217;t remember the timing, but didn&#8217;t Rousseau die shortly before Claire might have? Since Juliet died shortly before Sayid, I wonder if he will be taking on her personality soon. Could be very odd for Sawyer, if so.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

NatasNJ said:


> So a 60 minute episode to give us basically 5 minutes worth of anything.
> 
> 20 minutes to argue over what is in a pill. Could have been handled in 10 seconds and added nothing to the story.
> 
> ...


Is this sarcasm...? I thought anyone who felt like this would have stopped watching halfway into the first season...


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

MickeS said:


> Is this sarcasm...? I thought anyone who felt like this would have stopped watching halfway into the first season...


Season 1 & 2 it was still new. Fresh. You had to give them time to present the characters and story. We have 13 episodes left TOTAL. They presented tons of questions that have yet to be answered from seaosn one. Time is a tickin... And the only reason I watch at this point is to see how it wraps up. If they had 3+ seasons planned out from here I would have stopped watching cause every episode would have been Nicki & Pollo filler.


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

uncdrew said:


> Except that MIB's sole purpose (which he even said to Jacob on the beach) was simply to find the loophole and kill Jacob. Which he's now done.


I thought his purpose was to get off the island. Killing Jacob was a means to that end.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

NatasNJ said:


> And the only reason I watch at this point is to see how it wraps up.


That's what makes you annoying.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Shaunnick said:


> Dude. That is just like, wow. I'm impressed, I really like this theory. (thumbsup)


Thanks!



jking said:


> I wonder if the fact that the adoptive parents had split is an indication that the psychic was still on his game in the flash sideways and that sending Claire to the US (even though the plane wouldn't crash) would cause her to have to keep the baby anyway?


:up:



DevdogAZ said:


> I also don't understand all the grumbling about not getting answers. Did people expect that they'd lay everything out at the start of the season and then the final 16 episodes would be like the last half hour of "Return of the King," where it just wrapped up a bunch of happy endings? Of course they weren't going to do that. This is a mystery, and whether in a book, movie or TV show, you don't get the resolution to the mystery until the very end. That's how the author keeps the reader/viewer involved.
> 
> At this point, I honestly don't care what happens. I trust the writers and I'm just enjoying whereever they're going to take me. I have no interest in speculating about what might happen. I have no interest in knowing the ending beforehand. I just want to watch and enjoy the show that the writers are presenting to me. They've earned that right after 5+ seasons of excellent TV.


:up::up:



Cindy1230 said:


> I googled 'Dogen' but ended up finding the Lostpedia posting..
> A few interesting tid bits-
> 
> -Dōgen was the name of a prominent Japanese Buddhist philosopher, who founded the Soto Zen tradition. He was, for much of his life, the head of a monastery, Eihei-ji (which roughly translates to 'the temple of eternal peace').
> ...


RIGHT THERE!! All of you people who think they had absolutely no plan and came up with this stuff out of their asses, RIGHT F*ING THERE! That says to me they planned to have a Temple as early as the first time that we ever heard the date September 22. Wasn't that also when it aired?



Cindy1230 said:


> I take back that 'this was a meh episode' statement.


:up: x 3!! Welcome back! 



Necromancer2006 said:


> It's like I'm talking to myself. What happened, happened - the players just may be different. All of this has happened before. Blackrock, Dharma, 815.


:up: It's a bit like playing multiple games of backgammon, over and over.



wprager said:


> When he came back and said they never even asked him any questions, it reminded me a little of Han Solo in Episode V.


YES! I said the same thing to my wife! I even had to act out the scene from empire. Clear SW reference.



rondotcom said:


> When someone is telling an elaborate joke, are you the one in the room who always says "Yeah, yeah, blah, blah, hurry up and get to the punchline?"
> 
> Or when someone is playong an exquisite violin solo, are you the one who says to the guy next to you. "You know that really would sound better if he played it a little faster?"
> 
> Let the grandmaster play his game. Let him show us how it's done.


 :up:

Ok, other than lots of likes, here's a few more thoughts on the idea that all of this is a game..

MiB "just wants to go home". I'd been thinking that means leaving the island, or going back to the future, or leaving this timeline, or something. But maybe he means he just wants to win! (in backgammon you want to get your pieces home).

Umm, wow, umm, when looking up backgammon rules to confirm what I'd remembered (that the home board was actually called home - I'd been thinking about the bar), I saw a picture here of a backgammon doubling cube (haven't played in a long time), and it has the following numbers on its 6 faces:

2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64

(yeah I know that's just doubling each time, but hell, that looks awfully similar to 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42.. the 4 is the same, the 8 is the same, the 16 is the same the 23 is the same with the digits doubled.. the 4 in 64 and the extra 2 make 42, leaving only a missing 15 and an extra 6. numerology criticisms aside, tie it in with the existing backgammon references throughout the story, and it's pretty hard to ignore!)

BTW I'd forgotten that kid John Locke was playing backgammon when Richard came to meet him in his foster parents' house to give him that Dalai Lama style test. All I remembered today was the backgammon board from the pilot episode of the show, and the conversation with Walt.

Ok so also, the idea of a game (specifically a backgammon-like game) with people as the pieces fits in nicely with wanting "all of the people" (but settling for as many as you can get). Everyone screamed that we need all of the O6 to return, but when Aaron can't come, and non-O6 Walt stays back, no one complains too much. Protect these people here inside the temple.. Don't let Sawyer go! Why? He's a piece in the game, that even if he doesn't help us, could be used against us by the other side. Keep as many pieces as you can!

The idea of a game explains why there are rules, why people would need to look for loopholes to those rules, etc. Ben was CONVINCED that his daughter would be safe (from a man with a gun to her head) and surprised that she was shot. His response? "He CHANGED the RULES!". MiB went to all of that effort to kill Jacob when it was accomplished with a simple knife stabbing him in the chest.

Lastly, after we rewatched the awesome backgammon scene on the beach from episode 1 season 1, a friend at work caught this great realization.. 
Here's the transcript of the relevant piece:



> LOCKE: Backgammon is the oldest game in the world. Archeologists found sets when they excavated the ruins of ancient Mesopotamia. Five thousand years old. Thats older than Jesus Christ.
> WALT: Did they have dice and stuff?
> LOCKE: (nods) Mhhm. But theirs werent made of plastic. Their dice were made of bones.
> WALT: Cool.
> LOCKE: Two players. Two sides. One is light  one is dark. Walt, do you want to know a secret?


_Their dice were made of bones_! Bones with living muscle and tissue around them! The people are the variables, variables in the game!

What a cool game. What a great show. Damn it, Lost is awesome.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Fool Me Twice said:


> That's what makes you annoying.


LOL


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

jkeegan said:


> RIGHT THERE!! All of you people who think they had absolutely no plan and came up with this stuff out of their asses, RIGHT F*ING THERE! That says to me they planned to have a Temple as early as the first time that we ever heard the date September 22. Wasn't that also when it aired?


That is a big time reach, IMO. I think it's more likely that if it was considered at all, when they were fleshing out the characters around the Temple someone pointed out the historical Dogen and the date of his death.



> ...backgammon discussion...


Anyone interested in the "game theory" of LOST should check out this site: lostisagame.com (there are no spoilers there)

It's very complicated and convoluted; but the guy has done his homework!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

NatasNJ said:


> So a 60 minute episode to give us basically 5 minutes worth of anything.
> 
> 20 minutes to argue over what is in a pill. Could have been handled in 10 seconds and added nothing to the story.
> 
> ...


As you state in your next post, you have no patience fo this story. You're just watching to see how it wraps up. People like you are not who this story is aimed at. This is an elaborate, complicated story that requires patience and insight to understand. If you're not willing to respect the story enough to give it some patience, perhaps you'd be better off waiting until the final 2-3 episodes. That's when all the answers will be given. Up until then, it's still going to be mysterious and we won't know what's going on.

And just to be clear, we're not going to get answers to every single question that's been posed throughout the course of the show. If that's what you're looking for, you're going to be disappointed and you may as well stop now.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

mmilton80 said:


> <rant> I really enjoy trading ideas and insights about LOST episodes and the speculation as to where this is going. The detractors who simply post to complain are extremely obnoxious and for some reason have posted quite a bit today. Please create your own "I hate LOST and I want to complain about it" thread and post about your need for all of the answers there. That way those who want to talk about the episode do not have to read your ramblings. <end rant>


I find it far more obnoxious for people to tell others that their opinions are invalid or unwanted.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

mmilton80 said:


> <rant> I really enjoy trading ideas and insights about LOST episodes and the speculation as to where this is going. The detractors who simply post to complain are extremely obnoxious and for some reason have posted quite a bit today. Please create your own "I hate LOST and I want to complain about it" thread and post about your need for all of the answers there. That way those who want to talk about the episode do not have to read your ramblings. <end rant>


This makes no sense. Out of over 100 posts, only a handful have been relatively negative. Nobody has said they hate Lost. They just said they thought this episode dragged. That's a legitimate criticism. I don't know why fanbois think a show's thread must be 100% adulation. Lost, like every other tv show is a work of art. Different people are going to have different interpretations of it. As soon as I saw what NatasNJ wrote, I knew he was going to get unfairly pounded. I find the "If you don't like it, stay out of the thread" people just as obnoxious as you find the "I didn't like this episode" people.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

NatasNJ said:


> Season 1 & 2 it was still new. Fresh. You had to give them time to present the characters and story. We have 13 episodes left TOTAL. They presented tons of questions that have yet to be answered from seaosn one. Time is a tickin... And the only reason I watch at this point is to see how it wraps up. If they had 3+ seasons planned out from here I would have stopped watching cause every episode would have been Nicki & Pollo filler.


But the show has ALWAYS been such that what "happened" in the episode from a story perspective could always be summed up in 10 minutes if one wanted. The show has never been one where scene A leads to scene B because they have to get to scene C before the episode ends. They have taken their time and focused mostly on character interactions.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

I'm not sure if I'm remembering correctly, but didn't Richard save young Ben last year by bringing him to the temple? If so, I'm guessing that this is why that sweet kid turned into the dark hearted guy we all know and love. I think Richard even said beforehand that Ben would change by being saved. Am I remembering this right at all?


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> How about Arzt doing his best Dustin Hoffman impression? "I'm walkin' here, I'm walkin' here!"


See, I forgot about Midnight Cowboy... I always think of Back to the Future II


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

I just read a fabulous analysis of this episode. I'm not sure I agree with everything he says, but it's a great read. I think he addresses everything everyone has said here (including people complaining about filler)

http://darkufo.blogspot.com/2010/02/things-i-noticed-what-kate-does-by.html

Greg


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Cindy1230 said:


> See, I forgot about Midnight Cowboy... I always think of Back to the Future II


I hate to say it, but that's just wrong.

Greg


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

3D said:


> I'm not sure if I'm remembering correctly, but didn't Richard save young Ben last year by bringing him to the temple? If so, I'm guessing that this is why that sweet kid turned into the dark hearted guy we all know and love. I think Richard even said beforehand that Ben would change by being saved. Am I remembering this right at all?


Yes.
Which is why I find it interesting that Jacob wants the same treatment for Sayid.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

jking said:


> Yeah I agree. He's only been shot, bled out for several hours, drowned, died, came back to life and then taken straight to be tortured by electrocution and a red-hot branding iron. He really should be a lot tougher than that.


Point taken, yes, he has been through a lot. But Sayid has always been the tough guy. He used to torture other people. For him to lay there on the table and basically whine and cry just seemed totally out of character and unbelievable to me. He wouldn't say in a trembling voice "I don't understand why you're doing this."


----------



## T-Wolves (Aug 22, 2000)

jkeegan said:


> ...MiB "just wants to go home". I'd been thinking that means leaving the island, or going back to the future, or leaving this timeline, or something....


How about leaving Earth and going back to his home planet?

My main theory right now is that there is an advanced race that travels around the universe, Starfleet-like, looking for planets that contain sentient life. At each one of these planets, they drop off 2 members of their crew. These 2 must decide if the dominant species on this planet is inherently good or evil. As in a debate, one of the crew must lean on the side of good, the other on the side of evil. The 2 have certain abilities to control time/space/matter/etc. they can use to help them make their decision. At some point, the "ship" will return (or maybe the Island is their return ship), and the 2 will give their verdict, and then the race or planet or whatever will either be destroyed or welcomed into the "Federation." In this particular case, MIB long ago decided our species was inherently evil. But Jacob continues to hold out hope for us, and is willing to continue giving us more chances to prove we are worthy of continued existence.

When Jacob said "They're coming" (right after Ben stabbed him), he meant that the members of their race that left them there were returning. So now when they arrive, MIB is free to report that we are evil, presumably sealing our doom.

My theory is that somehow we will be given one last chance, and Hurley will be chosen to pass some kind of test to prove that we (mankind) are good. My thinking is that Hurley is probably the least violent member of the Losties, and maybe therefore one of the best (Rose & Bernard being the others) to represent us.

No matter what the actual ending, I have faith that Lindelof and Cuse will not disappoint.


----------



## Queue (Apr 7, 2009)

JYoung said:


> Yes.
> Which is why I find it interesting that Jacob wants the same treatment for Sayid.


I don't think Jacob wanted to same treatment. I think Sayid was suppose to get healed before he died. Maybe it was the death that allowed him to become "infected". Although that doesn't explain Claire getting infected when she seemed perfectly fine.


----------



## T-Wolves (Aug 22, 2000)

Cindy1230 said:


> ...I think Jacob always appears as Jacob and the MiB appears as whoever he wants to. Christian saying he speaks for Jacob is just the MiB being sneaky....


After last season's finale, I've been going on the assumption that MIB has been behind the appearance of pretty much *all* the "ghosts" that have appeared on the Island -- Christian (to pretend to be Jacob to those who don't know better?), Walt(to lure Shannon to her death, and to keep Locke from killing himself in the Dharma dead body pit), Hurley's invisible friend (to try to get Hurley to jump to his death), Alex(to convince Ben to do whatever FakeLocke says), and Yemi (not sure why).

But of course, it wouldn't really explain post-mortem appearances by Mr. Eko, and Libby, or Kate's horse, for example.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

T-Wolves said:


> How about leaving Earth and going back to his home planet?


You know, while typing I was trying to remember all of the ideas of what "home" are that I'd thought, and that was the one that eluded me while typing. Yeah, the idea of another planet fits in nicely with the comic book too (see last week's thread). But hell, home can mean things in games.. They even showed us a baseball again this week! I want to go home!!


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

T-Wolves said:


> But of course, it wouldn't really explain post-mortem appearances by Mr. Eko, and Libby, or Kate's horse, for example.


Or the off-island apparitions - even if you dismiss Hurley's a something different, Christian has appeared to Jack and Michael off the Island and Libby also appeared to Michael on the freighter...


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

jkeegan said:


> Sayid being "claimed" is the strongest game reference yet. I think that at least some of the Oceanic flight members are all pieces in a game (maybe very similar to backgammon), they're the few that can actually change things (they ARE the variables that Faraday hoped they were, but they can't change things themselves - one of the two players (Jacob or MiB) has to make them move, and both sides obviously want as many of the people as they can possibly have/get.


There was talk about Hurley being some kind of a gamer...even said at one point, "Back home, I'm known as something of a warrior myself." which people took to mean in some kind of gaming.

Not sure what that has to do with anything, but there it is.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

T-Wolves said:


> How about leaving Earth and going back to his home planet?
> (or maybe the Island is their return ship),


I love this whole theory, but especially the island as their ship. :up:

I'm in the camp thinking that Jacob was hoping to get Sayid to the temple in time to save him BEFORE he died so that what happened wouldn't happen. So I don't think there's any connection between him and Ben. I assume this "infection" is a real black hole like what made Danielle's shipmates and even her husband try to kill her. Ben isn't that bad...quite. Danielle also wasn't evil; just crazy. We haven't seen what Claire is like yet.

I wonder how Sayid would have reacted to the torture if he wasn't infected? There aren't too many other reactions to have unless you just don't feel the pain. If the alternative was for Jacob to be in him, then maybe he wouldn't have felt it?

If the infection is MiB, how did he get inside the temple?

I thought Claire had been injured before the night she walked away in the jungle. Maybe she died when no one was around, and then awakened. At first she would seem like herself like Sayid did, but to leave the baby...

And since she left with Christian, he must be the same, and has lied when he claimed to be speaking for Jacob. Everything he did worked toward getting Locke back so he could "resurrect" him.

Which brings up the question, who was really been getting instructions from Jacob in the past? Richard? Did he know Ben was following MiB? Did the lists come from Jacob through Richard, since Ben never knew Jacob or where he was? Or were they part of MiB's plot?


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

hefe said:


> There was talk about Hurley being some kind of a gamer...even said at one point, "Back home, I'm known as something of a warrior myself." which people took to mean in some kind of gaming.
> 
> Not sure what that has to do with anything, but there it is.


They probably took it to be about gaming since after he says that the next time we see him he is playing backgammon with Walt. And Hurley took 17th place in a backgammon tournament once (which is very good ).


----------



## rufus_x_s (Jul 14, 2004)

gchance said:


> When Jack asked the one guy, "Who ARE you?" I sang, "We are the priests... of the temples... of Syrinx"


 :up:

That's awesome. I wish I would have thought of that and subjected my wife to the same.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Did he say that was his _sole _purpose? Maybe it's a means to an end.


He did not say that. I made it up.

Making stuff up about this show is the best way I've found to cope with it. 

Like that one episode where I made up the polar bear. Remember how cool that was?

And the episode where I made up the huge Egyptian statue foot?


----------



## brermike (Jun 1, 2006)

Queue said:


> I don't think Jacob wanted to same treatment. I think Sayid was suppose to get healed before he died. Maybe it was the death that allowed him to become "infected". Although that doesn't explain Claire getting infected when she seemed perfectly fine.


Remember, too, that the water was no longer clear. The water was probably clear when Ben was taken to the Temple so something different could have and probably did occur. Whether Jacob knew of this when talking to Hurley is another interesting question.

One thing about Claire. She seemed quite weird the last time we saw her. She seemed evil in the cabin with Christian when Locke was told to move the Island. Also, right before she disappeared, Miles kept looking at her strangely, almost the same way he was looking at Sayid in this episode. I wonder if Claire almost dying in the house explosion, has anything to do with this. I remember others saying they thought she had died, and that was why Miles was looking at her oddly. Looks like it was something more that was set up at the end of season 4. Awesome


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

uncdrew said:


> He did not say that. I made it up.
> 
> Making stuff up about this show is the best way I've found to cope with it.
> 
> ...


Keep up the good work. :up:


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

Anyone remember how that PC game MYST ended?


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

uncdrew said:


> Anyone remember how that PC game MYST ended?


I got bored and quit.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

uncdrew said:


> Anyone remember how that PC game MYST ended?


There's more than one ending. In the "right" one the player frees the father and he apparently kills his sons (or at least permanently traps them in another 'age').

Why do you ask?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hefe said:


> I got bored and quit.


Ah, you DO remember!


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

jhowell said:


> Claire seems to have taken on Rousseaus personality.


I've seen statements like this a few times since the episode and I can't for the life of me figure out how people got that Claire is the "new Rousseau" based on five seconds of screen time and absolutely no dialogue. The only comparison that I can possibly seeing being made is that she has a rifle and looks kind of dishevled, but that describes 90% of the island's inhabitants. I think it's a little premature to compare her with Danielle at all, unless there are spoilers out there I don't know about (and don't want to).


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

mrdazzo7 said:


> I've seen statements like this a few times since the episode and I can't for the life of me figure out how people got that Claire is the "new Rousseau" based on five seconds of screen time and absolutely no dialogue. The only comparison that I can possibly seeing being made is that she has a rifle and looks kind of dishevled, but that describes 90% of the island's inhabitants. I think it's a little premature to compare her with Danielle at all, unless there are spoilers out there I don't know about (and don't want to).


I based it on her look, obviously hiding out in the woods, and setting traps. All things that Rousseau did.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

MickeS said:


> I based it on her look, obviously hiding out in the woods, and setting traps. All things that Rousseau did.


And had a baby on the island, that was lost in some way.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> ... This is an elaborate, complicated story that requires patience and insight to understand. If you're not willing to respect the story enough to give it some patience, perhaps you'd be better off waiting until the final 2-3 episodes. That's when all the answers will be given. Up until then, it's still going to be mysterious and we won't know what's going on..


this sums up what I love so much about Lost, and what I love about the discussions here on TCF about it, it's about thinking, options, opening your mind to things that you missed, or never even thought of, but someone else suggests, and BOOM that light bulb goes on, and you wind up talking about it for hours with friends.

It's about learning, paying attention, and occasionally having that "ah HA!" moment when you realize the scene you just watched pay off was set up 3 years prior. The making of this show is an art, and one that you can't just make with money, it takes talented people who care about what they're crafting.

There was a great quote in last weeks podcast where they're commenting about Evangeline Lilly watching the scene in the airplane with Locke and Boone and seeing Frogurt in it sleeping and she shouts out gleefully "FROGURT!" that's more then just doing your job, that's loving what you do and being invested in it as a whole.

Diane


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

hefe said:


> I got bored and quit.




Will LOST end the same way for you?

I remember my ending was just looking at some dude writing a book. Kind of a bummer for me, but I wasn't really sure I was done.

I'm certainly not saying that LOST will end the same way. Nor am I saying the creators of LOST have even thought about Myst. But I have noticed a few similarities.


----------



## rufus_x_s (Jul 14, 2004)

NatasNJ said:


> This is the part that bothers me the most. I can't remember all the previous episodes scenes to be able to tie EVERYTHING together and see the meaning. They pull you in so many directions and to try to understand it all is next to impossible on top of trying to recall each scene and how a future episode is genius cause it ties back into episode 12 from Season 2. WTF!


I don't remember a lot of stuff and a lot of it goes over my head also, which is why I rely on this board to put it together for me. 

Also I like the speculation of what's to come -- prepares my mind to be open for different possibilities and also to not be too disappointed if some things aren't explained to my satisfaction or are never explained.


----------



## rufus_x_s (Jul 14, 2004)

Re: Myst. I enjoyed it very much and also Riven and the next one after that.  I'll always regret cheating for a couple of answers in Riven.

I'm with the people here who are trusting the storytellers. I've enjoyed the ride so much that I don't have any worries for this season. I'm just savoring it. It's an incredible 100 hour movie. (Thank you, Lost creators, writers, actors, and everyone involved with making it possible!)


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Nobody has brought up the fact that when asked what she did, in one instance Kate said she was "_wanted_ for murder", and the other instance she said, "Would you believe me if I said I was innocent?" So perhaps in the sideways timeline, Kate really isn't a murderer and has been wrongly accused. That would be an interesting twist.


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Nobody has brought up the fact that when asked what she did, in one instance Kate said she was "_wanted_ for murder", and the other instance she said, "Would you believe me if I said I was innocent?" So perhaps in the sideways timeline, Kate really isn't a murderer and has been wrongly accused. That would be an interesting twist.


I mentioned it earlier. I think that's where they're going with it. With all the subtle differences in this timeline it seems reasonable to think that some of the bigger aspects of their lives will be different. Maybe Sawyer's parents didn't both die or maybe he didn't kill the guy in Australia. Jack's marriage could be solid, Jin could be planning on leaving Sun (which would by hysterical), maybe Michael and Walt's mom never broke up so he never had to go to Australia to get Walt... etc.

It stands to reason that there will be some significant differences because otherwise we'd just be watching the same exact flashbacks/back stories.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

On last week's episode (LA X parts 1 and 2) did they give any indication of what year Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Hurley, Jin, and Sayid are in (in the temple with the new Others)? Are they in the same time as Jun, Ben and Locke's body (which I guess would be around 2007)?

Does anyone know a website that has an up-to-date timeline that includes season six? All the timelines I found don't include the current season.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Dnamertz said:


> On last week's episode (LA X parts 1 and 2) did they give any indication of what year Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Hurley, Jin, and Sayid are in (in the temple with the new Others)? Are they in the same time as Jun, Ben and Locke's body (which I guess would be around 2007)?
> 
> Does anyone know a website that has an up-to-date timeline that includes season six? All the timelines I found don't include the current season.


I think they have to be, since The Others know about Ajira flight 316.

-smak-


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

Dnamertz said:


> On last week's episode (LA X parts 1 and 2) did they give any indication of what year Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Hurley, Jin, and Sayid are in (in the temple with the new Others)? Are they in the same time as Jun, Ben and Locke's body (which I guess would be around 2007)?
> 
> Does anyone know a website that has an up-to-date timeline that includes season six? All the timelines I found don't include the current season.


Yes they are... In the scene where the Others set off the flare/fireworks/whatever that was, they cut to Richard, Sun, etc by the Foot as they saw the signal. If I remember right it was right before NuLocke came out of the foot.


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

smak said:


> I think they have to be, since The Others know about Ajira flight 316.
> 
> -smak-


That too.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> Nobody has brought up the fact that when asked what she did, in one instance Kate said she was "_wanted_ for murder", and the other instance she said, "Would you believe me if I said I was innocent?" So perhaps in the sideways timeline, Kate really isn't a murderer and has been wrongly accused. That would be an interesting twist.


Eh, I took that as a clever way to avoid saying you were guilty.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

DevdogAZ said:


> Nobody has brought up the fact that when asked what she did, in one instance Kate said she was "_wanted_ for murder", and the other instance she said, "Would you believe me if I said I was innocent?" So perhaps in the sideways timeline, Kate really isn't a murderer and has been wrongly accused. That would be an interesting twist.


On the popup video show recapping last week's 2 hour premiere, I thought I saw


Spoiler



Text that said Kate was involved in the accidental shooting of her boyfriend. So looks like the reason she was arrested was changed from killing her stepdad.



I love the popup video shows. YMMV.


----------



## brermike (Jun 1, 2006)

hummingbird_206 said:


> On the popup video show recapping last week's 2 hour premiere, I thought I saw
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


Actually, that happened back in the season one episode Born to Run. It was the friend whom she buried the toy plane with (hence its significance). When he helped her visit her mom in the hospital. When she was fleeing, he went with her and got shot by the cops.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

laststarfighter said:


> I would have enjoyed this episode more if ABC didn't keep running that "the questions are over" promo all the time. It's like a big FU.


That's one reason why you have a TiVo..........to AVOID that crap.


----------



## GTuck (May 23, 2004)

I don't know if this theory has been brought up yet, but what if when they were torturing Sayid, they weren't really torturing Sayid? The test was to see if he faked pain? The electrocution test could have been just noise and the poker wasn't really hot? We didn't actually see a mark on his skin, right?


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

astrohip said:


> Excellent catch! With every episode, I remember how much I don't remember.


Zen Master Dogen, ladies and gentlemen! (oh I agree with you, just couldn't resist)



JYoung said:


> Yes.
> Which is why I find it interesting that Jacob wants the same treatment for Sayid.


Yep, that's just what this island needs - a mean, darkhearted evil Iraqi ex-Republican Guard torturer. Straight from the grave no less. Yikes. 

Actually, I think Dogen and Lennon were forced to gamble on the spring water working. If Sayid died without them helping, they were in big trouble. If the water didn't work, they were screwed. If he died while Jack was poking holes in him, they were screwed. The only possible out was to try the water and take their chances.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

A couple things...

First, I don't think there is any doubt Claire's the "new Rousseau". When Jin, Kate, and the two Others were walking around, one of them was volunteering information while Mac-from-Sunny was telling him to shut up... they basically said Rousseau died a few years ago (I think he said three, I haven't rewatched the episode yet). If there's no Rousseau, they're Claire's traps.

Second, I found out about a new Lost podcast everyone will want to listen to (or at least podcast listeners). It's called Geronimo Jack's Beard, and it's hosted by none other than Jorje Garcia. Cool stuff!

Edit: Jorge. I must have been thinking of Jorja Fox.

Greg


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

gchance said:


> Second, I found out about a new Lost podcast everyone will want to listen to (or at least podcast listeners). It's called Geronimo Jack's Beard, and it's hosted by none other than Jorje Garcia. Cool stuff!
> 
> Edit: Jorge. I must have been thinking of Jorja Fox.
> 
> Greg




You know, I have been sitting here for the last ten minutes trying to figure out how you can confuse the two and I can't come up with a rational explanation.


----------



## JETarpon (Jan 1, 2003)

gchance said:


> First, I don't think there is any doubt Claire's the "new Rousseau". When Jin, Kate, and the two Others were walking around, one of them was volunteering information while Mac-from-Sunny was telling him to shut up... they basically said Rousseau died a few years ago (I think he said three, I haven't rewatched the episode yet). If there's no Rousseau, they're Claire's traps.


Yes, three. Rousseau was killed in 2004 by Widmore's men. The Ajira plane went down in 2007.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

JYoung said:


> You know, I have been sitting here for the last ten minutes trying to figure out how you can confuse the two and I can't come up with a rational explanation.


They both have dark hair, duh!


----------



## teknikel (Jan 27, 2002)

eleven


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> ....At this point, I honestly don't care what happens. I trust the writers and I'm just enjoying whereever they're going to take me. I have no interest in speculating about what might happen. I have no interest in knowing the ending beforehand. I just want to watch and enjoy the show that the writers are presenting to me. They've earned that right after 5+ seasons of excellent TV.


That's exactly why I don't EVER read Lost threads completely; I skim them and actually sometimes don't bother with them at all. And Lost is the ONLY show I watch where I do that.


----------



## Mike Wells (Mar 9, 2000)

Favorite quote, for its description of smoky:



> KATE: So why do you people want us to stay at the temple?
> ALDO: We're protecting you.
> KATE: From what?
> ALDO: You been on this island a while, right? Ever see a big pillar of black smoke, makes a tikka-tikka sound, looks pissed off?
> ...


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Mike Wells said:


> Favorite quote, for its description of smoky:


 Plus, Kate looked finally a bit humbled/scared for a second when he said that.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

Perhaps this has been mentioned elsewhere, apologies if so, but it's amazing how the universe seems to be course correcting itself:

-Charlie almost died and had to be saved by Jack, same as on the island.
-Christain's body is missing, same as on the island.
-Claire was essentially "kidnapped" (this time by Kate), taken to a hospital (medical hatch) and treated by Ethan.
-Something happened that's forced Claire to have to keep the baby (for now).

I wonder if we will also see:

-Charlie eventually die by drowning.
-Locke cured of his condition, by Jack this time (I know this has been mentioned, but wanted to add it in).
-Sawyer and Juliet meet and be together for maybe 3 years (2004-2007)?
-Hurley meet Libby.
-Since Kate and Claire have a history now, something happen to make Claire contact Kate and ask her to take care of Aaron for her.

...etc


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

JYoung said:


> You know, I have been sitting here for the last ten minutes trying to figure out how you can confuse the two and I can't come up with a rational explanation.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> They both have dark hair, duh!


Dark hair and appendages that rhyme with "oobs".



Mike Wells said:


> Favorite quote, for its description of smoky:





jkeegan said:


> Plus, Kate looked finally a bit humbled/scared for a second when he said that.


Notice he didn't describe it as a monster of any kind. That would be name calling. 

Greg


----------



## thenightfly42 (Mar 5, 2002)

12

And on Sayid: I'm pretty convinced that whatever has claimed Sayid is why Jacob warned them not to let Sayid die. Since Sayid died, they are now in trouble. (I know that was mentioned before, but the point still seems to be in discussion.)


----------



## Queue (Apr 7, 2009)

jking said:


> -Hurley meet Libby.


If they write Libby in to have some big piece in this new universe/timeline/whatever, then that will be awesome about how the writers set her up years ago for something that everyone, including myself, complained that her character was a waste.


----------



## Alpinemaps (Jul 26, 2004)

Watched the episode last night, and skimmed the thread this morning. It was a 'B' episode to me - not a lot revealed, etc., but I'm okay with that. I'm always convinced we're going to see a payoff later. (My wife was frustrated with the episode, though).

Here's one thing I don't get. We hear Claire has the sickness. But, of all the Losties, it was Claire who was getting injections of the medicine to keep the sickness at bay, right?


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

jking said:


> Perhaps this has been mentioned elsewhere, apologies if so, but it's amazing how the universe seems to be course correcting itself:
> 
> -Charlie almost died and had to be saved by Jack, same as on the island.
> -Christain's body is missing, same as on the island.
> ...


I like this. I have nothing to add, but wanted to compliment your observations in this post. Other than Jack/Locke, I haven't really seen mention of these other parallels.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

jking said:


> Perhaps this has been mentioned elsewhere, apologies if so, but it's amazing how the universe seems to be course correcting itself:
> 
> -Charlie almost died and had to be saved by Jack, same as on the island.
> -Christain's body is missing, same as on the island.
> ...


So, you're saying... "What happened, happened?"


----------



## Queue (Apr 7, 2009)

Alpinemaps said:


> Here's one thing I don't get. We hear Claire has the sickness. But, of all the Losties, it was Claire who was getting injections of the medicine to keep the sickness at bay, right?


I totally forgot about the injections. But was that for the "infection" from the MiB? Or something for child birth?


----------



## brermike (Jun 1, 2006)

Alpinemaps said:


> Watched the episode last night, and skimmed the thread this morning. It was a 'B' episode to me - not a lot revealed, etc., but I'm okay with that. I'm always convinced we're going to see a payoff later. (My wife was frustrated with the episode, though).
> 
> Here's one thing I don't get. We hear Claire has the sickness. But, of all the Losties, it was Claire who was getting injections of the medicine to keep the sickness at bay, right?


Not sure if it is the same sickness or not. I think those injections had more to do with having the baby on the Island. The Others (Ben, Ethan, etc) at the time seemed most concerned with Claire successfully giving birth on the Island. Actually, now thinking back on it, I think it was Aaron that was getting the medicine (in utero from Ethan and as a baby when Charlie gave them the medicine).


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

gchance said:


> Dark hair and appendages that rhyme with "oobs".





















Not seeing the confusion here.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

gchance said:


> Notice he didn't describe it as a monster of any kind. That would be name calling.


There's no such thing as monsters.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

13


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

brermike said:


> One thing about Claire. She seemed quite weird the last time we saw her. She seemed evil in the cabin with Christian when Locke was told to move the Island. Also, right before she disappeared, Miles kept looking at her strangely, almost the same way he was looking at Sayid in this episode. I wonder if *Claire almost dying in the house explosion*, has anything to do with this. I remember others saying they thought she had died, and that was why Miles was looking at her oddly. Looks like it was something more that was set up at the end of season 4. Awesome


My take.

Claire died in the explosion. Got possessed and reanimated by MiB. That's why Miles looked 'funny' at her.

Yes, Miles also pointedly looked 'funny' at Sayid, Release 2.0


----------



## crazywater (Mar 7, 2001)

Ok...maybe I missed something but the ultra-sound date is 10-22-2004 but the original crash was 9-22-2004 and aren't we still in the same day in the alternate timeline? 

So everything is pushed forward a month?


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Some have speculated that date is the due date, not the current date.

What a producer has to say:
http://forum.thefuselage.com/showthread.php?p=2274437#post2274437


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

philw1776 said:


> My take.
> 
> Claire died in the explosion. Got possessed and reanimated by MiB. That's why Miles looked 'funny' at her.
> 
> Yes, Miles also pointedly looked 'funny' at Sayid, Release 2.0


We don't know whether MIB can reanimate *anyone* - to date we've seen no evidence that he can. We do know the he can take on the shape/persona of someone who is dead, i.e. Alex, Christian Shepherd. And we know that when he does that, he does *not* reanimate the dead person's corpse, i.e. Flocke, as they went to great lengths to show us Locke's corpse had not been reanimated.

There's also the open question as to whether MIB can appear as more than one dead person at a time. Can he still be Flocke and also appear as someone else? I don't think so, since they've made it pretty clear that he can't be both Flocke and Smokey (or Flocke and Alex) at the same time.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

Flocke = Fake Locke


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

hummingbird_206 said:


> Flocke = Fake Locke


I presume so. At least, that's how I used it. I thought I saw that usage already in either this thread or last week's?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Not seeing the confusion here.


Dude. His name is Jorge. Her name is Jorja. Similar spellings, slip of the keyboard. No, I don't think they look alike. They do, however, each have either boobs or moobs, you pick which is which.

Greg


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

DreadPirateRob said:


> We don't know whether MIB can reanimate *anyone* - to date we've seen no evidence that he can. We do know the he can take on the shape/persona of someone who is dead, i.e. Alex, Christian Shepherd. And we know that when he does that, he does *not* reanimate the dead person's corpse, i.e. Flocke, as they went to great lengths to show us Locke's corpse had not been reanimated.
> 
> There's also the open question as to whether MIB can appear as more than one dead person at a time. Can he still be Flocke and also appear as someone else? I don't think so, since they've made it pretty clear that he can't be both Flocke and Smokey (or Flocke and Alex) at the same time.


Not to argue anything, because I'm not certain what I think about the whole thing; but it should be noted that Christian's body has never turned up anywhere (but Jack did find his empty coffin). So while they have gone out of their way to show us that MIB is not using Locke's body, and it was also clear he was not using Yemi's, they have not cleared that up with regard to Christian.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

gchance said:


> Dude. His name is Jorge. Her name is Jorja. Similar spellings, slip of the keyboard. No, I don't think they look alike. They do, however, each have either boobs or moobs, you pick which is which.
> 
> Greg


Dude, I'm just giving you a hard time.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Dude, I'm just giving you a hard time.


Whoa. Dude. You got some Arzt on you.

Greg


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

gchance said:


> First, I don't think there is any doubt Claire's the "new Rousseau". When Jin, Kate, and the two Others were walking around, one of them was volunteering information while Mac-from-Sunny was telling him to shut up... they basically said Rousseau died a few years ago (I think he said three, I haven't rewatched the episode yet). If there's no Rousseau, they're Claire's traps.


This just made me realize how this might all tie together at the end (or I might be 100% wrong). Is everything on this island just happening in one big loop (just the roles are being replace by with new people)?

1. Rousseau came to the island, gave birth, and the baby was taken and raised by someone else. Now Claire has come to the island, gave birth, and the baby was taken and raised by someone else. Are there any other examples of people giving birth then having their child taken (can't remember how Faraday and his mother were separated)? Could Sun be next?
2. Some have speculated that Jack and Sawyer are turning into the new Jacob and Man in Black.

Any other similarities between previous people on the island and more recent people on the island?

Maybe the release of energy on the island causes a new plane to crash and start the cycle all over again.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

I can't remember, but when Jack left the island and went to his father's funeral did he find out Claire was his sister?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Dnamertz said:


> I can't remember, but when Jack left the island and went to his father's funeral did he find out Claire was his sister?


Yes. Claire's mother told him.


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

Dnamertz said:


> I can't remember, but when Jack left the island and went to his father's funeral did he find out Claire was his sister?


Yes. Claire's mom came to Christian's funeral and told Jack that Claire was Christan's daughter (and Jack's half-sister.) and that she was also on Oceanic 815. He asked Jack is he met Claire on the plane. He said no.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

acej80 said:


> What is the significance of the baseball? I'm confused by that one.


How many stitches are in a Major League baseball?

That's right, I just blew your mind.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

hefe said:


> How many stitches are in a Major League baseball?
> 
> That's right, I just blew your mind.


815?


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

No, 108.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Some have speculated that date is the due date, not the current date.
> 
> What a producer has to say:
> http://forum.thefuselage.com/showthread.php?p=2274437#post2274437


He does a good job of not answering anything.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> No, 108.


Oh, drat....


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Something crossed my mind last night, and I don't believe I've seen it discussed anywhere. I was surprised by the fact that no one has mentioned Atlantis in conjunction with our favorite island - especially since it sank. I don't know if there's any meaning from that at all, but given how much discussion there was about it possibly being Atlantis ...

And while I'm on the subject, what about Jughead not sinking the island per se - what if the special forces were unleashed and the island was moved, sans the donkey wheel, and it wound up a little off course? (and ironically wound up directly under the regular flight path of planes going from Sydney to LA)


----------



## mmilton80 (Jul 28, 2005)

About Smokey and reanimation...

Did he appear as Walt? Or does Walt just have special powers? Or was he appearing as Walt the whole time.... Eh, that is a long shot.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

jkeegan said:


> No, 108.


I wasn't aware of this before it was mentioned here, but I have to say that significant or not (my bet is not), that's just awesome. These are the kind of touches that make Lost great.



Delta13 said:


> Something crossed my mind last night, and I don't believe I've seen it discussed anywhere. I was surprised by the fact that no one has mentioned Atlantis in conjunction with our favorite island - especially since it sank. I don't know if there's any meaning from that at all, but given how much discussion there was about it possibly being Atlantis ...


My memory is hazy at this point but I think the producers said early on that it's not Atlantis. I seem to recall a podcast where they said a bunch of things that it's not, and Atlantis was one of them.

I may be wrong. 

Greg


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

gchance said:


> My memory is hazy at this point but I think the producers said early on that it's not Atlantis. I seem to recall a podcast where they said a bunch of things that it's not, and Atlantis was one of them.
> 
> Greg


Also, no time travel.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

So I wonder if the apparition of Ben's mom was Smokey, as well. That would make sense, I guess, that could be the start of Smokey's manipulation of Ben. If it was Smokey/MIB, then he wouldn't seem to need a body at all...


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Also, no time travel.


Did they ever say that? I can't recall specifically...


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Also, no time travel.





hefe said:


> Did they ever say that? I can't recall specifically...


They did, but it was within the context of what they were doing as it related to season 1.

http://blog.timelypersuasion.com/blog/?p=422

Greg


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

They were intentionally misleading, as they often are, which I'm more than okay with.


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

In regards to the time loop - I do remember something a while back with Horace (with a bleeding nose) digging or cutting down a tree. He kept repeating what he was doing and saying like it was a broken video feed that was in a loop. Does anyone remember what I am talking about?


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

bacevedo said:


> In regards to the time loop - I do remember something a while back with Horace (with a bleeding nose) digging or cutting down a tree. He kept repeating what he was doing and saying like it was a broken video feed that was in a loop. Does anyone remember what I am talking about?


This one?






Greg


----------



## acej80 (Jan 19, 2003)

hefe said:


> How many stitches are in a Major League baseball?
> 
> That's right, I just blew your mind.



:up:


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

acej80 said:


> :up:


Makes me wonder if after the numbers turned out to be a much bigger deal to Us than they are to Them, They didn't Google the numbers to see what They could use to blow Our little minds.


----------



## Johnny Dancing (Sep 3, 2000)

Was the crater where Juliet died there because of Juliet blowing up the bomb or Desmond blowing up the Swan hatch?

[ "On November 27, 2004, the Swan imploded on activation of the fail-safe by Desmond Hume. A large crater now resides in its place" ] Lostpedia

Hmm the answer is probably both.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

From Wikipedia...









bacevedo said:


> In regards to the time loop - I do remember something a while back with Horace (with a bleeding nose) digging or cutting down a tree. He kept repeating what he was doing and saying like it was a broken video feed that was in a loop. Does anyone remember what I am talking about?


I don't have any idea what it means, but here it is...


> [Switch to an open eye. It is Lockes as he awakens from sleeping in the jungle. There is a small plume of smoke from the campfire. Hurley and Ben are still asleep. We hear someone grunting and chopping. The sequence continues 17 times.. Locke gets up and walks toward the noise. He encounters Horace who is now pushing down the tree he was chopping.]
> 
> HORACE: Hello there.
> 
> ...


----------



## T-Wolves (Aug 22, 2000)

Johnny Dancing said:


> Was the crater where Juliet died there because of Juliet blowing up the bomb or Desmond blowing up the Swan hatch?


Because of Desmond "blowing up" the Swan hatch. When I re-watched the opener, I noticed that one of the pieces of metal scrap Sawyer tossed aside was the hatch's stationary bike.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

This is too funny, I had to share it here... Michael Emerson on The Soup, confused about 24... there are slight 24 spoilers from last week's episode, so be warned.

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/the_soup/b166989_losts_michael_emerson_found_on_soup.html

Greg


----------



## T-Wolves (Aug 22, 2000)

I have the Web Developer toolbar add-in for FireFox, and whenever I come across a site with interesting graphics (that I want to steal), I use the Images->View Image Information menu item to pull the images from the page so I can grab the images I want.

On ABC's main Lost page, the background looked interesting, so I grabbed it. You can do a View Background Image yourself on it, but it is also here:
http://www.imphil.us/images/lostbg.jpg

Then I noticed the stuff in the middle of the image. Any idea what this thing or these things are?









Probably just some kind of alignment arrow or tool used by the graphic designer, but you never know -- it might be a hint or a clue or something?


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

T-Wolves said:


> Probably just some kind of alignment arrow or tool used by the graphic designer, but you never know -- it might be a hint or a clue or something?


It will be if the writers see this (but hopefully the whole thing is in the can and they can't add any more new stuff).


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I just rewatched it--a couple things... Why did Kate offer the guy $200 to get her cuffs off? Was she kidding, or did she really pay him. And where did she get the money? I assumed that since claire gave her her credit card, she didn't take her cash.

I took the title, What Kate Does, to be referring to what she does when the plane lands in LA, but also when Sawyer leaves he tells her "Don't come after me," and I thought, she will because that's what Kate does. She goes after Jack and Sawyer. 

I forgot about the powdery stuff Dogen blew across Sayid before he tortured him. Was that part of the test?


----------



## Johnny Dancing (Sep 3, 2000)

T-Wolves said:


> Because of Desmond "blowing up" the Swan hatch. When I re-watched the opener, I noticed that one of the pieces of metal scrap Sawyer tossed aside was the hatch's stationary bike.


Hmmm Interesting, so they are back at the point where Desmond blew up the hatch. It looked like a fresh explosion so the time line might be the same.


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

Johnny Dancing said:


> Hmmm Interesting, so they are back at the point where Desmond blew up the hatch. It looked like a fresh explosion so the time line might be the same.


They're 3 years after the hatch explosion, in 2007. The wreckage of the hatch is what's been there since Desmond blew it up in 2004. They're definitely in 2007 because when the Others at the temple set off their signal flare (or whatever the hell it was), Richard and the rest of the others saw it from the base of the statue.


----------



## Johnny Dancing (Sep 3, 2000)

mrdazzo7 said:


> They're 3 years after the hatch explosion, in 2007. The wreckage of the hatch is what's been there since Desmond blew it up in 2004. They're definitely in 2007 because when the Others at the temple set off their signal flare (or whatever the hell it was), Richard and the rest of the others saw it from the base of the statue.


So how did Juliet get at the bottom of the exploded Desmond hatch? How did the other Losties appear around the exploded hatch? Even if this is a different timeline, there still had to be specific events in their current timeline to bring them there. This was not like one of the Island flashes where they were skipping around the Island in time. This shift was created by an event in the past that changed the future (the plane not crashing).

I believe they somehow lost their memory of the events that brought them from the plane landing safely in 2004 to them somehow getting back to the Island 3 years later and converging back at the same spot as where the bomb was to go off.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Johnny Dancing said:


> So how did Juliet get at the bottom of the exploded Desmond hatch? How did the other Losties appear around the exploded hatch?


They were where they were when the bomb went off, only in the future. Same place, different time.

Juliet was at the bottom because that's where she was when she set off the bomb. The others were around the perimeter because that's where they were when she set off the bomb.

You do know that they were building the hatch where Juliet set off the bomb, right?


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> They were where they were when the bomb went off, only in the future. Same place, different time.


Which begs the question, why did Kate wake up in a tree? Are we to suppose she was blown into the tree? And that Jack and Sawyer were blown to where they woke up? Hurley and Jin didn't move. So they weren't transported at the very instant the bomb went off, but an moment later? Hmm...

Am I splitting hairs here?


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

latrobe7 said:


> Which begs the question, why did Kate wake up in a tree? Are we to suppose she was blown into the tree? And that Jack and Sawyer were blown to where they woke up? Hurley and Jin didn't move. So they weren't transported at the very instant the bomb went off, but an moment later? Hmm...
> 
> Am I splitting hairs here?


Yeah I say what Rob said--they were where they were when the bomb went off, but of course that doesn't explain why Kate was in a tree. But maybe all four of them (Kate, Miles, Jack, and Sawyer) WERE blown around from the explosion. Juliet was pinned down so she'd be stationary, and the others were no where near that actual blast so they stayed put.

Then again we're looking for logic on a show where turning a pirate ship wheel makes a giant island (and a separate disconnected island) disappear and reappear somewhere else. And where a hyrdogen bomb detonation not only doesn't kill people standing RIGHT next to it, but instead sends them 30 years into the future, along with their van.

Kate waking up in a tree, not that hard to accept, lol.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Johnny Dancing said:


> So how did Juliet get at the bottom of the exploded Desmond hatch? How did the other Losties appear around the exploded hatch? Even if this is a different timeline, there still had to be specific events in their current timeline to bring them there. This was not like one of the Island flashes where they were skipping around the Island in time. This shift was created by an event in the past that changed the future (the plane not crashing).
> 
> I believe they somehow lost their memory of the events that brought them from the plane landing safely in 2004 to them somehow getting back to the Island 3 years later and converging back at the same spot as where the bomb was to go off.


Although this may be a dangerous limb to walk out on, given the Lost universe as we know it, but I think you've reversed cause and effect. The bomb going off apparently did 2 things: first, it was certainly just like one of the island flashes we've seen before. The Losties in 1977 jumped forward to match up with the rest of the gang in 2007. Second, a parallel timeline or universe branched off from that spot resulting in (among other things) 815 not crashing in 2004. But there were far more changes to that timeline than that - some we know, some we don't yet.

Jughead combined with the island energy was a cause; 815 not crashing in the other timeline was just 1 of many results.

I get the feeling that the day after the Lost finale may wind up being a sick call in day for a bunch of folks - as we all try to untwist our minds from the pretzel they're cooking up here.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

latrobe7 said:


> Which begs the question, why did Kate wake up in a tree? Are we to suppose she was blown into the tree? And that Jack and Sawyer were blown to where they woke up? Hurley and Jin didn't move. So they weren't transported at the very instant the bomb went off, but an moment later? Hmm...
> 
> Am I splitting hairs here?


The best answer I've seen to that question is that it is simply a homage to Bernard landing in a tree when 815 crashed.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Maybe, over the years between 1977 and 2007, a tree grew in the spot where Kate had been standing in 1977. So when she arrived in 2007 she found herself in the branches of the tree because in the intervening years the tree grew up from beneath where she had been.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Or maybe it was just we could see her straddling the big branch and then having to slide down the big branch to get off.....of it.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

My kids picked what movie we'd watch for family movie night, and they picked The Wizard of Oz. I hadn't seen it in quite a while (and the last time I saw it I was listening to Dark Side of the Moon).

It was particularly interesting to watch after the most recent episodes of Lost..

A few things in particular:

First, the man behind the curtain (when he was at the door) tries explaining to them all that NO ONE sees the Wizard - even HE hasn't seen him (same as the whole deal with Jacob and no one seeing him).

Second, when Dorothy kills the witch of the west, all of the witch's followers/employees remark something to the effect of that they're glad, because now they're free (same as Locke says to Bram and his bunch - good news, Jacob is dead - now you're free).

After they wanted to see the wizard, the man behind the curtain talked to them, and ended up flying away in a baloon. Oz lost their Wizard. Jacob is dead.

All that Dorothy has wanted the entire movie is to go home (same as smokey).

...and the tornado at the beginning of the movie was basically a bunch of dark sand blowing around in a pillar - looks very much like smokey.

I do think it'd be interesting seeing Kate dressed up in a Dorothy outfit.

Ya know, Toto looks a bit like the dog in the picture in the cabin.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

So I decided to check out lostpedia and see if they had any other insights I missed. The Wizard of Oz page has some other stuff, but nothing terribly recent:

http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Wizard_of_oz


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I was at a local sci fi convention and got to meet Mira Furlan. I sat in while geekadelphia.com blog interviewed her. It was really cool to listen to her - she has a beautiful voice - and she avoided answering any LOST give away questions.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

jkeegan said:


> I do think it'd be interesting seeing Kate dressed up in a Dorothy outfit.












Greg


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

gchance said:


> This one?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes - that's the one, thanks. I didn't remember that it was John's dream.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

bacevedo said:


> Yes - that's the one, thanks. I didn't remember that it was John's dream.


It was a dream, but more like a vision. I'm not sure how to view it now, after all we've seen. I'm thinking they changed direction. 

Greg


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> They were where they were when the bomb went off, only in the future. Same place, different time.





jlb said:


> Or maybe it was just we could see her straddling the big branch and then having to slide down the big branch to get off.....of it.


Exactly what I was thinking. A little too much analysis on this aspect of the story, IMHO. Totally agree with you and Rob on this one. Kate was just in the tree cause they figured we'd like to see her climb out of it.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

< 12 hours left!


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Fool Me Twice said:


> That's what makes you annoying.


Geez, folks, just block him already.

Throughout the show, there have been a long series of "coincidences" in which the characters' lives crossed long before they happened to be on a flight together. Desmond met Jack while jogging, Locke's father was Sawyer's nemesis, etc. There was even a season finale that focused almost entirely on it. We just assumed it was the play of fate, lots of happenstance, or literary license. But in last season's finale we saw that Jacob had his fingers in all their lives. It's not too big a stretch to conclude that Jacob might have been what was nudging them all into place.

But in the flashsideways alternate timeline, the same characters keep happening to bump into one another. This makes me suspect that either my theory (that the flashsideways story will be what happened "after" Faraday's reset-the-timeline plan is finally successfully carried out) is correct, and it also ends up leaving Jacob no longer dead, so he can still nudge people... to what end, though?; or that it's wrong. (But the evidence in favor of it still seems strong.) But I suppose it could just be literary license or vague "fate" the second time.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

I was thinking about that this morning... assuming that the realities split at the moment the bomb goes off; by that time Jacob had already visited young Sawyer; so Sawyer, at least gets visited by Jacob in both realities. I think it's possible/probable that the people visited by Jacob get visited in either reality. 

It seemed when Jacob visited Locke after falling out of the building that Jacob brought him back to life. I wonder if the encounter is the same in the alternate reality.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Even if Jacob is killed by Ben in all universes, that doesn't happen until 2007. In 2004, on the day of Oceanic 815, he's still alive.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

aindik said:


> Even if Jacob is killed by Ben in all universes, that doesn't happen until 2007. In 2004, on the day of Oceanic 815, he's still alive.


Kinda makes one wonder how much of what Jacob did was actually in preparation for what we're seeing now...in other words, was he a step ahead of the Other Guy?


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

We're assuming that whatever sent the island to the bottom of the ocean didn't kill Jacob in '77 in that timeline. If that's when it happened.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

mrdazzo7 said:


> Yeah I say what Rob said--they were where they were when the bomb went off, but of course that doesn't explain why Kate was in a tree.


What if Kate happened to be standing directly over a sapling, which grew up to that height over 30 years? 



danterner said:


> Maybe, over the years between 1977 and 2007, a tree grew in the spot where Kate had been standing in 1977. So when she arrived in 2007 she found herself in the branches of the tree because in the intervening years the tree grew up from beneath where she had been.


D'Oh!


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

I just watched part of the Pop Up Recap. When Kate says to Claire, "Would you believe me if I told you I was innocent?", the Popup said something to the extent of "This is a change in this flash-forward. In the other timeline Kate blew up her house and killed her father."

Are the popups canon?

I had assumed that Kate, while wasn't lying, believed that she was innocent in that she believed that she was justified in doing what she did, and therefore didn't commit the crime of murder.

But if the popup is true then maybe in this universe Kate didn't kill her father?


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Damon once said the popups were kind of like your uncle that's a good fan of Lost.. but it's not necessarily canon.

Also it didn't say exactly that.. It said something like this is a change, and then it said that Kate blew up her house and killed her father.. it didn't say "in the other timeline", so I found it kind of ambiguous.. But it's not canon anyway.


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

I thought they were created at least with participation froms someone on the show. I can't imagine an ABC suit making up facts to put in the pop ups. Doesn't mean it's an executive producer, but could still be one of the hundreds of people involved with creating the show.

Anyway, I think that's where they're going. I don't remember Kate every claiming to be "innocent" in the past. I think even when a person kills for what they see as justified reasons, they at least still recognize that it's murder. It's obvious that the other timeline is not unfolding in the same way, so it's 100&#37; possible that Kate's fugitive-ism has absolutely nothing to do with blowing up her father. 

This is good because they have a chance to reimagine whatever Kate was a fugitive for. I was always fine with her killing her father because he beat up her mom, but i always found the method to be kind of over the top. Although I guess it made sense given the insurance stuff, but still.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> I just watched part of the Pop Up Recap. When Kate says to Claire, "Would you believe me if I told you I was innocent?", the Popup said something to the extent of "This is a change in this flash-forward. In the other timeline Kate blew up her house and killed her father."
> 
> Are the popups canon?
> 
> ...


They're referring to the video shown at Comicon prior to the start of the season. According to the video she didn't kill her father, she killed her father's assistant. Whether or not it's that way in the actual show has yet to be seen.






Greg


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jkeegan said:


> Damon once said the popups were kind of like your uncle that's a good fan of Lost.. but it's not necessarily canon.
> 
> Also it didn't say exactly that.. It said something like this is a change, and then it said that Kate blew up her house and killed her father.. it didn't say "in the other timeline", so I found it kind of ambiguous.. But it's not canon anyway.


Plus "Would you believe me if I told you I was innocent?" isn't the same thing as "I'm innocent."


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Plus "Would you believe me if I told you I was innocent?" isn't the same thing as "I'm innocent."


:up: That was my take too (when I first heard her say it).


----------



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Plus "Would you believe me if I told you I was innocent?" isn't the same thing as "I'm innocent."


That's why I love these writers (as frustrating as they are sometimes). Every line can have multiple meanings. that line can be one way or another, and either would fit.


----------

