# Lost - 5/17 - Three Minutes



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Cool format


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Wasn't that line "For someone who wants his son back so badly, you don't seem to know much about him, Michael." also said by the lawyer in one of Michael's flashbacks?

(edited to make the quote exact from tonight's episode)


----------



## billboard_NE (May 18, 2005)

what was the web site in the comercial?? www.letyourcompassguideyou.com ?? I must have got it wrong


----------



## getbak (Oct 8, 2004)

billboard_NE said:


> what was the web site in the comercial?? www.letyourcompassguideyou.com ?? I must have got it wrong


No, that was it. I've been having problems getting the page to load. Obviously, a few people are trying to access it.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Spoiler



OH!!!! OH MAN! The preview for next week looks incredible!!!


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

(Deliberately posting un-spoilered): I just re-watched the preview slowly, and I don't recommend doing that - it gives some stuff away.

(Posted it un-spoilered for those who might be otherwise tempted - this might be one to just watch quickly or not at all)


----------



## Todd (Oct 7, 1999)

Another good episode! Nice to see that Sayed is onto Michael's deception. How am I going to do without this show over the summer!!??


----------



## Maui (Apr 22, 2000)

Great episode!!

I can't wait for the Finale. It should be a doozy!


----------



## faspina (Nov 4, 2003)

Arg, my old reliable series 2 tivo messed up. For some reason it said my network lost connection to the internet. Doh, I usually don't check it cause it is in the playroom. And I have been able to transfer shows with it. Lost did not record tonight, alias did but not lost doh. I will have to FIND it some other place.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

So are Jack, Kate, Hurley and Sawyer all "bad ones" I know locke is a "good one" and he isn't going.


----------



## super dave (Oct 1, 2002)

faspina said:


> Arg, my old reliable series 2 tivo messed up. For some reason it said my network lost connection to the internet. Doh, I usually don't check it cause it is in the playroom. And I have been able to transfer shows with it. Lost did not record tonight, alias did but not lost doh. I will have to FIND it some other place.


ABC advertised you can watch previous episodes for free at abc.com Happy hunting!


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

faspina said:


> Arg, my old reliable series 2 tivo messed up. For some reason it said my network lost connection to the internet. Doh, I usually don't check it cause it is in the playroom. And I have been able to transfer shows with it. Lost did not record tonight, alias did but not lost doh. I will have to FIND it some other place.


abc.com


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

so i'll be the first to ask

the others pretending about what? w/ the costumes and the fake beard? My guess is they are scientists and they are "pretending" to be savages w/ huts and such


----------



## Paperboy2003 (Mar 30, 2004)

anyone else think that Walt's actions in the tent seemed forced, as if he was acting in a way to make Michael do whatever they needed him to do?


----------



## Paperboy2003 (Mar 30, 2004)

Maybe Hurley will finally lose some weight on the trek across the island.....


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

Only good scene in one hour of filler was my man Sayid seeing through Michael's deception. OK, Sawyer telling Jack he was the nearest thing to a best friend was cool too. Reminds me of a stretch episode on 24.


----------



## faspina (Nov 4, 2003)

super dave said:


> ABC advertised you can watch previous episodes for free at abc.com Happy hunting!


\
Dumb ole me let me credit card expire back in march. Doh. It is fixed now and I have found the episode.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

MikeMar said:


> So are Jack, Kate, Hurley and Sawyer all "bad ones" I know locke is a "good one" and he isn't going.


Did she say they were Bad ones? I am curious as what is bad about Hurley. The other three...eh, I guess I could see, but not Hurley!


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

betts4 said:


> Did she say they were Bad ones? I am curious as what is bad about Hurley. The other three...eh, I guess I could see, but not Hurley!


Well as far as i remember, they have never said any of those 4 were "good" ones. It seems like jack, kate, and saywer def. And Hurley seems like a big part of the island w/ the whole # thing


----------



## Head (Sep 3, 2002)

philw1776 said:


> Only good scene in one hour of filler was my man Sayid seeing through Michael's deception. OK, Sawyer telling Jack he was the nearest thing to a best friend was cool too. Reminds me of a stretch episode on 24.


 :up:

Lil' slow for me tonight..


----------



## scheckeNYK (Apr 28, 2004)

even though my show recorded 1:03, it still cut off the end. Gotta remember to pad this damn show! Can anyone recap what happened at the tail end, after Hurley eulogized?


----------



## riverdoglb (May 17, 2006)

Haven't watched it yet. Can't wait


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

It's interesting that the "others" know Sawyer's real name when no one else does (except Locke). 

I can't believe that Micheal would kill Libby and Ana Lucia. He wasn't told to kill them, just to get Henry back. He should have been able to figure out a way to do that without killing anyone. All he had to do was be there alone (which had happened before) and then he could free Henry and shoot himself to create the story.

:up: for Sayid. Although who would believe that Michael wouldn't want Sayid on the team and would insist on Hurley joining. 

Hurley actually did appear to have lost some weight.


----------



## Guindalf (Jun 13, 2001)

faspina said:


> Arg, my old reliable series 2 tivo messed up. For some reason it said my network lost connection to the internet. Doh, I usually don't check it cause it is in the playroom. And I have been able to transfer shows with it. Lost did not record tonight, alias did but not lost doh. I will have to FIND it some other place.


It's available at abc.com tomorrow

Edit: smeek!


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Was anyone else waiting for Ms CLUE to tell Michael that Walt has to solve the mystery?


It was Michael, in the Hatch, with the revolver! 


You know it is also another 'game' reference for Locke.


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

It's also interesting that the "others" know more about Walt than Michael does.

Was the blood draw to get more information about Walt or to see if Michael is "infected?"

Alex seems resistant to the mind control of the "others". She doesn't seem dedicated to their cause despite being raised by them.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

BeanMeScot said:
 

> It's also interesting that the "others" know more about Walt than Michael does.
> 
> Was the blood draw to get more information about Walt or to see if Michael is "infected?"
> 
> Alex seems resistant to the mind control of the "others". She doesn't seem dedicated to their cause despite being raised by them.


Also, no one has mentioned yet. The "vaccine" that Charlie found. what is up w/ that? same stuff Desmond and the other take or give or something?


----------



## Ladd Morse (Feb 21, 2002)

And, of course, true to form neither Locke nor Ecko mention that they found another hatch -- even when all but point-blank asked what they were doing out all night.

Makes Charley's gift of the vaccines almost a "it never crossed my mind to mention it" ...


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

MikeMar said:


> Also, no one has mentioned yet. The "vaccine" that Charlie found. what is up w/ that? same stuff Desmond and the other take or give or something?


I would say its the same thing. The question is, is it good or bad? Is it protecting them or doing something bad to them?


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

I found the voiceover work on Walt very distracting.

Z


----------



## appleye1 (Jan 26, 2002)

betts4 said:


> Did she say they were Bad ones? I am curious as what is bad about Hurley. The other three...eh, I guess I could see, but not Hurley!


Did anyone ever define what good or bad really means anyway? It doesn't have to mean a good or bad person.

Good might mean good teeth, or it could mean good genes, or maybe it means good eatin'!


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

Interesting that some found it slow. I thought this episode was excellent buildup for the finale next week. Oh wait - is it a spoiler that next week's episode _is_ the season finale? 

Michael's flashbacks shocked me - I would have sworn that he was lying about the Others (as in them being barefoot, living in tents, having a hatch, only 2 weapons, etc). Of course, I don't think that's the complete truth, but it's still different than I expected.

Talk about deja vu all over again - Sawyer 'opens up' to Jack just before the s--t hits the fan. Again. Not to say it wasn't effective or even touching (in that manly way, of course ), just ironic for a show that keeps throwing us for a loop.


----------



## aaronw (Apr 13, 2001)

I guess I'll have to be the first to bring in the fark element.

IT'S A TRAP!


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Very cute Aaronw!


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Great build up to next week!

Michael described their camp as he saw it, but he knows he's setting the 4 up.


----------



## aaronw (Apr 13, 2001)

billboard_NE said:


> what was the web site in the comercial?? www.letyourcompassguideyou.com ?? I must have got it wrong


Okay, and *THIS* one said 'paid for by jeep'. The sublymonal said 'paid for by sprite'.

I think someone at some other ad agency is riding Lost's coat-tails in order to get some free exposure. I can't believe that both of these are part of the "Lost" universe.

Yes, I think it is letyourcompassguideyou.com:

whois -h whois.register.com letyourcompassguideyou.com

Registrant: 
DaimlerChrysler Corporation
Domain Administrator
1000 Chrysler Drive CIMS 485-04-76
Auburn Hills, MI 48326
BG

Domain Name: letyourcompassguideyou.com

Created on..............: Tue, Apr 25, 2006


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

BeanMeScot said:


> It's interesting that the "others" know Sawyer's real name when no one else does (except Locke).


Hurley knows it too. He was the one who showed Locke the manifest (and it was implied, pointed it out to him).

Nevertheless, the others do seem to know an awful lot about the backgrounds of all the losties. I suspect this is a whopping great clue to what they are doing. I'm not saying I know _what_ it explains, but it is a clue.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

BeanMeScot said:


> Was the blood draw to get more information about Walt or to see if Michael is "infected?"


She did ask Michael if he was Walt's biological father.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

By the way, I still haven't caught it.. Three Minutes? Which three minutes?


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Why were these people, especially Jack, buying into this "It's my son, so I get to call all the shots" BS line of argument? I don't see how that gives him the right to dictate to Kate, for example. Especially when what he's asking them to do is obviously risky. And it's not like Michael's judgment has been so great all along that he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

My favorite moment was when Sayid reminded Jack that he (Sayid) had suspected HG of being an Other from the beginning. Who ya' gonna trust, pretty boy?

I am glad to see I may have been wrong last week expecting Hurley to feel guilty about Libby's death. He's sad and pissed!


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> By the way, I still haven't caught it.. Three Minutes? Which three minutes?


When Miss CLUE had Walt brought into the tent, she said "You have three minutes."


----------



## Jolt (Jan 9, 2006)

Took me a bit but i figured out the website.


----------



## TeeSee (Jan 16, 2003)

mqpickles said:


> Why were these people, especially Jack, buying into this "It's my son, so I get to call all the shots" BS line of argument? I don't see how that gives him the right to dictate to Kate, for example. Especially when what he's asking them to do is obviously risky. And it's not like Michael's judgment has been so great all along that he deserves the benefit of the doubt.


I was wondering the same thing. He's asking them to risk their lives as a favor to him yet he isn't even allowing them any input as to the best and safest way to go about it. He's obviously very emotional, so how willing should they be to basically put their lives in his hands anyway?


----------



## Jolt (Jan 9, 2006)

But now it is messed up


----------



## whitson77 (Nov 10, 2002)

I think Michael "killing" two people for his son is a big deviation of his character.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

zordude said:


> I found the voiceover work on Walt very distracting.
> 
> Z


I thought it sounded like that too.

I was so glad Sayid saw through Michael's B.S.

I was practically yelling at Jack not to buy it...


----------



## Jolt (Jan 9, 2006)

Hmmm not sure if i goto into an area of the website i should be i am getting 

Index of /usr
*** SECURITY NOTICE ***

This system is for the use of authorized users only. 
Individuals using this computer system without
authority, or in excess of their authority, are subject
to having all of their activities on this system
monitored and recorded by system personnel. In the
course of monitoring individuals improperly using this
system, or in the course of system maintenance, the
activities of authorized users may also be monitored. 
Anyone using this system expressly consents to such
monitoring and is advised that if such monitoring
reveals possible evidence of criminal activity, system
personnel may provide the evidence of such monitoring
to law enforcement officials.


----------



## Jolt (Jan 9, 2006)

LOL This is whacked


----------



## Jolt (Jan 9, 2006)

Man i am in their server ... this is crazy... i idnt een mean to . i am able to get to the root directory


----------



## Jolt (Jan 9, 2006)

this is weird i am able to access peoples user accounts. I would think they are wanting you to go to this area. Totally weird.. Is anyone else getting any weird results?


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Watched the tent scene again with my wife - yeah, missed the 3-minutes part. Also missed her threatening Walt with "do you want me to put you back in the room again?".. (Walt didn't seem to like that suggestion all too much)

I'm slightly fixated on Charlie getting the drugs again - it seemed a bit forced, so I thought about it more.. I don't think they were just rushing a closure before the season was up.

..instead, I think it's somehow tied in with the vaccine. He gave himself a shot, and then later in the episode he rids himself of the thing that's been plaguing him (again).

{crazy-wacked-out-theory-that-I-don't-think-even-I'd-like-if-it-were-true}
Ok.. the Others from the Dharma initiative are angels, and that vaccine is some symbolic pull towards good.. maybe like holy water.. Keep taking it every so often to protect yourself from the evil we're studying, or you'll fall down and become evil like them. Charlie takes his - his head clears up (he hadn't been looking too good recently before that - he even participated in Sun's abduction).
{/crazy-wacked-out-theory-that-I-don't-think-even-I'd-like-if-it-were-true}

All of the game references (if Clue was indeed a game reference) go along with my recurring thoughts back to the movie The Game too.

Ok, Jeff sleep now.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Yeah about Charlie and the drugs......
He finds this case of vaccine and doesn't tell Jack (the doctor) about it!
Then not only does he try it on himself first but he wants Claire and the baby to take them.
Is he really off of the drugs or has he been compromised as well?
After all, didn't Ethan want to give vaccine to Claire and the baby?


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> I'm slightly fixated on Charlie getting the drugs again - it seemed a bit forced, so I thought about it more.. I don't think they were just rushing a closure before the season was up.
> 
> ..instead, I think it's somehow tied in with the vaccine. He gave himself a shot, and then later in the episode he rids himself of the thing that's been plaguing him (again).


He didn't hesitate to get rid of the drugs this time, so they're not as big a temptation as they used to be, but they are still enough of a temptation that he felt he had to get rid of them. The heroin is an "occasion of sin" for Charlie, as we Catholics say, and a good Catholic is to avoid occasions of sin.

I took the whole thing to mean he has gained strength to handle these challenges as a result of rediscovering his faith through building the church with Eko. That is his mission now. Earlier Charlie asked Eko what he was supposed to do with himself if Eko was staying in the bunker. Apparently, he decided that he should continue to build the church, with or without Eko.

I didn't think it had to do with the vaccine, but that's an interesting idea.


----------



## ethos42 (Jun 2, 2005)

wtf


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

JYoung said:


> Yeah about Charlie and the drugs......
> He finds this case of vaccine and doesn't tell Jack (the doctor) about it!


That drove me crazy too.



JYoung said:


> Then not only does he try it on himself first but he wants Claire and the baby to take them.
> Is he really off of the drugs or has he been compromised as well?
> After all, didn't Ethan want to give vaccine to Claire and the baby?


 Interesting possibilities (That's not consistent with my interpretation of what Charlie's up to, but intriguing). But it begs the question: Did he really even try the vaccine on himself? We only have his word that he did. If he has been compromised, then he wouldn't mind lying about something like that.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

BeanMeScot said:


> I can't believe that Micheal would kill Libby and Ana Lucia. He wasn't told to kill them, just to get Henry back. He should have been able to figure out a way to do that without killing anyone. All he had to do was be there alone (which had happened before) and then he could free Henry and shoot himself to create the story.


He needed something that would for sure make them want to follow him on his "war" against the Others. He also needed to make sure he wouldn't be accused of anything - if he had been left alone with Henry and Henry would've escaped and Michael had just a flesh wound, it would have seemed suspicious for sure. but killing two people... they would never suspect Michael of doing that. His actions made perfect sense to me, when we were shown how desperately he wanted his son back.


----------



## ethos42 (Jun 2, 2005)

here's another link off that site

http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/hmcintyr/mail/news_ad.jpg


----------



## lpamelaa (May 3, 2004)

Half-baked thoughts....

What do Jack, Kate, Sawyer & Hurley all have in common? They've all seen something "impossible" on the island.

Jack - dead father
Kate - black horse
Sawyer - can't remember exactly, but didn't it have to do with the innocent man he shot?
Hurley - imaginary friend

And, when Michael called Hurley "Hugo" that threw up a flag for me. I'm not sure his real name was public knowledge. A hint that he's been "compromised."


----------



## lpamelaa (May 3, 2004)

Oh, and I think the blood sample from Michael is to determine if he is indeed Walt's bio dad.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

Maybe it has to do with cloning somehow? Thats why they wanted Michael's blood? And why they need Jack, Kate, Sawyer and Hurleys? Maybe there is an infection on the island that the Others are trying to prevent from spreading to the rest of the world....


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Somard said:


> Hmmm not sure if i goto into an area of the website i should be i am getting
> 
> Index of /usr
> *** SECURITY NOTICE ***
> ...


Hey, my company uses the same legal warning! And we deal with drugs and medicines, whoa dude! And my avatar is standing on a beach! This can only mean one thing ...

It's way too late at night and I am posting in a Lost thread.


----------



## laststarfighter (Feb 27, 2006)

Man, they better start filming next season's episodes now. Looks like Walt is going through puberty. How are they going to explain him growing 6 inches and a beard after "less than a week" since Michael last saw him?  


I'm really surprised that the Hanso Foundation continues to advertise on a show that is intent on twisting the truth and smearing a fine organization like Hanso. They are trying to good work but this show is making them to look like evil puppetmasters who toy with people's lives. Hanso should pull their advertising dollar and not put up with it any longer.


----------



## borther (Jan 22, 2004)

I believe Michael is next to die. I don't think he can kill 2 people and get away with it. Maybe hurley kills him.... or Walt kills him. That would be a weird twist.


----------



## hc130radio (Sep 16, 2004)

Happy Mothers Day...for those who can read backwards...

http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/hmcintyr/mail/news_ad.jpg


----------



## Uncle Briggs (Sep 11, 2004)

lpamelaa said:


> Kate - black horse


I thought the horse was real. Didn't Sawyer see it too?


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Uncle Briggs said:


> I thought the horse was real. Didn't Sawyer see it too?


I think he did make a comment that he saw it too.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

JYoung said:


> Yeah about Charlie and the drugs......
> He finds this case of vaccine and doesn't tell Jack (the doctor) about it!
> Then not only does he try it on himself first but he wants Claire and the baby to take them.
> Is he really off of the drugs or has he been compromised as well?
> After all, didn't Ethan want to give vaccine to Claire and the baby?


I thought he did give Claire the vaccine, in the hatch, and eventually told her there wasn't enough for her and the baby too. Am I confusing this with something else


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

The four people on the list have seen visions (hallucinations) on the Island.
Kate saw a horse
Sawyer saw the same horse
Hurley saw Dave
Jack saw his father

To make things more interesting.... only Kate and Sawyer seemed to see the boar that wrecked Sawyer's tent, and only Sawyer and Hurley heard/saw the tree frog.

As for other people.....
Sayid and Shannon both saw Walt. Shannon is dead. The reason Sayid might not be on the list is because he and shannon weren't having 'visions', it was Walt projecting to him.

Locke, Claire, Charlie, and Eko all had dreams, and very vivid dreams. But I believe that the dreams are different then what the others had. The dreams may have been caused by the Island, not any sort of psychic power. Or something crazy like that. This is where I start to think I am thinking too much.


----------



## Todd (Oct 7, 1999)

ethos42 said:


> wtf


Okay, that was a bizarre!


----------



## LifeIsABeach (Feb 28, 2001)

Grape Ape. lol That Sawyer crakcs me up. 
http://www.tvparty.com/bgifs9/grapeape.jpg


----------



## mask2343 (Jan 6, 2003)

Great lead in to the season finale! Wish I wouldn't have read spoilers...then I wouldn't have known what was on the boat!


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

I thought there was a thread to talk about the commericial Web site (letyourcompassguideyou.com) but didn't see one and I didn't see much discussion on it here so I thought I would ask... in spoilers so as to be safe rather than sorry:



Spoiler



When I visit the site, all I see is a compass that spins around when you mouse over one of the compass points. This is all the site did until just a moment ago, the screen flashed something else in conjunction with a mouse action. I don't know what I did but I would like to see if I can repeat it. Has anyone done anything with this site yet?



As for this episode, I'll agree that it definitely wanted to fill the hour, give us some details about what's up with Michael and set us up for the finale. (The) good scenes have already been mentioned.

I think it is impressive that unlike last season where you kinda knew what it was leading to, I don't have any idea where the show is heading. Kinda like BSG and end of that finale.


----------



## yaddayaddayadda (Apr 8, 2003)

Sirius Black said:


> I thought there was a thread to talk about the commericial Web site (letyourcompassguideyou.com) but didn't see one and I didn't see much discussion on it here so I thought I would ask... in spoilers so as to be safe rather than sorry:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



Move your compass just south of East. You'll then see a flash, with the number 108....click on that number to get into the "directory"


----------



## twincaminferno (Mar 6, 2006)

So im guessing that Michael asked Libby to come down to the hatch (or asked someone to have her come down) so he can shoot her. He knew that he only way that Hurley would go with him is if she was murdered by the others. Now we know why she was down in the hatch for no reason.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

scheckeNYK said:


> even though my show recorded 1:03, it still cut off the end. Gotta remember to pad this damn show! Can anyone recap what happened at the tail end, after Hurley eulogized?


Sun, standing in the crowd at the funeral, looks out at the ocean and points, and yells "BOAT!"

Everyone looks and sure enough, there's a sailboat out there, heading in to shore. Everyone gathers on the beach and the boat turns a bit so it's going parallel to the beach. No one is visible on board.

Black screen.


----------



## fregienj (Feb 1, 2005)

betts4 said:


> Was anyone else waiting for Ms CLUE to tell Michael that Walt has to solve the mystery?
> 
> It was Michael, in the Hatch, with the revolver!
> 
> You know it is also another 'game' reference for Locke.





jkeegan said:


> All of the game references (if Clue was indeed a game reference) go along with my recurring thoughts back to the movie The Game too.


I deleted it so I can't double check, but I believe the closed captioning showed her name as "Ms Klugh" or something like that.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

twincaminferno said:


> So im guessing that Michael asked Libby to come down to the hatch (or asked someone to have her come down) so he can shoot her. He knew that he only way that Hurley would go with him is if she was murdered by the others. Now we know why she was down in the hatch for no reason.


Thought she was getting blankets for Hurley's picnic?


----------



## rizzlebizzle (Oct 14, 2005)

hc130radio said:


> Happy Mothers Day...for those who can read backwards...
> 
> http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/hmcintyr/mail/news_ad.jpg


It seems as though it says more than just that.


----------



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

twincaminferno said:


> So im guessing that Michael asked Libby to come down to the hatch (or asked someone to have her come down) so he can shoot her. He knew that he only way that Hurley would go with him is if she was murdered by the others. Now we know why she was down in the hatch for no reason.


How did Michael know of the connection between Hurley and Libby? He was gone during the time that they started to connect. In addition the look on Michael's face when he shot Libby indicates to me that it was not intentional.


----------



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

I need to go back and re-watch this episode, but when Michael was being brought back to The Others camp, was Cindy one of the individuals outside doing work around the camp? Did we ever find out what happened to her?

If I had a son being held captive, I was being held captive, I'm of African descent, the doctor holding and testing my son is of African descent, I'm playing the "race card", pure and simple.


----------



## yaddayaddayadda (Apr 8, 2003)

If you overlay the image of the blast door map has C4 in roughly the same location as the 'parchment' behind the compass on this site:
http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/

http://www.bryantchoung.com/archives/good pic of thing.jpg

could this be the location of the other's 'camp'?


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

golfnut-n-nh said:


> How did Michael know of the connection between Hurley and Libby? He was gone during the time that they started to connect. In addition the look on Michael's face when he shot Libby indicates to me that it was not intentional.


Every time I have seen that scene, I believe Micheal shooting Libby was reactionary, if not accidental. He seemed almost in shock when he was shooting Libby (nice shots though!).

What does Eko now believe his mission/job/destiny is? I understand why Locke is now so disillusioned about the "button", but why is Eko so facinated?

Did any miss Rose & Benard at the funeral? Kind of suprised they were not there.

I believe that Walt has either (a) been brainwashed or (b) is now working with the Others. He comments and actions seemed designed to make Micheal break down.

Side Note: I just got my copy of Entertainment Weekly with Lost on the cover. Has anyone read the articles yet? Are there any major spoilers for next week that I may not want to read. (FYI - I do watch the previews, so I know that much.)


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

How come Bernard wasn't at the funeral? He and Eko are the one two tailies left...


----------



## Artfreak (May 19, 2005)

Anyone expect Vincent to fetch the Mary heroin statues as Charlie was tossing them out?

And best line for me:

"We got caught in a net" ----Sawyer


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

The word "namaste". I have the translator dashboard widget (OSX) and it does not translate from Japanese. Can anyone tell me what it means?


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

RBlount said:


> What does Eko now believe his mission/job/destiny is? I understand why Locke is now so disillusioned about the "button", but why is Eko so facinated?
> 
> Side Note: I just got my copy of Entertainment Weekly with Lost on the cover. Has anyone read the articles yet? Are there any major spoilers for next week that I may not want to read. (FYI - I do watch the previews, so I know that much.)


In Eko's dream, his brother told him that pushing the button was extremely important. So it is now very important to Eko.

I have heard that you should not read the EW articles because there are finale spoilers.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Great episode. Silly me, but had we seen a grown Alex yet?

Anyways, on the compass website, I found it interesting that there is an */owelles* directory, which you could not traverse. Also, in one of the directories I found a bunch of "RFP" files. There is one for Hanso foundation buying Jeeps from Diamler Chrysler. They ordered *23*. Interesting.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

ethos42 said:


> here's another link off that site
> 
> http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/hmcintyr/mail/news_ad.jpg


That ad was in the NYTimes last week.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

RBlount said:


> What does Eko now believe his mission/job/destiny is? I understand why Locke is now so disillusioned about the "button", but why is Eko so facinated?


His dream, in which his brother appeard and instructed him to take Locke to the "?" hatch, convinced him that "pressing the button" is important, despite the evidence to the contrary found in the "?" hatch.


----------



## DonRoeber (Nov 30, 2003)

lpamelaa said:


> Oh, and I think the blood sample from Michael is to determine if he is indeed Walt's bio dad.


I figured it was to test for midichloridians.


----------



## DonRoeber (Nov 30, 2003)

jlb said:


> Great episode. Silly me, but had we seen a grown Alex yet?


Yes, she was in Claire's episode.


----------



## sushikitten (Jan 28, 2005)

mask2343 said:


> Great lead in to the season finale! Wish I wouldn't have read spoilers...then I wouldn't have known what was on the boat!


Okay, I thought I read all the spoilers and didn't read anything about what was on the boat - was it in the previews (I watched them, but not close enough to see or remember the next morning if the boat was shown!)?

Sawyer's line "I screwed her" seemed to jump out at me as really too blunt. Of course, there's really no better way to say it on prime time  but it just seemed [not out of character but...] a little harsh, maybe? (I don't know, it makes sense in my head.)

I AM SO TIRED OF MAJOR THINGS HAPPENING AND NO ONE TELLING ANYONE ELSE!! Charlie and the vaccine? I know he wants to get back in Claire's good graces (which he apparently did, as evidenced by the hand grab at the funeral) but not at least telling Jack about it? Thinking it might be dangerous? And Locke and Eko not mentioning the other bunker? I know this has been a recurring problem the entire season, but still...it's really starting to bother me.


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

jlb said:


> Great episode. Silly me, but had we seen a grown Alex yet?


Alex is the one that helped Claire escape. That's why she was quizzing Michael on them when she was guarding him.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Regarding the future of the character of Walt on the series:

Malcolm David Kelley (Walt) is definitely starting to go through puberty.

Since the first 2 seasons has covered roughly only 2 months of time (2 months covered in 2 years of television), this is obviously a problem.

I think last night's episode gave us a hint of how they plan to deal with this.

It looks like Walt has been reduced to a recurring character, instead of a regular. This reduces how often they have to use "tricks" to make him appear younger than he is.

In the "3 minutes" scene with Walt in this episode, I got the distinct impression that forced perspective (the technique used to make the Hobbits look much shorter than the actor's really are in the LOTR movies, and to make only tall-ish Michael Clarke Duncan look gigantic in "The Green Mile") was being utilized to make Walt look shorter than he now actually is.

His voice also appeared to have been dubbed (by a younger actor who's voice sounded like Malcolm David Kelley's sounded 2 years ago).

I think Walt will become a permanent "reluctant other", like Alex is. We will see him in only a couple of episodes per season from now on.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

Sirius Black said:


> The word "namaste". I have the translator dashboard widget (OSX) and it does not translate from Japanese. Can anyone tell me what it means?


It isn't Japanese. It is Hindi.

"Namaste is Hindi's universal greeting, as well as goodbye. It is common to hold ones hands together in front of the chest as praying and bow slightly when saying it."


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

jenhudson said:


> I AM SO TIRED OF MAJOR THINGS HAPPENING AND NO ONE TELLING ANYONE ELSE!!


You along with most of us! 

I can understand a motive for Eko wanting to keep the "?" hatch secret. Anyone who finds that hatch would find evidence that "pushing the button" is not important, yet Eko is convinced it is very important anyway. So, he doesn't want that hatch to become common knowledge.

On the other side of the coin, I'd expect Locke to be telling everyone he encounters about the "?" hatch! He now believes "the button" is madness and wants it to stop. OTOH, it looks like Locke is now just completely disillusioned with everything about the island, and has withdrawn himself from the other losties, and from his passion about the "island's mysteries" as well.


----------



## jamesbobo (Jun 18, 2000)

Michael told the others he wanted the boat. Since he freed "Henry" could the boat be an act of good faith to Mike?
I'm also in the camp that thinks Libby was an accidental killing. Ana was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. The hatch is never empty, not with the button being monitored and Henry being watched. So with everyone but himself and Ana gone, he shot Ana before the hatch became more crowded. Also, he can't kill Jack, Kate or Sawyer, so them being gone made him want to act quickly.

And now a word about next seasons schedule. Tired of too many repeats? I read in the Star Ledger that Lost will air seven new episodes in a row at the start of next season. Then it will go off the air !!!! It will return in January when new epsiodes will air for the remainder of the season.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

stevieleej said:


> Also, the whole thing with the torches lighting up around the circle is still confusing. The others would have had to plan to lead Jack's group to the spot; or have the others either there already (hiding the bushes), or sneaking up around them without being heard - all of which is a little far fetched.


This tells me that the others are very much in control of what's going on on the island.

Walt said, "they're pretending". In Michael's emotional state, and desperation to get Walt back, he failed to realize the full weight of this statement.

In "Maternity Leave", we see "Zeke" without his fake beard, and wearing clean fresh clothes. We see the "others" in control of a well stocked and maintained medical facility, and clearly in control of some advanced technology.

IMHO, the others work for Dharma. The "ambush" Michael plans to lead the other 4 into is extremely dangerous. They're lying about Michael getting Walt back (I think they plan to entrap him along with the other 4).

I think we'll find that Dharma caused the plane crash and lured certain passengers to be on that plane.


----------



## Canoman (Jan 12, 2006)

I thought it was funny that they took blood by jabbing a needle into Michael's bicep muscle. Blood is usually drawn from a vein on the underside of your elbow... I doubt this mishap was intentional, just sort of odd.


----------



## headroll (Jan 20, 2003)

It's obvious that there are words bleeding through from the other side of the page (hence backwards). I don't think you should be able to read it without some photoshopping of the image. Fortunately for us, I am sure it has been done already by some Lost fan. Anyone have a link to the reversed passage?

-Roll


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

laststarfighter said:


> Man, they better start filming next season's episodes now. Looks like Walt is going through puberty. How are they going to explain him growing 6 inches and a beard after "less than a week" since Michael last saw him?


Camera angles dude  and he can have one of those fake beards that the others use


----------



## laststarfighter (Feb 27, 2006)

Donbadabon said:


> It isn't Japanese. It is Hindi.
> 
> "Namaste is Hindi's universal greeting, as well as goodbye. It is common to hold ones hands together in front of the chest as praying and bow slightly when saying it."


Wikipedia has an explaination of namaste. Basically it means "I bow to you."


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

Donbadabon said:


> It isn't Japanese. It is Hindi.
> 
> "Namaste is Hindi's universal greeting, as well as goodbye. It is common to hold ones hands together in front of the chest as praying and bow slightly when saying it."


I stand corrected. Ignorant I am.


----------



## Frank_M (Sep 9, 2001)

I just sincerely hope that there's more to Charlie's recklessly taking the vaccine and giving it to Claire than poor writing. By that I mean, that they had Charlie act stupid just so they could get someone to take it. I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt... that there is information (or misinformation) that Charlie has... or some other reason for his actions.

Also, is this the first episode without flashbacks from before they were on the island?


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

Didn't Michael say he wanted the boat (as part of the arrangement he made with the Others)? I originally assumed that meant the power boat that the Others used to kidnap Walt but it could have meant the sailboat that shows up at the end of the episode.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

headroll said:


> It's obvious that there are words bleeding through from the other side of the page (hence backwards). I don't think you should be able to read it without some photoshopping of the image. Fortunately for us, I am sure it has been done already by some Lost fan. Anyone have a link to the reversed passage?
> 
> -Roll


The ad ran in last weeks NYTimes. I don't remember what was on the other side of the ad.


----------



## mightyb (Dec 5, 2003)

Frank_M said:


> Also, is this the first episode without flashbacks from before they were on the island?


No, there was an episode with flashbacks to Claire's abduction on the island...


----------



## jamesbobo (Jun 18, 2000)

Frank_M said:


> Also, is this the first episode without flashbacks from before they were on the island?


The episode that introduced the "tailies" didn't have any, if I remember correctly.


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

headroll said:


> It's obvious that there are words bleeding through from the other side of the page (hence backwards). I don't think you should be able to read it without some photoshopping of the image. Fortunately for us, I am sure it has been done already by some Lost fan. Anyone have a link to the reversed passage?
> 
> -Roll


You didn't need to. They showed the front of the list later in the show (although I could see the list said Jack, Kate, H and J from the back). The list was the full names of the ones the others want. Jack, Kate Hugo and James (Sawyer). I don't recall the last names now but they were on the list.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

More mysteries: there did appear to be a hatch there with the Others, and it had a Dharma logo on it we haven't seen before. Kind of an "S", maybe 2 rectangles, but I couldn't tell what it was. It was guarded by 2 guys. So why does it need to be guarded, and from whom?

There was an odd rock formation on top of the hill above the Others' camp. They lingered on it quite intentionally - was it an arrow or a keyhole?

Another reason not to trust Michael - he once before knocked out Locke and trapped him and Jack in the armory. Other than to advance the plotline, why would you even begin to trust him in a pinch? The man has no good decision-making skills.

Eko Talks, Locke Walks: who else thinks that Locke is going to look for Henry and the Others? And that the reason his name was not on the list was because Henry was supposed to bring Locke back?


----------



## Philly Bill (Oct 6, 2004)

scheckeNYK said:


> even though my show recorded 1:03, it still cut off the end.


I'm not sure why so many folks have issues with the extended shows. Is it because I have DTV and they update the schedule all the time through the stream? And if you have a regulart TIVO it has to dial in to get the schedule changes? My DTIVO never misses any shows that are extended by a minute or four.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Delta13 said:


> There was an odd rock formation on top of the hill above the Others' camp. They lingered on it quite intentionally - was it an arrow or a keyhole?


Remember in the flashback on the computer in this ep, michael was talking to "walt" and said to go to the rock w/ the hole in it and head north.


----------



## canyonero! (Apr 24, 2002)

The words bleeding through the NYTimes ad reads:

"If you are one, know one.
Happy Mothers Day!"

Only 2 directories on the Compass site are accessible:

http://letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/pthompso/mail/
http://letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/hmcintyr/mail/

What was the significance of Locke removing his leg brace and walking away from the beach during the funeral, after seeing Charlie toss his statues?


----------



## mightyb (Dec 5, 2003)

Philly Bill said:


> I'm not sure why so many folks have issues with the extended shows. Is it because I have DTV and they update the schedule all the time through the stream? And if you have a regulart TIVO it has to dial in to get the schedule changes? My DTIVO never misses any shows that are extended by a minute or four.


Yup, that is pretty much it. The stand alones don't dial in often enough to get those last minute/day changes....

The directTivo's, like you mentioned, get them from the satellite!


----------



## NoThru22 (May 6, 2005)

headroll said:


> It's obvious that there are words bleeding through from the other side of the page (hence backwards). I don't think you should be able to read it without some photoshopping of the image. Fortunately for us, I am sure it has been done already by some Lost fan. Anyone have a link to the reversed passage?
> 
> -Roll


They showed the entire note from the front later in the episode.


mightyb said:


> No, there was an episode with flashbacks to Claire's abduction on the island...


I am now convinced that only 1 out of 10 people in this thread even saw that episode.


----------



## bigrig (Jul 1, 2004)

headroll said:


> It's obvious that there are words bleeding through from the other side of the page (hence backwards). I don't think you should be able to read it without some photoshopping of the image. Fortunately for us, I am sure it has been done already by some Lost fan. Anyone have a link to the reversed passage?
> 
> -Roll


The piece of paper that he burns? That was the list of people he was supposed to bring. I'm not sure why he needed the list to remember 4 people... 

One thing I thought interesting was when Ms. Clue asked if Walt had ever appeared someplace unusual...kinda like when he showed up in the jungle that one time.

Matt


----------



## mightyb (Dec 5, 2003)

NoThru22 said:


> I am now convinced that only 1 out of 10 people in this thread even saw that episode.


"seeing" and "remembering" are two very different things!!!!


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

NoThru22 said:


> I am now convinced that only 1 out of 10 people in this thread even saw that episode.


Indeed.

What was going on the week that it aired?

But still, don't the majority of people on this board have *TiVos?*


----------



## Charon2 (Nov 1, 2001)

jenhudson said:


> Okay, I thought I read all the spoilers and didn't read anything about what was on the boat - was it in the previews (I watched them, but not close enough to see or remember the next morning if the boat was shown!)?


If you really want to know...


Spoiler



The final is a Desmond episode. Seeing that Desmond was on a solo race around the world, we can guess that the boat is Desmond's and that he is on it.



Anyhow, I thought it was a great setup episode. As a stand alone episode it doesn't do much, but as a setup to the season finale it works very well. 
Why Hurley? Sayid would be the bigger threat to them. I would hope Sayid and follows, perhaps with Charlie. The boat arrival may delay Jack and them from taking off long enough to give Sayid time to figure out a plan.
Where is Locke off to?


----------



## Magister (Oct 17, 2004)

My Series 2 got exactly everything and only cut out AFTER the previews for next week.

I wonder if they actually injected Michael instead of pulling blood.

I think Locke is going through a 'crisis of faith' at the moment. I wonder if he is just going on his walkabout now. Wonder if he is going to search for 'Crazy French Lady' and find out more about what is going on.

I noticed some of the guys in the 'Others' camp were very clean shaven. And they looked very nervous when Michael was being led in.

I saw lots of people at the funeral I had never noticed before. At least 5. Guess that gives them lots of fodder for future.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

I wonder why the scene with the Others confronting Jack and gang was edited...?

The first time we saw that scene, in its original episode, Zeke calls for Kate by saying, "Bring her out, Alex!"

This time, they edited out "Alex" and she stayed behind to talk to Michael.

Funny thing is, even though the word is edited out, you can hear the echo/ring of the word "Alex" as he shouts.


----------



## rlc1 (Sep 15, 2003)

stevieleej said:


> Most likely Desmond on the boat. What do you think?


Great thought. I think you could be right. Didn't Desmond tell Jack that he was in a sailing race and that's how he ended up on the island? Maybe he hid his sailboat somewhere, and now that he's out of the hatch, he retrieved it and is coming back to the beach to help people out...


----------



## Philly Bill (Oct 6, 2004)

hc130radio said:


> Happy Mothers Day...for those who can read backwards...
> 
> http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/hmcintyr/mail/news_ad.jpg


http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/14...f=pd_bbs_1/103-2760359-2450258?_encoding=UTF8


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

bigrig said:


> One thing I thought interesting was when Ms. Clue asked if Walt had ever appeared someplace unusual...kinda like when he showed up in the jungle that one time.


Was Michael present for those encounters?

The questions that the Others were asking Michael were the sort, given the other information that the Others knows, the Others should know he wouldn't know the answers to. Do we know for sure that Michael is Walt's father? All we know is that for the first 10 (?) or so years of his like Michael and Walt never even met.

The Others, on the other hand, seem to know a great deal that they shouldn't if they are really cutoff from the outside world.


----------



## mightyb (Dec 5, 2003)

Michael has to be feeling some guilt. 

When he was cleaning up the blood and mr. Eko came in and helped, and told him that story about hell, he certainly looked remorsful and as if he was really struggling with the situation he was in.


----------



## durl (Dec 1, 2005)

canyonero! said:


> What was the significance of Locke removing his leg brace and walking away from the beach during the funeral, after seeing Charlie toss his statues?


I'm guessing the significance is that Locke had his leg badly injured probably less than a week prior. I remember Jack saying something to him about needing crutches for something like a month or longer. It appears his leg healed miraculously fast.


----------



## durl (Dec 1, 2005)

jkeegan said:


> Wasn't that line "For someone who wants his son back so badly, you don't seem to know much about him, Michael." also said by the lawyer in one of Michael's flashbacks?
> 
> (edited to make the quote exact from tonight's episode)


I believe you may be right! Does anyone have a screenshot of the custody hearing to back it up? If it was the same person, it seems as though they had a purpose in getting Walt away from Michael.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Sirius Black said:


> Didn't Michael say he wanted the boat (as part of the arrangement he made with the Others)? I originally assumed that meant the power boat that the Others used to kidnap Walt but it could have meant the sailboat that shows up at the end of the episode.


If it was the Sailboat Michael was talking about, then wouldn't that assume Michael had previous knowledge of its existence, or had previous contact with the Others, prior to the period we got in the "13 Days ago" flashbacks? Maybe Michael (and Walt) are part of the Others from the beginning and they were plants.

On another note, did anyone else get the feeling when Michael was being walked through the Others' camp that you were watching Star Trek: Insurrection? You had very similar looking huts and I just had this feeling that all those young adults we saw watching Michael were actually much older than they were. Damn science fiction tangents......


----------



## ScottE22 (Sep 19, 2003)

And I don't think we've seen enough of Michael's backstory to know whether he saw any "visions" of Walt while he was growing up in Australia...


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

hefe said:


> I wonder why the scene with the Others confronting Jack and gang was edited...?
> 
> The first time we saw that scene, in its original episode, Zeke calls for Kate by saying, "Bring her out, Alex!"
> 
> ...


Closed caption still said "Bring her out, Alex!" I rewound it a couple of times to make sure I didn't miss 'Alex' in audio, but it wasn't there.

Also, isn't the girl who played Alex the genius girl in Malcom in the middle from two seasons ago or so?


----------



## Cboath (Jun 22, 2004)

hefe said:


> I wonder why the scene with the Others confronting Jack and gang was edited...?
> 
> The first time we saw that scene, in its original episode, Zeke calls for Kate by saying, "Bring her out, Alex!"
> 
> ...


I didn't think they edited it out. I still heard it, and I think in the scene from the original ep, you couldn't see who brought Kate out.

I think the echo/ring you are talking about is that they cut from Zeke to Alex in the middle of the sentence and it just was supposed to sound farther away.


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

jamesbobo said:


> And now a word about next seasons schedule. Tired of too many repeats? I read in the Star Ledger that Lost will air seven new episodes in a row at the start of next season. Then it will go off the air !!!! It will return in January when new epsiodes will air for the remainder of the season.


 :up: :up: :up:

If that's true, I think that's a great change! Then I won't be expecting new episodes only to be disgusted by more reruns.

As to last night, I thought it was a good episode. I liked seeing what happened to Michael while he was away interspersed with new stuff.

But I cannot accept how truly stupid a weenie Jack has become! To just let Michael start calling all the shots is totally out of character Glad that Sayid clued him in. I was a bit thrown by how easily Sayid appeared to give up going on the mission when Michael told him he shouldn't go. Glad that was just a ruse.

But the part where Sawyer told Jack about sleeping w/Ana just seemed stupid. When he's vying for Kate's affections with Jack, why would he give him ammunition to tell Kate he slept with another woman to show he's not worthy???? Totally out of character. As was Sawyer saying Jack was the closest thing he had to a best friend??? These guys have physically fought and been on the opposite side of every issue throughout the show. Now they're best buds. I can't suspend disbelief that much!

Also, Claire has been such a hardnose since Charlie abducted the baby in the night. She sure mellowed and gave in to liking him again way too quickly in this episode.

Oh yeah and when and how did Charlie manage to get such a precise haircut on the island???

Cheryl


----------



## NoThru22 (May 6, 2005)

hefe said:


> I wonder why the scene with the Others confronting Jack and gang was edited...?
> 
> The first time we saw that scene, in its original episode, Zeke calls for Kate by saying, "Bring her out, Alex!"
> 
> ...


I heard him say "Bring her out, Alex" this time as well. Alex begged the other guy to take Kate out so she could talk to Michael.

I forgot to talk about it in my earlier post, but did you notice the horrific make-up job they did on Mr. Friendly? They tried to intercut that scene in like it was all at the same time, but they didn't even remotely try to make him look the same. He was much cleaner and his beard was much longer in this episode, but they still showed him filthy with a short beard and tried to pretend like it was seconds later. At least this puts to rest the theory about the Marvin Candle video: the make-up people just suck.

That can't be Desmond's boat. He said he crashed it.


----------



## NoThru22 (May 6, 2005)

speedcouch said:


> But the part where Sawyer told Jack about sleeping w/Ana just seemed stupid... Totally out of character.


Totally out of character? I guess you don't know many men.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

I need to go back and watch the Walt scene again. That whole thing was great, between the lady doctor asking Michael all those questions and Walt talking about tests and them pretending.


----------



## Jericho Dog (Feb 10, 2006)

MikeMar said:


> Camera angles dude  and he can have one of those fake beards that the others use


or they can put the fake beards on everyone else to make Walt look younger....


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

NoThru22 said:


> I heard him say "Bring her out, Alex" this time as well. Alex begged the other guy to take Kate out so she could talk to Michael.
> 
> I forgot to talk about it in my earlier post, but did you notice the horrific make-up job they did on Mr. Friendly? They tried to intercut that scene in like it was all at the same time, but they didn't even remotely try to make him look the same. He was much cleaner and his beard was much longer in this episode, but they still showed him filthy with a short beard and tried to pretend like it was seconds later. At least this puts to rest the theory about the Marvin Candle video: the make-up people just suck.
> 
> That can't be Desmond's boat. He said he crashed it.


I just figured Mr. Friendly had done a few additional things before showing himself to the Losties. Just reach down, grab some dirt and smear. And just grab the end of the beard and take a quick knife to it.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

NoThru22 said:


> I heard him say "Bring her out, Alex" this time as well. Alex begged the other guy to take Kate out so she could talk to Michael.


If he said "Alex," then it isn't present in my recording due to a very short audio dropout, because I replayed it about 6 or 7 times to try and let my wife hear the echo...I'll check later at home to see if that's the case...

Did everyone else hear him say "Alex?"


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

Why would you only send out 5 people (especially with one of them being Hurley) when you have 11 guns? You know the Others have at least 2 guns and are proficient in setting up traps....let alone not allowing Syiad to go??? I just have a hard time swallowing that entire storyline.

Also, aren't Charlie's statues just going to be washed back onto the beach?


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

durl said:


> I'm guessing the significance is that Locke had his leg badly injured probably less than a week prior. I remember Jack saying something to him about needing crutches for something like a month or longer. It appears his leg healed miraculously fast.


Just based on what we've been shown...

Well, he was paralyzed enough to put him in a wheelchair prior to being on the Island. We know that was "healed" and that ...Rose had cancer and would have died were it not for the Island's effects. No one other than Locke and Rose are aware of the Island's effects in this regard.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

hefe said:


> Did everyone else hear him say "Alex?"


I heard "Alex" very clearly. I do believe when Zeke said "Alex" that the scene quickly switched back to her. Maybe that's what is throwing you off.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

Sirius Black said:


> Just based on what we've been shown...
> 
> Well, he was paralyzed enough to put him in a wheelchair prior to being on the Island. We know that was "healed" and that ...Rose had cancer and would have died were it not for the Island's effects. No one other than Locke and Rose are aware of the Island's affects in this regard.


And who was it that Locke was talking to after his leg accident that said something like "you know your leg is going to heal very quickly here"...


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

pmyers said:


> Why would you only send out 5 people (especially with one of them being Hurley) when you have 11 guns? You know the Others have at least 2 guns and are proficient in setting up traps....let alone not allowing Syiad to go??? I just have a hard time swallowing that entire storyline.
> 
> Also, aren't Charlie's statues just going to be washed back onto the beach?


Not sure why they aren't bringing extra people besides the reason of a too large of a group and you are seen miles away. And how many people there know how to shoot a gun really?

And w/ the whole Syiad thing, it was a great way to get people to find out that Michael is compromised now.

Syiad will probably trail behind now or something.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

stevieleej said:


> Most likely Desmond on the boat. What do you think?


Seems likely. I assumed that the boat Michael asked for was the one that they used to take Walt away from the raft.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

pmyers said:


> I heard "Alex" very clearly. I do believe when Zeke said "Alex" that the scene quickly switched back to her. Maybe that's what is throwing you off.


OK, must be an audio dropout, because it isn't there on my recording.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

pmyers said:


> And who was it that Locke was talking to after his leg accident that said something like "you know your leg is going to heal very quickly here"...


Close...


Season 2 Episode 19 said:


> LOCKE: I'm done with the hatch.
> 
> ROSE: Oh, now you're just frustrated. You'll be out of that splint and running around the island again in no time.
> 
> ...


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

hefe said:


> If he said "Alex," then it isn't present in my recording due to a very short audio dropout, because I replayed it about 6 or 7 times to try and let my wife hear the echo...I'll check later at home to see if that's the case...
> 
> Did everyone else hear him say "Alex?"


Nope


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

They better show us something else that made michael shoot ana lucia. Right now it looks like they wrote the episode where he shot her without knowing for sure why. That is just stupid if so. Based on this episode, he seems to have no real reason to have shot her. There are a lot of other ways he could have freed their guy.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

cherry ghost said:


> Nope


I see you were watching the Chicago station too. Were you also watching the HD feed?

I think I may also have it on my non-HD TiVo so I'll check and see if it is different on that recording...


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> They better show us something else that made michael shoot ana lucia. Right now it looks like they wrote the episode where he shot her without knowing for sure why. That is just stupid if so. Based on this episode, he seems to have no real reason to have shot her. There are a lot of other ways he could have freed their guy.


If he would never be alone in the hatch to let HG out. And HOW would he do it if he didn't know the combo?


----------



## Artfreak (May 19, 2005)

The audio cut out twice for us, during the scenes in which they have Kate. Really obvious, the "Alex" was cut out.

Also, I don't understand why Eko is assuming pushing the button is what his brother was referring to in his dream. I remember it as his brother telling him that the work he's doing now is the most important thing on the island, which IIRC, would have been his work in building the church, bringing the Losties together. I don't remember his brother saying anything specific about the button, it could be taken either way.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> They better show us something else that made michael shoot ana lucia. Right now it looks like they wrote the episode where he shot her without knowing for sure why. That is just stupid if so. Based on this episode, he seems to have no real reason to have shot her. There are a lot of other ways he could have freed their guy.


He didn't exactly have a lot of time to figure things out. I'm not sure how he could get it done with witnesses.


----------



## Artfreak (May 19, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> They better show us something else that made michael shoot ana lucia. Right now it looks like they wrote the episode where he shot her without knowing for sure why. That is just stupid if so. Based on this episode, he seems to have no real reason to have shot her. There are a lot of other ways he could have freed their guy.


I think it had something to do with the fact that just before he filled her with led, she told him she had come there to kill HG. Even though she said she couldn't bring herself to do it, maybe he thought that in just a matter of say, oh, 28 days she would feel like it again and be able to do it.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

hefe said:


> I see you were watching the Chicago station too. Were you also watching the HD feed?
> 
> I think I may also have it on my non-HD TiVo so I'll check and see if it is different on that recording...


HD with a Comcast DVR. I don't have it on my Tivo. At the time I noticed the missing "Alex" right away.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

MikeMar said:


> If he would never be alone in the hatch to let HG out. And HOW would he do it if he didn't know the combo?


Well he had a gun and the combination. At that point he could have just taken henry outside the hatch "to kill him" and then come back without the gun pretending like henry escaped.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> Well he had a gun and the combination. At that point he could have just taken henry outside the hatch "to kill him" and then come back without the gun pretending like henry escaped.


You think Ana would let him walk out w/ HG even w/ a gun pointed at him?

Highly doubt that. Especially not w/o her


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> Well he had a gun and the combination. At that point he could have just taken henry outside the hatch "to kill him" and then come back without the gun pretending like henry escaped.


A) I don't think Anna Lucia would have permitted that.

B) How do you justify yourself with that story to the rest of the Losties? "I decided to execute the prisoner, so I brought him outside..."


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

Artfreak said:


> The audio cut out twice for us, during the scenes in which they have Kate. Really obvious, the "Alex" was cut out.
> 
> Also, I don't understand why Eko is assuming pushing the button is what his brother was referring to in his dream. I remember it as his brother telling him that the work he's doing now is the most important thing on the island, which IIRC, would have been his work in building the church, bringing the Losties together. I don't remember his brother saying anything specific about the button, it could be taken either way.


I have a Comcast DVR and I heard the Alex clearly.

When Eko and Yemi were in the room where they enter the numbers in Eko's dream:

YEMI [shushing Eko]: The work being done in this place is important, Eko. It is more important than anything. And it is in danger. You must help John. He has lost his way. You must make him take you to the question mark.

[We hear the timer alarm start to sound. The timer starts flipping and shows black and red question marks flipping, instead of numbers. Yemi tries to enter the numbers but all the keys have questions marks on them.]

It's pretty apparent Yemi is talking about entering the numbers, not about the church.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

MikeMar said:


> You think Ana would let him walk out w/ HG even w/ a gun pointed at him?
> 
> Highly doubt that. Especially not w/o her


You seriously think that michael's plan made any sense? Here are several other plans that work no worse than his, in terms of dead people:

1. Go into the vault, give henry the gun, tell him to escape. Since it's the only gun in the area, he escapes. Problem solved.

2. Take henry and ana lucia out into the forest, henry "wrestles the gun" from michael, who lets him. He escapes, problem solved.

3. Tell the losties that he met the others and they want to negotiate for henry's freedom in exchange for walt and that they requested that specific people come whom they trust more than others.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

hefe said:


> A) I don't think Anna Lucia would have permitted that.
> 
> B) How do you justify yourself with that story to the rest of the Losties? "I decided to execute the prisoner, so I brought him outside..."


Something like this: I went in to interrogate him about walt and he escaped, we shot him as he fled.


----------



## headroll (Jan 20, 2003)

hefe said:


> If he said "Alex," then it isn't present in my recording due to a very short audio dropout, because I replayed it about 6 or 7 times to try and let my wife hear the echo...I'll check later at home to see if that's the case...
> 
> Did everyone else hear him say "Alex?"


I may be smeeking (will know once I finish the thread).

I did not hear "Alex" but CC clearly showed it.

-Roll

edit : I smeeked


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> Something like this: I went in to interrogate him about walt and he escaped, we shot him as he fled.


That's fine, but Michael didn't know the combo, he needed AL to give it to him, plus, she would have needed to go along with his story, which she wouldn't have.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

What are you talking about? She gave him the combo and was already willing to go along with him killing the guy.


----------



## mask2343 (Jan 6, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> You seriously think that michael's plan made any sense? Here are several other plans that work no worse than his, in terms of dead people:
> 
> 1. Go into the vault, give henry the gun, tell him to escape. Since it's the only gun in the area, he escapes. Problem solved.
> 
> ...


All three plans = BOREDOM. Ana Lucia and Libby being shot by Michael = RATINGS.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> What are you talking about? She gave him the combo and was already willing to go along with him killing the guy.


But Michael's end game was to get him outside and release him. How does he do that without AL interfering? SHE would have grabbed a weapon too. (if she even allowed it) There's no way Michael lets him go without AL having something to say about it.

AL alive=Henry not escaping.

Even if you believe there's a chance that it wouldn't be that way, Michael wasn't willing to take that chance.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

How would she have grabbed a weapon? What, you mean like a branch or something?

He does that by saying, "I'm going to kill him outside because otherwise we will both get in trouble" and if she says, "I'm going along" see above. Worst case scenario she doesn't agree and I suppose he kills her anyway. That is a lot better than just killing her right away without even trying to keep her alive.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

mightyb said:


> Michael has to be feeling some guilt.
> 
> When he was cleaning up the blood and mr. Eko came in and helped, and told him that story about hell, he certainly looked remorsful and as if he was really struggling with the situation he was in.


I agree somewhat.

Also when someone asked him what happened to AL and Libby, I expected him to say they were shot, but he said they were _murdered_. I think that is a significant distinction. He knows he is a murderer.

I also think he shot intentionally when Libby walked in on him. I don't think it was premiditated, but it was not accidental either, as many people believe. Accidental would be if he didn't know the gun was loaded or if his finger has some sort of involuntary spasm (or like a certain VP, if he was shooting at a covey of birds and someone was in the line of fire he didn't know was there). In Michael's case, he shot her spontaneously, but pulling that trigger was a voluntary action.

Back to the conversation with Eko, I thought Eko's response was really interesting. He told a story about someone who had done something arguably wrong, and who didn't truly feel sorry about it, but just wanted to have no negative consequences from it. That seems to be where Michael is now. I think he has guilt in the sense of realizing he did something that other people would not approve. However, I don't think he has any true remorse because he believes getting his son back trumps any and all other considerations.


----------



## Solver (Feb 17, 2005)

So now we know the name of five hatches and have the location of the sixth.

Swan
Arrow
Staff
Flame
Pearl
The others hatch

Does that now nearly complete the hatch map surrounding the big "?" on the blastdoor map.

And what is that "?" in the center, really?


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

RBlount said:


> What does Eko now believe his mission/job/destiny is? I understand why Locke is now so disillusioned about the "button", but why is Eko so facinated?


As soon as I read this question, I wondered if maybe it's tied to this idea some of us have had that Locke and Eko are two halves of the same person.. What if Eko is so dedicated _because_ Locke is so disallusioned?

I liked the fact that Eko also left his muddy shoes outside, like Locke did.

Thinking back to this duality idea (while trying to not get too literally tied to the whole "twins" concept), it did seem to me that Eko & Charlie building the church was kind of like Locke and Boone digging up the hatch.. and Jack and Sawyer talking _again_ before battle (as mentioned earlier in the thread) was like two halves of the same person talking to himself before something big was coming up (they were both interested in the same girl)..


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Solver said:


> So now we know the name of five hatches and have the location of the sixth.
> 
> Swan
> Arrow
> ...


The pearl is the ? and not one of the surrounding hatches.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> How would she have grabbed a weapon?  What, you mean like a branch or something?
> 
> He does that by saying, "I'm going to kill him outside because otherwise we will both get in trouble" and if she says, "I'm going along" see above. Worst case scenario she doesn't agree and I suppose he kills her anyway. That is a lot better than just killing her right away without even trying to keep her alive.


Look, your position is that he had no reason to shoot her. In most cases where someone gets shot, somthing else _could _ have been done.

For much of the show Michael has been shown to be rather irrational and impulsive where Walt is concerned. The question in my mind isn't "could Michael have done something different," it's "is it possible within the story that he would do this?" And that's a big "yes."

The man is desperate, and doesn't have the time or will to execute a more elaborate plan that has a greater chance of not working. What he chose to do is _plausible _ within this story. That's all that is required. We could argue all day about choices made in the plot, but in the end, the choice that was made is plausible in the context of the show.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

And my answer is "no", he would not just murder someone like that based on what we have seen. It is totally out of character for him. Yeah he behaves irrationally but not with such evil and murderous intent. He went from semi-heroic guy who would do about anything we the audience would do to help his son to anti-hero who would do things even the audience would not do for his son. I'm sorry but that is a big leap and one which I do not accept. It is getting to the point where Lost is turning into 24, with characters totally changing just so the writers can surprise us.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> And my answer is "no", he would not just murder someone like that based on what we have seen. It is totally out of character for him. Yeah he behaves irrationally but not with such evil and murderous intent. He went from semi-heroic guy who would do about anything we the audience would do to help his son to anti-hero who would do things even the audience would not do for his son. I'm sorry but that is a big leap and one which I do not accept. It is getting to the point where Lost is turning into 24, with characters totally changing just so the writers can surprise us.


Well, time to enter "agree to disagree" mode...

I have felt that Michael is probably the most impulsive and irrational character right from the start. I don't put much past him. He's never seemed heroic to me, always emotional and irrational.


----------



## Solver (Feb 17, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> The pearl is the ? and not one of the surrounding hatches.


 Are you sure of that? If that is the case then there are at least seven hatches.
Could it be that we were misdirected and have not seen the real "?".


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> And my answer is "no", he would not just murder someone like that based on what we have seen. It is totally out of character for him. Yeah he behaves irrationally but not with such evil and murderous intent. He went from semi-heroic guy who would do about anything we the audience would do to help his son to anti-hero who would do things even the audience would not do for his son. I'm sorry but that is a big leap and one which I do not accept. It is getting to the point where Lost is turning into 24, with characters totally changing just so the writers can surprise us.


Maybe Michael is getting "sick".


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

BeanMeScot said:


> Maybe Michael is getting "sick".


Or was told to murder AL, whatever. The important thing to me is that what we have seen now is not adequate as an explanation for me. Impulsive and irrational is one thing, but murderous is another thing. I feel in order to make what we have seen believable something else needs to be shown. Getting sick would be a nice twist. Him just murdering someone because the writers wanted to surprise us is not.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

hefe said:


> If he said "Alex," then it isn't present in my recording due to a very short audio dropout, because I replayed it about 6 or 7 times to try and let my wife hear the echo...I'll check later at home to see if that's the case...
> 
> Did everyone else hear him say "Alex?"


I *DID NOT* hear him say "Alex".

In fact, I heard it *exactly* the way you heard it, with the faint echo of Alex intact, but not the word Alex.

I think both you and I watch in HD. Could it have been a glitch in the HD audio, that didn't happen on the SD feed?

Could it be a glitch that happened on the east feed and not the west?

EDIT: In reviewing who heard "Alex" and who didn't, I think there is a pattern.

The word "Alex" was apparently lost in an audio dropout on the east/central HD feed, and not on the mountain or west HD feed or any SD feed.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

hefe said:


> Seems likely. I assumed that the boat Michael asked for was the one that they used to take Walt away from the raft.


No-he's referring to the motorboat that was used to kidnap Walt.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

spikedavis said:


> No-he's referring to the motorboat that was used to kidnap Walt.


Yes, that's _exactly _ what I said.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

hefe said:


> Seems likely. I assumed that the boat Michael asked for was the one that they used to take Walt away from the raft.





spikedavis said:


> No-he's referring to the motorboat that was used to kidnap Walt.


Umm same boat


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

Fish Man said:


> I *DID NOT* hear him say "Alex".
> 
> In fact, I heard it *exactly* the way you heard it, with the faint echo of Alex intact, but not the word Alex.
> 
> ...


I'm in Atlanta and heard Alex.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

BeanMeScot said:


> I'm in Atlanta and heard Alex.


wow, 1/2 way across the world you heard a fictitious character! awesome


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> What are you talking about? She gave him the combo and was already willing to go along with him killing the guy.


exactly. And you mean there's no way to tell the group-"Look. The Others want me to bring four of you, but it's a trap. We can set it up so it looks that way, but Locke, Sayid, Jin and Ecko and all these Red Shirts can be behind us in the hills following with a ton of weapons. When we get there, they show their cards and then we attack...


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

MikeMar said:


> Umm same boat


brainfart!! I was reading another post! DUH...


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

spikedavis said:


> exactly. And you mean there's no way to tell the group-"Look. The Others want me to bring four of you, but it's a trap. We can set it up so it looks that way, but Locke, Sayid, Jin and Ecko and all these Red Shirts can be behind us in the hills following with a ton of weapons. When we get there, they show their cards and then we attack...


I think that's what Syiad will do  but w/o michael's knowing


----------



## TR7spyder (Feb 28, 2006)

speedcouch said:


> But the part where Sawyer told Jack about sleeping w/Ana just seemed stupid. When he's vying for Kate's affections with Jack, why would he give him ammunition to tell Kate he slept with another woman to show he's not worthy???? Totally out of character. As was Sawyer saying Jack was the closest thing he had to a best friend??? These guys have physically fought and been on the opposite side of every issue throughout the show. Now they're best buds. I can't suspend disbelief that much!


I totally bought it! Sawyer appeared to be shaken up by AL's death, so he had to share it with someone. Kate and Jack are two people closest to him (even if they are often on opposite sides) and he couldn't tell this to Kate...


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

MikeMar said:


> I think that's what Syiad will do  but w/o michael's knowing


Well, yes, but Michael should realize there's no need for him to be deceptive.

What I want to know is how The Others know everyone's names...Do they have an internet connection out there with access to the flight manifest?


----------



## TR7spyder (Feb 28, 2006)

pmyers said:


> Why would you only send out 5 people (especially with one of them being Hurley) when you have 11 guns? You know the Others have at least 2 guns and are proficient in setting up traps....let alone not allowing Syiad to go??? I just have a hard time swallowing that entire storyline.
> 
> Also, aren't Charlie's statues just going to be washed back onto the beach?


Even they must realize that the others must have a lot more guns...

1 - At least one handgun prior to meeting Michael (used to shoot Sawyer on the raft)
2 - At least two rifles at the hatch as they brought Michael in.
2 - A hand gun and a rifle that were taken from Michael
5 - guns taken from Jack, Lock and Sawyer.

So that is 10 guns that they *know* others have!


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

It looks like the people on the Island knew the passenger list of the plane and brought the plane down with a magnetic weapon of some sort. And they only wanted certain people on the plane.


----------



## Chapper1 (Jan 2, 2004)

Fish Man said:


> I *DID NOT* hear him say "Alex".
> 
> In fact, I heard it *exactly* the way you heard it, with the faint echo of Alex intact, but not the word Alex.
> 
> ...


I watched it this morning from abc.com and heard Alex on that stream


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

Fl_Gulfer said:


> It looks like the people on the Island knew the passenger list of the plane and brought the plane down with a magnetic weapon of some sort. And they only wanted certain people on the plane.


How would they have known what flight it was? They had a list of the people they wanted the first night the Tailies arrived...


----------



## Jericho Dog (Feb 10, 2006)

spikedavis said:


> brainfart!! I was reading another post! DUH...


No no, that was the other post you were reading...!


----------



## danplaysbass (Jul 19, 2004)

MikeMar said:


> I think that's what Syiad will do  but w/o michael's knowing


Its Sayid...


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

danplaysbass said:


> Its Sayid...


It's it's.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

danplaysbass said:


> Its Sayid...


It's "It's"...


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

danplaysbass said:


> Its Sayid...


who cares  people have posted numerous spellings of Sayid and Locke


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Darn you hefe


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Well, we agree on something.


----------



## jwjody (Dec 7, 2002)

Possible smeek...

Anyone think the person in the boat is Desmond?

J


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

jwjody said:


> Possible smeek...
> 
> Anyone think the person in the boat is Desmond?
> 
> J


yup smeek


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Fl_Gulfer said:


> It looks like the people on the Island knew the passenger list of the plane and brought the plane down with a magnetic weapon of some sort. And they only wanted certain people on the plane.


That's one hell of a gamble when you consider that only fifty people or so survived (out of what, a couple of hundred?) the crash.
The odds are very much against them of only getting the people that they wanted and not having them killed in the crash.


----------



## uncdrew (Aug 6, 2002)

whitson77 said:


> I think Michael "killing" two people for his son is a big deviation of his character.


Agreed. I didn't like it.

From what Michael saw, I'd take the 40 something survivors and add all the Tailies and get all the guns and take over their camp. They have the numbers, the guns, etc.

I'd be so sick of sitting around doing nothing. Almost as sick of sitting around watching them do nothing.


----------



## danieljanderson (Nov 19, 2002)

I bet the Others will be pissed at Michael for killing Libby. I'm not sure why, but there has to be more story surrounding her.


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

MikeMar said:


> wow, 1/2 way across the world you heard a fictitious character! awesome


I also have HD. I think that's a trump!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

mightyb said:


> Yup, that is pretty much it. The stand alones don't dial in often enough to get those last minute/day changes....
> 
> The directTivo's, like you mentioned, get them from the satellite!


I record LOST on a standalone S1 and it had the correct 1:04 time, so it has nothing to do with DTV or broadband connection.



hefe said:


> I wonder why the scene with the Others confronting Jack and gang was edited...?
> 
> The first time we saw that scene, in its original episode, Zeke calls for Kate by saying, "Bring her out, Alex!"
> 
> ...


They said Alex in this episode too. Thats why she looked scared and talked the other dude into taking her out. I noticed it specifically in this episode because I didnt remember Zeke saying Alex in the previous ep.



mightyb said:


> Michael has to be feeling some guilt.
> 
> When he was cleaning up the blood and mr. Eko came in and helped, and told him that story about hell, he certainly looked remorsful and as if he was really struggling with the situation he was in.


Not to mention the fact that he went out and puked right after he was done. That was surely the guilt and stress that he was feeling.


spikedavis said:


> Well, yes, but Michael should realize there's no need for him to be deceptive.
> 
> What I want to know is how The Others know everyone's names...Do they have an internet connection out there with access to the flight manifest?


You really think its just by chance that these people were on that flight? I think the Others knew their names long before they got to the island.

And finally, why would Jack and the rest of them believe Michael when he said they only had two guns, when Jack knows for a fact that The Others have several more guns than that, just from what they took from Jack, Sawyer, etc.? Jack doesnt have an ounce of strategy in his mind. I cant believe that he didnt think it was odd the way Michael was demanding to dictate the terms and still didnt clue into it when Sayid was explaining it.

Its been mentioned, but the black womans name is Klugh, not Clue.

Finally, can we please move the discussions about the internet game to the OFFICIAL Lost Game Thread and stop cluttering up the episode discussion with talk about commercials, websites, and newspaper ads? Please?


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

devdogaz said:


> Its been mentioned, but the black womans name is Klugh, not Clue.


It sounds the same. That's why people are spelling it Clue. Others spell it Klugh because it was in the closed captioning that way.


----------



## Snappa77 (Feb 14, 2004)

> Originally Posted by hefe
> If he said "Alex," then it isn't present in my recording due to a very short audio dropout, because I replayed it about 6 or 7 times to try and let my wife hear the echo...I'll check later at home to see if that's the case...
> 
> Did everyone else hear him say "Alex?"


He did NOT say "Alex"............. He said 'Goth'....er...um.....or was it 'gaunt'?

lol

The debate continues.

Does anyone know the timestamp that the "commercial" appeared. The one that has everyone flocking to the new website?


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

Sirius Black said:


> Do we know for sure that Michael is Walt's father? All we know is that for the first 10 (?) or so years of his like Michael and Walt never even met.
> .


Maybe...

wait for it....

she cheated 

On another note...

In the beginning, when Michael was telling Jack the plan to just bring the 4 to the ambush... He said, in passing almost, something to the effect... they're the ones that know, they have to be the ones to come.

What do they know? Did he mean they know about the killings and henry gale's escape? Or do they know something else that the Others don't want them knowing?



Solver said:


> So now we know the name of five hatches and have the location of the sixth.
> 
> Swan
> Arrow
> ...


Which one is the shark from?


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

devdogaz said:


> I record LOST on a standalone S1 and it had the correct 1:04 time, so it has nothing to do with DTV or broadband connection.


It has to do with when your stand-alone made it's daily call.

ABC schedules Lost for exactly 1 hour when it's a couple of weeks out. Then, sometime after that but before the show airs, they decide if it's going to _really_ run 1:02, 1:04 or whatever.

Then, once that decision is made, the data is sent to Tribune, who in turn has to get the update to TiVo's dial-in servers, DTV, and everywhere else it has to go.

If they get the update to TiVos servers soon enough *and* your daily call happens after that update but before Lost airs *and* your TiVo's scheduler deamon re-examines the new data and catches the difference after the call but before Lost airs, *then* your TiVo does the right thing.

Since the guide is trickled to the DTV units continuously, they stand a somewhat better chance than the stand alone units that their scheduler is appropriately updated by air time. But, the stand alone units will do the right thing *if* ABC and Tribune get the data into the guide in a timely enough fashion.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

I have my lost SP padded by 10 min period


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

devdogaz said:


> I record LOST on a standalone S1 and it had the correct 1:04 time, so it has nothing to do with DTV or broadband connection.


DTV customers get the guide data via the satellite. 100% of the customers get the updated guide data.

SA customers get the guide data via the phone/boradband connection. Only those customers that make a phone call after the guide data is updated get the updated data. The percentage of SA customers that get the update is greater than 0% but less than 100%. AFAIK the daily phone call is made every 24-48 hours. A correction 12 hours in advance probably wouldn't get much more than 25% of the units.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

bruinfan said:


> Maybe...
> 
> wait for it....
> 
> she cheated


Let's think about this a-bit.

Michael has believed since Walt's mom was pregnant with Walt that he was Walt's biological father.

However, from Michael's earlier flashbacks we know that Walt's mom went through outrageous and major effort to make sure Michael was not able to be a part of Walt's life. She made it a point to live half a world away from where Michael lived, and she never showed Walt any of the letters Michael had written and the drawings he sent.

So, perhaps Walt's mom did cheat, and *she knew that Walt wasn't Michael's!!*

Now, let's think about the ramifications of this:

The others draw Michaels blood and do a DNA test and determine that he is *not Walt's biological father!*

Then, after Michael commits a double homicide trying to keep up his end of the deal to get Walt back, and knowingly leads Kate, Jack, Sawyer, and Hurley into an ambush, the "others" say, "Sorry, Michael, we've found out you're not really Walt's father. Deal's off!"

Wouldn't it suck to be Michael then!!


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

stevieleej said:


> Wasn't this odd that Eko begins telling this story when Michael only asked, "I hear you're a priest... ...I guess you believe in hell then." Eko could have just said, "yes".


I agree, it's like Eko knew there was more to Michael's question than what he was letting on. Eko is quite intuitive. But I don't think Eko suspects what it is Michael is hiding.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

lew said:


> DTV customers get the guide data via the satellite. 100% of the customers get the updated guide data.
> 
> SA customers get the guide data via the phone/boradband connection. Only those customers that make a phone call after the guide data is updated get the updated data. The percentage of SA customers that get the update is greater than 0% but less than 100%. AFAIK the daily phone call is made every 24-48 hours. A correction 12 hours in advance would probably wouldn't get much more than 25% of the units.


Smeeked by 4 minutes!


----------



## pallendo (Sep 28, 2005)

Oh, ya, not a smeek, been re-reading... http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/hmcintyr/mail/139191991471518711419.jpg


Spoiler



The mouth piece???


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Fish Man and lew, I know how the TiVo scheduling works. I was simply pointing out to those who always seem to assume that it has something to do with DTV or broadband that it isn't specifically tied to either of those.


----------



## thenightfly42 (Mar 5, 2002)

NoThru22 said:


> That can't be Desmond's boat. He said he crashed it.


True, but it has been a bunch of days since he ran off from the hatch. We don't know how much damage there was to the sailboat. Perhaps he was able to repair it?


Episode 3 - Orientation said:


> DESMOND: It was 3 years ago. I was on a solo race around the world, and my boat crashed into the reef, and then Kelvin came.


I think he fixed the boat and sailed away, but the island brought him right back.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

pallendo said:


> Oh, ya, not a smeek, been re-reading... http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/hmcintyr/mail/139191991471518711419.jpg
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


STOP!!!!

Seriously, take the internet game discussion to the Official Lost Game Thread. There are more people there who are interested in it and it won't bother the people here who are not interested.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

danplaysbass said:


> Its Sayid...





hefe said:


> It's it's.


...but at least he got the ellipsis right.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> ...but at least he got the ellipsis right.


Absolutely, its all about punctuation.

(Yes, that was intentional.)


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

devdogaz said:


> Fish Man and lew, I know how the TiVo scheduling works. I was simply pointing out to those who always seem to assume that it has something to do with DTV or broadband that it isn't specifically tied to either of those.


Except that it does, and it is.

A TiVo that is continuously getting fresh guide data (either via broadband or via DirecTV's stream) is far more likely to have up-to-date guide information than one that dials in every 48 hours.

So, it's not assumption, it's fact. The up-to-dateness of the guide data has _everything_ to do with DTV vs. broadband vs. dialup.

There's a lot more luck involved in your guide data being up to date at the critical moment when it only gets refreshed every 2 days.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Fish Man said:


> Except that it does, and it is.
> 
> A TiVo that is continuously getting fresh guide data (either via broadband or via DirecTV's stream) is far more likely to have up-to-date guide information than one that dials in every 48 hours.
> 
> ...


I agree with you. You're just arguing semantics. I was simply pointing out that any TiVo can get the correct guide data and that it doesn't _have_ to be a DirecTiVo or an S2 with broadband as others in this thread (and many other threads) have asserted.

Back to the LOST discussion please.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

devdogaz said:


> Fish Man and lew, I know how the TiVo scheduling works. I was simply pointing out to those who always seem to assume that it has something to do with DTV or broadband that it isn't specifically tied to either of those.


Of course it is. The 48 hour time period between phone calls means most of the SA customers won't be getting last minute schedule corrections. Specifically it's geared to how long it takes for tivo to update the SA units via phone calls vs how long it takes to simultaneously transfer the updated information to all the DTV units via the satellite.

I'm not questioning that some SA customers such, such as yourself, got the updated information. The point is the way TiVo scheduling works most customers won't.

edited to quote


> was simply pointing out that any TiVo can get the correct guide data and that it doesn't have to be a DirecTiVo


The distinction is *EVERY DTivo* can get the correct guide data *but a majority of SA units WON'T * get the last day changes.


----------



## TR7spyder (Feb 28, 2006)

Snappa77 said:


> He did NOT say "Alex"............. He said 'Goth'....er...um.....or was it 'gaunt'?
> 
> lol
> 
> The debate continues.


What debate? A few of you experience an audio glitch and didnt hear Alex.

While the rest of us clearly heard it! What is there to debate? I whish you guys would drop it, already. There are enough real clues to discuss to be making-up new ones .

BTW, My Comcast DVR stopped the recording moments after the previews ended (104 min). That is one thing that they seem to get right, but I still hate this DVR .


----------



## Solver (Feb 17, 2005)

That was a short "three minutes."


----------



## mightyb (Dec 5, 2003)

devdogaz said:


> I record LOST on a standalone S1 and it had the correct 1:04 time, so it has nothing to do with DTV or broadband connection.


Your stand alone then got the update in time, before the airing.

The stand alones on Dial up don't check as often as one on bb.


----------



## mightyb (Dec 5, 2003)

Fish Man said:


> It has to do with when your stand-alone made it's daily call.
> 
> ABC schedules Lost for exactly 1 hour when it's a couple of weeks out. Then, sometime after that but before the show airs, they decide if it's going to _really_ run 1:02, 1:04 or whatever.
> 
> ...


whoops...didn't finish reading...

i'm SMEEKALICOUS


----------



## Solver (Feb 17, 2005)

When Michael got to the computer and started typing, nothing appeared for a moment. Only after a few seconds did his typing start to echo on the screen.

He was being watched and the watcher(s) activated the two way.


----------



## thatmeowgirl (Oct 8, 2004)

stevieleej said:


> Most likely Desmond on the boat. What do you think?


Related spoiler I posted a few days ago:



Spoiler



In a flashback that is set in 2000 in L.A., Libby buys Desmond coffee and offers him her boat.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

thatmeowgirl said:


> Related spoiler I posted a few days ago:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


what episode is that from?

nevermind


----------



## NoThru22 (May 6, 2005)

BeanMeScot said:


> I just figured Mr. Friendly had done a few additional things before showing himself to the Losties. Just reach down, grab some dirt and smear. And just grab the end of the beard and take a quick knife to it.


They show him walking back from the clearing after their conversation and his beard is long and he's clean again. Quite a feat.


bruinfan said:


> Which one is the shark from?


If you look at the map from the hatch without writing superimposed over it, I think the hatch people call "The Flame" looks like "The Neptune" but then the symbol looks like a flame.


----------



## Solver (Feb 17, 2005)

Did anyone else notice a brief camera shot showing multiple rows of gauges in the swan station?


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

uncdrew said:


> Agreed. I didn't like it.
> 
> From what Michael saw, I'd take the 40 something survivors and add all the Tailies and get all the guns and take over their camp. They have the numbers, the guns, etc.
> 
> I'd be so sick of sitting around doing nothing. Almost as sick of sitting around watching them do nothing.


Problem here is, say they get the entire set of losties to ambush the others camp.

No losties are killed, all the others are killed, but Walt dies in the crossfire.

How does that help Michael?

If Walt wasn't there, then I agree 100% that that would be something they can do.

Michael can't take the chance that at the first sign of trouble, the others kill Walt.

-smak-


----------



## super dave (Oct 1, 2002)

For the men in the group:


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Thank you for that!


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

super dave said:


> For the men in the group:


Don't forget the lesbians and those now considering it after seeing the pics!


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Thoughts: Some mine, some from the water cooler at work....
Posted earlier -

The list -
Kate 
Sawyer 
Jack 
Hurley 

Now come the questions. No answers from me, but throwing out thoughts.

The Others had Kate captive in the clearing. Why didn't they keep her?
The Others had Jack and Sawyer where they could have easily captured them in the clearing. Why didn't they?

Hurley is the only one who has never been put in close proximity to The Others where they could have easily gotten him.

So, what is the point of having 4 people that Michael has to bring to you when you could have easily captured 3 of those 4 people already? 
Mrs. Clue suggested to Michael that the group would be mad enough to do just about anything. What did that tell Michael to do? It told him that he should go back, tell the group he knows where they are, let's get the guns and go get 'em.

So, Jack, Kate, Michael, Sawyer and Hurley all have guns. What was the one item The Bearded Man wanted from Jack, Sawyer and Locke in the clearing? Guns. After they gave up the guns, The Bearded man took the guns to his group and said "Divy them up." He wanted his 'men' armed. 

Our group of survivors has quite a few weapons, and all of those weapons are now being transported right into the camp of The Others. Who knows...this may be exactly what The Others want. Could it be more then that....of course. This IS Lost.

As posted earlier, those 4 people also had waking visions/island interactions:

Jack - his father.
Sawyer - the boar (maybe not a vision, but definately the boar was representative of the reincarnation of Frank Duckett). Sawyer also saw Kate's horse.
Kate - her horse (somehow the horse is a friendly 'savior' for Kate it times of trouble, possibly the reincarnation of Kate's natural father, Wayne? or her love interest Tom? ). Kate also saw Sawyer's boar.
Hurley - Dave. Dave was a manifestation in Hurley's mind, but he may also have been manifested again as a result of being on the island.

No one else has had these kinds of experiences except Boone, and he is dead. All other experiences have been in the form of a dream or vision. Shannon and Sayid saw Walt, but it seemed Walt was the creator of the experience, not 'the island'. 

Discuss?


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

If these people are big-wigs of Dharma, then wouldn't they have known that there were weapons in the Swan hatch and gotten them before the plane even crashed if they wanted them? Desmond couldn't have stopped them, assuming he isn't one of them. 
Which brings up another question--Ms. Clugh said that they couldn't go and release Henry, but Michael could. With their surveilence equipment and all their knowledge of their hatch, why couldn't they go get Henry? Is there some rule about the others crossing that line by the black rock. Something with disease or magnetism? Maybe the only way they can take people is if they come to the "others'" side of the island.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

betts4 said:


> ...
> The list -
> Kate
> Sawyer
> ...


This is a good observation and line of questioning. My only (wild) guess is that if the losties are part of some actual experiment(s) then perhaps it is possible that whoever is reviewing all the data has determined that during the earlier encounters it wasn't the right moment to take them, and now it is. This could be due to a need to prepare on the part of the others, some event or sequence of events (Henry Gale being captured and tortured?) on the part of the losties or some other external force.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

stellie93 said:


> Which brings up another question--Ms. Clugh said that they couldn't go and release Henry, but Michael could. With their surveilence equipment and all their knowledge of their hatch, why couldn't they go get Henry? Is there some rule about the others crossing that line by the black rock. Something with disease or magnetism? Maybe the only way they can take people is if they come to the "others'" side of the island.


Ethan had no trouble.

I think they just don't want to start a big conflict. They'd rather conduct the 'war' covertly rather than on the battlefield. Maybe there's some part of the experiment that they don't want to upset.

(Yeah, that's a pretty weak metaphor...)


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

stevieleej said:


> I thought it a little odd that Zeke said Kate was following Michael. Wasn't she following Jack, Lock & Sawyer?


Yes, she was following Jack, Locke, and Sawyer. But only Kate and we viewers knew that. Zeke thought she was *with* Jack, Locke, and Sawyer.



bigrig said:


> The piece of paper that he burns? That was the list of people he was supposed to bring. I'm not sure why he needed the list to remember 4 people...


He probably didnt need the list. But we saw Ms. Clue write the names down and stuffing them into his shirt pocket. He could have just been getting rid of the 'evidence' that he never really even looked at until then.



pmyers said:


> Why would you only send out 5 people (especially with one of them being Hurley) when you have 11 guns?


Because Ms. Clue specifically told Michael to bring those particular people back and nobody else. They already argued this on the episode.... Jack and others wanted to bring more manpower and gunpower but Michael had to try and convince them not to due to Ms. Clue's demand.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I just rewatched the ep and noticed a couple things--wouldn't you think Alex would know about Claire having the baby? Surely they're watching this after being so interested in him before he was born. Maybe Alex just isn't in the loop. 
Also, what's with Echo's cross standing up in the air when he came into the hatch? It was almost time to enter the numbers, and it was laying down flat after he "pushed the button." Could the magnetism be building up and then somehow reduced by something enabled when the button is pushed? So it would go off the charts if the numbers aren't entered?
One more weird idea--what if Walt's mother or stepfather consulted some paranormal organization (Dharma in disguise) about Walt's "powers" when he was in Austrailia? And then maybe they made his mother sick(she had a disease didn't she?) thinking they could get him. Only then Michael came along and got in the way.


----------



## darthrsg (Jul 25, 2005)

stellie93 said:


> Also, what's with Echo's cross standing up in the air when he came into the hatch? It was almost time to enter the numbers, and it was laying down flat after he "pushed the button." Could the magnetism be building up and then somehow reduced by something enabled when the button is pushed? So it would go off the charts if the numbers aren't entered?


It is not the first time a necklace has reacted to the "magnet". The effect seems to be localized in that walkway.


----------



## scsiguy72 (Nov 25, 2003)

lpamelaa said:


> Half-baked thoughts....
> 
> And, when Michael called Hurley "Hugo" that threw up a flag for me. I'm not sure his real name was public knowledge. A hint that he's been "compromised."


I noticed that right away. I don't think it is public knowledge. (I know Sawyer doesn't know...Reading note in bottle.."Whos Hugo"?)

And the list clearly shows the name Hugo


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

scsiguy72 said:


> I noticed that right away. I don't think it is public knowledge. (I know Sawyer doesn't know...Reading note in bottle.."Whos Hugo"?)
> 
> And the list clearly shows the name Hugo


Wasn't it to Michael that he directed that question? It certainly wasn't Jin. Michael didn't know who Hugo was.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

scsiguy72 said:


> lpamelaa said:
> 
> 
> > And, when Michael called Hurley "Hugo" that threw up a flag for me. I'm not sure his real name was public knowledge. A hint that he's been "compromised."
> ...


Michael needed someone to tell him that the name "James Ford" meant Sawyer. He didn't need any prompting to know that "Hugo Reyes" was Hurley.

Therefore he knew Hurley's real name before the Others. And therefore calling Hurley "Hugo" doesn't mean anything.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Amnesia said:


> Michael needed someone to tell him that the name "James Ford" meant Sawyer. He didn't need any prompting to know that "Hugo Reyes" was Hurley.
> 
> Therefore he knew Hurley's real name before the Others. And therefore calling Hurley "Hugo" doesn't mean anything.


Touche


----------



## lpamelaa (May 3, 2004)

Another thought on why the Others want Jack, Kate, Sawyer & Hurley to accompany Michael: perhaps the Others want to let these 4 in on the "secrets." Or they want to seed new information with them to change their view of the island. Or perhaps they want this group away from the main camp when "something" happens. 

There are a lot of reason the Others want these four other than to kill or capture them.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

darthrsg said:


> It is not the first time a necklace has reacted to the "magnet". The effect seems to be localized in that walkway.


Must be a cheap cross. A gold cross wouldn't stand up like that. Unless Yemi is part German, and it's an iron cross.



Yeah Jack's not the brightest sometimes. Who wouldn't have cracked up when Michael said, "Everyone can't go - they'll hear us coming!" and followed that up with the rimshot of "But Hurley has to go!"?

Okay ... whatever you say, Michael. Yeah, he's spry, we've heard it before.

One point about Michael calling Hurley Hugo - every other time he mentioned him he said "Hurley". I took it to be another nudge from the writers that Michael wasn't on the up-and-up, which we already knew anyway.


----------



## audioscience (Feb 10, 2005)

verdugan said:


> Also, isn't the girl who played Alex the genius girl in Malcom in the middle from two seasons ago or so?


I was thinking the same thing last night when I was watching and it is indeed the same girl from Malcom. I'm glad to see her because I really liked her in Malcom in the Middle.


----------



## jrgtivo (Mar 8, 2004)

In the preview for the finale did anyone else notice:



Spoiler



Jack is standing in front of a pile of the canisters from the pnuematic tube.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

audioscience said:


> I was thinking the same thing last night when I was watching and it is indeed the same girl from Malcom. I'm glad to see her because I really liked her in Malcom in the Middle.


Same here. Glad she's growing up. In Malcom she was a bit young if you know what I mean.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

verdugan said:


> Same here. Glad she's growing up. In Malcom she was a bit young if you know what I mean.


Even at a youger age, when she appeared on Malcolm, she always had a great presence.


----------



## Jericho Dog (Feb 10, 2006)

Solver said:


> That was a short "three minutes."


Remember, they were just pretending.....


----------



## durl (Dec 1, 2005)

I thought it was interesting that Clugh (Klugh, Clue...) knows the losties names, even Sawyer's real name and assumed name, BUT she asked Michael if he knew them. That seems to show that they knew who was on the plane but they don't know all the fine details about the lostie's interaction. Is this another indication that Dharma orchestrated who got on the flight somehow?


----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

stevieleej said:


> I know I asked yesterday, but I'll ask again...
> 
> Does anyone know if the preview for next week is online? I missed it during the broadcast.


Here ya go:

http://www.dharmasecrets.com/forum/index.php?topic=4057.0


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

durl said:


> I thought it was interesting that Clugh (Klugh, Clue...) knows the losties names, even Sawyer's real name and assumed name, BUT she asked Michael if he knew them. That seems to show that they knew who was on the plane but they don't know all the fine details about the lostie's interaction. Is this another indication that Dharma orchestrated who got on the flight somehow?


I, for one, think it is.

At the very least, they have a complete flight manifest.

Strong evidence that the crash, at least, if not the passengers that got on the plane, was orchestrated for some purpose, and the others are informed participants in the plan.

Remember, the tailies found that the others had a list of all of their names too.


----------



## RangersRBack (Jan 9, 2006)

DCIFRTHS said:


> Even at a youger age, when she appeared on Malcolm, she always had a great presence.


She did have a really hot 'presence'.


----------



## Jericho Dog (Feb 10, 2006)

RangersRBack said:


> She did have a really hot 'presence'.


I thought is was 'presents'.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

durl said:


> I thought it was interesting that Clugh (Klugh, Clue...) knows the losties names, even Sawyer's real name and assumed name, BUT she asked Michael if he knew them. That seems to show that they knew who was on the plane but they don't know all the fine details about the lostie's interaction. Is this another indication that Dharma orchestrated who got on the flight somehow?


Don't forget that in the original orientation video, when they showed the DeGroots(sp) in their office, there was a plate on the wall with the Oceanic logo on it. ...and in the medical hatch where they had Claire, they had a mobile of Oceanic planes.

Dharma at the very least is involved with Oceanic, if they don't own them.

(If Oceanic even exists.. They _survived_ this plane crash that they shouldn't have.. I still half expect to see them all wake up strapped to chairs somewhere imagining all this, or in a holodeck.. or they're in purgatory.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> Don't forget that in the original orientation video, when they showed the DeGroots(sp) in their office, there was a plate on the wall with the Oceanic logo on it. ...and in the medical hatch where they had Claire, they had a mobile of Oceanic planes.
> 
> Dharma at the very least is involved with Oceanic, if they don't own them.


I didn't notice the plate with Oceanic, and hadn't thought much about the mobile since that episode. Would be very interesting if Oceanic was owned by Dharma. Would certainly make it easier to manipulate who goes on what flight. And it makes me wonder more about Claire's psychic. He really wanted her on that flight. As others have suggested, he could be connected to Dharma. In that case, he might have known the destiny of that plane.



jkeegan said:


> (If Oceanic even exists.. They _survived_ this plane crash that they shouldn't have.. I still half expect to see them all wake up strapped to chairs somewhere imagining all this, or in a holodeck.. or they're in purgatory.


Now, if they all wake up in a holodeck or it's all a dream or some such thing, I'm going to be truly hacked off. The payoff on this series needs to be really good, or a lot of us will have wasted too much time on this show.

And what's with the ellipses with only 2 "periods"?


----------



## rlc1 (Sep 15, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> They better show us something else that made michael shoot ana lucia. Right now it looks like they wrote the episode where he shot her without knowing for sure why. That is just stupid if so. Based on this episode, he seems to have no real reason to have shot her. There are a lot of other ways he could have freed their guy.


I think that, given everything that Michael has gone through on the island has made him not exactly the best decision-maker. He is clearly wound very tightly now and was probably thinking that he had to get "Henry" out of there as quickly as possible, and get back to the Others before they changed their minds about giving Walt back to him. Notice how impatient he was about getting back to the others quickly with Jack, Sawyer, Kate, and Hurley....he was clearly frustrated with having to wait until after the burial of Ana Lucia & Libby. This is a man on the edge.


----------



## RangersRBack (Jan 9, 2006)

Jericho Dog said:


> I thought is was 'presents'.


OK you're right, she definitely has some presents.


----------



## KRS (Jan 30, 2002)

I think *Locke* knew that his leg would be healed because two more people had been "sacraficed" to the island. Similar to his comment to Ecko last episode.

I know it will piss off *devdogaz*  , but I think that discussion of the hints and imaged gleaned from the Hanso foundation ads are relevant to the thread. After all, the ad was run during the show. I'm looking at the www.letyourcompassguideyou.com site right now, and I am stuck at the logon screen. It is asking me "Are you one of the good ones [Y, N]?" but it won't accept any keystrokes. Did anyone else have that problem? I viewed the html source, and there is a message about updating your Flash version, but mine is current. Also, what is the meaning of "*Permissum Vestri Complector Rector Vos*" (the page's title)?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

rlc1 said:


> I think that, given everything that Michael has gone through on the island has made him not exactly the best decision-maker. He is clearly wound very tightly now and was probably thinking that he had to get "Henry" out of there as quickly as possible, and get back to the Others before they changed their minds about giving Walt back to him. Notice how impatient he was about getting back to the others quickly with Jack, Sawyer, Kate, and Hurley....he was clearly frustrated with having to wait until after the burial of Ana Lucia & Libby. This is a man on the edge.


He's been that way since the Others first took Walt.
Remember how he took off after Ana Lucia and company started their trek across the island.
We have ample evidence that he doesn't think this through.


----------



## vtfan99 (May 19, 2006)

Dont know how I did it, but I got past that. It took me to an index of user accounts....ftp style....very strange. Lots of random crap. I'd post the URL, but I have to hit 5 posts first.


----------



## vtfan99 (May 19, 2006)

A way around the 5 post limit...Post 3


----------



## vtfan99 (May 19, 2006)

Apologies...but I just want to post a link....Post 4


----------



## vtfan99 (May 19, 2006)

Only one more post....pathetic...I know

Ok...here is the link I was sent to after I got past the "good ones" prompt.

http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/


----------



## Solver (Feb 17, 2005)

KRS said:


> I think *Locke* knew that his leg would be healed because two more people had been "sacraficed" to the island. Similar to his comment to Ecko last episode.
> 
> I know it will piss off *devdogaz*  , but I think that discussion of the hints and imaged gleaned from the Hanso foundation ads are relevant to the thread. After all, the ad was run during the show. I'm looking at the www.letyourcompassguideyou.com site right now, and I am stuck at the logon screen. It is asking me "Are you one of the good ones [Y, N]?" but it won't accept any keystrokes. Did anyone else have that problem? I viewed the html source, and there is a message about updating your Flash version, but mine is current. Also, what is the meaning of "*Permissum Vestri Complector Rector Vos*" (the page's title)?


 It means "let your compass guide you" in latin.


----------



## nataylor (Apr 26, 2000)

KRS said:


> Also, what is the meaning of "*Permissum Vestri Complector Rector Vos*" (the page's title)?


Figuritively, it's Latin for "Let Your Compass Guide You." Literally, it translates as "People must give themselves over to embracing their leader."


----------



## Martin Tupper (Dec 18, 2003)

devdogaz said:


> Its been mentioned, but the black womans name is Klugh, not Clue.


But CLUE yield much better anagrams!!

MS CLUE = MUSCLE :up:

MISS CLUE = ISLE SCUM = SCUM LIES :up:

MISS KLUGH = GLUM SIKHS :down:


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

vtfan99 said:


> Only one more post....pathetic...I know
> 
> Ok...here is the link I was sent to after I got past the "good ones" prompt.
> 
> http://www.letyourcompassguideyou.com/usr/


You might wanna poke around a bit (jeep) and see what you might find (joop).

If you care, the jeep in question has a commercial that's linked to from one of those directories. The stream is on Youtube, and ends with a Dharma logo.
The Jeep is called the "C-7 Hatch". Heh.






Greg


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

Another explanation of why Michael killed Ana Lucia is that he was asked to by the Others. After all, she killed two of them. It might be another condition before the Others release Walt.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

verdugan said:


> Another explanation of why Michael killed Ana Lucia is that he was asked to by the Others. After all, she killed two of them. It might be another condition before the Others release Walt.


This is what I thought just after it happened and that the only reason he released Henry was so that he could go back and tell them "He completed his task, let the boy go", but since nothing was mentioned about Ana in this episode, I no longer think Ana's murder was part of the deal.


----------



## audioscience (Feb 10, 2005)

verdugan said:


> Same here. Glad she's growing up. In Malcom she was a bit young if you know what I mean.


Yeah, she's pretty hot now.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

BeanMeScot said:


> Maybe Michael is getting "sick".


Bingo!

Several characters have been showing increasingly irrational behavior, and the level of distrust is pathological. We could put it down to poor writing, or we could figure that it's part of a pattern. Why wasn't Michael just straight with everyone? Because he's not in his right mind.

On another point... no one's commented yet on THE MOST ANNOYING BUG EVER. Michael's on screen, he's saying something important, and suddenly a mouse cursor appears over his face, then wanders over to the corner, where the words "ABC Enhanced TV" appear, taking up almost a quarter of the screen. OK, so at least it didn't have sound (like some bugs I've seen on basic cable), but this is arguably the worst bug I've seen on a broadcast network.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

wmcbrine said:


> ... On another point... no one's commented yet on THE MOST ANNOYING BUG EVER. Michael's on screen, he's saying something important, and suddenly a mouse cursor appears over his face, then wanders over to the corner, where the words "ABC Enhanced TV" appear, taking up almost a quarter of the screen. OK, so at least it didn't have sound (like some bugs I've seen on basic cable), but this is arguably the worst bug I've seen on a broadcast network.


It was *very* annoying, and hopefully they won't do it again. It *totally* removes the viewer from the whole experience.

Honestly, I didn't like this episode. It didn't keep me glued to the chair like most of the LOST episodes do. I guess it doesn't help that I don't like Michael. I hope he doesn't make it to next season (his character that is).


----------



## Uncle Briggs (Sep 11, 2004)

mightyb said:


> "seeing" and "remembering" are two very different things!!!!


Since about half way through the season I have been saving the previous weeks episode and watching it again right before the new episode. sometimes I'm amazed at the things that I had forgotten.


----------



## Uncle Briggs (Sep 11, 2004)

Magister said:


> My Series 2 got exactly everything and only cut out AFTER the previews for next week.


Mine also, don't you have a better chance of getting the episode time corrected if your on broadband instead of dial-up?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Michael's Rumsfeldian war plan made absolutely no sense. Glad to see that the Others put him up to it. Sad to see that only one of the Losties was bright enough to see through it. 

It'd be cool if the boat's name was the SS Minnow.

Why is Eko's shirt in so much worse shape than anyone else's?

Would *you* vaccinate your baby with some random vaccine that Charlie gave you without checking with Jack first?


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

cheesesteak said:


> Would *you* vaccinate your baby with some random vaccine that Charlie gave you without checking with Jack first?


We haven't seen that happen......yet.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

SupFreak26 said:


> [link] I won't delete my other SP's for a new show. Especially one that can't last long due to certain plot restraints.





jones07 said:


> [link] My guess 6 weeks an this show is history


*Wrong! *



omnibus said:


> [link] If the planes tail falls off at more than a 100 feet of altitude, I'll be bummed. Pretty tough to survive that kind of "malfunction"


Don't be ridiculous. That would just be crazy...



Spoiler



It does. They do.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

OOH! Even better! From a thread several months earlier. The earliest Gilligan crack (still popular) AND the earliest wrong prediction of the show's early demise... A two-fer!



mask2343 said:


> [link] It was better the first time...when it was called "Gilligan's Island".
> 
> My prediction: Half a season and out.


This has been today's "TCF LOST Moment in History"...


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> Would *you* vaccinate your baby with some random vaccine that Charlie gave you without checking with Jack first?


We didn't see it, but Charlie _said _he already tried it on himself.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

wmcbrine said:


> Bingo!
> 
> Several characters have been showing increasingly irrational behavior, and the level of distrust is pathological. We could put it down to poor writing, or we could figure that it's part of a pattern. Why wasn't Michael just straight with everyone? Because he's not in his right mind.


I would argue that Michael has been that way since the start. (Has always been the most annoying character that way, to me.)


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

hefe said:


> I would argue that Michael has been that way since the start. (Has always been the most annoying character that way, to me.)


I tend to agree.

Michael's current behavior is largely just the way he's always been but clicked up a couple of notches now.

Because of his impulsiveness and irrationality, especially where Walt is concerned, the others were able to so easily "play" him the way they did.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

wmcbrine said:


> On another point... no one's commented yet on THE MOST ANNOYING BUG EVER. Michael's on screen, he's saying something important, and suddenly a mouse cursor appears over his face, then wanders over to the corner, where the words "ABC Enhanced TV" appear, taking up almost a quarter of the screen. OK, so at least it didn't have sound (like some bugs I've seen on basic cable), but this is arguably the worst bug I've seen on a broadcast network.


Having seen these things get bigger and louder over time, I keep wondering if there's anything we can do tell the networks that we are extremely unhappy with these obnoxious bugs. As wmcbrine pointed out, they are starting to get as big as 1/4 of the screen... sometimes covering someone's mouth while they're talking.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Magister said:


> My Series 2 got exactly everything and only cut out AFTER the previews for next week....


Ditto...mine had it scheduled for 1:04 from the time it was oringinally scheduled.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

mightyb said:


> Your stand alone then got the update in time, before the airing.
> 
> The stand alones on Dial up don't check as often as one on bb.


I was under the assumption that standalones, whether they're BB or DialUp, update *guide data* every 24 hours or so. But if they're BB, then they check for newly scheduled shows hourly, but not guide data.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

hefe said:


> We didn't see it, but Charlie _said _he already tried it on himself.


Which tends to add to my belief that Charlie is still on drugs, a total moron, or has also been compromised.


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> I was under the assumption that standalones, whether they're BB or DialUp, update *guide data* every 24 hours or so. But if they're BB, then they check for newly scheduled shows hourly, but not guide data.


I guess I don't understand what the difference is between checking for newly scheduled shows and checking for new guide data. Sounds like the same thing to me.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

Paperboy2003 said:


> anyone else think that Walt's actions in the tent seemed forced, as if he was acting in a way to make Michael do whatever they needed him to do?


Absolutely.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

JMikeD said:


> I guess I don't understand what the difference is between checking for newly scheduled shows and checking for new guide data. Sounds like the same thing to me.


TiVo checks every 24 hours or so for the guide data from Tribune Media Services. That data is what populates your program guide matrix showing what shows are on what channel at what time.

Newly scheduled shows are the ones that the user can remotely program in if he uses broadband for his connection. That's what TiVo checks for about every hour. I routinely schedule shows from my office, since I'm in PR and often need to record local TV newscasts on the spur of the moment.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

Paperboy2003 said:


> Maybe Hurley will finally lose some weight on the trek across the island.....


My thoughts are why would anyone allow Hurley to be part of the 5? We saw what happened with Etham when Charlie was hung.
Libbys death brings out the ubstable emotions of Hurley. Michael would never get by with telling me that it was his call when I was putting my life on the line. Sorry but I value my life also.
Jack needs to listen to Sayed which he said he was going to do. Jack also needs to understand what happened when they went looking for Michael.
I said 2 weeks ago that the entire thing is a huge set up. 
Michael has lied to everyone. He clearly understands that there are far more than 2 guns in the others possesion. He has seen the rifles they have.
This will be a bloodbath if they decide to fight it out. A capture would leave the surviors with only a handfull of guns. Snannon and Boone coming back will forever kill the show for me.
Boone has died in a previous episode and Boone the same. Are we now to see flashbacks which to me are the same as repeats.
The best to all that continue to watch the show, but I'm through wasting a hour of my time not knowing what to expext when I clearly know I can be watching something other.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

BeanMeScot said:


> It's interesting that the "others" know Sawyer's real name when no one else does (except Locke).
> 
> I can't believe that Micheal would kill Libby and Ana Lucia. He wasn't told to kill them, just to get Henry back. He should have been able to figure out a way to do that without killing anyone. All he had to do was be there alone (which had happened before) and then he could free Henry and shoot himself to create the story.
> 
> ...


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

lpamelaa said:


> Half-baked thoughts....
> 
> What do Jack, Kate, Sawyer & Hurley all have in common? They've all seen something "impossible" on the island.
> 
> ...


 The boar that Sawyer was going to shoot brought back the memory of him killing an innocent man.
Some think Kate was the reason Sawyer failed to shoot it. I think it was the boar and the way the boars eyes were fixated on Sawyer.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

laststarfighter said:


> Man, they better start filming next season's episodes now. Looks like Walt is going through puberty. How are they going to explain him growing 6 inches and a beard after "less than a week" since Michael last saw him?
> 
> I'm really surprised that the Hanso Foundation continues to advertise on a show that is intent on twisting the truth and smearing a fine organization like Hanso. They are trying to good work but this show is making them to look like evil puppetmasters who toy with people's lives. Hanso should pull their advertising dollar and not put up with it any longer. [/QUOTE
> Did not know that Hanso even existed other than in a fiticious manner.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

borther said:


> I believe Michael is next to die. I don't think he can kill 2 people and get away with it. Maybe hurley kills him.... or Walt kills him. That would be a weird twist.


 kate is next.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

betts4 said:


> The four people on the list have seen visions (hallucinations) on the Island.
> Kate saw a horse
> Sawyer saw the same horse
> Hurley saw Dave
> ...


Sawyer did see the same hoese as Kate. Sawyer also saw the boar and did not kill it because he remembered the innocent man he had killed.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

twincaminferno said:


> So im guessing that Michael asked Libby to come down to the hatch (or asked someone to have her come down) so he can shoot her. He knew that he only way that Hurley would go with him is if she was murdered by the others. Now we know why she was down in the hatch for no reason.


 Libby went for the blankets.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

madscientist said:


> Sun, standing in the crowd at the funeral, looks out at the ocean and points, and yells "BOAT!"
> 
> Everyone looks and sure enough, there's a sailboat out there, heading in to shore. Everyone gathers on the beach and the boat turns a bit so it's going parallel to the beach. No one is visible on board.
> 
> Black screen.


 Look to see that is is Desmond.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

RBlount said:


> Every time I have seen that scene, I believe Micheal shooting Libby was reactionary, if not accidental. He seemed almost in shock when he was shooting Libby (nice shots though!).
> 
> What does Eko now believe his mission/job/destiny is? I understand why Locke is now so disillusioned about the "button", but why is Eko so facinated?
> 
> ...


 The sad part is that Ms Clue is deceving Michael. She has no intention of allowing the 2 released if Michael is again captured.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

Donbadabon said:


> It isn't Japanese. It is Hindi.
> 
> "Namaste is Hindi's universal greeting, as well as goodbye. It is common to hold ones hands together in front of the chest as praying and bow slightly when saying it."


The larger and more important question is why is the Hindi"s universaral greeting be used?
We've seen one character deplore the faith healer as a joke. But Namaste is mentioned and not one single time is it attacked.
The show is a clever way of attracting people to the Hindu and Budda beliefs. It's not simply a mystery. Only a fool would think so, and I make no apologies for saying this.
Not by any stretch.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

stevieleej said:


> Most likely Desmond on the boat. What do you think?


It is absolutely Desmond. No two ways about it.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

Magister said:


> My Series 2 got exactly everything and only cut out AFTER the previews for next week.
> 
> I wonder if they actually injected Michael instead of pulling blood.
> 
> ...


 Me to. Reminded me of the Season 2 Millenium episode 23 when Terry O'Quinn playing Peter Watts was injected with the Millenium vaccination against the ebola like virus that was killing people.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

durl said:


> I'm guessing the significance is that Locke had his leg badly injured probably less than a week prior. I remember Jack saying something to him about needing crutches for something like a month or longer. It appears his leg healed miraculously fast.


The first thing that I thought of was how quickly he was healed when the plane first crashed killin others, and how he healed when Boone died.
I simply in this particular instance said, "Damn, AL and Libby died and now Locke can walk again.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Eugene82, has anyone ever told you that it's unlucky to post 13 times in a row in a thread? It's like lighting 3 on a match. 4 times. Plus 1.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

pmyers said:


> Why would you only send out 5 people (especially with one of them being Hurley) when you have 11 guns? You know the Others have at least 2 guns and are proficient in setting up traps....let alone not allowing Syiad to go??? I just have a hard time swallowing that entire storyline.
> 
> Also, aren't Charlie's statues just going to be washed back onto the beach?


Or is it like 9 guns. Zeke had an WW2 gun when Kate was captured, he got 4 guns from Jack, Sawyer, and Locke. Michael had a rifle and a hundgun taken by Zeke.
The guys guarding the Hatch had 2 guns. They are armed more than Michael told.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

Sirius Black said:


> Just based on what we've been shown...
> 
> Well, he was paralyzed enough to put him in a wheelchair prior to being on the Island. We know that was "healed" and that ...Rose had cancer and would have died were it not for the Island's effects. No one other than Locke and Rose are aware of the Island's effects in this regard.


It has always seemed that someone had to die for these poweres to be effective.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

TAsunder said:


> You seriously think that michael's plan made any sense? Here are several other plans that work no worse than his, in terms of dead people:
> 
> 1. Go into the vault, give henry the gun, tell him to escape. Since it's the only gun in the area, he escapes. Problem solved.
> 
> ...


It is very simple. AL was not coming back due to her contract. The writers in turn have her killed off to have us ask all the questions we are now asking about Michael.
AL has actually quit acting. She is no longer interested as it being a carrer.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

mask2343 said:


> All three plans = BOREDOM. Ana Lucia and Libby being shot by Michael = RATINGS.


You are absolutely correct. When a show drops to 14th in the ratings something drastic has to take place.
And as I've said, AL's contract was up and she would not have allowed Michael to shoot Gale when she herself could not do it.
Giving Michael the gun did not mean AL would have followed through on what Michael said. She, a former P.O. knew it would make her an accomplice and just as guilty. She had just had a flashback of killing the guy that shot her.
She seemed to be turning her life around at the time she was shot.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

I think the biggest reason quite a few people can't understand Jack's actions, or Michael's issues is because they are not meant to be reasonable and understandable. Whether laid at the door of the "infection", or just wacky jungle fever, the problem is really quite simple: *the writers need to get these characters over to a specific point on the island to advance the storyline.*

So why is Jack seemingly on the verge of seeing through Michael, but not really? Because he has to be. The season finale depends on it. We _*know*_ why Michael is so insistent - he's a one note crybaby on the Expresslane of the Highway to Hell. Sawyer, revenge on several levels but at least he invited Captain A-rab. Kate, because she's SuperKate and always wants to go. Hurley, revenge maybe but bad writing mostly. The last 2 didn't know the plan anyway, so they couldn't complain.

One line of dialog could have saved Jack from looking so idiotic all episode - when Sayid told him he thought Michael was compromised, he could have answered "I've felt something is wrong with him too. But why do you think he's been compromised?" And off the conversation would have gone, though it would have suffered somewhat for missing Sayid's little poke about being right about Henry.

And while I know lots of people liked the episode, I continue to have some trouble with it. Because Michael isn't Henry, and early on it became obvious what Michael wanted and since it was what the narrative needed - so let it be written, so let it be done. To me, it was forced. With Henry at the wheel, the rides were worth it no matter that you knew exactly what he was doing.

I look forward to the finale - (one should note for the record that they haven't actually buried anyone yet) - and hope the twisting to get there is worth it.


----------



## eugene82 (Mar 31, 2006)

Solver said:


> When Michael got to the computer and started typing, nothing appeared for a moment. Only after a few seconds did his typing start to echo on the screen.
> 
> He was being watched and the watcher(s) activated the two way.


I agree. The others have been monitoring all the time. They know faces and the names of those faces.
We earlier saw the monitoring station full of equipment. In an earlier episode we saw Michael looking above the computer and inspecting the wall.
This was prior to him knocking Locke out. Michael is well aware of cameras in the hatch. Cameras so small that the human eye can't see them unless it knows exactly where they are at.


----------



## Hemi (Jan 9, 2002)

So for days (weeks?) Michael runs through the jungle yelling 'Walt' at the top of his lungs and when he is told that Walt is right outside (of the tent)... he's quiet? 

For some reason, that really bugs me.

And another thing, wouldn't you think to demand that they prove to him that they do in fact have Walt and that he is alive and well before giving them more information or answering any more questions? 

Dan


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

Delta13 said:


> One line of dialog could have saved Jack from looking so idiotic all episode - when Sayid told him he thought Michael was compromised, he could have answered "I've felt something is wrong with him too. But why do you think he's been compromised?"


I strongly disagree - that would be totally out of character for Jack.

Since the pilot episode, Jack has been shown to be very emotional, and very much an 'all guns blazing' type of guy. As Sawyer mentioned when he 'stole' the guns, he knew Jack would be too blinded by his 'concern' for Locke to notice the guns. Considering how that episode went (and the weight given to his own 'relationship' with his father), Jack's reaction to Michael seems fully in character. Call that idiotic if you want, but it makes dramatic sense to me - it certainly doesn't seem forced.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

eugene82 said:


> The best to all that continue to watch the show, but I'm through wasting a hour of my time not knowing what to expext when I clearly know I can be watching something other.


Thanks, and I look forward to you doing so.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

eugene82 said:


> It is very simple. AL was not coming back due to her contract. The writers in turn have her killed off to have us ask all the questions we are now asking about Michael.
> AL has actually quit acting. She is no longer interested as it being a carrer.


AL is not coming back because her story was conceived as a 1 season story arc, no more. She knew when she signed on that it would be for one season. Executive Producers Damon Lindeloff an Carlton Cuse addressed that in their podcast.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

eugene82 said:


> The show is a clever way of attracting people to the Hindu and Budda beliefs.


 I really don't think so. In fact, one of the producers (Lindhoff?) is Catholic. There is a lot of Catholic imagery, presented respectfully (which isn't always the case in Hollywood), in this show. Spirituality is definitely a theme, but I really don't think they're proseltyzing Eastern religions in particular.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Delta13 said:


> We _*know*_ why Michael is so insistent - he's a one note crybaby on the Expresslane of the Highway to Hell.


 :up: Delta, this is one of the best lines ever on a Lost thread.


----------



## Bars & Tone (Aug 28, 2004)

eugene82 said:


> ...I'm through wasting an hour of my time not knowing what to expect ...


So you'd be happier if you knew ahead of time everything that was going to happen??


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

hanumang said:


> I strongly disagree - that would be totally out of character for Jack.
> 
> Since the pilot episode, Jack has been shown to be very emotional, and very much an 'all guns blazing' type of guy. As Sawyer mentioned when he 'stole' the guns, he knew Jack would be too blinded by his 'concern' for Locke to notice the guns. Considering how that episode went (and the weight given to his own 'relationship' with his father), Jack's reaction to Michael seems fully in character. Call that idiotic if you want, but it makes dramatic sense to me - it certainly doesn't seem forced.


You may not believe this, but I agree with the last paragraph. Oddly for a spinal surgeon, he is very impulsive. I wish he would think more, being the leader that he is supposed to be.

(I have this problem with my bosses at work, too.)

But here's the problem - in this episode Jack reacts to nothing emotionally (excluding empathy for the moment). He is almost analytical, postponing decisions and having discussions instead of just jumping and running off. He was somber, and even barely raised his voice to Eko when he found him. When Michael lashed him with "Do you have a son, Jack?" Jack tried to be reasonable.

Even his empathy for Michael is odd for a doctor who he himself says he has a very poor bedside manner.

You say that is in character for Jack. I'm not so sure. We will just have to agree to disagree, I'm sure. (But we are at least having a reasonable disagreement, and ain't that nice.)


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

mqpickles said:


> I really don't think so. In fact, one of the producers (Lindhoff?) is Catholic. There is a lot of Catholic imagery, presented respectfully (which isn't always the case in Hollywood), in this show. Spirituality is definitely a theme, but I really don't think they're proseltyzing Eastern religions in particular.


Here I was thinking that we shouldn't feed the trolls. 

Jokes aside, I agree with you. In this regard I'd say Lost is a lot like Star Wars, in that a key concept in each - the island in the case of Lost, the Force in the case of SW - is a metaphor for faith or religion (or however you'd like to word it). Much like Lucas' universe mixed elements of various spiritual disciplines, Lost weaves a lot of Western and Eastern elements. And weaves them exceptionally well, in my opinion.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

Delta13 said:


> But here's the problem - in this episode Jack reacts to nothing emotionally (excluding empathy for the moment). He is almost analytical, postponing decisions and having discussions instead of just jumping and running off. He was somber, and even barely raised his voice to Eko when he found him. When Michael lashed him with "Do you have a son, Jack?" Jack tried to be reasonable.


Interesting, I didn't 'see' things in quite the same way. I saw a lot of Jack's behavior in this episode as fall out from being 'caught in a net,' so to speak. I think I'll have to watch this again...


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Hard to contrast "faith versus reason" without some kind of religious overtones. But they haven't played one religion off another, and I agree they've played it well so far. Besides, Locke was the original Man of Faith and didn't belong to any known religion that we know of.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

eugene82 said:


> The best to all that continue to watch the show, but I'm through wasting a hour of my time not knowing what to expext when I clearly know I can be watching something other.


And yet you spent at least another 17 posts and another 2 hours and 8 minutes discussing a show you'd rather not waste your time on.
Ooookkkkkkaaaaaayyyyy.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Delta13 said:


> ... So why is Jack seemingly on the verge of seeing through Michael, but not really? Because he has to be. The season finale depends on it. We _*know*_ why Michael is so insistent - he's a one note crybaby on the Expresslane of the Highway to Hell. Sawyer, revenge on several levels but at least he invited Captain A-rab. Kate, because she's SuperKate and always wants to go. Hurley, revenge maybe but bad writing mostly. The last 2 didn't know the plan anyway, so they couldn't complain. ...


Nice summary. Could you explain what you meant about Hurley though? Is it because physically he isn't capable, do you feel it's not in his nature, or am I _totally_ off base?



Delta13 said:


> ... And while I know lots of people liked the episode, I continue to have some trouble with it. Because Michael isn't Henry, and early on it became obvious what Michael wanted and since it was what the narrative needed - so let it be written, so let it be done. To me, it was forced. With Henry at the wheel, the rides were worth it no matter that you knew exactly what he was doing. ...
> 
> I had a lot of trouble with episode too. *But*, you are right on the money about Gayle (Henry). Not only did he fit the part physically, but he did an awesome job with the execution. A fine example of acting that too often is missing from the tube (or plasma, LCD, DLP, projection etc.  )


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

Delta13 said:


> I think the biggest reason quite a few people can't understand Jack's actions, or Michael's issues is because they are not meant to be reasonable and understandable. Whether laid at the door of the "infection", or just wacky jungle fever, the problem is really quite simple: *the writers need to get these characters over to a specific point on the island to advance the storyline.*


This can't be pointed out too often. These are fictional characters in a story, and the writers make them up. I get very amused by the attempts to psychoanalyze or attribute motives to non-existent people. The characters are there to serve the story line, they have no independent existence.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

JMikeD said:


> I get very amused by the attempts to psychoanalyze or attribute motives to non-existent people.


A key ingredient to the success of any story (be it in literature, theater or tv/film) is for the audience to buy the conceits - whether they be time-and-place related or character related - of that story. Those who debate the actions and motivations of characters would argue, I'm sure, that _ongoing_ stories like Lost depend on characters (and their actions) being relatable or, at least, believable because, in their eyes, Lost sure doesn't depend on 'stuff happening.'

Or do you just watch Lost for the HD picture and 5.1 sound?


----------



## Philly Bill (Oct 6, 2004)

eugene82 said:


> The larger and more important question is why is the Hindi"s universaral greeting be used?
> We've seen one character deplore the faith healer as a joke. But Namaste is mentioned and not one single time is it attacked.
> The show is a clever way of attracting people to the Hindu and Budda beliefs. It's not simply a mystery. Only a fool would think so, and I make no apologies for saying this.
> Not by any stretch.


I think most people that live in the South Pacific are Hindu aren't they? When I went to Bali in Indonesia it was that way it seemed.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

Philly Bill said:


> I think most people that live in the South Pacific are Hindu aren't they? When I went to Bali in Indonesia it was that way it seemed.


Bali's Hindu population is the exception to the rule. Indonesia is a predominantly Muslim country (the most populous Muslim country in the world, actually)

Much of the South Pacific (Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Cambodia, etc) was formerly Hindu-influenced - names are rooted in Sanskrit, the 'language' of Hinduism - but most of those populations are now Muslim.


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

hanumang said:


> Or do you just watch Lost for the HD picture and 5.1 sound?


I don't have either.

I'm a big believer in suspension of disbelief, learned by watching cheesy SF/horror/mystery movies in my youth. I'll analyze music, but that's something that actually happens.

This site is fun and I enjoy it. I'm keen to figure out the puzzles because that's part of my personality. But psychoanalyzing nonexisting people isn't part of the process of my being entertained. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

JMikeD said:


> I'm keen to figure out the puzzles because that's part of my personality. But psychoanalyzing nonexisting people isn't part of the process of my being entertained. Your mileage may vary.


 I think this raises a key point that separates Lost fans into two main camps, although with a lot of overlap.

One camp believes the main thing is the island mystery, and the characters are there to forward that plot.

The other camp (to which I mostly belong) think the main thing is the character study, and the island mystery is secondary, although still important. Some people thought the back stories would end once every character had an episode with his/her back story. I think in some sense the back stories _are_ the story. This makes character motivation more important than in your basic action/adventure story.

That said, I don't think anyone believes it's all one or the other. I'd weight it 60% character driven, 40% plot driven. Then of course, if the writers know what they're doing, the character and plot aspects will blend very well when it's all said and done.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

I'll echo a couple of other posters that didn't think this episode was all that great. It was OK and it probably sets up the finale nicely (although we don't actually know that yet), but it was a bit slow.

Oh, and enough about whether he said Alex or not. Man, some heard it, some didn't. It's not a great conspiracy.



speedcouch said:


> But the part where Sawyer told Jack about sleeping w/Ana just seemed stupid. When he's vying for Kate's affections with Jack, why would he give him ammunition to tell Kate he slept with another woman to show he's not worthy???? Totally out of character. As was Sawyer saying Jack was the closest thing he had to a best friend??? These guys have physically fought and been on the opposite side of every issue throughout the show. Now they're best buds. I can't suspend disbelief that much!


Sawyer's vying for Kate's affection? Sawyer had Kate and threw her away, because he'd rather have the guns and the power. And Jack is the CLOSEST thing Sawyer has to a friend. Who else would he turn to? They both have a desire to compete and be in charge/powerful. They can relate to each other. The fact that he told Jack about it doesn't mean they're "best buds". I thought that whole scene was totally believable and that's exactly what Sawyer would have done.



pmyers said:


> Why would you only send out 5 people (especially with one of them being Hurley) when you have 11 guns? You know the Others have at least 2 guns and are proficient in setting up traps....let alone not allowing Syiad to go??? I just have a hard time swallowing that entire storyline.
> 
> Also, aren't Charlie's statues just going to be washed back onto the beach?


As someone else mentioned, Michael had to convince them to bring specific people. His logic about not wanting to bring an Army isn't that far fetched.

As for the statues.. possibly, but not always. Even if they did, it could be miles away on the shoreline.



headroll said:


> I may be smeeking (will know once I finish the thread).
> 
> I did not hear "Alex" but CC clearly showed it.
> 
> ...





jwjody said:


> Possible smeek...
> 
> Anyone think the person in the boat is Desmond?
> 
> J


I can understand when people accidentally "smeek", but whey in the world would you post something knowing that it might be a "smeek". Are your thoughts more valuable than others? You don't have the time to read the thread, but you have the time to post?

It's very annoying for those of us that read the whole thread to have to keep reading the same statements over and over again just because some members feel their opinion outweighs all else.



eugene82 said:


> Did not know that Hanso even existed other than in a fiticious manner.


ZZOOOMM


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

spartanstew said:


> Oh, and enough about whether he said Alex or not. Man, some heard it, some didn't. It's not a great conspiracy.


And those of us who didn't hear it recognized early on from the discussion that it was merely a glitch in our audio. I think that one has been put to bed.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

mqpickles said:


> That said, I don't think anyone believes it's all one or the other. I'd weight it 60% character driven, 40% plot driven. Then of course, if the writers know what they're doing, the character and plot aspects will blend very well when it's all said and done.


Excellent points. I'm with you on the split; the events on the island are intriguing, no doubt, (when something actually happens, that is) but the flashbacks are why Lost is Season Pass #1 on my DirecTivo.


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

hanumang said:


> Excellent points. I'm with you on the split; the events on the island are intriguing, no doubt, (when something actually happens, that is) but the flashbacks are why Lost is Season Pass #1 on my DirecTivo.


I don't disagree with you at all.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

JMikeD said:


> This site is fun and I enjoy it. I'm keen to figure out the puzzles because that's part of my personality. But psychoanalyzing nonexisting people isn't part of the process of my being entertained. Your mileage may vary.


Lost clearly is, among other things, a character study.

Character study type stories *specifically call for* the audience to contemplate the motivations of the characters.

In a "character study" type story, if it is written with any competence whatsoever (and IMHO, the writing on Lost is -usually- excellent) the "psychology" of the characters is developed and explored. The audience must be able to relate to the character's psychological and emotional state, either because they "see themselves" in the characters (given the character's experiences, they might react in a similar manner), or because they know "real people" who have acted similarly under similar circumstances.

In Lost, the writers engage in in depth study of the psychological makeup of their characters through the flashbacks. In fact, I can't remember a TV show engaging in deeper or more involved character development than "Lost" does.

In good fiction, the characters must be believable as human beings. Any television drama in which the character's behavior was random and completely without any motivational explanation would be, IMHO, a terribly poorly written show, and I wouldn't care to watch such a show.

That's not to say that I will not "suspend disbelief". But, "suspension of disbelief" in good writing, is typically limited to situations and circumstances into which the characters are placed. If the characters' actions are counter to real human psychology, thats simply poor writing.

In the case of "Lost" there's lots of suspension of disbelief. But, IMHO, it's all related to the "circumstances", no so much the behaviors.

Things that require "suspension of disbelief" in "Lost" include:


An island in the South Pacific, presumably of at least the square milage of Oahu, or if you prefer, Puerto Rico, that in 2004 remains completely undiscovered and uncharted. (Or perhaps, is "cloaked" or something by Dharma.)
That an airplane could break into 3 major sections at 30,000 feet and anyone aboard survive, let alone have survivors in all three sections (pilot in the nose section, "fusies" in the center section, "tailies" in the tail section.)
The existence of a mechanical or bio-mechanical device that can rip people to shreds, drag people off, but looks like a blob of black smoke.

Notice that these things that require a "suspension of disbelief" have to do with setting and circumstances, not the behaviors of characters.

Take, for example, any good Science Fiction. Star Trek, for example. It's pretty hard to swallow that 200 years or so from now we will be able to break the light speed barrier, or "beam" physical objects from place to place like a radio signal. So, "Star Trek" requires big suspensions of disbelief with respect to _settings and circumstances_, but it was successful because the *characters* were believable human beings.

So, in a character study like "Lost", not only is it appropriate for the audience to contemplate the psychological motivations of the characters, that is, in fact, the writers' *intent.*


----------



## rondotcom (Feb 13, 2005)

eugene82 said:


> laststarfighter said:
> 
> 
> > Man, they better start filming next season's episodes now. Looks like Walt is going through puberty. How are they going to explain him growing 6 inches and a beard after "less than a week" since Michael last saw him?
> ...


----------



## Mike20878 (Jun 8, 2001)

Bierboy said:


> I was under the assumption that standalones, whether they're BB or DialUp, update *guide data* every 24 hours or so. But if they're BB, then they check for newly scheduled shows hourly, but not guide data.


I think that's right. I don't know why they won't allow more frequent updates for broadband connections.


----------



## Mike20878 (Jun 8, 2001)

eugene82 said:


> laststarfighter said:
> 
> 
> > Man, they better start filming next season's episodes now. Looks like Walt is going through puberty. How are they going to explain him growing 6 inches and a beard after "less than a week" since Michael last saw him?
> ...


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Mike20878 said:


> Please don't cut off the last ] when quoting someone's post. It messes up the formatting.
> 
> Thanks.[/QUOTE
> 
> Yeah....what Mike said.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Mike20878 said:


> I think that's right. I don't know why they won't allow more frequent updates for broadband connections.


Maybe it has something to do with how often Tribune Media Services updates the program info? If they don't update it any more often than every 24 hours, then it would be pointless for TiVo to update the guide date any more often. Just speculation on my part.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Mike20878 said:


> eugene82 said:
> 
> 
> > Please don't cut off the last ] when quoting someone's post. It messes up the formatting.
> ...


----------



## Mike20878 (Jun 8, 2001)

mqpickles said:


> I really don't think so. In fact, one of the producers (Lindhoff?) is Catholic. There is a lot of Catholic imagery, presented respectfully (which isn't always the case in Hollywood), in this show. Spirituality is definitely a theme, but I really don't think they're proseltyzing Eastern religions in particular.


Actually, Damon Lindelof is Jewish. He mentioned his bar mitzvah in one of the earlier podcasts. Carlton Cuse is Catholic.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> Maybe it has something to do with how often Tribune Media Services updates the program info? If they don't update it any more often than every 24 hours, then it would be pointless for TiVo to update the guide date any more often. Just speculation on my part.


No, not pointless at all. Let's say Tribune Media updates the program info once every 24 hours, at 5 minutes past midnight. If your TiVo fetches its updates exactly at midnight, it will always be 24 hours behind. I would guess that it is not simple to figure out exactly when the new info will be available (I am assuming it is distributed to regional centers over a period of time, so exact timing depends on your location), in which case it makes sense for the TiVo to fetch on a more frequent schedule.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

wprager said:


> No, not pointless at all. Let's say Tribune Media updates the program info once every 24 hours, at 5 minutes past midnight. If your TiVo fetches its updates exactly at midnight, it will always be 24 hours behind. I would guess that it is not simple to figure out exactly when the new info will be available (I am assuming it is distributed to regional centers over a period of time, so exact timing depends on your location), in which case it makes sense for the TiVo to fetch on a more frequent schedule.


But, as we (or at least I) are speculating here, it apparently doesn't. That's why I called it speculation on my part. Many times, my guide has not been updated for 24 hours past when others' have (as evidenced by comments in these fora).


----------



## Jericho Dog (Feb 10, 2006)

Mike20878 said:


> eugene82Pleasedon'tcutoffthelast said:
> 
> 
> > when quoting someone's post. It messes up the formatting.
> ...


]

Yeah.
Exactly.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I totally agree with Fish Man on the excellent level of character development on Lost. In fact, in general, I prefer a good TV series to a movie for that very reason. It's almost impossible to get the level of understanding of the characters in a 2 hour movie as a series that goes on for several seasons.


----------



## kmcorbett (Dec 7, 2002)

Sirius Black said:


> The Others, on the other hand, seem to know a great deal that they shouldn't if they are really cutoff from the outside world.


Here's my theory: the Others are from the future. They are running an experiment, but it's not the same as the Dharma initiative.

Perhaps they must limit their interactions with people of the present to prevent infection. Either they brought the disease to the island, or it was present on the island before they came, but in either case they are here to study it and find the cure.

/kmc


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

kmcorbett said:


> Perhaps they must limit their interactions with people of the present to prevent infection.


But why do they have to act like jerks?


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

wmcbrine said:


> But why do they have to act like jerks?


...well, they're still human


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

Fish Man said:


> Lost clearly is, among other things, a character study.
> 
> Character study type stories *specifically call for* the audience to contemplate the motivations of the characters.
> 
> ...


That's your analysis, and I respect your opinion. We will have to continue to disagree, though.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

JMikeD said:


> That's your analysis, and I respect your opinion. We will have to continue to disagree, though.


That's fine.

You are interested in the "mysteries" and not the motivations of the characters.

Whatever floats your boat. 

IMHO, though, you're missing (at least) half the story that way.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

I agree.

That's part of why the clip shows are so lame. Those clip shows focus only on the island mystery/plot, and they come off like a skeleton, no flesh on them.


----------



## mulscully (May 31, 2003)

> Orginally posted by FISHMAN
> Take, for example, any good Science Fiction. Star Trek, for example. It's pretty hard to swallow that 200 years or so from now we will be able to break the light speed barrier, or "beam" physical objects from place to place like a radio signal. So, "Star Trek" requires big suspensions of disbelief with respect to settings and circumstances, but it was successful because the characters were believable human beings.


I agree, but also star trek used specutlative science to explain the technology. there were technical manuals, etc. So far there has not been any speculative science to explain the elements in lost from the writers end. The fans are trying to come up with some. (ie nano technology to explain the smoke).

I think Lost will need to offer some explainations soon to help contuinue to suspend disbelief where setting and circumstances are concerned.. Characters alone won't do it for many...


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

DCIFRTHS said:


> Nice summary. Could you explain what you meant about Hurley though? Is it because physically he isn't capable, do you feel it's not in his nature, or am I _totally_ off base?


Nothing like a little traveling to miss out on responding ... but at least my DTivo will save me Wednesday night since I won't get home till after the finale.

What I meant about Hurley's motivations being about "revenge" is that seems to be the reason why he decides to join the mini-army. We aren't told, and it was quite a shift to have during a burial ceremony. I said "bad writing" somewhat offhandedly, but I really don't believe Hurley would have acted that way. He felt he was unlucky, and people suffered around him all the time because of him. Even his lottery winnings just increased the bad luck. So I guess I'm saying it's not in his nature (as we know it right now).

I think he would have withdrawn, like he did while he digging the grave. But the plot requires him to move on, so move on he must. (Unless he never goes, but Michael would be very unlikely to go without him.) That's not necessarily *bad* that the plot moves things, don't misunderstand me. They do such a great job with the characters that I was a little let down by this episode. Spoiled maybe, but well there ya go. 

Obviously, I am guilty of evaluating the characters here but as Fish Man so well put it, suspension of belief is critical in fiction. Whether books or movies, it's what allows a viewer/reader to connect to the characters.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Delta13 said:


> ... What I meant about Hurley's motivations being about "revenge" is that seems to be the reason why he decides to join the mini-army. We aren't told, and it was quite a shift to have during a burial ceremony. I said "bad writing" somewhat offhandedly, but I really don't believe Hurley would have acted that way. He felt he was unlucky, and people suffered around him all the time because of him. Even his lottery winnings just increased the bad luck. So I guess I'm saying it's not in his nature (as we know it right now).


I agree that this is inconsistent with Hurley's character. It was also a very "cheesy" moment, and in my opinion, bad writing.



Delta13 said:


> I think he would have withdrawn, like he did while he digging the grave. But the plot requires him to move on, so move on he must. (Unless he never goes, but Michael would be very unlikely to go without him.) That's not necessarily *bad* that the plot moves things, don't misunderstand me. They do such a great job with the characters that I was a little let down by this episode. Spoiled maybe, but well there ya go.
> ...


Again, I agree with you. As I have previously stated, I think this episode was "not one of the best".

I'm hoping the season finale is well written. I intend to get _LOST_ in it  Okay. That was really bad!


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

I've wanted to post this before the finale, so here goes. It's how I think the endings of the last 3 episodes could have gone, and how I think _maybe_ they were planning to go.

"Two For The Road" - Jack, Kate, Sawyer and Locke are making their way back to the hatch (in the dark  ) and they run into Hurley, who asks if they've seen Libby. They say no, but say they are on the way to the hatch anyway. They get to the hatch, Michael falls out the door, bleeding from his wound, saying some guy shot him. Everyone rushes inside and finds AnaLucia and Libby shot. Scene ends with a montage of faces.

The only real change is adding Hurley wondering about Libby earlier. And obviously, the Michael exchange with AL is completely removed for dramatic purposes.

"?" - Story continues as it did originally, except for the missing minutes that are now at the end of "Two For The Road". Hurley's appearance as well. But one major change has now been introduced: we as viewers don't know what happened in the hatch. Story ends as it did originally, more or less, though there are now a couple of more minutes to spend in the Pearl hatch.

"3 Minutes" - As Michael gets more erratic, it becomes more clear that he is up to something, which the flashbacks prove. At the funeral, he hits his knees, head bowed, when the boat is sighted. While everyone looks around for the boat, Michael has another flashback - *what actually happened in the hatch*. The episode ends with a pained but fierce look on Michael's face.

It may seem a bit obvious and even cliched maybe, but I really wonder if they didn't want things to go this way anyway. No real changes to anything filmed, just the timing of the scenes is all. All of the hints about Michael - the vomiting, the helping dig the grave, the cleaning of the blood, the Hell conversation, Libby speaking his name - all build tension now.

It would also stress the point that Michael asked for a boat, and lo a boat appeared. In this new edit, it's what causes his flashback to occur. We don't know his reaction in the original scene.

Just some thoughts on how it could have been less forced. Hey, I've always wanted to direct.


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

AJ Abrams and a writer named Damen (?) from Lost were on my morning radio show today. They said that they have already mapped out the ending to Lost, its just a matter of how long it takes to get there.

One of the guys on the morning show that doesn't even watch Lost asked about the modern Washer and Dryer he had heard others talking about. They said that for someone who doesn't watch the show, he just asked the single most important question of the entire show! One of the guys said the washer and dryer seemed "out of time".

For tonight, they said


Spoiler



we would learn the back story of Libby and how she wound up at the clinic with Hurley.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

BeanMeScot said:


> AJ Abrams and a writer named Damen (?) from Lost ...


That would be Damen Lindelof.

He is the co-creator of the show, with Abrams. They are equal partners as creators/executive producers.

My "gut feeling" based on interviews, etc., is that the overall _story line_ of the show (what's happening, where the story is going) is mostly the brainchild of Lindelof. The _mood, atmosphere, presentation_ and, possibly, the character development, is mostly Abrams.

I could be way off, of course, and this is a rather broad generalization. But that's the feel I get from interviews etc. I've heard/read.


----------



## Guindalf (Jun 13, 2001)

BeanMeScot said:


> *AJ* Abrams...


Is he any relation to the show's executive produce, *JJ* Abrams?


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Delta13 said:


> What I meant about Hurley's motivations being about "revenge" is that seems to be the reason why he decides to join the mini-army. We aren't told, and it was quite a shift to have during a burial ceremony. I said "bad writing" somewhat offhandedly, but I really don't believe Hurley would have acted that way. He felt he was unlucky, and people suffered around him all the time because of him. Even his lottery winnings just increased the bad luck. So I guess I'm saying it's not in his nature (as we know it right now).


I have mixed feelings as to whether I consider this "bad writing" or too out of character for Hurley or not.

On the one hand, you are totally correct that it's "not like" the Hurley we've seen to date.

On the other hand, I *like* that Hurley is showing a little backbone. He's pissed and willing to try to do something rather than playing the victim all the time.

Of course, it's sadly ironic that the time Hurley finally decides to stop playing the victim he's playing right into Michael (and the others) nefarious plot!


----------



## Dennis Wilkinson (Sep 24, 2001)

Bit of a non sequitur, but I had a thought while trying to get all of the events of the past few weeks straight. 

I know there's been some speculation that Claire may be the daughter that Christian Shepard was looking for a few episodes back. I also know that the recent revelations about the psychic have stirred up more discussion about just what happened in his interactions with Claire. 

What if the two are related? Christian goes looking for his daughter (Claire), discovers that she's with child and is looking to give up the baby for adoption -- what if Christian was somehow the one trying to get Claire to LA with the baby, with the intent being for him (or another member of the Shepherd family) to adopt it? The psychic's change of heart could even be explained (somewhat) by a bribe. 

I can poke at least two holes in this, beyond the lack of evidence that the daughter and Claire are the same person. The first is the change in the psychic's manner when he actually gives Claire the money: he seemed genuinely nervous, and I don't think this is enough to explain that nervousness. The other is the timing of Christian's death -- if the second psychic/Claire interaction is close enough to the flight's departure, might he already be dead and not in a position to influence the psychic? 

Might just be my synapses misfiring this morning, but seems at least possible.


----------



## TR7spyder (Feb 28, 2006)

> One of the guys on the morning show that doesn't even watch Lost asked about the modern Washer and Dryer he had heard others talking about. They said that for someone who doesn't watch the show, he just asked the single most important question of the entire show! One of the guys said the washer and dryer seemed "out of time".


In addition to the washer and drier, did anyone else notice a very modern electrical stove top with coils concealed under a seamless surface? I havent heard people bringing it up.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

I'm getting nervous -- they're predicting severe storms in our area tonight...high winds, hail, damaging winds...which means possible cable/power outages. EEEEEK....I could miss the season finale!!


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Bierboy said:


> I'm getting nervous -- they're predicting severe storms in our area tonight...high winds, hail, damaging winds...which means possible cable/power outages. EEEEEK....I could miss the season finale!!


Well, it should be available on abc.com tomorrow, as recent episodes have been. Just don't read a newspaper, listen to a radio or watch any television until you have a chance to watch the show.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Fish Man said:


> I have mixed feelings as to whether I consider this "bad writing" or too out of character for Hurley or not.
> 
> On the one hand, you are totally correct that it's "not like" the Hurley we've seen to date.
> 
> On the other hand, I *like* that Hurley is showing a little backbone. He's pissed and willing to try to do something rather than playing the victim all the time.


Interesting, especially since Libby was the one who had been working with Hurley to help him overcome his destructive self-blame tendencies.


Fish Man said:


> Of course, it's sadly ironic that the time Hurley finally decides to stop playing the victim he's playing right into Michael (and the others) nefarious plot!


Also interesting, as the same kind of sad irony happened with AL. The time she finally decides not to just shoot someone as a first response, that also plays into Michael's hands (and is what gets her killed).


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

mqpickles said:


> Well, it should be available on abc.com tomorrow, as recent episodes have been. Just don't read a newspaper, listen to a radio or watch any television until you have a chance to watch the show.


Ah yes....I'd forgotten about that. Thanks!


----------



## TR7spyder (Feb 28, 2006)

Fish Man said:


> I have mixed feelings as to whether I consider this "bad writing" or too out of character for Hurley or not.
> 
> On the one hand, you are totally correct that it's "not like" the Hurley we've seen to date.
> 
> ...


Could this also be the "sickness" that Russo was talking about? If so, that can give writers a lot of freedom to totally change the charecters... and that would really suck .


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Dennis Wilkinson said:


> The other is the timing of Christian's death -- if the second psychic/Claire interaction is close enough to the flight's departure, might he already be dead and not in a position to influence the psychic?


It seems to me a dead person would be even _better_ positioned to influence a psychic, and make him nervous! Especially if he was a fake


----------



## Jericho Dog (Feb 10, 2006)

mqpickles said:


> Well, it should be available on abc.com tomorrow, as recent episodes have been. Just don't read a newspaper, listen to a radio or watch any television until you have a chance to watch the show.


You left out, Get on the Internet, or course.....

here in particular...
hope that's not a spoiler...

:up:


----------



## Jericho Dog (Feb 10, 2006)

Fish Man said:


> My "gut feeling" based on interviews, etc., is that the overall _story line_ of the show (what's happening, where the story is going) is mostly the brainchild of Lindelof. The _mood, atmosphere, presentation_ and, possibly, the character development, is mostly Abrams.
> 
> I could be way off, of course, and this is a rather broad generalization. But that's the feel I get from interviews etc. I've heard/read.


That's my thought.
Tha main story arc has always been known. They've been working out the other (yeah, I know)details as they go.

I read that the producer meets with the writers in a secure location, explains the main plot behind Dharma and the island, then they go off to write the detailed episodes. Oh, and they can't write anything down during the meeting.
Leave no trail.


----------

