# Lost: 4/1/09 "Whatever happened, happened"



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

When I was driving yesterday, I recalled all the interconnecting relationships in Lost: Sawyer's hated con man was Locke's father, etc etc etc. And right off the bat we see Kate finding a commonality with Sawyer.


----------



## shaunrose (Sep 13, 2001)

So if Jack had saved young Ben, he would have changed everything.


----------



## Paperboy2003 (Mar 30, 2004)

So it was Jacks stubborness that caused Ben to be evil. If only Jack had decided to help Juliet, then he wouldn't have been an 'Other'


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

After recent conversations here, I could really empathize with Miles when he was trying to explain "what happened, happened" to Hurley. 

Seriously, though, it's sweet to have my suspicions confirmed that they know exactly what they're doing, and that "whatever happened, happened" means "whatever happened, happened"...although I still suspect that the "alternate village" in the present is a violation of that, and the result of the universe breaking (although obviously not as a result of Ben's death, which I thought was a possibility).


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

26 minutes in, and I swear I'm watching Hurley and Miles reading this forum aloud.


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

Philosofy said:


> When I was driving yesterday, I recalled all the interconnecting relationships in Lost: Sawyer's hated con man was Locke's father, etc etc etc. And right off the bat we see Kate finding a commonality with Sawyer.


I must have forgotten, how did Kate know Sawyers baby mama? Other than him telling stories of her to Kate of course...


----------



## Frash (Jan 15, 2005)

I hope there is a good point to all of Kate's story tonight because it seemed very boring to me. The island story was great and very interesting, but I would've been OK with Kate helping young Ben simply because he's a child. I felt they were trying to tie in guilty feelings for leaving young Aaron behind.

I'm enjoying the "new Jack" and really enjoyed the scene of him refusing to operate. 

Worst scene of the night: A small boy is dying inside the van but Kate decides to stop everything so she can demand an answer to why Sawyer is helping her?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Frash said:


> I'm enjoying the "new Jack" and really enjoyed the scene of him refusing to operate.


I like how Jack has turned into Sawyer and Sawyer has turned into Jack...and not only does Sawyer make a better Sawyer than Jack does, but he makes a better Jack.

(Couldn't be a redemption storyline coming for our boy Jack, now, could there?)


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

I loved the interchange between Hurley and Miles.
Great episode all around tonight. At the end when Ben woke up I assume it was after Sun bashed him in the head with the oar, correct?


----------



## Unseen Llama (Nov 29, 2005)

There seemed to be some sort of recognition on Ben's face when he woke up in the bed. The same way Desmond had recalled a memory. Maybe Ben was just staring at John though.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

"You can leave....but I'll shoot you in the leg"

Hurley looking at his hand - "Back to the future"
Best scene was Miles and Hurley and what happened happened.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Unseen Llama said:


> There seemed to be some sort of recognition on Ben's face when he woke up in the bed. The same way Desmond had recalled a memory. Maybe Ben was just staring at John though.


My first thought was the guy we see from the back there was Richard. Then they show it to be Locke and it is even better. I wanted to hear Locke say something like "like my necktie?"


----------



## shaunrose (Sep 13, 2001)

When they handed over Ben to Richard, did the Other say that Richard should be checking with Ellie and Charles? I heard Charles for sure, but I was not sure if he said Ellie or not. What do you think that means for Penny? Was she born on the island if Charles is still there in the 70's?


----------



## Frash (Jan 15, 2005)

betts4 said:


> Hurley looking at his hand - "Back to the future"


I was hoping that the DI was going to have a dance and Hurley would play the guitar he brought and blow the crowd away with his "new" sound.


----------



## Frash (Jan 15, 2005)

shaunrose said:


> When they handed over Ben to Richard, did the Other say that Richard should be checking with Ellie and Charles? I heard Charles for sure, but I was not sure if he said Ellie or not. What do you think that means for Penny? Was she born on the island if Charles is still there in the 70's?


Yes, he said Ellie first, then Charles.


----------



## rufus_x_s (Jul 14, 2004)

Hurley says to Miles something about why didn't older Ben remember Sayid torturing him? Miles is stumped, but who's to say that Ben *didn't* remember Sayid?


----------



## brermike (Jun 1, 2006)

I love how Kate's reason for returning had nothing to do with Jack or Sawyer, but to sesrch for Claire. She wants Aaron to have his real mother. It's one of the first unselfish choices made by Kate and shows some sorely missing growth from her.

Loved the episode for all the reasons already stated, plus I loved how Richard mentioned Charles and Ellie. This keeps getting more and more interesting


----------



## PKurmas (Apr 24, 2001)

Paperboy2003 said:


> So it was Jacks stubborness that caused Ben to be evil. If only Jack had decided to help Juliet, then he wouldn't have been an 'Other'


But, of course, Jack wasn't supposed to save him. If he *had*, then the future would have changed, and that's just not allowed!

I just spent a half hour of quality time drawing the time loop out for my 16 year old daughter. I now find myself asking new questions about Charles & Ellie, and also about Daniel. We know Charles & Ellie still on the island in 1977. When was Daniel born? (Lostpedia doesn't say.) If he was a professor at Cambridge in 1996 he'd have to have been born in the mid-60s, he'd probably be on the island (as would his father...), and he'd be almost an adult. I'm thinking that the Daniel that's a professor at Cambridge is time-looped Daniel (except he'd recognize Desmond in "The Constant", and he didn't seem to). And as for Charles, he's in his 40s in 1977, but Ben takes away everything & he gets tossed off the island at some point... before or after the Purge (we don't know, right?).

Only 166 more hours 'til the next episode!!!


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

shaunrose said:


> When they handed over Ben to Richard, did the Other say that Richard should be checking with Ellie and Charles? I heard Charles for sure, but I was not sure if he said Ellie or not. What do you think that means for Penny? Was she born on the island if Charles is still there in the 70's?


Sonya Walger, the actress who plays Penny, was born in 1974. If she's the daughter of Charles and Ellie, would that make her Daniel's sister?

Edit: Jeremy Davis, who plays Daniel Farraday, was born in 69.


----------



## PKurmas (Apr 24, 2001)

rufus_x_s said:


> Hurley says to Miles something about why didn't older Ben remember Sayid torturing him? Miles is stumped, but who's to say that Ben *didn't* remember Sayid?


Richard said he wouldn't remember any of this... so he must forget that Sayid shot him. Convenient explanation, I think, for the gap in Ben's memory.

Of course, I'm more convinced than ever that Ben remembers Juliet, especially after re-watching the podcast from last year. I'm also beginning to think that the producers may have teased Michael Emerson with a tiny bit of extra info... e.g. "You already know Juliet & the Losties, but you can't let them know how. So act really conniving."


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

Gawd, I love this show. The reparte between Miles and Hurley, saying just what we'd all said. Sawyer's evolution, Kate coming clean with Aaron's grandmother attempting to resolve her issues, and the ultimate irony of Jack's non-involvement causing the very thing he thought he'd prevent by non-action, young Ben's becoming the adult Ben nemisis. Not only that, he's now got smoking hot Juliette pissed at him as well. The only predictable part, and that was fine with me, was Ben waking up to Locke. You KNEW that was gonna happen.

Nice orchestral violin music as Kate bade farewell to her 'son'.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

rufus_x_s said:


> Hurley says to Miles something about why didn't older Ben remember Sayid torturing him? Miles is stumped, but who's to say that Ben *didn't* remember Sayid?


Later Richard explains that Ben would never remember the day's events as he takes Ben into the stone temple to have a toe on each foot amputated.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

And where the heck is Farraday? No explanation yet, but I'll throw something out. If Farraday somehow gets off the ilsand, and is unstuck in time, he might be transported to Cambridge to become a professor. It plays with his mind, but ultimately he gets on that freighter and back to the island, and is stuck in an infinite loop.


----------



## toddvj (Apr 22, 2004)

Okay, so why was everyone so hellbent on saving young Ben? Would you save Adolph Hitler if he was a child, just because he's "young and innocent?"


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

"Save the Nazi, save the world!"


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Philosofy said:


> And where the heck is Farraday? No explanation yet, but I'll throw something out. If Farraday somehow gets off the ilsand, and is unstuck in time, he might be transported to Cambridge to become a professor. It plays with his mind, but ultimately he gets on that freighter and back to the island, and is stuck in an infinite loop.


My new theory is that Faraday is tutoring mommy in all the science involved in time travel. Remember that when the H-bomb was on the island, she didn't seem to know anything about it in the slightest. No scientific understanding at all. In 2007, she is the leading expert on the science of time travel.

(Obviously at some point, Faraday was among the Dharma people at the Orchid, but it doesn't mean he was there all the time. He may have been there under cover, perhaps even with the help of some people we know. He did look in that scene like he was hoping not to be noticed.)


----------



## tewcewl (Dec 18, 2004)

toddvj said:


> Okay, so why was everyone so hellbent on saving young Ben? Would you save Adolph Hitler if he was a child, just because he's "young and innocent?"


That's the question, isn't it? Jack answered that. Sawyer, Kate and Juliet answered that.

I liked this episode. I have a sneaking feeling this is going to be the proverbial quiet before the storm. I love how they've gone back to the original way of telling character stories: on the island and then a flashback.

What's astounding about this episode is that it validates the closed captioning that suddenly appeared on the DVD of the Season 4 episode when Sawyer whispers in Kate's ears even though there's no audible dialogue.

One question that I was trying to dredge up in my memory: Did Kate know the connection between Sawyer and Clementine? Because that would have been a hell of a long explanation that Sawyer didn't have time for in the helicopter before he jumped out.


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

toddvj said:


> Okay, so why was everyone so hellbent on saving young Ben? Would you save Adolph Hitler if he was a child, just because he's "young and innocent?"


Comparing Ben to Hitler?! Sheeesh!


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

shaunrose said:


> So if Jack had saved young Ben, he would have changed everything.


That's what I was thinking about when Jack told Juliet that he returned for a reason, but he didn't himself know what the reason was. What if he was supposed to be there to save Ben and keep him from going to the others... and he blew it?


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

I don't think the comparison is unfair. Ben is practically Hitler, just on a smaller scale.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

toddvj said:


> Okay, so why was everyone so hellbent on saving young Ben? Would you save Adolph Hitler if he was a child, just because he's "young and innocent?"


First of all, Ben is hardly Adol*f* Hitler.

Second... I think I would, for the reasons given in this episode. You're already changing history, what's to say saving him wouldn't make enough of a change?


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

MickeS said:


> First of all, Ben is hardly Adol*f* Hitler.
> 
> Second... I think I would, for the reasons given in this episode. You're already changing history, what's to say saving him wouldn't make enough of a change?


How can you say Ben is "hardly Adolf Hitler?" He's their (the 815ers) Hitler. He's committed genocide, ran prison camps, done medical and psychological manipulation. And he's a charismatic and somewhat whacked leader.

And it was obvious that he would become what he would become when he was given to the Others. That choice was made clear to Sawyer and Kate.

"He won't be the same ever again. He won't remember this and will forever be one of us." Or words to that effect from Richard.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Everyone is talking about how Jack failing to operate actually caused Ben to be who he ended up being.

I find it more ironic and sad that it was actually Sayid who even more directly caused Ben to be who he ended up being... and it was Sayid who was most directly and seriously harmed by Ben. And, where is Sayid now? How can he survive at all with _both_ Dharma _and_ the Others looking for him?


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

When Sawyer delivered Ben to the others, he said something like "this kid's been shot. He's both of our problems, now." What did that mean? Why would the others think it was their problem? Was that Sawyer pretending he thinks the guy who shot Ben was an Other?


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Because the Dharma folk thought that Sayid was a Hostile. So they think the Hostiles totally broke the treaty by shooting Ben, and Dharma will probably go after them, especially if Ben dies. There will be an all out war.

If the Hostiles can save Ben it will go a long way to avoiding that.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Philosofy said:


> 26 minutes in, and I swear I'm watching Hurley and Miles reading this forum aloud.


I have to admit, I thought that same thing. 
And that I laughed out loud at that conversation.



Unseen Llama said:


> There seemed to be some sort of recognition on Ben's face when he woke up in the bed. The same way Desmond had recalled a memory. Maybe Ben was just staring at John though.


Ben look genuinely surprised and a little fearful that Locke was alive.



toddvj said:


> Okay, so why was everyone so hellbent on saving young Ben? Would you save Adolph Hitler if he was a child, just because he's "young and innocent?"


Jack and Sayid wouldn't.

I wonder if Kate and James will second guess themselves now that they've turned Ben over to Richard and sealed his destiny.

And Ben may not remember Juliet trying to save him consciously but I bet he remembers subconsciously.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Peter000 said:


> Because the Dharma folk thought that Sayid was a Hostile. So they think the Hostiles totally broke the treaty by shooting Ben, and Dharma will probably go after them, especially if Ben dies. There will be an all out war.
> 
> If the Hostiles can save Ben it will go a long way to avoiding that.


"This boy's been shot" doesn't tell the Hostiles that one of them did it. Why would they think that's what happened?

Richard knows that Sawyer knows that the guy who shot Ben is not a Hostile. (But the conversation I'm talking about was not with Richard). But both had to keep of the charade that Sawyer = Dharma and Sayid = Hostile, for the benefit of Richard's people not knowing who Sawyer really is.

So, Ben won't remember, what exactly? The day he got shot? Anything that happened before he got shot?


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

Maybe it's because I'm a dad now, but I was really moved by the scene where Kate leaves Aaron. I found it heart-wrenching.


----------



## brermike (Jun 1, 2006)

spikedavis said:


> Maybe it's because I'm a dad now, but I was really moved by the scene where Kate leaves Aaron. I found it heart-wrenching.


Same here. It was quite effective and Evangaline Lily did a phenomenal job in this episode. I hope the writers see what she can do when allowed to do more than flip flop between men.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

spikedavis said:


> Maybe it's because I'm a dad now, but I was really moved by the scene where Kate leaves Aaron. I found it heart-wrenching.


Yes, great scene.


----------



## FlugPoP (Jan 7, 2004)

I also like the "new" Jack.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

brermike said:


> Same here. It was quite effective and Evangaline Lily did a phenomenal job in this episode. I hope the writers see what she can do when allowed to do more than flip flop between men.


Completely agree. I usually don't like Kate's character-and usually wince at an episode centered around her-but everything in this episode rang true. She sold every scene she was in and every action & decision Kate made. Very well done, if you ask me.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

Frash said:


> I hope there is a good point to all of Kate's story tonight because it seemed very boring to me.


Well, we now know that the reason Kate came back had nothing to do with helping the island, which is consistent with her earlier stance of wanting nothing to do with it.



Frash said:


> The island story was great and very interesting, but I would've been OK with Kate helping young Ben simply because he's a child. I felt they were trying to tie in guilty feelings for leaving young Aaron behind.


I don't think it was guilt so much as it was that she could empathize with Roger about what it would be like to lose a child. Her goal was to reunite Ben with his father, which is why she was able to accept what Richard said would happen to him.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

Hurley: What happened to then?
Miles: We passed then.
Hurley: When?
Miles: Just now. We're at now now.
Hurley: Go back to then.
Miles: When?
Hurley: Now!
Miles: Now?
Hurley: Now!
Miles: I can't.
Hurley: Why?
Miles: We missed it.
Hurley: When?
Miles: Just now.
Hurley: When will then be now?
Miles: Soon.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Hey, Jack and Kate are both universal donors. But, Boone's still dead.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

When they cut to Ben waking up just after Alpert brought Young Ben into the temple it reminded me of Desmond getting a new memory just after we saw Faraday talk to Hatch Desmond. It might not mean anything, but I thought of that scene while watching.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

I thought the grocery store stocker guy really nailed his line. You could tell he had been practicing for hours, trying to find just the perfect delivery. I really believed the juice boxes were on aisle five; and that he was really excited to share that information.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Oh, and who goes to a grocery store to get a kid a drink?


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Someone above mentioned the music during the Kate-Aaron goodbye scene. I don't know the title of that theme, but it's the big gun they bring out during the gut-wrenching moments. I think they could play that over any scene and I'd choke up.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

50 posts and no JKeegan. I believe he is now legally deceased. Who has a claim on his theories? Anyone? Anyone?


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

aindik said:


> When Sawyer delivered Ben to the others, he said something like "this kid's been shot. He's both of our problems, now." What did that mean? Why would the others think it was their problem? Was that Sawyer pretending he thinks the guy who shot Ben was an Other?


I was wondering the same thing when he said that.



Fool Me Twice said:


> Hey, Jack and Kate are both universal donors. But, Boone's still dead.


Yeah, a shame since there was medical equipment for transfusions growing all over the jungle they were in the middle of.



Fool Me Twice said:


> Oh, and who goes to a grocery store to get a kid a drink?


Somebody who's kid asks for a drink and when they look around the road they're on they see a grocery store right there. They should pass it up and just look for a convenience store? I can think of four grocery stores within three miles of me. I can think of one convenience store.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I'm curious as to what happens when Ben's pop asks the inevitable "Dude, where's my son?"

I don't like present Jack. I don't like 70's Jack. I don't like Jack as Jack. I don't like Jack as Sawyer. I just don't like Jack.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Jeeters said:


> Yeah, a shame since there was medical equipment for transfusions growing all over the jungle they were in the middle of.


Jack used bamboo(?) (had you forgotten?). The transfusion made no difference because Boone was too badly injured in the fall. And it was just a bit of trivia, not a criticism. Simmer down.



> Somebody who's kid asks for a drink and when they look around the road they're on they see a grocery store right there. They should pass it up and just look for a convenience store? I can think of four grocery stores within three miles of me. I can think of one convenience store.


Yes. They should pass it up and look for a convenience store. He's not dying of thirst. But, really, it's not a big deal. Just something that crossed my mind. They needed a big store to stage the lost Aaron bit, and I'm okay with that.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Fool Me Twice said:


> 50 posts and no JKeegan. I believe he is now legally deceased. Who has a claim on his theories? Anyone? Anyone?


Whatever happened to Fishman? He used to be a prolific, insightful Lost poster.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

cheesesteak said:


> Whatever happened to Fishman? He used to be a prolific, insightful Lost poster.


Yeah, I thought of him last week actually. Season One and Two, when everything was a mystery, he'd take an idea and run with it for half a page.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Jack used bamboo(?) (had you forgotten?).


No, I didn't remember that. Thanks.


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

Interesting when Richard was by an Other about Ellie & Charles, Richard responding "I don't answer to them" (or something like that.) Richard really seems to be the man behind the curtain of the Others.


----------



## danplaysbass (Jul 19, 2004)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Jack used bamboo(?) (had you forgotten?). The transfusion made no difference because Boone was too badly injured in the fall.


Actually, I think it was a spike from a sea urchin or some other marine life. Sun found it for him.

So here is my question and a theory:

So now Ben as a kid is an Other. So do we assume that he gets healed and then reintegrates into Dharma so that he can then perform the genocide he did when he was grown?

Or, my thought is that maybe he doesn't reintegrate into Dharma, something else happens (maybe a war between the DI and the others) and the DI are eradicated. This explains why in the current 2007 the DI facility is rundown and abandoned.

Thoughts?


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Test said:


> I must have forgotten, how did Kate know Sawyers baby mama? Other than him telling stories of her to Kate of course...


They showed it in the intro package- way back when Kate saw her somewhere selling fake gold jewelry and recognized her as a fellow scam artist. They struck up a friendship at that point.



Peter000 said:


> "He won't be the same ever again. He won't remember this and will forever be one of us." Or words to that effect from Richard.


"He will forget this ever happened and *his innocence will be gone.*"

*His innocence will be gone.*
Sounds like a fall from grace? 
As in estranged from Christ/"Good"?
Beyond redemption?

Is this true of all The Others?
What does imply about Richard and the Widmarks?


----------



## Cindy1230 (Oct 31, 2003)

I get the point of Kate's flashback (I thought it was a bit too long) but I was reminded of the the scene, from last season(?), when Kate was seeing Cassidy (now confirmed in this episode) and keeping it a secret from Jack,...I think it was very annoying and pointless. I guess the point was that the audience didn't know what had happened to Sawyer on the island. But because Kate was keeping secrets, it helped Jack continue to go downhill and them breaking up. Just an observation that bugged me.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Cindy1230 said:


> I get the point of Kate's flashback (I thought it was a bit too long) but I was reminded of the the scene, from last season(?), when Kate was seeing Cassidy (now confirmed in this episode) and keeping it a secret from Jack,...I think it was very annoying and pointless. I guess the point was that the audience didn't know what had happened to Sawyer on the island. But because Kate was keeping secrets, it helped Jack continue to go downhill and them breaking up. Just an observation that bugged me.


She couldn't tell Jack she was seeing Cassidy, because she'd also have to tell Jack that she told Cassidy that the O6 story was a lie.


----------



## tms317 (May 2, 2003)

Donbadabon, loved the Spaceballs reference!! I wonder why Kate is so sure Claire is alive when she just disappeared and left her baby in the woods? I'd probably assume she was dead.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Seriously, though, it's sweet to have my suspicions confirmed that they know exactly what they're doing, and that "whatever happened, happened" means "whatever happened, happened"


It actually means, "whatever happened, happened - but we will continue to use cheap writing tricks like amnesia and sudden memory spikes to accommodate this"

It's funny that you think they know what they've been doing all along, because it seems to me that having to resort to the grade-school amnesia plot device indicates that they hadn't fully planned out the stuff we are seeing now when they were writing Ben's flashback episode from a while back.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> It actually means, "whatever happened, happened - but we will continue to use cheap writing tricks like amnesia and sudden memory spikes to accommodate this"
> 
> It's funny that you think they know what they've been doing all along, because it seems to me that having to resort to the grade-school amnesia plot device indicates that they hadn't fully planned out the stuff we are seeing now when they were writing Ben's flashback episode from a while back.


I still don't know why they had to use amnesia. It's perfectly within Ben's character to not show all his cards so I wouldn't have expected him to tell the 815ers he already knew them. They wouldn't have believed him anyway and Ben is smart so he wouldn't have said anything.

I still think he "knew" something about the 815ers when he showed up in their camp. Or someone he knew knew...


----------



## shaunrose (Sep 13, 2001)

TAsunder said:


> It actually means, "whatever happened, happened - but we will continue to use cheap writing tricks like amnesia and sudden memory spikes to accommodate this"
> 
> It's funny that you think they know what they've been doing all along, because it seems to me that having to resort to the grade-school amnesia plot device indicates that they hadn't fully planned out the stuff we are seeing now when they were writing Ben's flashback episode from a while back.


I can understand a small amount of this to fit in some of the things they are trying to do. I don't think anyone thinks they had all of the details of all of the seasons written out well in advance. But the essential elements are well planned out and, I think, very satisfying to see them play out.

On the other hand, I would think there was a more clever way to explain this particular thing. The Lost writers have certainly shown they are capable of rising to that challenge.

But, we have not yet seen what causes this amnesia. Perhaps if we wait and see what happens next week, it will be a little more satisfying than just plain amnesia.


----------



## Magister (Oct 17, 2004)

TriBruin said:


> Interesting when Richard was by an Other about Ellie & Charles, Richard responding "I don't answer to them" (or something like that.) Richard really seems to be the man behind the curtain of the Others.


I don't think Richard ever really reported to 'Ben' either. I think Richard exists to the others as a powerful figure, but outside of the traditional reporting structure. The 'others' really need normal people to be the leaders, but Richard doesn't have that 'need'.

Is the temple how the others turned the tailie children and 'good' people into others?


----------



## Bryanmc (Sep 5, 2000)

This is the best show that's ever been on TV. Seriously.


----------



## sshedlock (May 14, 2004)

Bryanmc said:


> This is the best show that's ever been on TV. Seriously.


+1


----------



## fin416 (Mar 21, 2009)

Are we to assume in the 3years he has been there he learned about it from....Faraday maybe?


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

fin416 said:


> Are we to assume in the 3years he has been there he learned about it from....Faraday maybe?


He learned about it from Locke.


----------



## Scubee (Mar 2, 2005)

Magister said:


> Is the temple how the others turned the tailie children and 'good' people into others?


You know, I easily forget about those from 815 that were taken and suddenly seemed OK with being an Other. The flight attendent comes to mind. The fact that being taken into the temple erases at least some memories could explain that.

My wife mentioned that the losing of innocense that is tied to the temple and the Others confirms that the Others are "bad guys". I long ago gave up on trying to figure out good guys and bad guys, but it was an interesting statement.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

shaunrose said:


> But, we have not yet seen what causes this amnesia. Perhaps if we wait and see what happens next week, it will be a little more satisfying than just plain amnesia.


I'm wondering if saving Ben involves reversing time for him, allowing the wound to be undone. Perhaps it's the time reversal that will cause him to not remember since to him the events would have never happened.

Maybe the Temple allows for localized undoing of events, and perhaps this is what Faraday will end up harnessing in an attempt to save Charlotte that will ultimately result in the Incident.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

BitbyBlit said:


> I'm wondering if saving Ben involves reversing time for him, allowing the wound to be undone. Perhaps it's the time reversal that will cause him to not remember since to him the events would have never happened.
> 
> Maybe the Temple allows for localized undoing of events, and perhaps this is what Faraday will end up harnessing in an attempt to save Charlotte that will ultimately result in the Incident.


Theses are some awesome ideas :up: :up:


----------



## fin416 (Mar 21, 2009)

Locke didn't even know about it until he got down the well. From Jacks father.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

When Ben said he was born on the island, maybe he wasn't lying, but was referring to a "second birth".

Woah! While I was typing that I had a weird improbable thought. What if Young Ben's consciousness was transferred to Ajira-Crash Ben during the Temple procedure, so that when he woke up and saw Locke, he didn't know where the hell he was, or who that creepy bald guy was staring at him.


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

Scubee said:


> My wife mentioned that the losing of innocense that is tied to the temple and the Others confirms that the Others are "bad guys". I long ago gave up on trying to figure out good guys and bad guys, but it was an interesting statement.


I didn't take the "losing of innocense" as evil. My mind went to Adam and Eva and the apple. I assumed Ben would have knowledge, he would know everything the others know.

Now, is that evil? Maybe. Its still not clear to me. I just have a hard time buying any side as good. Both sides have killed.

Love this show!


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

fin416 said:


> Locke didn't even know about it until he got down the well. From Jacks father.


He was there when Ben turned it, wasn't he?


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

Fool Me Twice said:


> When Ben said he was born on the island, maybe he wasn't lying, but was referring to a "second birth".
> 
> Woah! While I was typing that I had a weird improbable thought. What if Young Ben's consciousness was transferred to Ajira-Crash Ben during the Temple procedure, so that when he woke up and saw Locke, he didn't know where the hell he was, or who that creepy bald guy was staring at him.


I like this idea. To take it further, Little Ben(LB) flashes into Future Ben's(FB) consciuosness. Similar to Desmond still being on the island but fllashing into other times of his life.

When LB flashes he keeps/picks-up FB's memories when he flashes back. He now remembers everything that will happen. His innocense is lost because he sees all of the things he will someday do to protect the island.

It would also explain how he knows which "losties" to kidnap later.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

aindik said:


> He was there when Ben turned it, wasn't he?


He was outside with the Others, including Richard, when the island moved. And he didn't go down the tunnel with Ben to see that there was a chamber with a wheel. All he knew at the time was that there was something there that Ben had used to move the island.

But Faraday's been down there, so it wouldn't surprise me if Miles found out from him.


----------



## hanumang (Jan 28, 2002)

shaunrose said:


> But, we have not yet seen what causes this amnesia. Perhaps if we wait and see what happens next week, it will be a little more satisfying than just plain amnesia.


Actually from the early season arc (time-jumping, with Jin in particular) don't Rousseau's fellow castaways also suffer from some type of event amnesia? Maybe my memory is failing me, but I thought we saw Jin witness an exchange between Rousseau and her boyfriend to that effect.

I like the idea of the temple/smoke monster saving Ben's life. It explains sinister his nature (as Rousseau witnessed with her crew after they came back) as well as how Ben is connected to the smoke monster (something we witnessed last season as it took out most of the freighter assault team).



fin416 said:


> Are we to assume in the 3years he has been there he learned about it from....Faraday maybe?


If the season premiere is to be believed Faraday was present while the Orchid is being built - including mention of (and laughter about) time travel - so I also suspect that Faraday told Miles as well as Sawyer & co.


----------



## Magister (Oct 17, 2004)

lodica1967 said:


> I didn't take the "losing of innocense" as evil. My mind went to Adam and Eva and the apple. I assumed Ben would have knowledge, he would know everything the others know.
> 
> Now, is that evil? Maybe. Its still not clear to me. I just have a hard time buying any side as good. Both sides have killed.
> 
> Love this show!


Traditionally, the persuit of knowledge is considered evil. Don't read this book or that subject is forbidden. Don't go there. Don't let your kids read that. Or I don't want my kid to see that on TV, since they will 'Learn something'. Burn the astromers, they speak heresy. Science is bad.

So loss of innocense is an evil thing.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

No, Locke was upstairs when Ben went down to turn the donkey wheel, I believe.

Did Locke tell any of the O6 about the donkey wheel while he was off island? I can't believe he wouldn't have explained it to Jack or Hurley in passing at least. They then could have imparted that information to Miles.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Why does everyone assume "loss of innocence"= "evil?"

Just because a person doesn't believe in Santa Claus anymore doesn't mean they're evil. Just because Ben became an Other, doesn't mean that's what turned him "evil." He had pretty much a alcoholic ******bag of a father, that helped out some I'm sure.


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

Magister said:


> So loss of innocense is an evil thing.


I agree with that part! (from a Biblical standpoint, not necessarily from a Lost standpoint)

But that fact that Richard warned them that Ben would lose his innocense, makes me wonder if the others are the bad guys? They could have just taken Ben and been done with it, why the disclaimer?

Again, I think both sides have to be evil(killing each other etc..). I'm just having a hard time telling the bad guys from the good guys at this point.

Maybe using the right side/wrong side would be better than using good/evil side.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

lodica1967 said:


> I didn't take the "losing of innocense" as evil. My mind went to Adam and Eva and the apple. I assumed Ben would have knowledge, he would know everything the others know.


That's the way I read it also. Once the Others cure him, he will be "aware" of what they are aware of, and no longer be an "innocent".

Since we don't truly know who the Others are, and whether they are good or evil or some shade in between, Ben's loss of innocence isn't good or bad to us, it just is.

It's the next step in this journey we're on.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

hanumang said:


> If the season premiere is to be believed Faraday was present while the Orchid is being built - including mention of (and laughter about) time travel - so I also suspect that Faraday told Miles as well as Sawyer & co.


Well, Dr. Chang and at least some of the other Dharma people know about the Donkey Wheel.
And Miles has been Dharma for three years now.


----------



## barbeedoll (Sep 26, 2005)

I fall on the side of those who think the writers of Lost know exactly what they are doing, whether we agree with their plot structure or not.

This episode, I thought that Kate spilling her guts to everyone she met about the island, what really happened to the Oceanic 6, and her intention to return to the island was to set up a future plot scenerio. At some point, I think present day people from the US (Hawking? Widmore? Penny?) will try to come to the island again to rescue/kill/??? the ones who returned. Somehow those Kate confined in will spill the beans.

Barbeedoll


----------



## barbeedoll (Sep 26, 2005)

I loved that it was Hurley, the person who spends most of his present day life in a mental institution, was the one to come up with the logic about time travel to stop Miles in mid-theory.

Barbeedoll


----------



## whitson77 (Nov 10, 2002)

I knew young ben wasn't dead.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Great episode. Yes it gives me a headache, but an enjoyable one. I also enjoyed the Hurley/Miles scenes.


----------



## aintnosin (Jun 25, 2003)

So, I'm just speculating but it looks like next week we get:


Spoiler



the rest of the story of how Ben becomes the man he is today.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Someone above mentioned the music during the Kate-Aaron goodbye scene. I don't know the title of that theme, but it's the big gun they bring out during the gut-wrenching moments. I think they could play that over any scene and I'd choke up.


Wasn't that the same music they played in the scene where the helicopter is heading to the freighter and Sawyer jumps out? But it lost something in that scene with the helicopter noises in the background.


----------



## 7thton (Mar 3, 2005)

Frash said:


> Worst scene of the night: A small boy is dying inside the van but Kate decides to stop everything so she can demand an answer to why Sawyer is helping her?


She stopped because the security gate, or whatever you want to call it, was still active. Sawyer then pulled up, they spoke, and then Sawyer lowered the gate.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

Bryanmc said:


> This is the best show that's ever been on TV. Seriously.


+ infinity

Last night's ep was fantastic from many standpoints.

- Probably my favorite Kate episode ever. Evangeline Lilly was incredible (and incredibly hawt, too). Really nuance performance.

- The Miles/Hurley scene had me literally falling off my couch giggling. Not only did it capture the essence of the time travel discussion on this forum over the whole season, but it was a pretty good paraphrase of a discussion that my best friend and I had last night an hour or so *before* the episode (right down to the "holding the hand in the front of the face" homage from BTTF).

- Great points about Sawyer becoming Jack and Jack becoming Sawyer. Also, great scene with Juliet and Jack towards the end.

- Not sure how in the hell Sayid is going to get by with both groups after him. Of course, he's the best equipped of any of the Losties to make it, but still.

- Loved the line (although it was predictable) that Locke had for Ben at the end: "Welcome to the Land of the Living", with the knowing smirk.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

lodica1967 said:


> I like this idea. To take it further, Little Ben(LB) flashes into Future Ben's(FB) consciuosness. Similar to Desmond still being on the island but fllashing into other times of his life.
> 
> When LB flashes he keeps/picks-up FB's memories when he flashes back. He now remembers everything that will happen. His innocense is lost because he sees all of the things he will someday do to protect the island.
> 
> It would also explain how he knows which "losties" to kidnap later.


Whoa....good thinking! That sounds very plausible.

It would also explain why those particular people (kate, jack, hurley, etc) were on Flight 815 in the first place. LB/FB find ways to make sure all those people are on that particular flight because he knows they have to be there.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

What gave Julliet the idea that Richard could save Ben? Or is that just a plot convenience?

When Jin flipped Ben over, anyone else notice that there was no exit wound? Lends credence to the earlier theory that the bullet could have been lodged against his spine, causing a tumor after 30 years.


----------



## aintnosin (Jun 25, 2003)

wprager said:


> What gave Julliet the idea that Richard could save Ben? Or is that just a plot convenience?


She was an Other, so she must know something about their capabilities.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

wprager said:


> What gave Julliet the idea that Richard could save Ben?


Juliet is an Other. She knows all kinds of stuff about them that we don't know.


----------



## TheDewAddict (Aug 21, 2002)

I don't think Little Ben's consciousness could be in Big Ben's body, because after the crash, Ben knew who Sun was. Little Ben would, as far as we know, have no clue who she is.


----------



## lodica1967 (Aug 5, 2003)

TheDewAddict said:


> I don't think Little Ben's consciousness could be in Big Ben's body, because after the crash, Ben knew who Sun was. Little Ben would, as far as we know, have no clue who she is.


I was thinking he was just there briefly, while his body healed.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

So, a few thoughts...

I think (current) Ben has somehow retained all memory. Remember that when 815 crashed, he gave a list of all the people he wanted captured. We originally thought it was because they had outside contact and were just able look up the info. What if Ben knew all along that 815 would crash and he'd have a chance for revenge?

Second, I think Richard is the living embodiment of the island. Notice how Sawyer said "Where the hell did you come from?". Plus the fact that Richard never ages...

Anyway, just a thought.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I still want to know what happened to the other 815ers? In three years nobody has ever found those people? Or perhaps we'll find out they became Others. I loved Miles expression when Hurley called him out on his theory. We paused it, RIGHT before Hurley said that, my son said EXACTLY the same thing!!

I'm thinking Claire is an Other.

I also think that Ben losing his innocence means he will KNOW whatever there is to know about the Others, and that something he finds out is so diabolical, it will convince him to turn on the DI folks.

I think Richard is the one that told Ben that the Losties had been there before, since it's obvious that Richard was Ben's mentor as an other. Therefore, I think he ALWAYS knew that the Losties had been there before after the 815 crash, and it influenced all his decisions going forward.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

DavidTigerFan said:


> I think (current) Ben has somehow retained all memory. Remember that when 815 crashed, he gave a list of all the people he wanted captured. We originally thought it was because they had outside contact and were just able look up the info. What if Ben knew all along that 815 would crash and he'd have a chance for revenge?


Jacob gave him the list.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Jacob gave him the list.


hmm, then who/what is Jacob? Perhaps Ben wanted revenge on all and Jacob told him he could only have these people..


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

DavidTigerFan said:


> hmm, then who/what is Jacob?


Someone who needs help and hates technology.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

DavidTigerFan said:


> hmm, then who/what is Jacob? Perhaps Ben wanted revenge on all and Jacob told him he could only have these people..


Do you really think it's revenge? Because whatever happened, happened.

Maybe Ben needed them to be on that flight so they could later come back and be there to save him by taking him to the others.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Jstkiddn said:


> Do you really think it's revenge? Because whatever happened, happened.
> 
> Maybe Ben needed them to be on that flight so they could later come back and be there to save him by taking him to the others.


Yeah that too, but I was thinking revenge because of Sayid shooting him. They basically pointed out the fact that Ben remembers Sayid when Miles said "Oh I hadn't thought of that".

Besides, what ever happened when Faraday said "Whatever happened, happened" but then proceeded to knock on the hatch and get Desmond to come out? Do we just assume that he _always_ knocked on it? Even though Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory?


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

GDG76 said:


> I still don't know why they had to use amnesia. It's perfectly within Ben's character to not show all his cards so I wouldn't have expected him to tell the 815ers he already knew them. They wouldn't have believed him anyway and Ben is smart so he wouldn't have said anything....





shaunrose said:


> But, we have not yet seen what causes this amnesia. Perhaps if we wait and see what happens next week, it will be a little more satisfying than just plain amnesia.


we don't know if it's amnesia... whatever it is, i agree with shaunrose, it will play out nicely.... i hope...

so going back to this time travel thing...

we assume miles is giving true facts about time travel...

and all this talk about time travel on these threads really goes over my head cuz there's so many theories and assumptions, so i haven't delved into them, understanding only that "whatever happened, happened", and waiting for the story to play out... but here's how i understand it so far...

what happenned in the past, happened, and will always happen. that much i knew.

here's where i got new info that i didn't catch before...

the future is not set. the present is the present, and it's always developing. so we know ben is alive in the future, so he can't die as a kid. but miles can die today, cuz he is in his present on a different timeline that they shifted to when the wheel was turned. but we know miles was in the future, but on an alternate timeline.

so, does "what happened happened" to the survivors? they crashed and all this stuff happened to them, but they got transported back, but it happens to ben in the future(interacting with the island survivors), but if jack dies in 1977, does ... damn, this is why i don't try to figure it out... i get lost in my own line of thinking...

let me go back to the street analogy. ugh, i can't... never mind!!!!


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

DavidTigerFan said:


> Besides, what ever happened when Faraday said "Whatever happened, happened" but then proceeded to knock on the hatch and get Desmond to come out? Do we just assume that he _always_ knocked on it? Even though Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory?


Yes, we assume he *always* had knocked. They just spent an entire show emphasizing that point that whatever happened, happened.


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

bruinfan said:


> the future is not set. the present is the present, and it's always developing. so we know ben is alive in the future, so he can't die as a kid. but miles can die today, cuz he is in his present on a different timeline that they shifted to when the wheel was turned. but we know miles was in the future, but on an alternate timeline.


One timeline.

We know the future ben (i.e. older ben) is alive in the future. so he didn't die, so he can't die.

For miles, a younger miles is alive in the future, but the older miles in the past could die without affecting that.

No alternate timelines.


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> I don't like present Jack. I don't like 70's Jack. I don't like Jack as Jack. I don't like Jack as Sawyer. I just don't like Jack.


You don't know Jack. (tm)


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Jstkiddn said:


> Maybe Ben needed them to be on that flight so they could later come back and be there to save him by taking him to the others.


My theory is still that Ben wants to save the world, and although his methods are extreme (cruel, nasty, whatever), ultimately he just wants to be the hero.


DavidTigerFan said:


> Besides, what ever happened when Faraday said "Whatever happened, happened" but then proceeded to knock on the hatch and get Desmond to come out? Do we just assume that he _always_ knocked on it? Even though Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory?


Why does everybody (OK, not everybody; anybody) assume Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory? That makes absolutely no sense. Why would the new memory magically appear years later?

Faraday knocked on the hatch because, why not? If nothing happened, nothing happened. As it turns out, something happened (that which had always happened), and then we cut to the moment when Desmond remembered that conversation. Nothing mystical about it.


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

ct1 said:


> One timeline.
> 
> We know the future ben (i.e. older ben) is alive in the future. so he didn't die, so he can't die.
> 
> ...


then what happened when the wheel was turned? i thought miles said something got shook up or something... i took that to mean they were on a different timeline...

they are moving up and down the same street with the time shifts... ok...

so if miles died in 1977, and say hurley saw him die, then 30 yrs later hurley could bump into miles again?


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Why does everybody (OK, not everybody; anybody) assume Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory? That makes absolutely no sense. Why would the new memory magically appear years later?
> 
> Faraday knocked on the hatch because, why not? If nothing happened, nothing happened. As it turns out, something happened (that which had always happened), and then we cut to the moment when Desmond remembered that conversation. Nothing mystical about it.


From Lostpedia on episode "Because you left":



> Three years after the rescue, Desmond awoke in bed with Penny. He seemed to suddenly recall his encounter with the time-traveling Daniel, despite not having had this memory at any point before, and visibly shook as the change took place. At the time, around five years previous, Daniel had told him that "the rules don't apply" to him, implying that Desmond's past can in a way be altered, something which cannot happen to anyone else.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Why does everybody (OK, not everybody; anybody) assume Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory? That makes absolutely no sense. Why would the new memory magically appear years later?
> 
> Faraday knocked on the hatch because, why not? If nothing happened, nothing happened. As it turns out, something happened (that which had always happened), and then we cut to the moment when Desmond remembered that conversation. Nothing mystical about it.


The conversation Desmond had with Penny when he woke up indicated (to me) that this wasn't any ordinary memory. In remembering it, he seemed very sure that he'd never remembered it before. This wasn't an "oh yeah, that" memory. This was a memory of something about which he has absolutely no prior recollection. If that makes sense.

ETA:


George Carlin said:


> Do you ever get that strange feeling of vuja de? Not deja vu, vuja de. It's the distinct sense that somehow, something that just happened has never happened before. Nothing seems familiar. And then suddenly the feeling is gone. Vuja de.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DavidTigerFan said:


> From Lostpedia on episode "Because you left":


That's somebody's interpretation, but I think it's utterly wrong. Again, _it makes no sense_. Why would the new memory emerge at that moment? Where was it for all those years between the time the meeting happened and the time the memory magically appeared in Desmond's mind?

I know I've had times when I've remembered something that I had completely forgotten. It's a spooky experience.


----------



## robbhimself (Sep 13, 2006)

DavidTigerFan said:


> Besides, what ever happened when Faraday said "Whatever happened, happened" but then proceeded to knock on the hatch and get Desmond to come out? Do we just assume that he _always_ knocked on it? Even though Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory?


the way i see it, when faraday knocked on the hatch the donkey wheel was off track, so they were flying thru space and time all willy nilly, and it was completely random when they were.

once the wheel was back on track, whenever they were sets the actual timeline back in motion, so from that point on whatever happened happened. they had to be careful when the wheel was off track because that was random and they could have changed things, but with the wheel now back in the socket whatever happens always happened.

the reason desmond woke up with that fuzzy memory is because the knocking didn't occur before, that was a minor change to history. as for ben, richard said that once the others took him he would forget the events of the past few days, so there is no way he would have remembered sayid or being shot. i think it's just one of those random lost coincidences that the writers try to throw people off track (and get some great miles-hurley script written by reading some forums  )


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That's somebody's interpretation, but I think it's utterly wrong. Again, _it makes no sense_. Why would the new memory emerge at that moment? Where was it for all those years between the time the meeting happened and the time the memory magically appeared in Desmond's mind?
> 
> I know I've had times when I've remembered something that I had completely forgotten. It's a spooky experience.


Why would someone who was paralyzed suddenly wake up on an island and walk? That makes no sense.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

bruinfan said:


> then what happened when the wheel was turned? i thought miles said something got shook up or something... i took that to mean they were on a different timeline...
> 
> they are moving up and down the same street with the time shifts... ok...
> 
> so if miles died in 1977, and say hurley saw him die, then 30 yrs later hurley could bump into miles again?


The supposed 2007 meeting in both their lives happened TO BOTH OF THEM *before* they experience the day Miles dies, which just 'happens' to be in 1977.


----------



## JadeWolf07 (Jan 1, 2004)

I could swear Little Ben was shot on the left side of his chest last week, but in this episode the wound seemed to be on his right side...is anyone sure either way about this??


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

tewcewl said:


> One question that I was trying to dredge up in my memory: Did Kate know the connection between Sawyer and Clementine? Because that would have been a hell of a long explanation that Sawyer didn't have time for in the helicopter before he jumped out.


I assume he told her to look after his daughter and gave her Cassidy's name and city. She must have remembered her name, because she didn't look surprised to see her old friend. What about the $$ that Sawyer put in an account for Clementine when he was in prison? I thought that was a lot of money. Actually, I wasn't sure there really was a Clementine--when she said, "do I have to wake her," or something, I thought she had scammed Sawyer and never had a child. He didn't see her, did he?



Peter000 said:


> How can you say Ben is "hardly Adolf Hitler?" He's their (the 815ers) Hitler. He's committed genocide, ran prison camps, done medical and psychological manipulation. And he's a charismatic and somewhat whacked leader.


Hitler wanted to conquer the world. Ben just wants to save the world and be left alone on his little island.



Magister said:


> Is the temple how the others turned the tailie children and 'good' people into others?


What about the "brain washing" they used on Carl? Or is that what they do with "bad people"?



lodica1967 said:


> I didn't take the "losing of innocense" as evil. My mind went to Adam and Eva and the apple. I assumed Ben would have knowledge, he would know everything the others know.
> 
> Now, is that evil? Maybe. Its still not clear to me. I just have a hard time buying any side as good. Both sides have killed.
> 
> Love this show!


:up: I think the Others have knowledge that lets them know what must happen to "save the world." They're sort of like God--they look at life from a different vantage point, especially time wise. It seems that time doesn't effect Richard, and maybe some of the rest. So they are justified in doing some of the things they do. Also, probably some of them get carried away with their power sometimes. Richard was waiting for the right time to convert Ben, and this is it. Ben's own snarky personalily notwithstanding, I think he's a good guy. Or not...


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That's somebody's interpretation, but I think it's utterly wrong. Again, _it makes no sense_. Why would the new memory emerge at that moment? Where was it for all those years between the time the meeting happened and the time the memory magically appeared in Desmond's mind?


I'm pretty sure Desmond and Penny had a conversation about Desmond remembering that memory at that exact moment. I seem to remember her asking why he was just now having the memory.


----------



## sirfergy (May 18, 2002)

It looked like it was on the left side to me. Were you watching in a mirror?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

stellie93 said:


> Ben's own snarky personality notwithstanding, I think he's a good guy. Or not...


I think he's a nasty, despicable little man with a lust for power and manipulation, and a complete amorality when it comes to getting his way.

And I think he's putting all that to use in saving the world.


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

bruinfan said:


> then what happened when the wheel was turned? i thought miles said something got shook up or something... i took that to mean they were on a different timeline...


One timeline.



bruinfan said:


> they are moving up and down the same street with the time shifts... ok...


Right.



bruinfan said:


> so if miles died in 1977, and say hurley saw him die, then 30 yrs later hurley could bump into miles again?


Sure, if an older miles died in 1977, the period of time when the younger miles lived 30 yrs later is still there (up until he went back in time).

Anything that happened then, happened. It doesn't change.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That's somebody's interpretation, but I think it's utterly wrong. Again, _it makes no sense_. Why would the new memory emerge at that moment? Where was it for all those years between the time the meeting happened and the time the memory magically appeared in Desmond's mind?


Think of Desmond as a "widget" not a person. Time will be relative to the widget and it always flows forward. Time will always be passing at the same rate no matter where you are in the timeline. Desmond didn't have the memory before because it had not happened to future desmond and had not happened to past desmond.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That's somebody's interpretation, but I think it's utterly wrong. Again, _it makes no sense_. Why would the new memory emerge at that moment? Where was it for all those years between the time the meeting happened and the time the memory magically appeared in Desmond's mind?
> 
> I know I've had times when I've remembered something that I had completely forgotten. It's a spooky experience.


If this was really a memory, then he thinks Daniel Farraday told him years ago, before the 815ers cracked the hatch, to go find Farraday's mother, Eloise Hawking. Desmond wakes up years later and says "Penny, we have to go find this woman right now." Years after Farraday told him to do it? Why would it be such an emergency?


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think he's a nasty, despicable little man with a lust for power and manipulation, and a complete amorality when it comes to getting his way.
> 
> And I think he's putting all that to use in saving the world.


Such a character profile with the dichotomy between despicable character vs noble action is what make's Ben's character, so aptly played by the actor, so intriguing.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

aindik said:


> If this was really a memory, then he thinks Daniel Farraday told him years ago, before the 815ers cracked the hatch, to go find Farraday's mother, Eloise Hawking. Desmond wakes up years later and says "Penny, we have to go find this woman right now." Years after Farraday told him to do it? Why would it be such an emergency?


...because he'd forgotten what he was supposed to do regarding Eloise and it just 'now' occurred to him. How is this different than if you suddenly recalled a very important task that you'd forgotten to do? That's the emergency.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

philw1776 said:


> ...because he'd forgotten what he was supposed to do regarding Eloise and it just 'now' occurred to him. How is this different than if you suddenly recalled a very important task that you'd forgotten to do? That's the emergency.


The difference is, it's many years later. He spoke with Farraday a number of times since he got out of the hatch and Farraday never mentioned the "find my mother" thing in all that time.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

aindik said:


> The difference is, it's many years later. He spoke with Farraday a number of times since he got out of the hatch and Farraday never mentioned the "find my mother" thing in all that time.


I think another thing people are forgetting is that Daniel and Miles have both stated in separate episodes that time is not a straight line for them anymore-they experiences aren't linear-it's like a ball of string. That's why Daniel speaking to Desmond at the hatch changed things-so that in the future, Desmond was affected. It wasn't as if Desmond had this memory on the Frieghter, or after he was rescued-he had it at a specific moment in time-once Daniel changed things.

If you want to believe things didn't happen like that-OK. But to suggest that this is not how the creators of the show portray this information is disingenuous.

EDIT:

One thing to keep in mind as well, is that as previously stated-Desmond is special. He not only has had his own adventures time traveling-but he appears to be the only person to witness the "white flash" when the time travelers vanish.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

spikedavis said:


> I think another thing people are forgetting is that Daniel and Miles have both stated in separate episodes that time is not a straight line for them anymore-they experiences aren't linear-it's like a ball of string. That's why Daniel speaking to Desmond at the hatch changed things-so that in the future, Desmond was affected. It wasn't as if Desmond had this memory on the Frieghter, or after he was rescued-he had it at a specific moment in time-once Daniel changed things.
> 
> If you want to believe things didn't happen like that-OK. But to suggest that this is not how the creators of the show portray this information is disingenuous.


I agree with you. He had the memory at a specific time, because of something that happened on the island. I was arguing with Rob who apparently thinks that Desmond woke up with that memory at that time by coincidence.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

aindik said:


> I agree with you. He had the memory at a specific time, because of something that happened on the island. I was arguing with Rob who apparently thinks that Desmond woke up with that memory at that time by coincidence.


Oh totally-I just wanted to further illustrate my theory. I agree that this scene can be up for interpretation-and as to if things in the future can be changed-I think-will definitely be addressed this season. But they certainly made it lean in one direction.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

sirfergy said:


> It looked like it was on the left side to me. Were you watching in a mirror?


I thought it was on the right side when Jin rolled him over--no mirrors.

Was that the temple Richard went into? Have we seen it before?

I don't really see why Kate went back. She knew by then that the threat to take Aaron was just Ben, and that his grandmother knew nothing about him. What's she going to do--have Claire sign adoption papers? It's not like leaving him for a weekend; she could be gone for years, and there's no way she'd get him back. Maybe I'm selfish, but I would never have given him up.

I like when Kate says she doesn't like the new Jack, and he says, "You didn't like the old me." The acting on this show is awesome--all of them. The expression on Hurley's face when Miles calls him an idiot. Sawyer telling Kate they wouldn't have worked. And then Ben and Locke.

I wonder why the Others wait so long to get rid of Dharma. I think this is a sign that they aren't really all bad. They put up with them for years, let them send Bunnies traveling in time, they overlook "the incident," and then finally Dharma does something so dangerous that they have to be wiped out.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

stellie93 said:


> I don't really see why Kate went back. She knew by then that the threat to take Aaron was just Ben, and that his grandmother knew nothing about him. What's she going to do--have Claire sign adoption papers? It's not like leaving him for a weekend; she could be gone for years, and there's no way she'd get him back. Maybe I'm selfish, but I would never have given him up.


Seems to me, her intention is to somehow reunite Claire with Aaron. She doesn't want to keep him.



stellie93 said:


> I like when Kate says she doesn't like the new Jack, and he says, "You didn't like the old me."


That was pretty awesome.

Well, we now know why Sun, Kate and Sayid came back. What is Jack "supposed to" do? Why did Hurley come back?

When Juliet says "we didn't need saving," why wouldn't Jack say that Locke told him she did.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

spikedavis said:


> Oh totally-I just wanted to further illustrate my theory. I agree that this scene can be up for interpretation-and as to if things in the future can be changed-I think-will definitely be addressed this season. But they certainly made it lean in one direction.


Additionally I'm of the thought that while you can not truly change the future, as we saw when Desmond tried to save Charlie, the universe kept correcting.

I really think this self-correction will be one of the core principles in Lost time travel as a whole.(I could also be completely wrong..)
Diane


----------



## Fleegle (Jan 15, 2002)

stellie93 said:


> Was that the temple Richard went into? Have we seen it before?


Yep, it was The Temple. We've seen it a couple times before when the Smoke Monster tried to drag Locke into it, but at that time, we had not heard of The Temple, and again this season when the Smoke Monster drug a member of Rousseau's team into it. Then everyone but her went down into the same hole after the guy. This seems to be teh cause of "The Sickness" that she described.

But I think this is teh first time we've seen that door to the Temple.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

dianebrat said:


> Additionally I'm of the thought that while you can not truly change the future, as we saw when Desmond tried to save Charlie, the universe kept correcting.
> 
> I really think this self-correction will be one of the core principles in Lost time travel as a whole.(I could also be completely wrong..)
> Diane


Great point. The SPECIFICS changed-but ultimately the universe caught up.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

aindik said:


> I agree with you. He had the memory at a specific time, because of something that happened on the island. I was arguing with Rob who apparently thinks that Desmond woke up with that memory at that time by coincidence.


Here's my theory on this (and I haven't got it all figured out yet.) Desmond is Daniel's anchor. What that means, we don't know yet. But I think it might mean that the way Daniel and Desmond interact is differently. If one of them becomes unstuck in time, and interracts with the other, it will happen to both of them at different times.

For sake of argument, lets say Daniel and Desmond were born at the same time. Daniel gets unstuck in time at age 30, and meets a ten year old Desmond and tells him something. Desmond will forget it, but the memory will appear to him at age 30, the same age that Daniel was when Daniel interracted with Desmond.

I know it can have holes in it, but I think Desmond being an anchor is very important to that scene.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

spikedavis said:


> Great point. The SPECIFICS changed-but ultimately the universe caught up.


Except nothing actually changed. Desmond had visions, but what he saw hadn't actually happened yet. The only thing that happened is what happened, and that never changed.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

aindik said:


> The difference is, it's many years later. He spoke with Farraday a number of times since he got out of the hatch and Farraday never mentioned the "find my mother" thing in all that time.


THAT Faraday he'd spoken with had not yet knocked on the door and given the warning. It was too early in Faraday's _personal timeline _regardless of the so called year they were in so that earlier Faraday could not tell him.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Fleegle said:


> But I think this is teh first time we've seen that door to the Temple.


We've seen it before, but didn't know it was a door. It just looked like a wall. Heck, it still looked like a wall when Richard pushed his way into it.

Greg


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

philw1776 said:


> THAT Faraday he'd spoken with had not yet knocked on the door and given the warning. It was too early in Faraday's _personal timeline _regardless of the so called year they were in so that earlier Faraday could not tell him.


How much about this stuff does Desmond know?


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

aindik said:


> How much about this stuff does Desmond know?


I haven't a clue. Not much, _I think._ Other more astute and rigorous LOST fans than I will inform us.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

PKurmas said:


> But, of course, Jack wasn't supposed to save him. If he *had*, then the future would have changed, and that's just not allowed!
> 
> I just spent a half hour of quality time drawing the time loop out for my 16 year old daughter. I now find myself asking new questions about Charles & Ellie, and also about Daniel. We know Charles & Ellie still on the island in 1977. When was Daniel born? (Lostpedia doesn't say.) If he was a professor at Cambridge in 1996 he'd have to have been born in the mid-60s, he'd probably be on the island (as would his father...), and he'd be almost an adult. I'm thinking that the Daniel that's a professor at Cambridge is time-looped Daniel (except he'd recognize Desmond in "The Constant", and he didn't seem to). And as for Charles, he's in his 40s in 1977, but Ben takes away everything & he gets tossed off the island at some point... before or after the Purge (we don't know, right?).
> 
> Only 166 more hours 'til the next episode!!!


If Widmore didn't leave the Island until the Purge (approx. 1992), how did he build such a huge empire in such a short period of time?


PKurmas said:


> Of course, I'm more convinced than ever that Ben remembers Juliet, especially after re-watching the podcast from last year. I'm also beginning to think that the producers may have teased Michael Emerson with a tiny bit of extra info... e.g. "You already know Juliet & the Losties, but you can't let them know how. So act really conniving."


Ben always acted like he knew more about what was going on then everyone else. We simply thought it was because he had access to the outside world, but now we find out he had a lot more knowledge than that. I think the scenes in the early seasons are going to hold up very well to this new development.


Fool Me Twice said:


> Yes. They should pass it up and look for a convenience store. He's not dying of thirst. But, really, it's not a big deal. Just something that crossed my mind. They needed a big store to stage the lost Aaron bit, and I'm okay with that.


Why go to a convenience store for anything? I never go to any of those, because almost invariably, everything is more expensive than at a grocery store. I see nothing wrong with Kate taking Aaron to a grocery store.


TAsunder said:


> It actually means, "whatever happened, happened - but we will continue to use cheap writing tricks like amnesia and sudden memory spikes to accommodate this"
> 
> It's funny that you think they know what they've been doing all along, because it seems to me that having to resort to the grade-school amnesia plot device indicates that they hadn't fully planned out the stuff we are seeing now when they were writing Ben's flashback episode from a while back.


I don't get where you're getting amnesia from. Just because Richard said Ben wouldn't remember doesn't mean it will be amnesia. It simply means that by becoming a part of the Others, he'll be changed significantly.


Peter000 said:


> No, Locke was upstairs when Ben went down to turn the donkey wheel, I believe.
> 
> Did Locke tell any of the O6 about the donkey wheel while he was off island? I can't believe he wouldn't have explained it to Jack or Hurley in passing at least. They then could have imparted that information to Miles.


Depends on what you mean by "upstairs." Locke was in the chamber with Ben when Ben put the chair in the time chamber and blew the hole in the wall. Remember, at that time, Locke still thought he was the one to move the Island. It wasn't until Ben started going in the tunnel that Locke realized Ben was going to do it.


Rob Helmerichs said:


> Why does everybody (OK, not everybody; anybody) assume Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory? That makes absolutely no sense. Why would the new memory magically appear years later?
> 
> Faraday knocked on the hatch because, why not? If nothing happened, nothing happened. As it turns out, something happened (that which had always happened), and then we cut to the moment when Desmond remembered that conversation. Nothing mystical about it.


Totally agree with this.


stellie93 said:


> I wonder why the Others wait so long to get rid of Dharma. I think this is a sign that they aren't really all bad. They put up with them for years, let them send Bunnies traveling in time, they overlook "the incident," and then finally Dharma does something so dangerous that they have to be wiped out.


I don't think The Others got rid of Dharma at all. I think Ben did it on his own, for his own selfish reasons.


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That's somebody's interpretation, but I think it's utterly wrong. Again, _it makes no sense_. Why would the new memory emerge at that moment? Where was it for all those years between the time the meeting happened and the time the memory magically appeared in Desmond's mind?
> 
> I know I've had times when I've remembered something that I had completely forgotten. It's a spooky experience.


I agree with this that it makes no sense, but I still haven't figured out which interpretation of the scene is correct. Although, I really hope that the memory did not just magically go to him when it was needed. I think he just happened to remember at that time which has no relation to the time that he was told other than the fact that they were shown in the episode together. Why would the memory come to him at that time?

I don't think the writers had things planned out from the beginning and are making it up as they go along more or less, but I still give them more credit than to have to resort to memories suddenly appearing just because they are needed.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

DavidTigerFan said:


> Yeah that too, but I was thinking revenge because of Sayid shooting him. They basically pointed out the fact that Ben remembers Sayid when Miles said "Oh I hadn't thought of that".
> 
> Besides, what ever happened when Faraday said "Whatever happened, happened" but then proceeded to knock on the hatch and get Desmond to come out? Do we just assume that he _always_ knocked on it? Even though Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory?


but he also said the rules do not apply to desmond, becuase he is miraculously special. or something like that.

I think it has to do with desmond being unstuck in time, or the effects of him turning the key, remember when he could see the future? this is why he is special.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

realityboy said:


> I agree with this that it makes no sense, but I still haven't figured out which interpretation of the scene is correct. Although, I really hope that the memory did not just magically go to him when it was needed. I think he just happened to remember at that time which has no relation to the time that he was told other than the fact that they were shown in the episode together. Why would the memory come to him at that time?
> 
> I don't think the writers had things planned out from the beginning and are making it up as they go along more or less, but I still give them more credit than to have to resort to memories suddenly appearing just because they are needed.


I agree, why the memory showed up at that moment makes no sense at all, even if the "rules" do not apply to him. Why would he not have allways remembered? Unless there is something else controlling what he sees.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

Fleegle said:


> Yep, it was The Temple. We've seen it a couple times before when the Smoke Monster tried to drag Locke into it, but at that time, we had not heard of The Temple, and again this season when the Smoke Monster drug a member of Rousseau's team into it. Then everyone but her went down into the same hole after the guy. This seems to be teh cause of "The Sickness" that she described.
> 
> But I think this is teh first time we've seen that door to the Temple.


Yes, they have made it clear after tonights episode that the Temple somehow changes people. Rousseau called it "The Sickness", but clearly it changes the way they think and act in a specific way.

What is also very interesting is that the smoke monster seems to be pulling people into the temple to change them. It has tried to pull locke into the temple without success. It was trying to do that to change him, instead of just killing him, which it could have easily done.

Also maybe this has to do with "good" people, maybe only good people can hace their "innocence" lost. If they allready have no innocence then maybe they can't be changed?


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Except nothing actually changed. Desmond had visions, but what he saw hadn't actually happened yet. The only thing that happened is what happened, and that never changed.


Yes, well if that is the case, what is the point? Why the urgency in any of this; after all, whatever happened, happened, right?

From Flashes Before Your Eyes in season 3:


> MS. HAWKING: Well, I know your name as well as I know that you that don't ask Penny to marry you. In fact, you break her heart. Well, breaking her heart is, of course, what drives you in a few short years from now to enter that sailing race -- to prove her father wrong -- which brings you to the island where you spend the next 3 years of your life entering numbers into the computer until you are forced to turn that failsafe key. *And if you don't do those things, Desmond David Hume, every single one of us is dead.* So give me that sodding ring.


So what does she mean "if you don't"; he shouldn't have a choice, right?

And, BTW, he bought the ring, which according to Hawking he wasn't supposed to - how would she know what he's "supposed" to do? Visions? So where are these "visions" coming from anyway...


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think he's a nasty, despicable little man with a lust for power and manipulation, and a complete amorality when it comes to getting his way.
> 
> And I think he's putting all that to use in saving the world.


Reminds me of the line that goes, "No one can have a higher opinion of him than me, and I think he's a dirty, rotten, two-timing, backstabbing SOB."


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

latrobe7 said:


> And, BTW, he bought the ring, which according to Hawking he wasn't supposed to - how would she know what he's "supposed" to do? Visions? So where are these "visions" coming from anyway...


But there's a difference between what happened, and what people thought would happen or thought should happen or wanted to happen or had visions of.

There is not, to my knowledge, a documented case in Lost of something happening, and then not happening, or vice versa. Except for the abandoned village, which I think is a symptom of the universe breaking (because of the Incident and the Hatch-Blow and maybe some other things we haven't seen yet).


----------



## Bryanmc (Sep 5, 2000)

whitson77 said:


> I knew young ben wasn't dead.


I think everybody but Sayid knew that.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But there's a difference between what happened, and what people thought would happen or thought should happen or wanted to happen or had visions of.


Well, yeah, that's technically true, things can only ever happen one way; but so what? That doesn't explain much, things happened that way because the events where influenced by people who have knowledge of the future. That makes as much sense as an Escher drawing.

Any change in the past will be perceived as the way things have always happened.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

latrobe7 said:


> Any change in the past will be perceived as the way things have always happened.


But that's not what's being shown on Lost. _There are no changes_.

Except the abandoned village.

And I think people not believing there are no changes is what's stopping them from seeing how important the abandoned village is.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

fin416 said:


> Are we to assume in the 3years he has been there he learned about it from....Faraday maybe?


Clearly, the most obvious answer is that Faraday told everyone what was going on, Orchid- and donkey wheel-wise, up until the point that he ... left. Or was no longer ... there. Locke didn't have a clue what was under the Orchid, only that that was where it all started.

Other thoughts and poor-man's-Jeff musings ... 


I don't think Ben will have "grade school writing amnesia"  - there's no way to know just yet what Richard meant by no memory of this. We don't know diddly about how he gets healed, what's in the Temple, or what he truly remembers afterwards. We'll find out soon enough. Besides, the kid's been through quite a set of shocks - he might not remember much anyway.

But I see what Richard did a little differently. He wasn't just going to heal Ben - he took him, in a sense. I think that's when he decided that Ben should be "schooled" or "trained" (or whatever) to be the next leader. Whatever goes on in the Temple is part of that, I think. Remember, Richard already knows that Ben is the upcoming leader from 1954 Locke.

I liked that now we can talk about the DVD CC of Sawyer without spoilers. Clearly, Kate and Sawyer talked quite a bit about Cassidy. There wasn't any time at all to go over it in the helicopter.

Whatever Ben remembers about the Losties, it isn't evident in the 815 plane crash itself. He doesn't know if there are survivors ("There might actually be survivors! I want lists in 3 days."), and he instructs Mikhail to get information on every single passenger. They got a ton of info from the Flame from the outside world. But the wildcard here is not Ben, but *Richard*. What info Richard collects and finds out is what I would find very interesting.

So Ellie and Widmore were still on the island in 1977, but we just don't know when they left. Widmore had to have left before 1992 and the purge. Not only would we like to know how he built an empire so fast, but how did he go from the hotheaded young kid killing everything around him to sharing the island with Dharma?

Hmm, notice how easy it will be for Aaron to wind up back on the island? He went home with his grandmother! There's a free will lesson with the O6 and the Ajira flight: you can't force the future. They had to choose to be there, even though they HAD to be there (with the possible exception of Sayid, of course).


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

toddvj said:


> Okay, so why was everyone so hellbent on saving young Ben? Would you save Adolph Hitler if he was a child, just because he's "young and innocent?"


Wow I love google + wikipedia... Your post reminded me of this episode, which I confirmed was TZ..

In a similar fashion, an episode of the 2002 Twilight Zone entitled "Cradle of Darkness" features a time traveller (Katherine Heigl) going back in time to kill Hitler as an infant. The time traveller kidnaps the infant Hitler and leaps from a bridge, killing herself and the baby. A horrified housekeeper, who had witnessed the murder, does not tell Hitler's parents but rather bribes a homeless woman to sell her baby. The baby is then returned to the Hitler household where he takes the place of the murdered infant, growing up to become the Hitler that the world knew.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But that's not what's being shown on Lost. _There are no changes_.
> 
> Except the abandoned village.
> 
> And I think people not believing there are no changes is what's stopping them from seeing how important the abandoned village is.


Yeah, I get that - but how would you know if anything changed?

I don't know if you're referring to me in regard to the Dharmaville; but I certainly think it's significant, just not in quite the same way you do...

There's a regular blogger over at DarkUFO whose analysis I enjoy; this week some of it reminded me of the discussion here:


> You've got to ask yourself why the writers would go to such great lengths to explain this in such detail... so much that they'd even name the episode this way. Convincing us that nothing can ever be changed is akin to the island convincing Jack that nothing he really does matters anymore. It's akin to Hawking telling Desmond that his only destiny lies in pushing the button. It's a smokescreen, a curtain - it's just a big fat giant set up. They do this so that when things finally do get changed, or we get verification that things have already been changed, it'll be that much more a dramatic yanking of the rug from beneath our proverbial feet.
> 
> In all the movies and shows I've ever watched, my biggest holy sh*t moment came at the end of the Sixth Sense. I was lucky enough to see that movie without knowing the ending, and I'll never forget the shivers that shot down my spine during the big reveal. Even cooler, they spent the next minute or so going back to show me just how many clues I'd missed along the way - clues that seemed so obvious at the end, but not so obvious as the story was told.
> 
> LOST's ending is going to be exactly this way. There's going to be one big huge crazy no-effing-way reveal, and when it comes it's going to make time travel look like a secondary sub-plot. Half the viewers will act cataclysmically pissed off, but to the other half will think it the most ingenious thing they've ever seen.


link


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Delta13 said:


> So Ellie and Widmore were still on the island in 1977, but we just don't know when they left. Widmore had to have left before 1992 and the purge. Not only would we like to know h*ow he built an empire so fast*, but how did he go from the hotheaded young kid killing everything around him to sharing the island with Dharma?


Having information about the future (i.e., 2004-2007) could sure help acellerate the pace of empire-building.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

latrobe7 said:


> Yeah, I get that - but how would you know if anything changed?


Because we would see a scene one way, and then we would see it another way. That hasn't happened.


latrobe7 said:


> There's a regular blogger over at DarkUFO whose analysis I enjoy; this week some of it reminded me of the discussion here:
> link


That's exactly what I've been saying. What happened, happened. Except for the abandoned village.

I don't think it's a coincidence that they hammer home that what happens, happens, in the episode before they (apparently, judging from the scene at the end of this one) finally--FINALLY--return to the abandoned village.

And next week's episode is titled


Spoiler



Dead Is Dead


 for what it's worth.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Because we would see a scene one way, and then we would see it another way. That hasn't happened.


Not a complete, obvious, redone scene; that would put the issue to rest wouldn't it? No, we have not seen that - but that doesn't mean we won't. There were those picture frames though...



> That's exactly what I've been saying. What happened, happened. Except for the abandoned village.


Yes, you have said that already.


----------



## bettyoops (Apr 22, 2007)

I don't think I'm smeeking, but didn't anyone get the feeling that when Ben regained consciousness and saw John sitting there next to him, that he would have thought that he was in the "land of the dead", since he had already killed John. That's what I thought and I laughed when John welcomed him to the "land of the living".!!

I love the new Jack.... he's kept his old, surly rascally self but still manages to show his softer, more sensitive new caring self.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

bettyoops said:


> I don't think I'm smeeking, but didn't anyone get the feeling that when Ben regained consciousness and saw John sitting there next to him, that he would have thought that he was in the "land of the dead", since he had already killed John. That's what I thought and I laughed when John welcomed him to the "land of the living".!!
> 
> I love the new Jack.... he's kept his old, surly rascally self but still manages to show his softer, more sensitive new caring self.


Not really mentioned so far is that this should put to bed the idea that Ben knew Locke would be resurrected by the island. As well as the idea that Locke couldn't kill himself, so Ben did the dirty deed for him. Nope, we've seen very few things surprise Ben - and he looked like he was going to have a freakin' coronary. I think the "land of the living" crack was really meant for the fans. "Thought the buggering little creep was dead after we didn't show him moving on the cot and Sayid shot him as a kid in the next episode? Ha ha!"

As for Jack well, recovering abusers tend to mellow out. Maybe he's just feeling the 70s Dharma vibe, man.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Delta13 said:


> As for Jack well, recovering abusers tend to mellow out. Maybe he's just feeling the 70s Dharma vibe, man.


I strongly suspect that Horace has some really good stuff.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

JYoung said:


> I strongly suspect that Horace has some really good stuff.


If he does, he got it from Oldham.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> Why go to a convenience store for anything?


The word "convenience" comes to mind. Buying a single serving of milk (can you buy those at grocery stores? I really don't know.) isn't going to put a dent in Kate's settlement money.

Anyway, you've answered my question about WHO goes to grocery store to by a drink. You. So, thanks for that.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

Freckles continues to have one of the most boring stories in the show. The only thing more painful than that in this episode was the forced exchange with Hurley and Miles about time travel. I was glad to see both of those characters given some lines but I felt the writing was rather patronizing and bordered on nonsensical given the issues about "memory spikes" that TAsunder raised earlier in the thread. If Desmond and Farraday have special time properties then spend the time talking about that instead of things we've already figured out.

Freckles' run through the supermarket (nice heels, BTW) certainly showcased what a horrid MPEG2 encoder my local ABC affiliate has. What a mess.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

ElJay said:


> If Desmond and Farraday have special time properties then spend the time talking about that instead of things we've already figured out.


But, we're not the only ones watching.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

latrobe7 said:


> There's a regular blogger over at DarkUFO


Isn't that a spoiler site? I've always avoided that place since I somehow got the idea that it's just spoilers everywhere. Or, if not spoilers "everywhere", then (and almost as bad) spoilers as booby traps--the kind that catch the corner of your eye in another section of the page you're reading, like the comments area or a forum thread link.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Why does everybody (OK, not everybody; anybody) assume Desmond woke up in the present with a new memory? That makes absolutely no sense. Why would the new memory *magically *appear years later?
> 
> Faraday knocked on the hatch because, why not? If nothing happened, nothing happened. As it turns out, something happened (that which had always happened), and then we cut to the moment when Desmond remembered that conversation. Nothing *mystical *about it.


Why must it necessarily be magical if you (or whoever) can't imagine why Desmond received (developed?) a new memory at that point. The writers just have to come up with a reason for those two points in time to be synched in Desmond's head. They could explain it by way of his former flashes and the idea of Desmond as Faraday's constant.

Philosophy touched on the idea above. It's the same basic working idea I've had for a while now. They could make it work. I don't think we can dismiss it as a theory yet.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Philosofy said:


> 26 minutes in, and I swear I'm watching Hurley and Miles reading this forum aloud.


My wife had to stop the show to ask why I found that conversation so hilarious.



PKurmas said:


> Richard said he wouldn't remember any of this... so he must forget that Sayid shot him. Convenient explanation, I think, for the gap in Ben's memory.


I can't decide if _that_ is a "we planned it all along" or not. Feels more like an "oops, we missed something... quick, explain it" to me. Particularly considering...



GDG76 said:


> I still don't know why they had to use amnesia. It's perfectly within Ben's character to not show all his cards so I wouldn't have expected him to tell the 815ers he already knew them. They wouldn't have believed him anyway and Ben is smart so he wouldn't have said anything.


...this. :up:



Fool Me Twice said:


> Yes. They should pass it up and look for a convenience store. He's not dying of thirst.


If a supermarket happens to be the first place to see, why not use a supermarket? The prices will be a lot cheaper too. I wouldn't go out of the way to find one but if the first spot I saw was a supermarket, sure, no reason not to.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Philosofy said:


> Here's my theory on this (and I haven't got it all figured out yet.) Desmond is Daniel's anchor. What that means, we don't know yet. But I think it might mean that the way Daniel and Desmond interact is differently. If one of them becomes unstuck in time, and interracts with the other, it will happen to both of them at different times.
> 
> For sake of argument, lets say Daniel and Desmond were born at the same time. Daniel gets unstuck in time at age 30, and meets a ten year old Desmond and tells him something. Desmond will forget it, but the memory will appear to him at age 30, the same age that Daniel was when Daniel interracted with Desmond.
> 
> I know it can have holes in it, but I think Desmond being an anchor is very important to that scene.


Like Fool Me Twice, I initially agreed with this line of thinking. Upon further refelction, however, you're forgetting that Desmond was off the island for three years when he rememberd the encounter with Faraday. For Faraday, that encounter occurred within a couple of days, biologically, of Desmond leaving the island. Under your theory, Desmond should have received the new memory sooner. 


DevdogAZ said:


> If Widmore didn't leave the Island until the Purge (approx. 1992), how did he build such a huge empire in such a short period of time?
> 
> Ben always acted like he knew more about what was going on then everyone else. We simply thought it was because he had access to the outside world, but now we find out he had a lot more knowledge than that. I think the scenes in the early seasons are going to hold up very well to this new development.


I think you answered your initial question with your follow-up observation. He got rich the Biff Tannen way. Maybe at some point, Widmore will get alot of information about the future from the Losties.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> There is not, to my knowledge, a documented case in Lost of something happening, and then not happening, or vice versa. *Except for *the abandoned village, which I think is a symptom of the universe breaking (because of the Incident and the Hatch-Blow and maybe some other things we haven't seen yet).


You sort of undermine your first sentence with the first two words of the next sentence. That you have a theory as to *why* the village has changed is all well and good (and I'm tempted to even agree), but until we know for certain, it appears to be a case of something happening that didn't previously happen. I think you're being a little too dismissive of those who think that Desmond woke up with a new memory. Whether it makes sense based on what we've been told thus far or not, the scene certainly played in such a way that it was fair to interpret that Desmond woke up with a new memory. I tend to agree with you that the memory was already there, but, as I'm not a huge fan of such an incredible coincidence, I'm holding out hope that they provide an acceptable explanation as to why Desmond could have obtained a new memory at that time.



Delta13 said:


> [*]Whatever Ben remembers about the Losties, it isn't evident in the 815 plane crash itself. He doesn't know if there are survivors ("There might actually be survivors! I want lists in 3 days."), and he instructs Mikhail to get information on every single passenger. They got a ton of info from the Flame from the outside world. But the wildcard here is not Ben, but *Richard*. What info Richard collects and finds out is what I would find very interesting.[/LIST]


That scene, from the opening of season 3, has been on my mind as well. I'm not convinced it means that Ben was totally taken by surprise by the plane crash. He might have been putting on a show of it for the benefit of everyone else. As has been pointed out numerous times, Ben's knowledge of the 815 survivors could have just as easily been from his past experiences as from information gathered from the Flame. If nothing else, he was certainly prepared with his orders.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Hunter Green said:


> If a supermarket happens to be the first place to see, why not use a supermarket? The prices will be a lot cheaper too. I wouldn't go out of the way to find one but if the first spot I saw was a supermarket, sure, no reason not to.


I guess it's just me then. Oh, well. Already too many posts on that one little comment. I'm willing to accept that you're all wrong.


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Isn't that a spoiler site? I've always avoided that place since I somehow got the idea that it's just spoilers everywhere. Or, if not spoilers "everywhere", then (and almost as bad) spoilers as booby traps--the kind that catch the corner of your eye in another section of the page you're reading, like the comments area or a forum thread link.


If you're what I call "spoiler-sensitive", I would not advise going there. But IMO, the front page is pretty spoiler-safe. The spoilers are kept where they belong under the "spoilers" tab; and for the big spoilers they have "Are you sure?" buttons you have to click before you can read anything.

I don't read the comments there because of the "booby-trap" or "gotcha" spoiler-dorks. So far, I've never been spoiled without my consent.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Fool Me Twice said:


> I guess it's just me then. Oh, well. Already too many posts on that one little comment. I'm willing to accept that you're all wrong.


Actually, with a kid already strapped in the car seat, I'd probably go through a McDonald's drive-through. Of course, doing that would have made it difficult for Kate to almost lose Aaron.

The question is: was the woman who found Aaron _really _about to take him to customer service? I didn't trust her any more than Kate did.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

3D said:


> I tend to agree with you that the memory was already there, but, as I'm not a huge fan of such an incredible coincidence, I'm holding out hope that they provide an acceptable explanation as to why Desmond could have obtained a new memory at that time.


But there's no coincidence. In fact, it's the opposite of coincidence. The two scenes happened years apart. Of course they showed the two scenes side by side. But that's only because after they showed Desmond and Faraday meeting, they then showed the moment (years later) when Desmond finally remembered the meeting, and remembered what it was that he was supposed to do. That's a thematic connection, not a direct cause-and-effect connection.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But there's no coincidence. In fact, it's the opposite of coincidence. The two scenes happened years apart. Of course they showed the two scenes side by side. But that's only because after they showed Desmond and Faraday meeting, they then showed the moment (years later) when Desmond finally remembered the meeting, and remembered what it was that he was supposed to do. That's a thematic connection, not a direct cause-and-effect connection.


I guess the coincidence I was talking about was that the memory happened at just such a time that it led Desmond to be in Los Angeles at the exact time as everyone else. Amusingly enough, however, as of right now, nothing has actually come of Desmond making that journey at that particular time (although I suspect that when we see how Ben got so bloody, we'll see the repurcusions, for Penny, of Desmond remembering that golden nugget when he did).

Maybe "incredible coincidence" was not the best choice of words. Put simply, in spite of the general suspension of disbelief inherent in being able to enjoy a show of this nature, I have a hard time believing that Desmond, having been in complete isolation for a long period of time, wouldn't have remembered one of his only encounters in several years with another being as soon as he saw that person again, as opposed to three years later. At the very least, he should have remembered it when, in the Constant, his consciousness travelled back in time and he saw Faraday at Cambridge, which is specifically where Faraday told him to go to find his mother.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Anyone else notice Ben's twitching finger just before he regained consciousness at the end of the episode. I'd noticed it on first viewing, but had forgotten about it. I just cued up that scene and noticed it again. Ben has his index finger extended. Most of his hand is off screen, but you can see his finger twitching--flicking is maybe a better word. Discarding a booger? An insignificant acting choice? Or could it be a significant bit of action? (I'm still toying with the idea of Little Ben transferring in.)


----------



## hapdrastic (Mar 31, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But that's not what's being shown on Lost. _There are no changes_.
> 
> Except the abandoned village.
> 
> And I think people not believing there are no changes is what's stopping them from seeing how important the abandoned village is.


See...my whole take on the abandoned village is...that it's not different. It was significant enough to me to take note of it looking "different" for me to even give it a second thought. It's been three years since anyone lived there...they're in a jungle - things rot fast in a jungle. Also, it was night, so we barely saw any of it clearly. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a complete non-issue and people are blowing it way out of proportion. I feel the same way about "the numbers" being heard as they were crashing - I didn't even hear them, so they don't seem significant.

That said, I could be wrong, I just think people have a tendency to "reach" when observing this show. And, I do sometimes dismiss relevant facts as trivial - the four-toed statue never seemed like a big deal to me, either (that is, the fact there was a statue was interesting, just not the four-toes part).

Guess we'll see once we're back in that timeline.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

hapdrastic said:


> Guess we'll see once we're back in that timeline.


I guess.

To me, they were as obvious as they possibly could have been that this was the old Dharma village, abandoned and never moved into by the Others, without having freaking subtitles on the screen explaining it. They showed the old Dharma village in the very same episode, with all the old Dharma trappings, which were not present when the Others lived there, then showed the abandoned village with the same trappings. I don't think they were trying to be subtle or tricky; I think they thought it was blatantly obvious. This is probably one of those times when they're reading the internet postings, whacking themselves on the forehead, and saying "What the hell else could we have done to make it even MORE obvious?!?"

To me, this discussion has become similar to the "Did Sun sleep with her tutor?" discussion...a meaningless and needless sidetrack.


----------



## 3D (Oct 9, 2001)

I've thought since the episode when they showed it that the run down Dharma village was significant. I've also thought, however, that the runway that Lapidus used to land the plane was the one being worked on by the Others when Sawyer and Kate were engaged in forced labor. I'm thinking that I'm likely wrong about one of these assumptions.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Hunter Green said:


> I can't decide if _that_ is a "we planned it all along" or not. Feels more like an "oops, we missed something... quick, explain it" to me. Particularly considering...





Spoiler



Considering that when the initial Ben as Henry Gale storyline was brought in, they had not yet decided that he was going to stay on until they end, I can see that the later decision meant they would have to retcon it. 
But I will give them this much, it's one of the best retcons I've seen.


I think when it's all said and done, they'll come out and tell us what had to be retconned as they went, much like JMS did on B5. I give him a lot of credit in explaining what was planned, and what needed to be tweaked, and I suspect Lost will be the same.

Diane


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

I haven't watched any of the DVD's, just live (TiVo'd) TV. Do they explain plot points in the commentary? I'd love to see a boxed set with the pop up lost and commentaries on Blu Ray.


----------



## bottomsup (Mar 3, 2006)

mqpickles said:


> Actually, with a kid already strapped in the car seat, I'd probably go through a McDonald's drive-through. Of course, doing that would have made it difficult for Kate to almost lose Aaron.
> 
> The question is: was the woman who found Aaron _really _about to take him to customer service? I didn't trust her any more than Kate did.


You know, the mom in me was having a a fit a couple of weeks ago, because Aaron is what, just a little over 3? And there was a scene where Kate just put him right into a seatbelt; no booster, no carseat, no high backed booster. I was pleased to see baby Aaron in a car seat last night.

But I think Kate just reacted to the woman the way she did, because from the back, she looked like she could have been Claire, feeding into her feelings that someone who had a right to Aaron would eventually come take him away, anyway.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

Fool Me Twice said:


> But, we're not the only ones watching.


I hope this show isn't thinking it can build its audience at this point in the game...


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ElJay said:


> I hope this show isn't thinking it can build its audience at this point in the game...


What does that have to do with anything? There are probably a few hundred thousand fans of LOST who follow it as closely as we do here on this forum. There are several million fans who watch the show on a weekly basis, but don't delve into the deeper mysteries. That conversation between Miles and Hurley was perfect for 90% of the people watching this show. Just because a few of us felt like it was a little too elementary doesn't mean that most viewers didn't appreciate/need it.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

ElJay said:


> I hope this show isn't thinking it can build its audience at this point in the game...


No, but they certainly want to retain as much as they can.


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> What does that have to do with anything? There are probably a few hundred thousand fans of LOST who follow it as closely as we do here on this forum. There are several million fans who watch the show on a weekly basis, but don't delve into the deeper mysteries. That conversation between Miles and Hurley was perfect for 90% of the people watching this show. Just because a few of us felt like it was a little too elementary doesn't mean that most viewers didn't appreciate/need it.


sheesh, i read these threads every week, and that conversation helped me.

besides, there are so many theories abound, and they go so in depth... i don't spend the time reading these posts about time travel and memories, when it's all conjecture until it's revealed on the show. so i miss some stuff on this thread.

besides, isn't the miles/hurley conversation clarification on the rules? i didn't think they were explained very clearly by faraday. IOW, there was alot left too interpretation (evidenced by the countless lost thread pages), and miles helped clarify some of it... at least that's how it helped me.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> What does that have to do with anything? There are probably a few hundred thousand fans of LOST who follow it as closely as we do here on this forum. There are several million fans who watch the show on a weekly basis, but don't delve into the deeper mysteries. That conversation between Miles and Hurley was perfect for 90% of the people watching this show. Just because a few of us felt like it was a little too elementary doesn't mean that most viewers didn't appreciate/need it.


Well said. Also, even among the hardcore viewers, I think a lot of us enjoyed the Miles/Hurley scenes. I certainly did. It played to me as entertaining, not patronizing. YMMV (and by Y I mean Eljay, not Devdog).


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

This week's video podcast has the actors who play Miles and Hurley, discussing the issues "for real" during moments between takes while they were filming that discussion scene. Funny and interesting stuff. (And no spoilers, since it's just the actors speculating like we do).


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

aindik said:


> Well, we now know why Sun, Kate and Sayid came back.


Has Sun done something important? Other than whack Ben over the head?



spikedavis said:


> Great point. The SPECIFICS changed-but ultimately the universe caught up.


If Charlie had died sooner, then he wouldn't have turned off the signal that allowed the freighter to find them, and that would involve a huge course correction. He must have always died like he did.



DevdogAZ said:


> Ben always acted like he knew more about what was going on then everyone else. We simply thought it was because he had access to the outside world, but now we find out he had a lot more knowledge than that. I think the scenes in the early seasons are going to hold up very well to this new development.
> 
> I don't think The Others got rid of Dharma at all. I think Ben did it on his own, for his own selfish reasons.


The Others all came in in gas masks and helped with the clean-up. You don't think they were in on the planning? Ben was up on the hill with his father at the time.

We don't know yet how much contact Ben as a boy will have with the O6. He knows Sawyer, but not his real name, and Jin. So he reads over the manifest from 815 after it crashes and sees 1 or 2 familiar names? I wonder when he realizes who they are and what's going on? Then there's Juliet. No wonder he wouldn't let her leave the island, and went to such lengths to get her there. Whether or not he had a crush on her as a kid, he knows she will time travel. At least I'm assuming by the time the O6 return to the present (if they do) everyone will know where they came from.



latrobe7 said:


> And, BTW, he bought the ring, which according to Hawking he wasn't supposed to - how would she know what he's "supposed" to do? Visions? So where are these "visions" coming from anyway...


Maybe she's time traveling from the present and knows what he did (should do to avoid screwing everything up). So she went back to babysit him and make sure he stays on the right path, because Desmond is special because of turning the key, and no one has ever been in this situation before. He may be the only one who can really do something different.



mqpickles said:


> Having information about the future (i.e., 2004-2007) could sure help acellerate the pace of empire-building.


Do we have any reason to think Widmore has time traveled? I can't see Jack or Locke giving him stock tips in 1977.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

stellie93 said:


> Has Sun done something important? Other than whack Ben over the head?


I meant, we know why she decided to come back. Because Jin is there.


----------



## Sromkie (Aug 15, 2002)

aindik said:


> I agree with you. He had the memory at a specific time, because of something that happened on the island. I was arguing with Rob who apparently thinks that Desmond woke up with that memory at that time by coincidence.


No matter when they show Desmond "recalling" the memory, you could say the same thing. The only way they could make it clear it was not a newly inserted memory would be for them to have followed his life from the moment he was told... all the way until he recalled the information again. They clearly don't have the time to do that. They couldn't have had him say, "oh, yeah, I always remembered this, but I was just putting it off, because that wouldn't work for the story-since they needed to get him to Eloise at the same time as the O6. I think it's more likely that he had a dream that helped him recall the memory at that moment, rather than the memory just being inserted.

If it was just inserted at that moment, then that assumes that the two points in time were running simultaneously. And, well, if we take it as "their time was just like a ball of string with many points overlapping with many others, then he would have had the memory inserted at many times.

I side with Rob on this one. I think it's the most logical possibility. Of course, they could have avoided all of this confusion by just inserting one additional, unrelated, scene between the other two.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Sromkie said:


> No matte when they show Desmond "recalling" the memory, you could say the same thing. The only way they could make it clear it was not a newly inserted memory would be for them to have followed his life from the moment he was told... all the way until he recalled the information again. They clearly don't have the time to do that. They couldn't have had him say, "oh, yeah, I always remembered this, but I was just putting it off, because that wouldn't work for the storysince they needed to get him to Eloise at the same time as the O6. I think it's more likely that he had a dream that helped him recall the memory at that moment, rather than the memory just being inserted.
> 
> If it was just inserted at that moment, then that assumes that the two points in time were running simultaneously. And, well, if we take it as "their time was just like a ball of string with many points overlapping with many others, then he would have had the memory inserted at many times.
> 
> I side with Rob on this one. I think it's the most logical possibility. Of course, they could have avoided all of this confusion by just inserting one additional, unrelated, scene between the other two.


To throw out a possibility that falls somewhere between changing the past and pure coincidence: Perhaps when Daniel (in Daniel's present) tells Des (in Des's past) to find his mom, it jogs Des's memory (in Des's present) of a conversation that was years ago to Des, because Des is Daniel's constant.

In other words, because of that constant relationship, a conversation with Daniel can enter (or in this case re-enter) Des's consciousness at times other than when it's actually happening from Daniel's standpoint.

I think it fits well with the choice of the word "constant."

(This is similar to what Philosophy said earlier, although he used the word "anchor," but I don't think it's quite the same thing, so I am preemptively denying any smeeking.)


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

Suppose Daniel did change events by talking to Desmond. Even in that case, Desmond still would have needed to have forgotten about Daniel talking to him because otherwise the Desmond in the new timeline would have acted differently. So Desmond's memory doesn't really say anything about whether or not events were changed.

This is why the idea of "inserted memories" doesn't make any sense. If the Desmond we saw remembering the event was in the original timeline, then by definition Daniel did not change anything. On the other hand, if the Desmond we saw remembering the event was in an alternate timeline, then that means the memories would have been with him since the time Daniel talked to him, even if he had forgotten about them.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

BitbyBlit said:


> Suppose Daniel did change events by talking to Desmond. Even in that case, Desmond still would have needed to have forgotten about Daniel talking to him because otherwise the Desmond in the new timeline would have acted differently. So Desmond's memory doesn't really say anything about whether or not events were changed.


But according to this theory, the Desmond in the new timeline DID act differently. Just later than he would have had he remembered earlier. So if there was some time-correcting force stopping him from remembering earlier, then it would have just kept on stopping him, since if whatever happened, didn't happen, then time would be altered anyway. And as far as time is concerned, what difference does it make if time is altered now or a year ago, or two years ago, or three years ago?


BitbyBlit said:


> On the other hand, if the Desmond we saw remembering the event was in an alternate timeline, then that means the memories would have been with him since the time Daniel talked to him, even if he had forgotten about them.


But others are arguing that the memories only appeared in his brain when he remembered them; that in the intervening years they weren't there.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

In the scene where Kate loses Aaron in the grocery store and finally finds him, seeing him supposedly leaving with a woman, did anyone else think that the woman looked like Claire from behind? I saw this momentary mistaken identity as helping to give Kate the notion that she neded to go back to the island and find the boy's mother.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But according to this theory, the Desmond in the new timeline DID act differently. Just later than he would have had he remembered earlier.


Right, but my point was that we have no way of distinguishing between Desmond not remembering certain events because he forgot them and Desmond not remembering certain events because he didn't experience them.

In the timeline where Desmond eventually remembers talking to Daniel, we know for a fact that he forgot about it. What we don't know is whether or not there was a different timeline in which Desmond never did talk to Daniel. Desmond's memory loss doesn't give us any information about that, however, since that occurred in the timeline that we know for sure exists.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> And as far as time is concerned, what difference does it make if time is altered now or a year ago, or two years ago, or three years ago?


I'm not sure exactly what you are saying here. From Desmond's point-of-view, it doesn't matter when in Daniel's timeline that Daniel talked to him. But it does matter when in his own timeline that the event occurred, which was while he was still in the hatch. If time did change, it would have changed then for Desmond.


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

BitbyBlit said:


> Right, but my point was that we have no way of distinguishing between Desmond not remembering certain events because he forgot them and Desmond not remembering certain events because he didn't experience them.


I think people are hung up because it seems like in one scene, Daniel tells Desmond to do something and the next scene he remembers, but in reality (well, tv reality), those scenes were separated by years of time. Of course they have to show us that particular point in Desmonds life, remembering the event. It would be pretty boring to show us other points in the years when he wasn't doing something relevant to the plotline.

He remembered at just that point in time because he was supposed to -- to make all the timing work out to get the O6 back to the island.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

mqpickles said:


> The question is: was the woman who found Aaron _really _about to take him to customer service? I didn't trust her any more than Kate did.


I thought it was Claire that had him by the hand until she turned around.

I can't remember now...did the woman have an Aussie accent? If so, I have a theory.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

philw1776 said:


> In the scene where Kate loses Aaron in the grocery store and finally finds him, seeing him supposedly leaving with a woman, did anyone else think that the woman looked like Claire from behind? I saw this momentary mistaken identity as helping to give Kate the notion that she neded to go back to the island and find the boy's mother.


Ack...I just smeeked your post. Should have read a few posts farther.

I too thought it was Claire at first.

Could it have been future/older Claire?


----------



## Ladd Morse (Feb 21, 2002)

Jstkiddn said:


> Could it have been future/older Claire?


The woman certainly looked a bit like Claire. If it was a future/older Claire, she certainly had been ridden hard and put away wet, as they say in the horse business.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Jstkiddn said:


> I thought it was Claire that had him by the hand until she turned around.
> 
> I can't remember now...did the woman have an Aussie accent? If so, I have a theory.


I don't think she had an Australian accent.

I agree now it was supposed to make us think Claire. But for whatever reason, I didn't think that at all at the time.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

mqpickles said:


> I agree now it was supposed to make us think Claire. But for whatever reason, I didn't think that at all at the time.


I was thinking Claire's mother.

Or would that be CLAY-yuh's muth-thuh?


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Or would that be CLAY-yuh's muth-thuh?


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Fool Me Twice said:


> 50 posts and no JKeegan. I believe he is now legally deceased. Who has a claim on his theories? Anyone? Anyone?


Bahahaha!  I feel so appreciated!

I had an insanely busy week at work. Tuesday I stayed all night, at 7am went out to my car to sleep for 4 hours, stayed at work Wed until around 9, watched Lost delayed by an hour or so, fell asleep almost immediately after, then on Thursday I worked until 3:30am.

It was all worth it though.. Friday I gave a big demo of our new 3-floor mezzanine, with mobile robots riding a 3-floor vrc (elevator) on their own to pick up the shelves of products that they needed, which they took back down to the first floor for picking.

Missed out on Thursday night COD4 too.

Posting from page 2 of the thread so noone calls an ambulance or anything.  I'm probably catch up next Wednesday.

Great episode. Don't wanna smeek too much, so I'll hold off most of my comments until I catch up.

..Jeff (still in the past.. Wasn't on the right heading. Typing this on my Apple II with an Execute button)


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Ladd Morse said:


> The woman certainly looked a bit like Claire. If it was a future/older Claire, she certainly had been ridden hard and put away wet, as they say in the horse business.


Hey, YOU try spending a few years in Jacob's cabin. Everyone's old in there, it ain't no Fountain of Youth. 

Besides, it couldn't have been Claire. She would've said, "You lost your BAY-bee. Don't ever lose your BAY-bee."


----------



## rhuntington3 (May 1, 2001)

I'd have to agree with Bryan and the DreadPirateRob. Excellent episode! I love this season!


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

philw1776 said:


> In the scene where Kate loses Aaron in the grocery store and finally finds him, seeing him supposedly leaving with a woman, did anyone else think that the woman looked like Claire from behind?


Not just from behind either. I don't know if it was deliberate, but she certainly looked a lot like Claire.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

Here's a thought: what was Jacob now seems to be Christian. Is that a seat that rotates, like being leader of the others/hostiles?

EDIT: here's a weird idea. The Island is a manifestation of God. Jacob/Christian is the Holy Spirit, Richard Alpert is the Father, and Locke/Ben/Widmore have all had turns at being the Son.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Philosofy said:


> Here's a thought: what was Jacob now seems to be Christian. Is that a seat that rotates, like being leader of the others/hostiles?


I don't think it's Christian. I think it's Jacob, manifesting itself in the form of Christian at this particular moment.


----------



## tgrim1 (Sep 11, 2006)

MickeS said:


> Not just from behind either. I don't know if it was deliberate, but she certainly looked a lot like Claire.


My initial thought when this went down was that this woman was trying to take him, and I thought she reminded me of the butcher lady.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't think it's Christian. I think it's Jacob, manifesting itself in the form of Christian at this particular moment.


Sure is possible. 2 things that make you wonder though - if Jacob can do all this stuff as Christian, why did he have to say "Help me" to Locke awhile back; and why tell Locke after he fixed/turned the wheel to "Say hello to my son".

Now that I think about it, Jacob had a problem with so much as a flashlight. Christian turned on a light in the "abandoned village" shack. Hmm.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

The main thing that makes me think Christian isn't jacob is christian said he isn't Jacob.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Oh, and jkeegan, welcome to the land of the living.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Faraday had his brain fried sometime in the past. He needed a caretaker. He didn't know why he was crying when he saw the 815 footage.

Years later, Sawyer said Faraday was "no longer with" them. It's been speculated that he meant that Faraday had lost his mind. 

So, are these two events are linked? Was Dharma Faraday trying to influence his past self in the future?


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

http://forum.lostpedia.com/wednesday-thread-fun-lost-pics-t31976.html


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Here's one for you then about Faraday: what if the Faraday we saw crying at the 815 footage isn't the same Faraday time-wise who landed on the island?

Oh, and as for the picture - from statue to statuesque


----------



## rrrobinsonjr (Nov 26, 2004)

I have to say that this has been one of my favorite seasons. I eat the time travel stuff up with a giant spoon...Always have.

I specifically wanted to mention that I literally applauded this week.

When Hurley held his hand up to examine it, I paused the TiVo and started clapping. I turned to my girlfriend, laughed and said, "He is going to make a Back to the Future reference".

Unpause.....BAM!

I laughed again.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Ok, caught up.

Five things I thought while reading through this week's thread:

1) "His innocence will be gone".. I take this as a statement that Ben's about to have to learn something profound that regular Dharma people don't know.. Basically the image that comes to mind is Neo finding out about the Matrix after taking the pill. I wouldn't be that surprised if it was almost literally something like that, in fact, where he finds out this is all a game, or a simulation, or an artificial world, etc. His naive, child-like innocence, will be gone, and he'll forever be one of the people who "knows".

2) When Kate asks Jack what he's doing, and why he's letting Ben die, she says "This is OUR fault. We brought Sayid back - we caused this!". Did we just find out that Kate and Jack told the bounty hunter about Sayid, instead of Ben? If it was Ben, would Kate really say "We brought Sayid back"?

3) To repeat my opinion from many episodes ago(the season opener), I think that when Daniel was telling Desmond to get his mother, and when he said "You're the only person who can help us, because Desmond, the rules, the rules don't apply to you. You're uniquely, and miraculously special.", he was talking about Desmond's mind-time-jump-within-your-own-body, "Slaughterhouse Five"-like jumping (and the memory problems they caused). Desmond on the boat didn't even remember who Sayid was.. Later Desmond from the boat couldn't remember details for the lady at Oxford about when he'd visited Daniel there. At the VERY least, Desmond's memory gets cloudy sometimes, so that'd be enough of a reason to bother trying to get him to help them (because maybe he might forget it now but remember it someday). But far more interesting, is the idea that maybe the Desmond in the hatch there WAS future Desmond. Maybe future Desmond still jumps around in time (not the visions, but the actual mind time jumping, like when he was in the helicopter), and future Desmond from 2007 on the boat with Penny jumped back to inside the hatch.. He took it as just a dream (I imagine he'd have quite a few nightmares about being back in the hatch), but it was actually a jump, and when he jumped back he assumed he'd woken up. Since it was a future Desmond in the hatch then, the Desmond 10 minutes later in the hatch wouldn't remember any of that, because it was future Desmond that experienced that conversation, not pre-2004 Desmond.

It's worth noting to that before Daniel pounded on the door, he ran off to read his notebook, read something that we specifically didn't see, then went to talk to Desmond. If what he'd read was "If anything goes wrong, Desmond will be MY constant" as many of us were guessing, why wouldn't they show us that text? Maybe we'll see something more interesting there.

Oh, and as an aside, I don't know where all of these theories of "he has a special relationship with his constant and they can communicate" or "things happen in sync with each other" came from.. When Daniel first told him the idea of a constant (to let his mind figure out which was the past and which was the present), he didn't even originally intend it to be a person.. He'd said something like 'something in both times that you care about'.. it was Desmond who asked if it could be a person, and Daniel said yes but he'd have to make contact with them (presumably so the brain could tell from the conversation if this was an older or younger version of Penny, so he could keep stable which was the past and present). There's nothing special about them - just that you could tell from observing them in both times which was which, newer or older.

4) Here's one that's really been rattling in my brain. Remember the conversations we'd had early in the season (after the season opener) about whether it was the people moving in the flashes or it was the island?

I'd suggested that the island is moving forward and backward in time, such that you're seeing an earlier version of the island beneath your feet, or a later version, but you were relatively stationary in time (well, moving forward at 1 second per second, like we all are). When you're standing in 70s Dharmaville, it's really still you here in 2007, but you're on a 1970 version of the island. The island is actually shifting, though, so someone leaving the island to go back to the real world could still come out in the past in the rest of the world..

Well, suppose that were true for a moment.. The island moves through time, takes natives and "stuck" people with it, and shifts around relative to the rest of the world. What if Desmond's mind jumping (going from the helicopter in 2005 to the army in 19whateveritwas) is actually Desmond's consciousness floating between two physical versions of Desmond on the earth - one in the army in 1984, and one somewhere in the south pacific in 1984 (but the island he's on is shifted back so its actually a 2005 version of the guy). Instead of his consciousness jumping around in time, it's jumping from Desmond to Desmond (as if you had two ethernet cards with the same MAC address on the same LAN - which one would receive packets destined for that unique address?). Still one timeline, just with a shift of the island back and forward in time.

Things that might explain:
A) Daniel talks to the in-the-hatch version of Desmond, but a flash happens to move the island around in time, so Desmond's consciousness jumps again (right then). This would explain why a Desmond-mind-time-jump would end exactly when the white light happened (otherwise it'd be a coincidence that he'd jump just as Daniel appeared to jump). That would have worked out fantastically if Desmond remembered it in 2005 instead of 2007.
B) Maybe Daniel (who also has been exposed to radiation - no lead suit for his head) had something sad/severe happen during a flash (oh, say, the death of Charlotte), and almost instantaneously mind-time-jumped to the off-island-time version of himself, which let's say was sitting at home watching on TV as they announced 815.. He'd have been very sad just for a second, crying, heart rate up, etc, then suddenly went back to his current self, not knowing why he was sad.

5) When Richard says "He will always be one of us", maybe he means that the actual mind of kid Ben is going to be replaced with a consciousness/soul/reincarnation/essence of one of the Others, and that this body won't be Ben anymore - he'll be one of us.. (like, the one of us currently on deck waiting for the next non-flawed body they're gonna kidnap for it).

Oh, and one more thing. To all of the theories that Richard in the temple will use time-something to fix Ben, let's not forget that Richard looked genuinely surprised/skeptical about the mere idea of time travel with Locke showed up in the 50s.. It's not like he's known about that for millenia or anything.. Richard even seemed surprised and intrigued when Sawyer told him about the future.

Ok, posting.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> 3) To repeat my opinion from many episodes ago(the season opener), I think that when Daniel was telling Desmond to get his mother, and when he said "You're the only person who can help us, because Desmond, the rules, the rules don't apply to you. You're uniquely, and miraculously special.", he was talking about Desmond's mind-time-jump-within-your-own-body, "Slaughterhouse Five"-like jumping (and the memory problems they caused). Desmond on the boat didn't even remember who Sayid was.. [Because 1996 Desmond hadn't met Sayid yet. Remember, it was a consciousness switch, not just a jump of one consciousness back and forth, so 1996 Desmond was on the Boat with Sayid] Later Desmond from the boat couldn't remember details for the lady at Oxford about when he'd visited Daniel there [Because he hadn't visited him yet. This was an example of Desmond being "special" and changing the past. Also, when 1996 Desmond switches back to his correct time, he won't have a memory of meeting him either--the only thing his past self will remember is a very vivid nightmare about being held captive on a boat.] At the VERY least, Desmond's memory gets cloudy sometimes, so that'd be enough of a reason to bother trying to get him to help them (because maybe he might forget it now but remember it someday).
> 
> But far more interesting, is the idea that maybe the Desmond in the hatch there WAS future Desmond. [You know, I like this idea. In fact I've considered and dropped this idea more than once because it seemed like it would require some sort of external intelligence to control when his consciousness jumped to. Also, Desmond had to go through all that trouble of finding a "constant" when he was jumping before, and it caused him some serious trouble, and we've seen nothing to suggest he went through that whole nose-bleeding ordeal again. But your number 4 below might hold the kernel of a workable idea.] Maybe future Desmond still jumps around in time (not the visions, but the actual mind time jumping, like when he was in the helicopter), and future Desmond from 2007 on the boat with Penny jumped back to inside the hatch.. He took it as just a dream (I imagine he'd have quite a few nightmares about being back in the hatch), but it was actually a jump, and when he jumped back he assumed he'd woken up. Since it was a future Desmond in the hatch then, the Desmond 10 minutes later in the hatch wouldn't remember any of that, because it was future Desmond that experienced that conversation, not pre-2004 Desmond.
> 
> ...


What WAS Daniel looking at in his notebook before he talked to Hatch Desmond? If it was a jump-timing table or something else technical will it be something we can understand? Or will it remain vague and esoteric--only understandable by those special few within the story's high-priesthood, like the Pendulum and map in the Lampost--more suggestive than explanatory? Is there a logical explanation for the events we have seen, based on rules the writers have created?


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

As an aside, all apostles (and apostates for that matter) of the Faraday Postulate should, if they haven't yet, watch the movie _Timecrimes_.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Never heard of it. The first half of the trailer was good enough for me... Acquiring...


----------



## rrrobinsonjr (Nov 26, 2004)

Hunter Green said:


> As an aside, all apostles (and apostates for that matter) of the Faraday Postulate should, if they haven't yet, watch the movie _Timecrimes_.


Top of my Netflix Queue!!


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

Refresh my memory: how did Daniel know Desmond was in the hatch?


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

jkeegan said:


> But far more interesting, is the idea that maybe the Desmond in the hatch there WAS future Desmond.


But the Desmond that Daniel talked to didn't recognize him. So either future Desmond was just disoriented in his "dream" or Daniel was interacting with past Desmond, but the memories were being stored in future Desmond's brain.



jkeegan said:


> I'd suggested that the island is moving forward and backward in time, such that you're seeing an earlier version of the island beneath your feet, or a later version, but you were relatively stationary in time (well, moving forward at 1 second per second, like we all are). When you're standing in 70s Dharmaville, it's really still you here in 2007, but you're on a 1970 version of the island. The island is actually shifting, though, so someone leaving the island to go back to the real world could still come out in the past in the rest of the world.
> 
> Well, suppose that were true for a moment.. The island moves through time, takes natives and "stuck" people with it, and shifts around relative to the rest of the world. What if Desmond's mind jumping (going from the helicopter in 2005 to the army in 19whateveritwas) is actually Desmond's consciousness floating between two physical versions of Desmond on the earth - one in the army in 1984, and one somewhere in the south pacific in 1984 (but the island he's on is shifted back so its actually a 2005 version of the guy). Instead of his consciousness jumping around in time, it's jumping from Desmond to Desmond (as if you had two ethernet cards with the same MAC address on the same LAN - which one would receive packets destined for that unique address?). Still one timeline, just with a shift of the island back and forward in time.


Other than what the force behind the time traveling acts upon, having everything else but a select group of people move through time is equivalent to having just that select group of people move through time. What you describe could also happen if it was Desmond that was doing the time traveling instead of the island.



jkeegan said:


> Oh, and one more thing. To all of the theories that Richard in the temple will use time-something to fix Ben, let's not forget that Richard looked genuinely surprised/skeptical about the mere idea of time travel with Locke showed up in the 50s.. It's not like he's known about that for millenia or anything.. Richard even seemed surprised and intrigued when Sawyer told him about the future.


Richard might not have known exactly how the Temple worked. And even if he had an idea about it involving time, it didn't involve actual travel through time, so maybe he was surprised about a more advanced usage of time manipulation. Or perhaps he was surpised that time could be manipulated outside of the Temple. Maybe he was surprised because he knew that it could only happen if something bad happened to the Temple.

Did we ever see (or hear) the smoke monster in 1950? Maybe it was created because Richard wanted to protect the Temple from something he expected to eventually happen to it.

Another possibility is that exotic matter is involved, but in a non-time-manipulating way. Perhaps the exotic matter acting on a body binds that body to the island. Except that then it doesn't make sense that Ben was asked to leave. But maybe turning the Donkey Wheel does something special.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

Philosofy said:


> Refresh my memory: how did Daniel know Desmond was in the hatch?


Sawyer knew (or guessed, since I don't remember them knowing what year it was) that Desmond was in the hatch, and wanted to try talking to him.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Hunter Green said:


> As an aside, all apostles (and apostates for that matter) of the Faraday Postulate should, if they haven't yet, watch the movie _Timecrimes_.


Ah... Time Travel and gratuitous Eurobabe nudity. I enjoyed that. Thanks! :up:


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

BitbyBlit said:


> Philosofy said:
> 
> 
> > Refresh my memory: how did Daniel know Desmond was in the hatch?
> ...


Didn't they know what year it was based on having just seen Claire give birth?


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

aindik said:


> Didn't they know what year it was based on having just seen Claire give birth?


They jumped right after Claire gave birth. They were in a time when Inman and Desmond were in the hatch. And now that I think about it, I think we knew this because they saw Inman and Desmond coming out of the hatch and talking. Inman then left, and Desmond went back in. That's when Sawyer decided he wanted to talk to past Desmond.


----------



## tewcewl (Dec 18, 2004)

Thought I'd share this with you. Popular Mechanics, if you don't already know, has been following LOST for a few seasons now, talking about the science and/or theories behind each episode. In this week's posting, they absolutely get right the philosophy and science behind LOST's idea of time traveling by quoting Novikov's Self-Consistency principle which says (from the article): 


> There is zero probability of a time traveler doing something that would change the future; therefore, the universe will keep time travelers from altering the past to change the future.


So, essentially, they're saying whatever happened, happened. For examples in LOST's world, they refer to Michael's inability to shoot himself in front of Mr. Friendly. So, for the current debate with what happened between Faraday and Desmond, it means that Faraday always told Desmond what he told him and Desmond always had that memory, but didn't remember it until that moment. I agree with those that suggested it could have been made more clear by inserting an unrelated scene between those two events.

Check it out here.


----------



## peitsche (Nov 13, 2002)

I'm sure somebody can shoot this theory down quickly, but here it goes:

Is it possible that Hurley (or somebody Hurley told about the numbers) put those numbers on the outside of the hatch when he was with the DI in the 70s?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

peitsche said:


> I'm sure somebody can shoot this theory down quickly, but here it goes:
> 
> Is it possible that Hurley (or somebody Hurley told about the numbers) put those numbers on the outside of the hatch when he was with the DI in the 70s?


They've already said that the numbers have a specific (but unspecified) meaning, involving some equation that will help them save the world.

Or maybe the universe?

Hurley recites the numbers to Farraday, Farraday mumbles something about how those are interesting numbers, scribbles in his notebook for a few years, comes up with the theoretical basis for the machine whose button needs to be pressed, the numbers end up getting broadcast, Hurley's friend from the nuthouse hears them...


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Speaking of time-travel movies, I've just finished one that doesn't follow Faraday's postulate: "Primer". A very low budget mind-twister. I think I'm going to need to watch it a couple more times to understand it, and it appears that the filmmaker expects you to. It's subtle in it's clues There's a narrator in the form of a phonecall to help you along, but you're expected to work things out yourself. It might be a great movie, I don't know yet.

A good line: "Are you hungry? I haven't eaten since later today."


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Somebody made a chart of Primer:

http://www.freeweb.hu/neuwanstein/primer_timeline.html

If you thought the movie gives you headaches now, wait until you've read the chart!


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I get the entering of the numbers, but what was the point of broadcasting them? Do we know? 

By the way, if you looked last week and were disappointed, the new podcast is up.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

I thought the broadcasting was so that members of Dharma not on the island would know if any of the Valenzetti numbers had been successfully changed.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

peitsche said:


> I'm sure somebody can shoot this theory down quickly, but here it goes:
> 
> Is it possible that Hurley (or somebody Hurley told about the numbers) put those numbers on the outside of the hatch when he was with the DI in the 70s?


No shooting down, but maybe a grade of Incomplete.  Why, because we don't know if the O6 + 815 folks will even be around on the island come time for the Swan to be built. So there's no way to say right or wrong.

But it's fun to play: Hurley finds out that Dharma is studying the numbers, and he goes into one of his patented "the numbers are bad!" rants and flips out. The head psychologist sees his reaction and goes, "Wow - if that's what it does to our cook, imagine if we lock people up in the Swan and make them enter the numbers every 108 minutes!" And then rubs his hands together, and cackles.

So Hurley causes the numbers to be used that way ... more _Lost_ poetry.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Somebody made a chart of Primer:
> 
> http://www.freeweb.hu/neuwanstein/primer_timeline.html
> 
> If you thought the movie gives you headaches now, wait until you've read the chart!


AWESOME.. It feels like I just watched the movie again (I'd already watched it at least 2-3 times). I'd missed the part about the rats in the attic.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

tewcewl said:


> Thought I'd share this with you. Popular Mechanics, if you don't already know, has been following LOST for a few seasons now, talking about the science and/or theories behind each episode. In this week's posting, they absolutely get right the philosophy and science behind LOST's idea of time traveling by quoting Novikov's Self-Consistency principle which says (from the article):
> 
> So, *essentially, they're saying whatever happened, happened.* For examples in LOST's world, they refer to Michael's inability to shoot himself in front of Mr. Friendly. So, for the current debate with what happened between Faraday and Desmond, it means that *Faraday always told Desmond what he told him and Desmond always had that memory*, but didn't remember it until that moment.* I agree with those that suggested it could have been made more clear by inserting an unrelated scene between those two events. *
> Check it out here.


Whoa! Rob H here writes for Pop Mechanics?!?

Who knew???


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

tewcewl said:


> Thought I'd share this with you. Popular Mechanics, if you don't already know, has been following LOST for a few seasons now, talking about the science and/or theories behind each episode. In this week's posting, they absolutely get right the philosophy and science behind LOST's idea of time traveling by quoting Novikov's Self-Consistency principle which says (from the article):
> 
> So, essentially, they're saying whatever happened, happened. For examples in LOST's world, they refer to Michael's inability to shoot himself in front of Mr. Friendly. So, for the current debate with what happened between Faraday and Desmond, it means that Faraday always told Desmond what he told him and Desmond always had that memory, but didn't remember it until that moment. I agree with those that suggested it could have been made more clear by inserting an unrelated scene between those two events.
> 
> Check it out here.





philw1776 said:


> Whoa! Rob H here writes for Pop Mechanics?!?
> 
> Who knew???


Yeah, but Rob thinks everything is broken.. He's an apostle with an asterisk.. (or maybe drifting more towards being an apostate).


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Hunter Green said:


> As an aside, all apostles (and apostates for that matter) of the Faraday Postulate should, if they haven't yet, watch the movie _Timecrimes_.


I just looked up Timecrimes on IMDB, and it gave a release date of 2011. Freaked me out a bit.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

mqpickles said:


> I just looked up Timecrimes on IMDB, and it gave a release date of 2011. Freaked me out a bit.


This is not the Timecrimes you're looking for.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

I might be 'smeeking, but what if Hurley was the one who put the numbers on the hatch?


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Speaking of time-travel movies, I've just finished one that doesn't follow Faraday's postulate: "Primer".


Thanks for the counter-recommendation: it's on top of my Netflix queue, and I'm avoiding looking at the chart so as not to be spoiled.



mqpickles said:


> I just looked up Timecrimes on IMDB, and it gave a release date of 2011. Freaked me out a bit.


Oh, sorry, you're not in the timeline I thought you were in. I will have reposted this recommendation retroactively next time we're talking in 2013.


----------



## mqpickles (Nov 11, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> This is not the Timecrimes you're looking for.


Yeah, that's what I figured. Still, it was a bit spooky -- and more importantly, funny -- to see 2011. 



Hunter Green said:


> Oh, sorry, you're not in the timeline I thought you were in. I will have reposted this recommendation retroactively next time we're talking in 2013.


I think we talked in 2013 last Thursday.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Wow.. Please don't reply in-line like that again, it made it insanely difficult to reply to. Creating this post with quotes by hand..



jkeegan said:


> 3) To repeat my opinion from many episodes ago(the season opener), I think that when Daniel was telling Desmond to get his mother, and when he said "You're the only person who can help us, because Desmond, the rules, the rules don't apply to you. You're uniquely, and miraculously special.", he was talking about Desmond's mind-time-jump-within-your-own-body, "Slaughterhouse Five"-like jumping (and the memory problems they caused). Desmond on the boat didn't even remember who Sayid was..





Fool Me Twice said:


> [Because 1996 Desmond hadn't met Sayid yet. Remember, it was a consciousness switch, not just a jump of one consciousness back and forth, so 1996 Desmond was on the Boat with Sayid]


Right, Desmond from the past was in future Desmond's body, so he didn't remember who Sayid was.. but furthermore past Desmond occupied this time, so future Desmond will have no memory ever of these events (except you think he might have from having remembered it from the past, but as you'll see below that seems to not be the case). Note that it's NOT a consciousness "switch".. Past Desmond was the only one conscious here, in the future time.. It's not like two versions of a person switch places.. We've actually seen this for ourselves - one half falls asleep during the mind jump. Minkowski appeared to pass out during his jump, he was out before waking up and saying he'd just been on a ferris wheel, and the poor girl that Faraday experimented on was out when Desmond went to see her. In fact, since it looks like you're asleep when you're jumping, it probably happens almost unnoticed when you're _actually in bed_, as Desmond was on the boat, which leads even more credibility to my idea that future-living-on-the-boat-with-Penny-Desmond jumped back to the hatch and heard Faraday talk to him. Not only was he disoriented, but even through that disorientation he even said "Don't I know you??" to Faraday! (He should be able to do that either because he remembered Oxford, which see below I'm not so sure he would, or later because he remembered him from 3 years ago meeting once on the island (before leaving on the helicopter).



jkeegan said:


> Later Desmond from the boat couldn't remember details for the lady at Oxford about when he'd visited Daniel there





Fool Me Twice said:


> [Because he hadn't visited him yet. This was an example of Desmond being "special" and changing the past. Also, when 1996 Desmond switches back to his correct time, he won't have a memory of meeting him either--the only thing his past self will remember is a very vivid nightmare about being held captive on a boat.]


Wrong - you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. When future Desmond that lives with Penny on the boat goes to Oxford again to look up Faraday's mom, he talks to a lady who works there. He says he was there before. She asks him details about it (what year, or something), and he was very hazy on the details.. They made it seem pretty obvious (to me anyway) that they weren't saying it was just "I haven't been here in x years" memory issues but rather that the whole thing was hazy at best..

Now, he DOES remember Ring lady wasting years of his life.. Hmm..



jkeegan said:


> At the VERY least, Desmond's memory gets cloudy sometimes, so that'd be enough of a reason to bother trying to get him to help them (because maybe he might forget it now but remember it someday).
> 
> But far more interesting, is the idea that maybe the Desmond in the hatch there WAS future Desmond.





Fool Me Twice said:


> [You know, I like this idea. In fact I've considered and dropped this idea more than once because it seemed like it would require some sort of external intelligence to control when his consciousness jumped to. Also, Desmond had to go through all that trouble of finding a "constant" when he was jumping before, and it caused him some serious trouble, and we've seen nothing to suggest he went through that whole nose-bleeding ordeal again. But your number 4 below might hold the kernel of a workable idea.]


What stopped the nose bleeding was establishing a way for his brain to get "grounded" and know when the hell he was, the same way we feel ok waking up in our bedroom but feel very confused and disoriented waking up in a hotel room after a drunken night on the town, wondering where our teeth went. 

He HAS that constant, even in the scene where he jumped.. Penny. The jumping didn't stop - just the damage his brain was experiencing because he couldn't right his brain (until he created a link that helped him with that - Penny).



jkeegan said:


> Maybe future Desmond still jumps around in time (not the visions, but the actual mind time jumping, like when he was in the helicopter), and future Desmond from 2007 on the boat with Penny jumped back to inside the hatch.. He took it as just a dream (I imagine he'd have quite a few nightmares about being back in the hatch), but it was actually a jump, and when he jumped back he assumed he'd woken up. Since it was a future Desmond in the hatch then, the Desmond 10 minutes later in the hatch wouldn't remember any of that, because it was future Desmond that experienced that conversation, not pre-2004 Desmond.
> 
> It's worth noting to that before Daniel pounded on the door, he ran off to read his notebook, read something that we specifically didn't see, then went to talk to Desmond. If what he'd read was "If anything goes wrong, Desmond will be MY constant" as many of us were guessing, why wouldn't they show us that text? Maybe we'll see something more interesting there.
> 
> Oh, and as an aside, I don't know where all of these theories of "he has a special relationship with his constant and they can communicate" or "things happen in sync with each other" came from..





Fool Me Twice said:


> [Pure, wild, ham-fisted conjecture. Something I'm sure you'd know little about. ]


Let me rephrase.. Why conjecture that Faraday's idea that 'having some sort of constant might keep you from going crazy/sick' accidentally stumbled upon some magical link between people that lets them sync up and/or communicate because they decided to talk to each other. 



jkeegan said:


> When Daniel first told him the idea of a constant (to let his mind figure out which was the past and which was the present), he didn't even originally intend it to be a person.. He'd said something like 'something in both times that you care about'.. it was Desmond who asked if it could be a person, and Daniel said yes but he'd have to make contact with them (presumably so the brain could tell from the conversation if this was an older or younger version of Penny, so he could keep stable which was the past and present). There's nothing special about them - just that you could tell from observing them in both times which was which, newer or older.
> 
> 4) Here's one that's really been rattling in my brain. Remember the conversations we'd had early in the season (after the season opener) about whether it was the people moving in the flashes or it was the island?
> 
> I'd suggested that the island is moving forward and backward in time, such that you're seeing an earlier version of the island beneath your feet, or a later version, but you were relatively stationary in time (well, moving forward at 1 second per second, like we all are). When you're standing in 70s Dharmaville, it's really still you here in 2007, but you're on a 1970 version of the island. The island is actually shifting, though, so someone leaving the island to go back to the real world could still come out in the past in the rest of the world..





Fool Me Twice said:


> [Isn't the fact that Ben, Sun, and Lapidus remained in 2008 when they returned to the island a problem for this idea?]


It depends who's "stuck" and moving with the island. Maybe different 'jumps' are associated with different sets of 'stuck' people. Maybe Ben, Sun, and Lapidus were stuck and moved with the island just like Richard and the others did, and Kate/Jack/etc stayed still (and the island moved ahead of them beneath their feet, and they ended up in 1977).



jkeegan said:


> Well, suppose that were true for a moment.. The island moves through time, takes natives and "stuck" people with it, and shifts around relative to the rest of the world. What if Desmond's mind jumping (going from the helicopter in 2005 to the army in 19whateveritwas) is actually Desmond's consciousness floating between two physical versions of Desmond on the earth - one in the army in 1984, and one somewhere in the south pacific in 1984 (but the island he's on is shifted back so its actually a 2005 version of the guy). Instead of his consciousness jumping around in time, it's jumping from Desmond to Desmond (as if you had two ethernet cards with the same MAC address on the same LAN - which one would receive packets destined for that unique address?). Still one timeline, just with a shift of the island back and forward in time.





Fool Me Twice said:


> [I didn't follow this part, but it seems like you're confusing a consciousness switch (which we have seen) with a single consciousness jumping around (which we have not seen).]


Again, we haven't seen a switch.. We've seen a single consciousness jumping around, leaving a passed-out person in its place. Desmond fell off of a ladder and spilled red paint. Minkowski and the girl were asleep in bed before waking up. Charlotte was in and out of consciousness around her girl-like comments (as future Charlotte probably jumped back for a bit and past Charlotte jumped forward for a bit). Remember when Desmond went back to the army? At first there was a brief time when future Desmond went back, before it was past Desmond coming forward for the rest of the episode.



jkeegan said:


> Things that might explain:
> A) Daniel talks to the in-the-hatch version of Desmond, but a flash happens to move the island around in time, so Desmond's consciousness jumps again (right then). This would explain why a Desmond-mind-time-jump would end exactly when the white light happened (otherwise it'd be a coincidence that he'd jump just as Daniel appeared to jump). That would have worked out fantastically if Desmond remembered it in 2005 instead of 2007.
> B) Maybe Daniel (who also has been exposed to radiation - no lead suit for his head)





Fool Me Twice said:


> [If Daniel is mind-jumping, I don't think it's due to the low levels of radiation from his rat experiments, but due to something he does to himself to directly affect past or future--something we haven't seen yet. Either something he did in the past after he left Oxford for America, or something he does while with the DI. Or maybe a combination of both.]


Agreed, but at the very least he has had enough radiation (enough that the writers bothered to mention it) to believe that he should be likely to experience jumping near the island (at least if he goes off course).



jkeegan said:


> had something sad/severe happen during a flash (oh, say, the death of Charlotte), and almost instantaneously mind-time-jumped to the off-island-time version of himself, which let's say was sitting at home watching on TV as they announced 815.. He'd have been very sad just for a second, crying, heart rate up, etc, then suddenly went back to his current self, not knowing why he was sad.





Fool Me Twice said:


> What WAS Daniel looking at in his notebook before he talked to Hatch Desmond? If it was a jump-timing table or something else technical will it be something we can understand? Or will it remain vague and esoteric--only understandable by those special few within the story's high-priesthood, like the Pendulum and map in the Lampost--more suggestive than explanatory? Is there a logical explanation for the events we have seen, based on rules the writers have created?


Can't wait to see.
32+ hours left!


----------



## peitsche (Nov 13, 2002)

Philosofy said:


> I might be 'smeeking, but what if Hurley was the one who put the numbers on the hatch?


hmmm...I could have sworn somebody else threw out that idea just recently...


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Can't read this thread anymore...too confusing....how many hours left?


----------



## sushikitten (Jan 28, 2005)

Steveknj said:


> Can't read this thread anymore...too confusing....how many hours left?


:up:


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

Hunter Green said:


> Thanks for the counter-recommendation: it's on top of my Netflix queue, and I'm avoiding looking at the chart so as not to be spoiled.
> 
> Oh, sorry, you're not in the timeline I thought you were in. I will have reposted this recommendation retroactively next time we're talking in 2013.


Primer is an incredibly good movie, but INCREDIBLY COMPLEX. I recommend watching it once, and then watching it a second time with the wikipedia page for the movie open-seriously, trust me. You'll get much more enjoyment out of it that way.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

jkeegan said:


> Again, we haven't seen a switch.. We've seen a single consciousness jumping around, leaving a passed-out person in its place.


I think I'm remembering correctly that in the official podcast they say that many people misinterperet what's happening in The Constant and that what we are seeing is a consciousness switch. The confused Desmond on the boat is 1996 Desmond. It seems to me that's what happened to Charlotte too while she was dying--we hear from Charlotte as a little girl and Charlotte as anthropology student in her final moments.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Fool Me Twice said:


> I think I'm remembering correctly that in the official podcast they say that many people misinterperet what's happening in The Constant and that what we are seeing is a consciousness switch. The confused Desmond on the boat is 1996 Desmond. It seems to me that's what happened to Charlotte too while she was dying--we hear from Charlotte as a little girl and Charlotte as anthropology student in her final moments.


What they said in that podcast was that people were misinterpretting it as future Desmond going into the past, where actually we're seeing 1996 Desmond doing the traveling into the future. While that's true for most of the episode (which would cause confusion), the very first jump back, Desmond is confused in the army, not knowing where he is.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Ah. You're right! I bothered to look it up this time. I'm getting close to season four now while rewatching the whole series. One thing that keeps frustrating me while rewatching is just how much I've forgotten or misremembered--mostly details, but sometimes whole segments!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I think they'll have a nifty market when this is all over for a new set of DVDs/Blu-rays with new commentary tracks, talking about what they were up to at various points and pointing out connections, set-ups, etc. I bet they'd make a few sales.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

I'd buy it.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Peter000 said:


> I'd buy it.


You already have ... you just haven't remembered it yet.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

22.5 hours left. Or ago. I forget which.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

jkeegan said:


> What they said in that podcast was that people were misinterpretting it as future Desmond going into the past, where actually we're seeing 1996 Desmond doing the traveling into the future. While that's true for most of the episode (which would cause confusion), the very first jump back, Desmond is confused in the army, not knowing where he is.


Oh wow, so the 1996 Desmond going to the future was completely independent from the future Desmond going to 1996? I interpreted it as a switch because I figured it was too coincidental that future Desmond would take the body of himself from a time where another jump, which just happened to end up in same time as his future self, had also taken place.

So Desmond's jumps worked like everyone else's, he just had another jump from his past self overlapping (or rather interleaving) with his future to past jumping. I do remember him "falling asleep" a few times, but I interpreted that as a "transition period" while switching back and forth.

I wonder if 1996 Desmond jumping to the future is going to turn out to be an important plot point, because otherwise I think it would have been better to leave that out to avoid the confusion of mixing the two separate jumps.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

wprager said:


> You already have ... you just haven't remembered it yet.


No, I haven't experienced it yet since I am NOT ON AN ISLAND time hopping.

Sheesh.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

That's what you think. Or thought. Or will think.

Ah crap, my head just exploded.


----------



## BitbyBlit (Aug 25, 2001)

Peter000 said:


> No, I haven't experienced it yet since I am NOT ON AN ISLAND time hopping.
> 
> Sheesh.


Neither was 1996 Desmond. Had any strange dreams lately?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Peter000 said:


> No, I haven't experienced it yet since I am NOT ON AN ISLAND time hopping.


What is a continent, if not a REALLY BIG island?


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

My likely vain hopes for future episodes: I'd love to see Mr Newly Passive (Jack) somehow come in contact with his past self thereby causing 'The Incident' and his horrific well deserved demise, leaving Sawyer with the onerous task of having to sacrifice his body over and over again to please both Juliette and a needy Kate. This sequel carried in unrated DVD. But that's just me, projecting.


----------



## Mishkin (Apr 20, 2002)

philw1776 said:


> My likely vain hopes for future episodes: I'd love to see Mr Newly Passive (Jack) somehow come in contact with his past self thereby causing 'The Incident' and his horrific well deserved demise, leaving Sawyer with the onerous task of having to sacrifice his body over and over again to please both Juliette and a needy Kate. This sequel carried in unrated DVD. But that's just me, projecting.


I think you're looking for the Lost: Fan Fiction forum...

Not to be confused with the Slash Fiction forum...bad, Google, bad! <shudder>


----------



## thenightfly42 (Mar 5, 2002)

peitsche said:


> I'm sure somebody can shoot this theory down quickly, but here it goes:
> 
> Is it possible that Hurley (or somebody Hurley told about the numbers) put those numbers on the outside of the hatch when he was with the DI in the 70s?





Philosofy said:


> I might be 'smeeking, but what if Hurley was the one who put the numbers on the hatch?





peitsche said:


> hmmm...I could have sworn somebody else threw out that idea just recently...


Don't worry, *peitsche*... in *Philosofy's* timeline, you hadn't posted your theory yet. In fact, no one has ever smeeked.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

just about 3 hours left!


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

But if Smeek had never smeeked, then we couldn't call it a smeek. So whatever happened, happened. Smeek has ALWAYS smeeked. He was smeeking when we were doing MAIL on VT-52s, doing Snoopy pictures with typewriters, etc. When he heard the telephone had been invented the first thing he did was point at a friend and say, "Come quickly! I need you."

Did you know if you add up the numbers that correspond to the letters in "a smeek" that it totals 54? Half of 108! Make of *that* what you will.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Delta13 said:


> But if Smeek had never smeeked, then we couldn't call it a smeek. So whatever happened, happened. Smeek has ALWAYS smeeked. He was smeeking when we were doing MAIL on VT-52s, doing Snoopy pictures with typewriters, etc. When he heard the telephone had been invented the first thing he did was point at a friend and say, "Come quickly! I need you."
> 
> Did you know if you add up the numbers that correspond to the letters in "a smeek" that it totals 54? Half of 108! Make of *that* what you will.


You realize somebody already said that exact same thing in this thread.

Three whole days from now!

Read the $%#@ing thread before you post!


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Hunter Green said:


> Thanks for the counter-recommendation: it's on top of my Netflix queue, and I'm avoiding looking at the chart so as not to be spoiled.





spikedavis said:


> Primer is an incredibly good movie, but INCREDIBLY COMPLEX. I recommend watching it once, and then watching it a second time with the wikipedia page for the movie open-seriously, trust me. You'll get much more enjoyment out of it that way.


Yup, and I think that with Primer you could easily have someone give you a scene-by-scene description of what happens, and you STILL wouldn't be spoiled.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> You realize somebody already said that exact same thing in this thread.
> 
> Three whole days from now!
> 
> Read the $%#@ing thread before you post!


That's one thing about Lost. Reading the threads only makes it better.

Greg


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

doing a quick rewatch before the new episode airs..

When young Ben (just shot) groans/whispers "please help", it almost reminded me of Jacob saying "help me" to Locke about Ben.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Ha!

When Kate arrived at what's her name's house, the music on the radio said:

"Just like it used to be
The only thing different
the only thing new
I've got your picture"

Ha! Make of THAT what you will!!


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

The "I'm going to have to tell them what happened.. ..but I'll give you as much of a head start as I can" line is a double from somewhere else in the series. Who said it?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

jkeegan said:


> The "I'm going to have to tell them what happened.. ..but I'll give you as much of a head start as I can" line is a double from somewhere else in the series. Who said it?


Was it when Michael shot Libby and Ana Lucia, and whoever was the first one to find him (was it Locke?) let him leave the hatch to go after Walt?


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> You realize somebody already said that exact same thing in this thread.
> 
> Three whole days from now!
> 
> Read the $%#@ing thread before you post!


Holy cow, I've invented Pre-Smeeking!


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

For those watching along at home, I've watched _Primer_ at long last. Very interesting.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Hunter Green said:


> For those watching along at home, I've watched _Primer_ at long last. Very interesting.


You didn't quote Locke, I'm amazed.

You know, when he said, "I think we're gonna have to watch this again."

Greg


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

gchance said:


> You didn't quote Locke, I'm amazed.
> 
> You know, when he said, "I think we're gonna have to watch this again."


But he already watched it again.

You know, before the first time.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

Actually, I didn't decide to watch it again. I am glad I watched it, but I don't particularly feel any great need to go back over it several times in order to piece together the timeline. That would be like solving a puzzle, and that can be fun, but there are plenty of puzzles on my bookshelf I'm not spending the time to solve this weekend, and this one would be more time and probably less enjoyment.

My feeling about the movie (which was corroborated by later reading the Wikipedia article) is that the writer _could have_ made things happen in a way that would leave the alert, intelligent watcher aware of what happened when the movie finished, but _chose not to_, as an artistic device to try to give the audience some of the sense of what it would be like for Abe and Aaron as they went through all this. That's fine with me.


----------



## jkeegan (Oct 16, 2000)

Well, a while from now go back and look at the timeline that someone posted here.
It's WAY more complex than they could have "just answered". I agree with the artistic choice of letting us feel what they felt, but it was pretty cool later to see just how much each of them actually did.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

I did go through the timeline afterwards. The choice I made was simply to not go back through the movie following the timeline to verify it or see what new light it shed; or more tellingly, to not go back through the movie picking out clues until I could create the same timeline.

As someone who's written some similarly complexly plotted stories, I know that it's easy to write a story that is impossible to follow on the first time through, and sometimes it's harder to make the story make sense without bogging it down. But ultimately you decide how much you want to tell the watcher, and how much you want to make the watcher figure out, based on what you want the story to do. I don't disagree with the creator's decision to lean heavily towards one side of that equation: that's what he wanted to do, that's fine with me. But I don't consider the lack of explanation a virtue any more than I consider it a vice. It's just a choice.


----------



## tewcewl (Dec 18, 2004)

Hunter Green said:


> As someone who's written some similarly complexly plotted stories, I know that it's easy to write a story that is impossible to follow on the first time through, and sometimes it's harder to make the story make sense without bogging it down. But ultimately you decide how much you want to tell the watcher, and how much you want to make the watcher figure out, based on what you want the story to do. I don't disagree with the creator's decision to lean heavily towards one side of that equation: that's what he wanted to do, that's fine with me. But I don't consider the lack of explanation a virtue any more than I consider it a vice. It's just a choice.


I agree with you to a certain extent. The ending of _Donnie Darko_ confused the hell out of me and killed what I thought, up to that point, was a great movie.


----------

