# Lost - "The Long Con" 2/8/2006 *Spoilers*



## shaunrose (Sep 13, 2001)

I have a question. Was that Kate's mother in the diner (the waitress for Sawyer and his partner)?


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

shaunrose said:


> I have a question. Was that Kate's mother in the diner (the waitress for Sawyer and his partner)?


could be, but i know for sure she was the step-mother in supernatural last night...

dont know if this ep was good or not.....


----------



## Paperboy2003 (Mar 30, 2004)

Previews, which shall not be discussed, looked quite compelling.

Did anyone catch the ember go up Hurley's nose while he was sitting with Sayid at the fire?

Lame story line with Sawyer and the guns


----------



## Kamakzie (Jan 8, 2004)

I am confused about the ending. Sawyer switched the bag and ripped off the lady right?


----------



## TSuellentrop (Jan 16, 2006)

what makes you think she is Kate's mom?


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Kamakzie said:


> I am confused about the ending. Sawyer switched the bag and ripped off the lady right?


Yes. In the end, he was really ripping off the girl and his partner.

For some reason, this episode got me suspicious of this Scott/Steve character. Nobody can get his name right, apparently one of them died (I think he said it was Scott?) But what gets me is if AL never met Scott, how could she get him confused with Steve? Then there was the shot of Hurley reading a manuscript that was entitled something about a twin I think. It all seemed kinda fishy to me.


----------



## Droobiemus (Sep 30, 2004)

unicorngoddess said:


> Yes. In the end, he was really ripping off the girl and his partner.
> 
> For some reason, this episode got me suspicious of this Scott/Steve character. Nobody can get his name right, apparently one of them died (I think he said it was Scott?) But what gets me is if AL never met Scott, how could she get him confused with Steve? Then there was the shot of Hurley reading a manuscript that was entitled something about a twin I think. It all seemed kinda fishy to me.


Actually, the title was "Bad Twin," which is equally suspicious. Or these writers could just be messing with us, just as they were with the radio frequency ("Or another time...just kidding, dude").


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

But Hurley's comment about 'another time' really got me thinking too.

So it was Bad Twin? That makes it even more suspicious. 

Maybe it was like that season of Big Brother where one of the house guest was secretly playing with her twin. What if Scott and Steve are playing the Mole. One stays and spies while the other reports to The Others...then they switch.

Hmmm...


----------



## bro1ncos (Aug 2, 2004)

Liked the episode.

Have to admit didn't see any of it coming. Not Sawyer going after the guns, and not Charlie being involved. Now after the fact it fits together when Sawyer says the art of the con is getting the other person to make a decision. Make them think the decision is their own. When really the idea is his.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

I saw the HD ember go up Hurley's HD nostril too. Hilarious.

The book Locke was rifling through was "An Occurence at Owl Creek Bridge" by Ambrose Bierce. A famous short story that I'll spoiler just in case. Here's a link to the story in case you've not read it yet. [Read it. It's short.]



Spoiler



Set during the civil war. A man is about to be hanged from a bridge, but the drop breaks the rope and he falls into the river. Over the course of the story he makes his was home. As he opens the door to greet his wife he wakes up to find that the rope did not break at all and his escape was a dream and he dies by hanging after all.


----------



## Dennis Wilkinson (Sep 24, 2001)

TSuellentrop said:


> what makes you think she is Kate's mom?


Sure looks like her.

She was also the mom on last night's Supernatural, and one of the aunts on "Sabrina the Teenage Witch". Not, um, that I, er, ever watched that... 

Charlie's involvement took me by surprise.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

TSuellentrop said:


> what makes you think she is Kate's mom?


Yep.

(Should I be embarrassed that I recognized her from "Sabrina the Teenage Witch"?)


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

"Bad Twin" is the name of a real Lost novel to be released in May.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1401302769/002-3043684-3708867?v=glance&n=283155



> Book Description
> Sometimes evil has a familiar face . . .
> Paul Artisan, P.I. is a new version of an old breed -- a righter of wrongs, someone driven to get to the bottom of things. Too bad his usual cases are of the boring malpractice and fraud variety. Until now.
> 
> ...


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

I have mixed feelings about tonight's episode. Usually watching LOST for me is an "event". One of the few shows my wife & I watch together, and almost live (we only wait long enough to have enough buffer to skip commercials). I look forward to it every week.

Tonight was . .. meh. I started feeling, about halfway through, that I was just watching a TV show. Any typical drama/action series. It did end well, and the previews give me hope. But this was the first time that I felt if I dropped the series (and I don't watch a lot of ongoing shows) I wouldn't miss it.

Even this thread reflects that. By one hour after the show was over, last week had 26 posts. This week--11. Some weeks it has been dozens.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

There was a shot of Evangeline Lilly tonight that made her look really odd. Older. I don't think it was on purpose. It was when she started to suspect that AL was the one who attacked Sun.

I just realized that the rain came when Charlie attacked Sun, just like it does when the others come.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

A nice pic from Sledge.


----------



## hoopsbwc34 (Jan 28, 2003)

So who was Sawyer's partner? I recognized him from earlier episodes, but I can't remember what his role was? Is he the one that tricked Sawyer ino killing the guy in Australia?


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

I for one really enjoyed the Sawyer background, it was kinda cool. You see why he plays everyone, cause he has always done that. But I kinda wished that it was Ana-Lucia that did it, would have been crazy having her trying to start the army, well her or Jack.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

TSuellentrop said:


> what makes you think she is Kate's mom?


She had the same name, job, and face.

Speaking of faces though, I had a hard time recognizing Kim Dickens. I knew the voice right away, but I didn't make the connection until I saw her name in the credits. Even after that, I thought she looked completely different (than on Deadwood or even the more modern-set Out Of Order).

I think he gave her part of the money and kept some there for himself. If he had been completely faking his feelings for her, wouldn't he have just continued on with the scam as planned?

I think the whole thing Sawyer pulled off was pretty interesting. I think that Locke's character's name is no coincidence, and it raised some pretty interesting questions about self-government in a society and whether Sawyer has just as much right as anyone else to make himself "the law" just as Locke and Jack had done by locking up the guns.


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

Maybe we'll be lucky and James will kill everyone.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I thought it was a great episode. It was awesome how the backstory of Sawyer fit in perfectly with the current story on the island. As soon as Sawyer told the girl that the trick in a long con is to get the other person to think it was their idea, I knew he was playing her. As soon as Locke asked Sawyer to help him move the guns, I knew Sawyer was playing Locke. I just didn't know what the point of it all was, and I'm not sure that I do now. Locke can't stay awake 24/7 and he can't ever go to the stash without having to take all kinds of precautions. He's basically put himself in an impossible position. He made a great point about the other submitting to Jack and Locke but without any real reason to, but he's not a good leader. 

I thought the ending was awesome too. We found out that Charlie helped Sawyer, that he did it merely to piss Locke off, and we got the foreshadowing of the "Bad Twin" novel and the 40's radio station. While the last couple of eps were not that great, I think this one was great and I can't wait for more.


----------



## Cboath (Jun 22, 2004)

Fl_Gulfer said:


> Maybe we'll be lucky and James will kill everyone.


But then there would be no show anymo...... OH! I get it.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

When Sawyer's con-lady said "Why don't you think about it in here" I was hoping they *wouldn't* go into the shower. It would have been a lot more of a "sexual" line.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

Fool Me Twice said:


> "Bad Twin" is the name of a real Lost novel to be released in May.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1401302769/002-3043684-3708867?v=glance&n=283155
> Quote:
> ...


 That reminds me of Jacques Futrelle, a writer who died on Titanic.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

Took me a little while to recognize his female con in this. Without all "Deadwood" get up I almost did not recognize her.

http://imdb.com/name/nm0225332/


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

> If he had been completely faking his feelings for her, wouldn't he have just continued on with the scam as planned?


Because 1) he would have had to share the loot with his parner, and 2) he wanted to let her know the truth. Of course, he still had to go through with the con... because he's Sawyer. 

LOVED tonight's episode. Best of the season. Maybe of the series.


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

It needed a Quinn Martin-esque voiceover, with a different title: "Tonight's episode: The Come-uppance".

Jack and Locke clearly got handed theirs on a platter. Egos led them astray, and they each believe they know the right way and no else needs to be involved, or is even smart enough to be involved. Sawyer blasted that with his gun, both literally and figuratively.

Neither have been acting in the group's best interest. And not everyone is happy about that. Charlie and Sawyer both had grudges to act upon, and act they did. 

Otherwise, an interesting episode though I wouldn't go so far as to call it the best ever. In terms of dropping names and flashbacks however, I'd say it's the leader of any of the 1 hour episodes. To wit, mentioned/seen in this episode:

Boone
Danielle ("french woman")
Rose and Bernard ("Bernard's a dentist")
Kate's horse
Kate's mom
Virgin Mary statues
hints about the hatch film (Locke looking through books)
metal gun case
the raft
Sawyer's glasses
Sawyer's stash
Steve/Scott (or, Scott/Steve. Whatever)
falling off cliffs
the Others
Michael
Shannon (both Sayid's melancholy and Locke mentioning "another 'accident'")
Sayid torturing Sawyer

It just seemed there were a lot of references thrown in, but appropriately so.

For once this season, the backstory seemed to fit the actual goings on on the island.


----------



## joits (Feb 8, 2006)

MickeS said:


> Because 1) he would have had to share the loot with his parner, and 2) he wanted to let her know the truth. Of course, he still had to go through with the con... because he's Sawyer.
> 
> LOVED tonight's episode. Best of the season. Maybe of the series.


yep, i loved it too. sawyer's been pretty gentle throughout the season. i think he's been biding his time, seeing where he can get an advantage. of couse he's been hurt, but a con like him always has some kind of plan in the back of his mind. then when the time came... he struck. charlie... pissed off so therefore he would make an easy mark. jack and locke were so busy arguing with each other. sayid is still in mourning. no one trusted ana lucia so she was no threat. kate... she was all over him. she'd be easy to man handle. so just like he conned that poor lady, he conned everyone on the island and now he's the big dawg.

u know that jin will eventually find out what charlie did... and he better get his running shoes when he does.


----------



## justapixel (Sep 27, 2001)

Paperboy2003 said:


> Previews, which shall not be discussed, looked quite compelling.


Does nobody here read the rules????

You can discuss the previews for next week, but you have to put them in spoiler tags.

Sawyer is so freaking hot.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

justapixel said:


> Does nobody here read the rules????
> 
> You can discuss the previews for next week, but you have to put them in spoiler tags.
> 
> Sawyer is so freaking hot.


justapixel, every time I see your avatar I think of actress Christine Baranski.










And that is no way meant as an insult.

Please forgive my OT'ness.


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

Fool Me Twice said:


> I saw the HD ember go up Hurley's HD nostril too. Hilarious.
> 
> The book Locke was rifling through was "An Occurence at Owl Creek Bridge" by Ambrose Bierce. A famous short story that I'll spoiler just in case. Here's a link to the story in case you've not read it yet. [Read it. It's short.]
> 
> ...


The was a short film of "Occurence", shown on the Twighlight Zone in the late 50's or early 60's. I saw it...


----------



## justapixel (Sep 27, 2001)

atrac said:


> justapixel, every time I see your avatar I think of actress Christine Baranski.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I ADORE Christine Baranski!!!!

I don't look anything like her though.

But, I take it as a compliment anyway.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

justapixel said:


> Sawyer is so freaking hot.


And they say men are shallow.  

I thought it was a very interesting episode and Charlie is going down a very dark path.
And Sawyer, all he can do is con people because he's simply an a******.

While Sawyer may have had a point with the way Jack and Locke have been leading, Jack was essentially forced into the leadership role.
It's not like Sawyer is fighting him for valid reasons.


----------



## lordargent (Nov 12, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Jack was essentially forced into the leadership role.
> It's not like Sawyer is fighting him for valid reasons.


Wasn't jack part of the reason that sawyer got tortured in the first place.

Anyway, here's to hoping charlie bites it soon. He's #1 on my death list now that boone and shannon are gone. I never liked him from the beginning of the show.

Michael is #4, but he's out of the picture for now.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

Dennis Wilkinson said:


> Sure looks like her.
> 
> She was also the mom on last night's Supernatural, and one of the aunts on "Sabrina the Teenage Witch". Not, um, that I, er, ever watched that...
> 
> Charlie's involvement took me by surprise.


Nothing wrong with old Zelda! And her cohort got a good job on biggest loser 

One thing I totally don't get. Ok Sawyer has all the guns fine. And yes he has a heroin addict as an assistant. But unless Charlie takes over gunning after Sawyer goes to sleep, the whole threat thing is truly BS. I guess I dont understand how just one/two people with guns can control 40+ people for more than a day or so. It's like, big deal, you gotta gun. So what. The group truly has the power and are needed to make the camp run. what's he gonna do, shoot every last one? After the first shot, they would all rush him and kill him i'm sure

What am I missing here in saying this is an empty threat?


----------



## LifeIsABeach (Feb 28, 2001)

hoopsbwc34 said:


> So who was Sawyer's partner? I recognized him from earlier episodes, but I can't remember what his role was? Is he the one that tricked Sawyer ino killing the guy in Australia?


I don't remember him from a previous Lost episode (I never pick up on those things), but I'm pretty sure I recognized him from one of the Seinfeld Chronicles episodes. In that episode Jerry has this male friend he is trying to break up with. They go to a diner and the guy is very obnoxious. That was quite a few years ago so I did not recognize him at first, but as soon as I heard his voice I was pretty sure it was him. Then in Lost he acted obnoxious in the diner as well. I wonder if they did that on purpose. Or if I am just nuts.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

newsposter said:


> ....I guess I dont understand how just one/two people with guns can control 40+ people for more than a day or so....


In Lost-time that day or so could be 4 or 5 episodes, so plenty of time to develop a story arc around the guns and even wrap it up with A-L getting popped.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

lordargent said:


> Anyway, here's to hoping charlie bites it soon.


I'd say after last night, that's a LOT less likely, since he's now Locke's Evil Twin (with Sawyer Jack's Evil Twin). I'm sure they'll be playing off those four for a long, long time to come...


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

skanter said:


> The was a short film of "Occurence", shown on the Twighlight Zone in the late 50's or early 60's. I saw it...


Also on the DVD Treasures of the Twilight Zone. I actually just saw that a couple of weeks ago. If that turns out to be a hint about what's going on in the show, that's going to make me mad.


----------



## Syron (Jun 22, 2005)

newsposter said:


> One thing I totally don't get. Ok Sawyer has all the guns fine. And yes he has a heroin addict as an assistant. But unless Charlie takes over gunning after Sawyer goes to sleep, the whole threat thing is truly BS. I guess I dont understand how just one/two people with guns can control 40+ people for more than a day or so. It's like, big deal, you gotta gun. So what. The group truly has the power and are needed to make the camp run. what's he gonna do, shoot every last one? After the first shot, they would all rush him and kill him i'm sure
> What am I missing here in saying this is an empty threat?


I think Sawyer realizes the group NEEDS the guns to protect themselves against "The Others", so if they do anything to rush him or take his gun away, and he doesn't tell them where the stash of guns are, they are screwed.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Yeah, I don't think he's trying to be the new leader. He's just controlling a commodity from which he can profit.


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

JYoung said:


> And they say men are shallow.


Hey, we have to listen to all of you guys drool over Boomer on BG threads and Kate on here. 



JYoung said:


> I thought it was a very interesting episode and Charlie is going down a very dark path. And Sawyer, all he can do is con people because he's simply an a******.


Now, I saw it as Sawyer didn't like it because Kate had told him "everyone loves you now" a couple episodes ago. He seems to have this need for what I call "self-flagellation". Punishing himself because of his past. To me, that's where the flashback tied it. He knew he had done all these rotten things and didn't think he deserved to be "loved" on the island, so he decided to go back to his evil ways and make everyone dislike him again.

I was totally blindsided by Charlie being the one who helped him. Still thought it was Ana Lucia all the time. Awesome surprise ending!

Thought this was one of the better episodes this season. But then I have always liked Sawyer over Jack. Liked seeing him get the upper hand over those who like to think they are doing what is right for the group, but only serving their own egos.

Cheryl


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

Syron said:


> I think Sawyer realizes the group NEEDS the guns to protect themselves against "The Others", so if they do anything to rush him or take his gun away, and he doesn't tell them where the stash of guns are, they are screwed.


Ok but let's be realistic, even in the context of the show. How far from camp could he have taken them? They could have 40 people looking for them and probably come up with them pretty quickly. The safe was truly the only unreachable place on the island.


----------



## pendragn (Jan 21, 2001)

newsposter said:


> After the first shot, they would all rush him and kill him i'm sure...


I'm with you most of the way, but I just want to add that this is a very big part of his plan working. Nobody wants to be "the first shot." That alone is enough to keep a large group from confronting him with the thought of doing violence.

tk


----------



## dba62 (Sep 2, 2005)

Charlie has moved off my kill list. Now that he has turned evil, he's a much more interesting character.


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

newsposter said:


> Ok but let's be realistic, even in the context of the show. How far from camp could he have taken them? They could have 40 people looking for them and probably come up with them pretty quickly. The safe was truly the only unreachable place on the island.


I didn't understand why Locke wanted to move them from the safe to begin with. He had already changed the combination a couple of times, what's one more? The only reason Jack had the combination was cause Locke gave it to him. Just change it and don't give it to him. What's so hard about that?


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

MickeS said:


> Because 1) he would have had to share the loot with his parner, and 2) he wanted to let her know the truth. Of course, he still had to go through with the con... because he's Sawyer.
> 
> LOVED tonight's episode. Best of the season. Maybe of the series.


I don't see how what he did (giving her the bag, telling her she was the mark, etc) changed whether he'd have to share the loot with his partner. The question I was responding to was did he give her a bag with actual money, switch bags, or what? I guess I'll just need to go back and watch again, but my point was that I thought he gave her half the money; I don't see why he wouldn't have just continued with the scam he had set up on her and taken all of the money if his feelings weren't real.


----------



## Big_Daddy (Nov 20, 2002)

Great episode, stronger than the last few - but now, I like the last few better as it set up what happened last night.

Like most of you, Charlie's involvement blindsided me. I felt sad - I liked the little hobbit - and hate to see him go down this path. And Rob Helmerich is right - he's now Locke's evil twin. I'm glad to see Charlie getting some plot action, after being relatively ignored in the first several episodes of the season.

But I keep wondering if Charlie's behavior is related to Rousseau's warning of the others being "infected", or if it is related to the "Quarantine" warning on the hatch actually meaning something, rather than a ploy to keep people pushing the button.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

BeanMeScot said:


> I didn't understand why Locke wanted to move them from the safe to begin with. He had already changed the combination a couple of times, what's one more? The only reason Jack had the combination was cause Locke gave it to him. Just change it and don't give it to him. What's so hard about that?


That's exactly what Sawyer said to Locke, and Locke's response was it wouldn't matter if he changed the combo, Jack would find a way to get in.

Btw, were we to assume from Charlie's refusal of the statue at the end that he hadn't been using the heroin all the time he'd been stashing the statues?


----------



## yaddayaddayadda (Apr 8, 2003)

BeanMeScot said:


> I didn't understand why Locke wanted to move them from the safe to begin with. He had already changed the combination a couple of times, what's one more? The only reason Jack had the combination was cause Locke gave it to him. Just change it and don't give it to him. What's so hard about that?


I'd assume changing the combination would take longer than the time Jack was expected to be there? I don't know how long it takes to change the lock on a safe, but it seems it would take a while.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

1 - Does anyone know the song that was playing on the shortwave radio?

2 - Maybe my ears aren't working like they used too, but I could've sworn Jack called Locke "Jack" during the opening scene in the hatch.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

devdogaz said:


> I thought it was a great episode. It was awesome how the backstory of Sawyer fit in perfectly with the current story on the island. As soon as Sawyer told the girl that the trick in a long con is to get the other person to think it was their idea, I knew he was playing her. As soon as Locke asked Sawyer to help him move the guns, I knew Sawyer was playing Locke. I just didn't know what the point of it all was, and I'm not sure that I do now. Locke can't stay awake 24/7 and he can't ever go to the stash without having to take all kinds of precautions. He's basically put himself in an impossible position. He made a great point about the other submitting to Jack and Locke but without any real reason to, but he's not a good leader.
> 
> I thought the ending was awesome too. We found out that Charlie helped Sawyer, that he did it merely to piss Locke off, and we got the foreshadowing of the "Bad Twin" novel and the 40's radio station. While the last couple of eps were not that great, I think this one was great and I can't wait for more.


I'm in agreement. I can't believe all the negativity about this episode. I thought it was one of the best in a long time and it sets up a huge story line coming down the pike. Now, not only will they be fighting "the others" but they will have to fight each other. There's a bunch of battle lines being drawn.

As soon as Sawyer got the guns, I KNEW he had to be working with someone and I knew it was Charlie, since right now, he's the only real outcast besides Sawyer.

What I also find interesting is that the writers over the course of the season were showing us this softer side of Sawyer, making him even a bit likable, and then we get to see it was all a CON.

BTW, there were so many sarcastic one liners this episode, most of them by Sawyer. Very funny


----------



## jamesbobo (Jun 18, 2000)

justapixel said:


> Does nobody here read the rules????
> 
> You can discuss the previews for next week, but you have to put them in spoiler tags.


Very well:


Spoiler



Jack makes the time run out on the computer.



By the way, great episode.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> ....BTW, there were so many sarcastic one liners this episode, most of them by Sawyer. Very funny


Actually, I'm getting a little tired of those. I thought they were way overdone in this ep.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

To answer my own question, was it Glenn Miller playing the song on the shortwave radio?
If so, that could be interesting...

Glenn Miller, U.S. Army Major and band leader

Flight on December 15, 1944

Reported as "terrible weather conditions which existed between London and Paris."

Disappeared on flight between London and Paris.

Area Believed Crashed: English Channel


----------



## MitchO (Nov 7, 2003)

Not only was it the Glenn Miller Orchestra that they heard at the end, but I believe it was also a version of Bobby Darrin's "Beyond the Sea", which is the song that Rousseau wrote the (French) lyrics too that Shannon recognized as "that song at the end of Finding Nemo".


----------



## jschuman (Feb 20, 2001)

speedcouch said:


> Thought this was one of the better episodes this season. But then I have always liked Sawyer over Jack. Liked seeing him get the upper hand over those who like to think they are doing what is right for the group, but only serving their own egos.


I don't get this. I can somewhat see Locke as 'serving his own ego' when dealing with things onthe island, but not really with Jack. Jack has been treating people the whole time while everyone clamored for him to be the leader. Unless you count his desire to "save people" as feeding his ego?

To me, Jack has made decisions on the island that truly have been in the group's best interest. Sure, individuals at certain times didn't agree with him, but I don't think he was attempting to serve his own ego when making them. In my mind he was 'elected' the de facto leader of their group and has been acting that way. No, he wasn't literally 'elected' or anything, but that doesn't change the fact that in a time of crisis, when everyone needed some direction, he stepped up and provided it.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

MitchO said:


> Not only was it the Glenn Miller Orchestra that they heard at the end, but I believe it was also a version of Bobby Darrin's "Beyond the Sea", which is the song that Rousseau wrote the (French) lyrics too that Shannon recognized as "that song at the end of Finding Nemo".


Glenn Miller died about 10 years before Bobby Darrin came into prominence.


----------



## charlief1975 (Apr 16, 2004)

LifeIsABeach said:


> I don't remember him from a previous Lost episode (I never pick up on those things), but I'm pretty sure I recognized him from one of the Seinfeld Chronicles episodes. In that episode Jerry has this male friend he is trying to break up with. They go to a diner and the guy is very obnoxious. That was quite a few years ago so I did not recognize him at first, but as soon as I heard his voice I was pretty sure it was him. Then in Lost he acted obnoxious in the diner as well. I wonder if they did that on purpose. Or if I am just nuts.


I can't think of his name, but he's been in a few episodes of Seinfeld and he's a character actor, I've seen him in a few movies.


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

Are we witnessing a transformation into Otherness of Charlie and Sawyer?


----------



## chavez (Nov 18, 2004)

> but I'm pretty sure I recognized him from one of the Seinfeld Chronicles episodes.


actually he played the guy who sold jerry some stock and was suspected of being a coke addict. kramer goes to a bar and photographs him in the toilet, etc.


----------



## tecban (Oct 10, 2005)

I thought this was one of the best episodes of the season and the series. Sawyer's character is interesting and complicated, and even Charlie is showing a little more depth than before. Complex people with good and bad traits, who are drawn toward behaviors and decisions that either allow them to "right" the past or compound it. 

I thought Sawyer definitely completed the long con, that was the point -- even though he's conflicted and even sorry about it, he feels he can't help but be what he is. Another great parallel to the events on the island. Charlie surprised us at the end; after Sawyer confronted everyone, we thought it might have been Kate working with con with him. While that would have been an interesting direction too, I liked how it played out better.

Pretty sure the Glenn Miller song was "Moonlight Serenade." -- and I see stevie beat me to it! I think two "pretty sures" equals "almost positive."


----------



## MitchO (Nov 7, 2003)

You guys are right; it's Moonlight Serenade. Not sure why I had "Beyond the Sea" in my head.


----------



## KRS (Jan 30, 2002)

When Sawyer was manning the computer terminal to enter the numbers, there was a beeping noise that roused him from drifting off. It certainly wasn't the loud alarm that Locke suggested would be too noisy to sleep through when Claire asked to sleep in the bunker. Why aren't more castaways living in there?

Why did both Locke and Sawyer feel the need to haul all the guns to a new location? Why not just take the ammo - it would be a lot easier to hide and would still give them the power.

There was definately a weird vibe going on when Locke and Jack were discussing the heroin statues. I still don't think that Locke is using, but his keeping the statues does not seem to be simply for possible medical reasons.

So, with the black Mercedes being empty, does that suggest that Sawyer killed his partner to keep all the money? And was that the same guy from the previous Sawyer flashback?


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

More proof the writers read the boards was Locke's comment about keeping the heorin for medicinal purposes 

I think it's clear now that Charlie isn't using.

I still think the logistics behind Sawyer's con are pretty silly...how long can you let that last?


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

KRS said:


> When Sawyer was manning the computer terminal to enter the numbers, there was a beeping noise that roused him from drifting off. It certainly wasn't the loud alarm that Locke suggested would be too noisy to sleep through when Claire asked to sleep in the bunker. Why aren't more castaways living in there?
> 
> Why did both Locke and Sawyer feel the need to haul all the guns to a new location? Why not just take the ammo - it would be a lot easier to hide and would still give them the power.
> 
> ...


Kevin Dunn has never been in "Lost" before.

I'm not sure if it suggests that or not. If he gave Cassidy part of the money, then I'm sure he had no intention of giving any to his partner.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

pmyers said:


> More proof the writers read the boards was Locke's comment about keeping the heorin for medicinal purposes
> 
> I think it's clear now that Charlie isn't using.
> 
> I still think the logistics behind Sawyer's con are pretty silly...how long can you let that last?


You mean "a government fund kicks in and triples your money in a week" isn't perfectly plausible?


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

jeff125va said:


> You mean "a government fund kicks in and triples your money in a week" isn't perfectly plausible?


I meant his con regarding the guns. The guy has to sleep sometime.....


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

pmyers said:


> I meant his con regarding the guns. The guy has to sleep sometime.....


Oh, _that_ con. Well, a big part of it is knowing where all of the other guns are. Even if someone could wrest the gun from him in his sleep, what are they going to do? Threaten to kill him unless he tells them where the rest are? That would be a bit counter-productive. Charlie is desperate to hide the fact that he attacked Sun, so I don't see him turning on Sawyer. And if Sawyer's smart, he will re-hide the guns from Charlie or he already has.


----------



## chavez (Nov 18, 2004)

> what are they going to do? Threaten to kill him unless he tells them where the rest are? That would be a bit counter-productive.


they could just start shooting parts of him off till he talks.


----------



## sonnik (Jul 7, 2000)

I thought the radio bit was interesting, because it was really their first acknowledgement of the outside world. I know some theories had suggested that those on the island were the last survivors of humanity. Unless there's some people who think the signal was truly local, you've got to assume this discounts the outside world experiencing some sort of disaster.

On the previews:


Spoiler



To me it looked like only the leftmost digits (minutes) were displayed in the tickdown in the previews. The seconds digits (black on white) weren't displayed - they were cropped out of frame. I seem to recall them teasing with a timeout before in the previews. I don't think they'd keep teasing that, though - hopefully, maybe... perhaps?


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

chavez said:


> they could just start shooting parts of him off till he talks.


Well he's been tortured once before, and I just don't see it happening again, even if they do KNOW this time that he knows what they think he knows.


----------



## Scubee (Mar 2, 2005)

pmyers said:


> More proof the writers read the boards was Locke's comment about keeping the heorin for medicinal purposes


Wouldn't this episode have been shot a month or more ago? What are the chances of the writers reading the board and re-shooting a scene just to include that line? I think it's more likely that they realized and even intended the questions to be asked as to why Locke would keep the statuettes.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

sonnik said:


> I thought the radio bit was interesting, because it was really their first acknowledgement of the outside world. I know some theories had suggested that those on the island were the last survivors of humanity. Unless there's some people who think the signal was truly local, you've got to assume this discounts the outside world experiencing some sort of disaster.
> 
> On the previews:





Spoiler



So you're saying the countdown was really 14, 13, 12, 11, 10 and they cropped off the other digit(s)? That would be worse of a tease than Jin speaking English and it turning out to be in Hurley's dream. My guess is that will be the very end of the episode and we still won't find out what happens, or doesn't happen.


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

jeff125va said:


> Well he's been tortured once before, and I just don't see it happening again, even if they do KNOW this time that he knows what they think he knows.


Sawyer said he would die before giving up the guns.


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

jschuman said:


> I don't get this. I can somewhat see Locke as 'serving his own ego' when dealing with things onthe island, but not really with Jack. Jack has been treating people the whole time while everyone clamored for him to be the leader. Unless you count his desire to "save people" as feeding his ego?.


Yes, that's what I mean about Jack. And based on him having the "need" to be a do-gooder from the flashbacks.

Cheryl


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

Scubee said:


> Wouldn't this episode have been shot a month or more ago? What are the chances of the writers reading the board and re-shooting a scene just to include that line? I think it's more likely that they realized and even intended the questions to be asked as to why Locke would keep the statuettes.


I agree. It's a very plausible and likely explanation, so it's no big coincidence that both the writers and people on message boards would think that that's the reason he kept them. This was just the first time Locke wasn't alone with them, hence the first opportunity to say something out loud about it.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

jeff125va said:


> Oh, _that_ con. Well, a big part of it is knowing where all of the other guns are. Even if someone could wrest the gun from him in his sleep, what are they going to do? Threaten to kill him unless he tells them where the rest are?...


no...but it would be a pretty easy way to get a gun and at least take some of the power away from him. And like somebody else said earlier....how far or good could he really of hid those guns?


----------



## jschuman (Feb 20, 2001)

speedcouch said:


> Yes, that's what I mean about Jack. And based on him having the "need" to be a do-gooder from the flashbacks.
> 
> Cheryl


I can understand why you think that, I just disagree. 
Is the "need to be a do-gooder" such a bad quality? I mean, if he was *causing* bad stuff to happen _just_ so he can swoop in and save the day, that's one thing, but in this case he is truly trying to help.


----------



## chavez (Nov 18, 2004)

> Sawyer said he would die before giving up the guns.


yeah i know he said that... but start pulling strips of skin off of his back and i bet he'd talk.



> Well he's been tortured once before, and I just don't see it happening again, even if they do KNOW this time that he knows what they think he know


i agree. it won't happen again.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

speedcouch said:


> Yes, that's what I mean about Jack. And based on him having the "need" to be a do-gooder from the flashbacks.
> 
> Cheryl


He certainly has that need, and it's definitely affected his behavior in a few situations, but all of that aside, he's still a doctor and would have treated and saved people and probably ended up in the same leadership type role regardless of his ego issues.

And whether Locke has ego/control issues, he has a lot of survival skills so the same could be said about him ending up in a leadership role. I don't really see any of the key characters in leadership roles _solely_ to serve their own egos. That being said, I do like Sawyer challenging what is essentially their self-appointment to being in control of the guns, hatch, food, etc. Not because I don't like those guys, it just raises interesting questions about people in authority in a society.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

> In that episode Jerry has this male friend he is trying to break up with. They go to a diner and the guy is very obnoxious. That was quite a few years ago so I did not recognize him at first, but as soon as I heard his voice I was pretty sure it was him.


THAT'S where I recognized him from, thanks! Saw that episode just a few weeks ago.

Maybe Sawyer did hide the guns and the ammo in separate places. I know I would've, but I don't know if the writers would have cared enough about the details to have him do that.

I don't really care how well he hid it, or where. The point is that he has the guns stashed away, and he know feels like he got his revenge on all of them, and is in control of something. Good enough for me, the details of it don't concern me.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

> start pulling strips of skin off of his back and i bet he'd talk.


I don't think he would.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

pmyers said:


> no...but it would be a pretty easy way to get a gun and at least take some of the power away from him. And like somebody else said earlier....how far or good could he really of hid those guns?


Oh I think he could have hidden them extremely well, but if someone were to get the one he has from him, he may not be able to get back to them without being followed. So yeah, the one he does have could represent a lot of power.

But, I think he could make it pretty difficult for them to get it away from him, probably enough to require them to sneak up and attack him.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

pendragn said:


> I'm with you most of the way, but I just want to add that this is a very big part of his plan working. Nobody wants to be "the first shot." That alone is enough to keep a large group from confronting him with the thought of doing violence.
> 
> tk


lucia would dont you think?

And while yes, jack 'could' try to get into the safe, i still think it's the most easily defendable position. Out in the woods, it's literally open to anyone who searches for it. They would easily be able to sneak someone out to do a search pattern and gain the upper hand.

and james, love the spoiler...I was thrilled to see it. so much, that I hope others read it too because it's so cool  It's very cool. You wanna see it don't you? 

this isn't the spoiler, but it's my real feelings about it



Spoiler



it's something i wanted to happen since we found out about it! Can't wait to see it!!!


----------



## RegBarc (Feb 18, 2003)

pmyers said:


> I meant his con regarding the guns. The guy has to sleep sometime.....


Pretty easy to solve, actually. Remove the clip from the gun, with the bullet in the chamber, and sleep on that clip. Gun is useless without it. It's like a metal bat, and Sawyer still knows where the rest of the stash is.


----------



## scheckeNYK (Apr 28, 2004)

How come they haven't made use of the other hatch at all again? Is it too far across the Island? Is that maybe on the other side of the "line," which is why the Others were so aggressive with the Tallies? Time to travel aside, I wonder why Sawyer wouldn't hide them there. He'd be one of the few who even knew how to get there.

Great ep IMHO. But I love a good con.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

After sleeping on it, I've decided that I don't like Sawyer's plan. We needed to see him try to retain power. There are instances of rebels overthrowing governments, only to realize that they don't know how to run a country and so the coup ultimately fails due to incompetent management. 

Sawyer's was a nice con, but con men disappear after they score. Sayer can't disappear--he's on an island. If he's the new "sherif in town", then he darn well better appoint some deputies. If others in camp are tired of Jack and Locke running things, then he'd have some leverage, but we haven't seen evidence of that. As it is, there's no reason to believe that Sawyer will last one night. Remember, this is the guy that's gotten is ass kicked by virtually everybody on the island! He's going to wake up tomorrow with Locke's knife at his throat and Eko's club in his face.

Sawyer's little power grab should fail. We should have seen it fail. That would have made a complete episode, and a more satisfying one.


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

jeff125va said:


> That's exactly what Sawyer said to Locke, and Locke's response was it wouldn't matter if he changed the combo, Jack would find a way to get in.
> 
> Btw, were we to assume from Charlie's refusal of the statue at the end that he hadn't been using the heroin all the time he'd been stashing the statues?


I heard that as well but it is a stupid response. Yeah, Jack could blow the door like he did the hatch but it's hard to control dynamite. Not likely he would do it. He could blow up the whole facility (and himself with that unstable stuff).  He could try to break in the safe but that is difficult to do, as well. At the least, Jack would have to work a while to get the guns out. That gives him and everyone else time to cool off and rethink everything. Instead, Locke takes the guns and hides them where they are unsecured? And how did Sawyer know he would not just change the combination? That would have messed up all his plans and been the most logical thing to do.


----------



## NoThru22 (May 6, 2005)

The T-1000 was the guy from the previous Sawyer episode. I think he told the girl about the con because he was keeping all the money for himself and he didn't want his partner to come back and kill her. He still took all her money but at least he saved her life (sort of.)


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

> Sawyer's little power grab should fail. We should have seen it fail. That would have made a complete episode, and a more satisfying one.


Maybe it should fail, but to have squeezed it into one episode would have been crazy.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

BeanMeScot said:


> I heard that as well but it is a stupid response. Yeah, Jack could blow the door like he did the hatch but it's hard to control dynamite. Not likely he would do it. He could blow up the whole facility (and himself with that unstable stuff). He could try to break in the safe but that is difficult to do, as well. At the least, Jack would have to work a while to get the guns out. That gives him and everyone else time to cool off and rethink everything. Instead, Locke takes the guns and hides them where they are unsecured? And how did Sawyer know he would not just change the combination? That would have messed up all his plans and been the most logical thing to do.


When Jack and Locke were locked in that room in an earlier episode Jacke pointed out an air vent in the roof. Locke said that he bolted it down from the outside (didn't make much sense then either). A convenient entryway.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

Fool Me Twice said:


> When Jack and Locke were locked in that room in an earlier episode Jacke pointed out an air vent in the roof. Locke said that he bolted it down from the outside (didn't make much sense then either). A convenient entryway.


I think you have it backwards.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

DLiquid said:


> I think you have it backwards.


You mean it was bolted down (up) from the inside?

Anyway. It's an easy point of entry.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

Sawyer's con relied on Locke moving the guns rather that changing the combination. I know this falls into his con explanation of having someone think it is their own idea to do something you want them to do, but it was quite a long shot for the plan to rely on it.

So Sawyer conned both his partner and his girlfriend? Why not just take the money from the girlfriend, why tell her about the partner and say that he loves her? That was just cold blooded. NoThru22 makes the point that maybe he was trying to save her, which kind of makes sense, but I'm sure she would go straight home when she found no money in the bag, thinking the partner story was BS. So being out of her house for a day would save her from getting killed by the partner? I don't really get it.

I'm not sure I like how the main characters are becoming less likeable over the past few episodes. Locke, Jack, Charlie, Sawyer, they've all taken a turn to the dark side recently. I do like Charlie as the hooded dark jedi though. If Charlie is the evil twin of Locke and Sawyer the evil twin of Jack, then why have Locke and Jack turn darker? Locke beating down Charlie and giving him evil stares seemed almost out of character for him. Then you have Jack wanting to form an army and run around with guns when as Kate mentioned they are supposedly in no danger if they don't "cross the line."

I was glad to see confirmation that Charlie is not using. I never thought that he was.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

I think Sawyer's con of his partner was his move to go on his own.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

MickeS said:


> Maybe it should fail, but to have squeezed it into one episode would have been crazy.


They could have done so, if they had chosen to. But, they decided to make a very plot-driven episode focused on the parallel cons. (This was an unusual choice for this show which prides itself on being character driven, and not having neat and tidy episodes with a beginning middle and end.) Because of this choice, they ended this show on the surprise ending, rather than let the action continue and let the primary tension in the camp between Sawyer/Jack/Locke resolve itself.

Now, if there was a plausible way for Sawyer to retain power, none of this would matter. If we were shown a widespread division in the camp, then I could accept that Sawyer would be safe for a while. As it is, I can't imagine how he could make it through the night. In that case, the episode should have covered that. (IMO, of course.)


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

I also meant to say that I saw him conning his partner and the women. It all reminded me of Matchstick Men.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I'm really surprised that anybody thinks Sawyer is making a play for power. He's just doing what he always does--getting his hands on what he can in order to profit from it. If they want the guns, they'll have to buy them from Sawyer now.

(That, and pissing Jack off!)


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

> http://www.mclaughlinlabs.com/leigh/lost/tran_2x11.htm
> JACK: Good. Give me a boost up.
> 
> LOCKE: It's no use. *I bolted it shut from the inside*.
> ...


Ah hah! See! Bolted it shut from the inside _of the air vent_, meaning the outside of the gun room. That doesn't make sense to me. He should have bolted it shut from the inside _of the gun room _ to make it more difficult to enter.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

speedcouch said:


> Now, I saw it as Sawyer didn't like it because Kate had told him "everyone loves you now" a couple episodes ago. He seems to have this need for what I call "self-flagellation". Punishing himself because of his past. To me, that's where the flashback tied it. He knew he had done all these rotten things and didn't think he deserved to be "loved" on the island, so he decided to go back to his evil ways and make everyone dislike him again.


Oh I understand why Sawyer did it. The show has been pretty clear about most of the motivations of the characters.
I think that the character of Sawyer is interesting and does shake up the status quo.
However, I also recognize that his character is to be a self centered prick.


----------



## Sir_Q (Jun 27, 2002)

Wouldn't the missing statues from the safe sort of implicate Charlie?


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

Fool Me Twice said:


> Ah hah! See! Bolted it shut from the inside _of the air vent_, meaning the outside of the gun room. That doesn't make sense to me. He should have bolted it shut from the inside _of the gun room _ to make it more difficult to enter.


I think the point of that scene was that it was bolted shut so that no one could get IN through the air vent. They wanted to get out, but without a wrench it didn't really matter how it was bolted, they weren't going anywhere.


----------



## smickola (Nov 17, 2004)

I agree with the idea that the con was Sawyer's reaction to everybody liking him...he seems to have a need to be hated, and was obviously miffed that he was suddenly likeable. And he seemed to need to ruin whatever it was that was developing between him & Kate.

I don't think that Sawyer is truly interested in having power, or in really being the "new sherriff in town"...I think that he really just wanted to piss off Jack and Locke, Jack especially. I wouldn't be surprised if in pretty short order he gives the guns back...he's aware they need them for self defense against the others....but by then he will have made his point, and regained the loathing he appears to thrive on.

I was a little disturbed by some of the elements of Sawyer's con as well....why would he be so certain that Kate would ask him to go warn Locke about Jack coming, as opposed to just run there herself? And unless changing the lock combination would be impossible for time constraints, why would he be so certain that Locke would hide the guns rather than change the combination? Neither assumption seems like a slam dunk to me...

I figured out pretty early on that Charlie was involved, he was the only one who would have the motivation to turn against the others, plus since he's been banished it wouldn't be obvious that he wasn't around with everyone else when it happened.

One other thing...if Locke was in such a hurry to move the guns from Jack, why did he take time to move the statues with the heroin as well?


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm really surprised that anybody thinks Sawyer is making a play for power. He's just doing what he always does--getting his hands on what he can in order to profit from it. If they want the guns, they'll have to buy them from Sawyer now.
> 
> (That, and pissing Jack off!)


He doesn't want to rule the whole tribe, but he does want power--the power to live as he pleases. He refuses to submit to any form of authority. He resents Jack taking his meds and he resents the others divvying up his "stuff". He's a sociopath unable to make the smallest sacrifice of ego. His plan was to knock Jack off his pedestal and take for himself control of his own life. His plan worked--temporarily.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

DLiquid said:


> I think the point of that scene was that it was bolted shut so that no one could get IN through the air vent. They wanted to get out, but without a wrench it didn't really matter how it was bolted, they weren't going anywhere.


I tried to read it that way when I first heard it too. But, then he should have simply said "We don't have a wrench." ::shrugs::


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

Sir_Q said:


> Wouldn't the missing statues from the safe sort of implicate Charlie?


thanks for reminding me of that!


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

mwhip said:


> I also meant to say that I saw him conning his partner and the women. It all reminded me of Matchstick Men.


Me too. I thought the girlfriend and Sawyer's partner were going to end up being the ones actually conning Sawyer.

And I think the point of Saywer's flashbacks were to show us that he was indeed a bad person. He never loved that girl, he was conning her the whole time. Then he got greedy and didn't want to split the money with his partner, told the partner he wasn't going to do it. He got the partner to make him want to go after him and the girl (that's how he said cons work) Then he told his girlfriend his partner was going after them, sent her somewhere with a bag of 'money' knowing that the partner is going to be hunting her down. In the meantime, his partner is going to be following the girl, thinking she has the money and probably kills her. But by the time he realizes there's no money in that bag, Sawyer is long gone. Sawyer keeps all $600k to himself...its that simple. I think his line to Kate saying that he's a bad person and has never done a good thing in his life proves that. Maybe his partner did kill the girl he was with and maybe he does feel guilty about it. But the fact still remains that he says he's a bad person and nothing can change that.


----------



## Sir_Q (Jun 27, 2002)

I think the scene with Saywer pausing and looking at the picture of the two of them shows that he does have some feelings for her.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I really liked this episode. I agree 100% with Rob, etc.: the idea that Sawyer's plan is bad because he can't control 40 people by himself with just one gun misses the point. Sawyer isn't trying to become "king of the island". He wants to (a) get back at Jack, and show Jack (and others) that even if they don't like Sawyer, they can't mess with him without paying price, and (b) show everyone that Jack and Locke aren't so hot and don't deserve to be de facto leaders of the group, and (c) get some r-e-s-p-e-c-t, not by earning it, but by having something other people want so they have to respect him. He's not going to try to run the camp, he's not going to take everyone's stuff (as he said, he doesn't even want his stash back). He just wants to show everyone he's not some punk they can railroad whenever they feel like it, and that he is now an important person in the camp that they better not piss off. Of course they could rush him, they could take the gun while he's sleeping, etc. etc. But the only solution to the situation they're in is if they can force Sawyer to tell them where the guns are: as long as Sawyer has control over the guns he's still BMOI. I think it's quite realistic to believe that Sawyer won't talk, at least not unless they are willing to do a LOT more damage to Sawyer than I think they are... these people are mostly middle-class Westerners, after all. Chopping peoples' fingers off is not something they're going to do. Especially since most of them don't really want the guns anyway.

The problem with the show was that the island con Sawyer pulled was really weak: as someone else mentioned the pivot-point of the entire con was getting Locke to move the guns, and that was such an incredible long-shot, and so illogical a move (especially for Locke, for whom that kind of panicked thinking is utterly against his character), that no real con would ever be based around it. Even when Locke was deciding to move the guns, before I realized what Sawyer was up to, I thought it was really unusual: bad writing. Locke would either have (a) left the guns there, not changed the combination, and tried to talk Jack out of it when he arrived: Locke is very big on letting people make their own decisions; or (b) changed the combination and then dealt with whatever came next. It's unlikely Jack would have started blasting through walls to get into the safe. Having the entire con rest on Locke doing something so unpredictable and uncharacteristic is where the show fell apart.

The issue of who would tell Locke is actually not a problem: it doesn't matter one whit to the con who tells Locke. In fact, Sawyer would probably have preferred it if Kate had gone to tell Locke because that leaves him (Sawyer) even further out of the loop. All that matters was that Locke decide to move the guns (see previous paragraph) and that Charlie was there and able to track Locke without Locke realizing it (also somewhat far-fetched, but I can forgive this since Locke would be worried and hurrying and Charlie has a lot of anger, and thus determination).

Anyway. I still liked this episode a lot . Sawyer had some GREAT nicknames in this show. I have to admit I was guessing for most of the show. I thought A-L did the kidnapping right at the start. Then when Sawyer suggested A-L did it to Kate I immediately decided Sawyer was behind it. But of course, he couldn't have done the kidnapping itself since he was with Kate. I thought he was working with A-L: she for her reasons (to scare people into joining the army) and he for his (although I didn't know what that was). The twist with Charlie at the end was great! I totally didn't guess that and yet in hindsight it was so obvious! They did it really well, keeping Charlie off-screen for the entire show and avoiding any "cut-away" shots of him which make it so obvious who's involved.

I give it :up: :up: :up: :up:


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

unicorngoddess said:


> ...Then he told his girlfriend his partner was going after them, sent her somewhere with a bag of 'money' knowing that the partner is going to be hunting her down. In the meantime, his partner is going to be following the girl, thinking she has the money and probably kills her. But by the time he realizes there's no money in that bag, Sawyer is long gone. Sawyer keeps all $600k to himself...its that simple...


Ah, thanks for that explanation. That makes more sense to me. I kept wondering what would keep Sawyer's partner from coming after Sawyer.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

speedcouch said:


> Hey, we have to listen to all of you guys drool over Boomer on BG threads and Kate on here.
> Cheryl


Yeah, but they really ARE hot!


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Sir_Q said:


> I think the scene with Saywer pausing and looking at the picture of the two of them shows that he does have some feelings for her.


Or he just felt guilty. I think if he loved her, he wouldn't have pulled the con...end of story. But we know that Sawyer's guilt does get to him...like when he almost conned the guy with a son. I think Sawyer feels guilty about pulling these cons but he feels that its just who he is and can't change that.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

anyone notice drugs got charlie in trouble and it was taking away of drugs that was the last straw for sawyer?

dont do drugs


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

unicorngoddess said:


> Me too. I thought the girlfriend and Sawyer's partner were going to end up being the ones actually conning Sawyer.
> 
> And I think the point of Saywer's flashbacks were to show us that he was indeed a bad person. He never loved that girl, he was conning her the whole time. Then he got greedy and didn't want to split the money with his partner, told the partner he wasn't going to do it. He got the partner to make him want to go after him and the girl (that's how he said cons work) Then he told his girlfriend his partner was going after them, sent her somewhere with a bag of 'money' knowing that the partner is going to be hunting her down. In the meantime, his partner is going to be following the girl, thinking she has the money and probably kills her. But by the time he realizes there's no money in that bag, Sawyer is long gone. Sawyer keeps all $600k to himself...its that simple. I think his line to Kate saying that he's a bad person and has never done a good thing in his life proves that. Maybe his partner did kill the girl he was with and maybe he does feel guilty about it. But the fact still remains that he says he's a bad person and nothing can change that.


That explains a lot, assuming that we know that ALL of the money was in the bag he went back inside for. Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention, but did the bag he gave her definitely have no money in it? Does that also mean that the partner had gotten out of the car to watch the girl in case she or they left out the back of the house, and that Jack knew that? (was it really the partner's car at all?)


----------



## gschrock (Dec 28, 2001)

> (b) changed the combination and then dealt with whatever came next.


Locke did make a comment that changing the combo wasn't going to stock Jack.

And as for how well something could be hidden, anyone's that geocached can realize how hard it is to find something, and that's if you're told where to look. We've got a pretty jungle covered area, I'd guess you could find a spot that would be hard to find. Heck, look at Charlie's drug stash. Actually, the part that might be interested is whether Sawyer could remember exactly where he stashed the guns. I could just see him not being able to find them again.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

I thought I remember seeing some guy walk toward her house and that's what prompted her leaving out the back...? Do I remember that correct or was that just some guy Sawyer paid $10 to wait in the car 5 minutes then walk across the street?


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

1 more thing: I hope Sawyer found a nice dry place to stash the guns....because wet, rusty guns are worthless.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

jeff125va said:


> was it really the partner's car at all?)


I don't think it was. I think the traditional use of a black car to spy on someone was just a gimmick to make this girl think she was in real danger. If it really was the partner's car, I don't think Sawyer would have risked going to sit in it.

Maybe the hotel he sent the girl was a predetermined meeting place for Sawyer and his partner. So when she shows up with a bag of money, the partner goes in thinking Sawyer isn't going to take the money as planned and send her on her way.


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> Me too. I thought the girlfriend and Sawyer's partner were going to end up being the ones actually conning Sawyer.
> 
> And I think the point of Saywer's flashbacks were to show us that he was indeed a bad person. He never loved that girl, he was conning her the whole time.


I think it was clear he DID indeed love her. Based on the scene where his partners accused him of going soft and the sincerity when he said goodbye to her. I choose to believe he sent her away to save her from the partner and took to money to further keep the partner away from her. But then I'm a romantic, I guess. 

Cheryl


----------



## BeanMeScot (Apr 17, 2002)

jeff125va said:


> That explains a lot, assuming that we know that ALL of the money was in the bag he went back inside for. Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention, but did the bag he gave her definitely have no money in it? Does that also mean that the partner had gotten out of the car to watch the girl in case she or they left out the back of the house, and that Jack knew that? (was it really the partner's car at all?)


I got the impression that the bag he gave her was like his briefcase of "money" she saw originally. The top and bottom bills are real but the ones in the middle are newsprint.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

speedcouch said:


> I think it was clear he DID indeed love her. Based on the scene where his partners accused him of going soft and the sincerity when he said goodbye to her. I choose to believe he sent her away to save her from the partner and took to money to further keep the partner away from her. But then I'm a romantic, I guess.
> 
> Cheryl


But that was all part of the con. He had to make his partner believe that he loved her in order to maket he partner want to go after her to get the money himself. Then he had to make her believe that he was just trying to save her by filling her bag with the 'money' and telling her to run so he could handle his partner. All the while, his partner will be thinking Sawyer sent the girl packing with her money so his partner would go after the girl. I believe that's what they call a double cross.


----------



## mcdougll (Jan 27, 2003)

I also thought that Locke moving the guns wasn't exactly in-character for him. However, while Sawyer's con did depend upon moving the guns, he had nothing to lose by trying.

Also, Sawyer could easily have had Charlie take over manning the button while he (Sawyer) followed Locke to get the guns. I don't know which one did the following, but it doesn't really matter.

Good episode!


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

unicorngoddess said:


> But that was all part of the con. He had to make his partner believe that he loved her in order to maket he partner want to go after her to get the money himself. Then he had to make her believe that he was just trying to save her by filling her bag with the 'money' and telling her to run so he could handle his partner. All the while, his partner will be thinking Sawyer sent the girl packing with her money so his partner would go after the girl. I believe that's what they call a double cross.


unicorngoddess speaks the truth.
Also, I'm not convinced that Sawyer would be "in love" with Kate if there wasn't the obvious attraction between her and Jack.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

When Sawyer and Kate were playing the drinking game "I never" he said



> http://www.lost-theseries.com/transcripts.php?epid=17
> SAWYER: I've never been in love.
> 
> KATE: (surprised) You've never been in love?
> ...


Then again, he is a liar. But, that was written as a truthful moment, I think. So, unless there's a continuity problem, he wasn't in love with her.


----------



## Scubee (Mar 2, 2005)

Fool Me Twice said:


> "Bad Twin" is the name of a real Lost novel to be released in May.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1401302769/002-3043684-3708867?v=glance&n=283155


The author's name is Gary Troup? Rearrange those letters to get PURGATORY.


----------



## dba62 (Sep 2, 2005)

DLiquid said:


> Charlie is not using. I never thought that he was.


Yes - it shows that he can be evil without the influence of drugs.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Fool Me Twice said:


> When Sawyer and Kate were playing the drinking game "I never" he said
> 
> Then again, he is a liar. But, that was written as a truthful moment, I think. So, unless there's a continuity problem, he wasn't in love with her.


But then when he was delirious with fever in the bunker, he said to Jack "I love her". 
The assumption is that he was referring to Kate but of course that may not be correct.

And as you note, he is a liar....


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Scubee said:


> The author's name is Gary Troup? Rearrange those letters to get PURGATORY.


That's hilarious!  Nice catch. This will encourage those who insist on believing that the characters are really dead--in spite of the producers saying that they're not.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

dba62 said:


> Yes - it shows that he can be evil without the influence of drugs.


If he were using I doubt he would be evil, he'd just be comatose and unreliable, like his brother in the flashbacks.


----------



## goMO (Dec 29, 2004)

why was Sawyer counting "one thousand one, one thousand two..." in the car, and then went back in the house?


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

BeanMeScot said:


> I got the impression that the bag he gave her was like his briefcase of "money" she saw originally. The top and bottom bills are real but the ones in the middle are newsprint.


I just watched it again, and I'm still not 100% sure what happened. When Sawyer came into the house, the briefcase with the money was sitting open on the table, so if that money was fake and/or had newsprint, it was right there for her to see and count. When he was telling her to go, we saw him emptying the money from the briefcase into a bag - either the one he gave her or an identical one, but he did empty the money from the briefcase. Just after he removed the last of the money from the briefcase, the camera cut to her, facing away from him at the table, so if he switched the bags at that point, it was obscured.

If he didn't switch the bags, then that money was fake, and she had the opportunity to see that while Sawyer was out. I guess it's possible it was supposed to be fake for their "scam" but then she obviously knew that it wasn't very much money, but I guess it could have been more than she needed until he got there - at least a few thousand I imagine. But if that money was fake, then how did he get the presumably real money that he took at the end from her? That is, if they were just using phony money for their scam, why would she have taken out all of her money in cash?


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

goMO said:


> why was Sawyer counting "one thousand one, one thousand two..." in the car, and then went back in the house?


I think he was making sure she was gone.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

goMO said:


> why was Sawyer counting "one thousand one, one thousand two..." in the car...?


I thought a bomb was going to go off.......oh.....wait.....that would be "24"!


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

goMO said:


> why was Sawyer counting "one thousand one, one thousand two..." in the car, and then went back in the house?


at first I thought he was waiting for the house to blow up....now I have no idea.


----------



## chavez (Nov 18, 2004)

maybe just giving her time to be gone so he can go in without worrying about her seeing him or something


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

"One Mississippi, two Mississippi..."


----------



## Granny (Mar 29, 2005)

DLiquid said:


> Sawyer's con relied on Locke moving the guns rather that changing the combination. I know this falls into his con explanation of having someone think it is their own idea to do something you want them to do, but it was quite a long shot for the plan to rely on it. ...


Not necessarily. All he had to do was convince Locke that he needed to do something with the guns. Even if he just changed the combination, he would at some point have to open the door, and at that point Sawyer could bonk Locke on the head and take the guns. It's not like he was going to keep it a secret that he had them. My question is, if he has secreted the guns in the woods, what is to keep the Others from taking them?

My current gripe? When is Jin going to learn some English? Total immersion for, how long is it? and he still speaks no English? Not even realistic.


----------



## tewcewl (Dec 18, 2004)

Granny said:


> My current gripe? When is Jin going to learn some English? Total immersion for, how long is it? and he still speaks no English? Not even realistic.


He HAS been learning English. Not enough to be fluent, but still...


----------



## durl (Dec 1, 2005)

dba62 said:


> Yes - it shows that he can be evil without the influence of drugs.


Maybe I'm being too analytical, but I think he did an evil act because he feels like no one believes in him. People believe he's using drugs again (false), and that he was trying to hurt Aaron (also false). He's a desperate man who feels like he's got nothing to lose. Still, I didn't like his turn to the "dark side." He's not the most exciting character, but I didn't want him to hurt others.

I believe Sawyer simply wants control (of every facet of his life) and he doesn't care who he hurts to get it. He hates everyone...and comes up with reasons later. Being "sheriff" of the island is plain stupid. Cons make their hit then move on to other pastures, but he doesn't have that luxury. He's conned people, they know it, and he can't get away from them. The whole thing is pointless for him. I kinda liked him turning "nice" and hoped that resolving his issues might let the story turn towards solving the mystery of the island. Now we're back to season one attitudes.

Anyway, I believe Charlie will redeem himself somehow. I have no idea how, but he's in an odd situation now. He's not bad, but he's committed bad acts in order to get revenge on those who wronged him. Now he's in limbo, not a Sawyer, but he can't be in with Jack.


----------



## etexlady (Jun 23, 2002)

I'm still not quite sure what happened in Sawyer's previous life con. I had the impression his partner was waiting in the car and then when Sawyer got in the car it was empty. That made me wonder if the partner and the girl had played the con on Sawyer. I agree with the comments about his one liners and nicknames for everyone. I'm sick of them...."freckles" and "dimples". He is a prick for sure.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

jeff125va said:


> I just watched it again, and I'm still not 100% sure what happened. When Sawyer came into the house, the briefcase with the money was sitting open on the table, so if that money was fake and/or had newsprint, it was right there for her to see and count. When he was telling her to go, we saw him emptying the money from the briefcase into a bag - either the one he gave her or an identical one, but he did empty the money from the briefcase. Just after he removed the last of the money from the briefcase, the camera cut to her, facing away from him at the table, so if he switched the bags at that point, it was obscured.


The switch was a simple magician's slight of hand trick. The bag was sitting in a chair that was pushed under the table. You hold the two bags together as one opening up the front bag to load the money. Once the money is loaded he pushed the chair under the table a bit, concealing the fact that the bag with the money in it is still in the chair. What he's doing is picking up the bag in the back, handing it to her while he pushes the chair back under the table. It's a simple switcheroo.

The reason for the counting is he wanted to make sure he stayed in the car long enough for her to get far enough away to give him enough time to go in the house and get the bag of money.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Two things:

First, I don't think we saw any evidence that Sawyer double-crossed his partner. The fact that the car was empty meant nothing. Sawyer was simply using the car and the threat of the partner to get the girl on the run and to think that she had the money. There was absolutely nothing in the episode to indicate that Sawyer wasn't just going to meet his partner at the diner at some later date and split the money with him then. 

Someone mentioned that the missing statue implicate Charlie in the heist. I don't think it does. Wasn't the safe pretty much empty when Jack arrived? I think Locke moved everything that was in there, thus allowing Charlie to get not only the guns but also the statues and the other medicines that Jack had stored in there.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Granny said:


> My current gripe? When is Jin going to learn some English? Total immersion for, how long is it? and he still speaks no English? Not even realistic.


He sure did know how to say GUN real good.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

devdogaz said:


> First, I don't think we saw any evidence that Sawyer double-crossed his partner. The fact that the car was empty meant nothing. Sawyer was simply using the car and the threat of the partner to get the girl on the run and to think that she had the money. There was absolutely nothing in the episode to indicate that Sawyer wasn't just going to meet his partner at the diner at some later date and split the money with him then.


Well, if he wasn't double crossing his partner, why did he make him think he was in love with her? And why didn't he actually use him in his actual plan to get the money. It just seems that the fact that his partner wasn't involved in the end plan to get the money makes it highly likely that Sawyer double crossed him.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> Well, if he wasn't double crossing his partner, why did he make him think he was in love with her? And why didn't he actually use him in his actual plan to get the money. It just seems that the fact that his partner wasn't involved in the end plan to get the money makes it highly likely that Sawyer double crossed him.


I think that when Sawyer had that conversation with his partner, he was being genuine. He wasn't going to go through with it because of his feelings for her. But then the partner said he'd kill them both and also reminded Sawyer that he was a con man and that's what con men do. Sawyer probably realized that his partner was right and decided to go ahead and go through with it.

I'm not saying that Sawyer didn't double cross his partner, just that there was no indication of it in the episode.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> He sure did know how to say GUN real good.


If Jin was Japanese instead of Korean, I'd make a Gundam Tank joke.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

I thought watching Lost in SD was bad...

I hadn't considered watching it on a hospital room TV with sound through the tiny 1.5 inch speaker in the combination TV/light/nurse-call control!

I'm all better though and home from the hospital...

I'll try to catch up with this thread when I have re-watched on my TiVo of the newly restored ABC HD channel in New Orleans!


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

bruinfan said:


> Sawyer said he would die before giving up the guns.


Let Sayid go all "Jack Bauer" on him and we'll see about that.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm really surprised that anybody thinks Sawyer is making a play for power. He's just doing what he always does--getting his hands on what he can in order to profit from it. If they want the guns, they'll have to buy them from Sawyer now.
> 
> (That, and pissing Jack off!)


Precisely. The characters' traits and foibles are well written and set up ahead of time. No sudden emergence of uncharacteristic behaviour. We were given all the info in previous episodes to anticipate the behaviours. Yes, Sawyer veered from recently being the likable guy, but he did so staying in character as someone with a perverse need to be disliked. I understand that a bit as I always liked pissing certain folks off and enjoyed the notoriety. I like Sawyer a lot (in a manly man sorta way) as a character. He had a blizzard of new nicknames last night, except for Kate where he sticks with Freckles.

Sawyer simply wants to piss Jack off and to continue his needs to be the trader for personal profit. Meanwhile, the Hobbit discovered how important it was for him to get back at Locke whom he perceives as a threat to his relationship with Claire and the baby. This was also well set up by the previous episodes. I never thought he was using again.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

devdogaz said:


> I'm not saying that Sawyer didn't double cross his partner, just that there was no indication of it in the episode.


I completely disagree. If he wasn't cutting his partner out of the con, he would have stuck with the original plan and walked out the door with the briefcase.

The writers on LOST don't usually connect all the dots for you, which I think is great.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

DLiquid said:


> I completely disagree. If he wasn't cutting his partner out of the con, he would have stuck with the original plan and walked out the door with the briefcase.
> 
> The writers on LOST don't usually connect all the dots for you, which I think is great.


This is what I don't get. How do we know that what he did wasn't the original con all along? He conned the girl out of all her money. He got her to think that his partner was after them both. He walked out the door with the empty briefcase to continue the con that his partner was in the car. He went back in the house and got the bag of real money. What part of that was a deviation from the "original" plan? We never had any indication of what the original plan was except that the girl was the mark and the target was her $600k. In the end, he took the money from her so I don't see how that was a deviation.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

devdogaz said:


> This is what I don't get. How do we know that what he did wasn't the original con all along? He conned the girl out of all her money. He got her to think that his partner was after them both. He walked out the door with the empty briefcase to continue the con that his partner was in the car. He went back in the house and got the bag of real money. What part of that was a deviation from the "original" plan? We never had any indication of what the original plan was except that the girl was the mark and the target was her $600k. In the end, he took the money from her so I don't see how that was a deviation.


Well when the writers don't connect all of the dots, you can usually come up with all kinds of possible scenarios. I look at the evidence and assume the most likely scenario.

Your scenario? That the original plan was for Sawyer to tell her that he loves her and has chosen not to con her, and ironically he just told his partner that he has chosen not to con her? Not such a likely scenario.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

devdogaz said:


> This is what I don't get. How do we know that what he did wasn't the original con all along? He conned the girl out of all her money. He got her to think that his partner was after them both. He walked out the door with the empty briefcase to continue the con that his partner was in the car. He went back in the house and got the bag of real money. What part of that was a deviation from the "original" plan? We never had any indication of what the original plan was except that the girl was the mark and the target was her $600k. In the end, he took the money from her so I don't see how that was a deviation.


Wouldn't that make the scene where he met with Gordy in the diner pretty much meaningless? If he was planning all along on double-crossing Gordy, why would he have tried to get out of it "honestly?"

It seems pretty likely that he was planning on getting the money from her through some scam that she thought she was in on with him. When he got back to the house and he pointed out the car to him, she asked if it was the guy from "the Mercado deal" to which he replied "there is no Mercado deal."

I'm still not 100% sure how what all happened, but I really think that he did fall in love with her and deviated from his original plan. Yes, he evidently took the money or a lot of it, but I think somehow he made sure Gordy wouldn't find either one of them.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. This has all been posted, and maybe it's obvious, but I'll recap.

The original plan was to wait for his girlfriend propose the long con using her $600K, to which Sawyer would agree, then he and his partner would take the money and run. Over the six months, he began to care about her and told his partner he couldn't do it, but then his partner threatened to kill Sawyer and his girlfriend. So much for backing out. So Sawyer's options were:

- Go through with the original plan. Sawyer was too pissed at his partner to give him any money after the diner conversation.
- Run away with the girl and hide forever. Not a great option.
- Kill the partner. Sawyer's not a killer.
- Con both the girl and the partner. Eureka, this way he lives up to his self-image of never doing anything nice. It's a win-win.

By conning the girl and sending her off, he pretty much guaranteed that she would be safe. Once his partner found out Sawyer tricked them both, he would assume Sawyer didn't really care for her and he would have nothing to gain by killing her.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

DLiquid said:


> - Kill the partner. Sawyer's not a killer.


Other than when he killed that one guy...


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

jeff125va said:


> Oh, _that_ con. Well, a big part of it is knowing where all of the other guns are. Even if someone could wrest the gun from him in his sleep, what are they going to do? Threaten to kill him unless he tells them where the rest are? That would be a bit counter-productive. Charlie is desperate to hide the fact that he attacked Sun, so I don't see him turning on Sawyer. And if Sawyer's smart, he will re-hide the guns from Charlie or he already has.


1. Correct on first part. Sawyer can sleep like a baby. He knows they won't do anything, cause there's nothing they could actually do.
2. As to the second part, I don't think Charlie has any leverage on Sawyer so there's nothing he can "turn". Just because Charlie followed Locke doesn't mean he knows where Sawyer hid the guns. I'm sure Sawyer moved them again.



chavez said:


> they could just start shooting parts of him off till he talks.


But,



bruinfan said:


> Sawyer said he would die before giving up the guns.


Which I believe.

I also think there's no way of knowing whether or not Sawyer double crossed his partner. It could be either way. I believe he did fall in love. When he told his partner he was out and the partner told him he'd kill him he might have just decided to go ahead and get the money and split it with the partner, which he did. The partner wasn't in the car because there was no reason for him to be there and perhaps the partner didn't want to be involved visually. Sawyer would have just driven to where the partner was and they'd split the money.
Of course, the other theory about tricking the partner into going after the girl is also plausible. There's no way to know at this point, which is accurate.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Well, I think we were to assume the 'original' con had Sawyer's partner being the Meraco deal. He was probably supose to be meeting his partner at the diner to do this Meraco deal and get her money. Instead, Sawyer tells him he's not going through with it. Sawyer gets back to the girls house...she believes the guy outside to be the con (the money was all there so apparently the con was suppose to be going down right then and there) 

Sawyer's partner told him he was going to go after this girl and kill her. I honestly don't think he sent her running to protect her. That guy is gonna be hunting her down. Like I said, it really wouldn't surprise me if Sawyer's partner killed her and then found out there wasn't any money.


----------



## emandbri (Jul 5, 2004)

Granny said:


> My current gripe? When is Jin going to learn some English? Total immersion for, how long is it? and he still speaks no English? Not even realistic.


It's been a year and a half for us but how long for them? 40 days? and for a lot of those 40 days he had no desire to learn english.

Emily


----------



## Delta13 (Jan 25, 2003)

Sawyer wasn't lying during the drinking game; he just now chooses to believe his partner - "You're not in love, it's just your hormones". Easier to accept, easier to believe.

One of the few (if only) flashbacks where the guy looks just like he does after 50+ days on the island. 



> Is the "need to be a do-gooder" such a bad quality? I mean, if he was causing bad stuff to happen just so he can swoop in and save the day, that's one thing, but in this case he is truly trying to help.


 But is he trying to help? Or just doing what he only believes is just? Jack has decided on several courses of action that only he has a voice in, and can be pretty inflexible. Guns, medicine, even such as chasing Michael across the island. Setting up an army. He clearly trusts no one anymore, and listens to no one's advice. Not a good prescription for a leader.

Locke was right, after all - Jack was going to get the guns and break their agreement. He might have even been willing to "cross a line" ... what would that have provoked? To what end?

Because he's a doctor he has no ego? Hah, and a surgeon, no less. That's one of the reasons for the backstory with the hot Italian daughter. Ego. And doing the wrong thing for the seemingly right reasons.

And if the previews are somewhat accurate then


Spoiler



Jack forces the system to countdown to zero. I doubt he does it to heal anyone.


----------



## balboa dave (Jan 19, 2004)

Did anyone else see the Lost promo during the Super Bowl? Set to Robert Palmer's Addicted to Love, it integrated scenes from the show into the video, with the words changed to Addicted to Lost? I found it hilarious.

Here it is if you missed it. There are spoilers I guess, but only for episodes before this one.


----------



## Vito the TiVo (Oct 27, 2003)

I'm surprised at the negativity towards this episode around here. It was a very solid episode for the series and one of the best that didn't have huge reveals. 

The problem with the series as of late is that it was getting a little stale in terms of conflict within the group. The full on Ana Lucia/Jack bonking heads never happened, nor did the Eko/Locke conflict that people expected. Additionally, from episode one people have been expecting to see the tribe develop into two factions: black and white. I think we are finally seeing the beginning of this, except instead of Locke and henchman (Charlie, Boone) against Jack/Kate, we're seeing it suddenly develop between Sawyer/Charlie and Jack/Locke with Kate in the balance. Where would Ana Lucia end up? 

Additionally you had a flashback with definitely reflected and informed the island story that we were watching, with the conclusion being in the flashback showing that Sawyer really does have a heart of stone when it comes to power/money/influence. No rough guy with a heart of gold for you women-folk out there. 

I personally found this episode far more engaging and satisfying than even many where something was revealed about the island... I'm thinking of Eko's story in particular.

Really good head to head conflict between characters where you can understand both sides point of view, that's what good drama is made of. If I got a couple more episodes like this I wouldn't even mind if they put off french women and Desmond and Others and hatches and buttons and films and strange connections and Walt and Aaron and... You see my point. This character drama satisfied in ways simply dribbling out details couldn't.

I for one am looking forward to the rest of the season now and has knocked me out of the LOST doldrums that I fell into.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

> Originally Posted by *bruinfan*
> Sawyer said he would die before giving up the guns.


They should torture Sawyer when they want the guns back. Sawyer says he won't crack. Everybody cracks under enough torture and Sawyer's not a tough guy. Ana-Lucia wouldn't have any problem knocking him around.


----------



## Big_Daddy (Nov 20, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Also, I'm not convinced that Sawyer would be "in love" with Kate if there wasn't the obvious attraction between her and Jack.


JYoung, this is a much more interesting question than did Sawyer love or not love his mark in the flashbacks. For flashbacks, either he did love her, but still conned her (I don't think he was doing it to "save" her), or he didn't and it was all premeditated - "I'm not a good person."

But where does Kate fall? The episode makes it clear that he was using Kate as a tool to advance his own agenda. So when combined with the delirium comment, he can still use and discard those he loves. Or is she just a way at jabbing at Jack?

I've generally disliked the Kate/Sawyer romance, and the scenes of her fawning over him, but this episode made that relationship much more interesting.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

emandbri said:


> It's been a year and a half for us but how long for them? 40 days? and for a lot of those 40 days he had no desire to learn english.
> 
> Emily


He was busy  How long were they on the raft anyway?


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

I thought this was a good episode but there's one thing I don't get.

With Sawyer in the hatch, it means Charlie would have had to track Locke to find out where he eventually hid the guns. There have been mulitple times where Charlie has been exposed by multiple people as a terrible outdoorsman having no skills while Locke is the outdoors Zen master. How did Locke not pick up on Charlie "tracking" him? I guess Charlie just mysteriously got powers from "the dark side"


----------



## Frank_M (Sep 9, 2001)

You know, I think people are missing Sawyer's con completely. The person being conned wasn't Locke or Jack... it was Charlie.

Charlie was the "long con." Remember... Sawyer explained that the object of the long con was to get the mark to ask YOU to do something. I think it is clearly implied that Charlie came to Sawyer wanting to get back at Locke.

So "they" crafted the idea that Charlie kidnap Sun. "They" crafted the idea that they get Locke to move the guns... and eventually be responsible for losing them. And the reason that Sawyer is the one to tell Locke? Because then he is sitting in the hatch when Locke is moving the guns. No way he can be accused of following him, or stealing them. 

And as to his relationship with Locke and Jack... nothing he said to them wasn't completely true. Jack was coming to steal the guns, he told Locke.... and Locke must have taken the guns, he told Jack.

And while Charlie knows everything... he (Charlie) is even more guilty than Sawyer. I mean, Charlie's responsible for what happened to Sun, not Sawyer. So he's safe from that.

The only real question is the "why" from Sawyer's position. Why did he want to steal the guns.

I think the flashback answered that too. He did it because it is who he is. The only item that has value is the guns, so he stole them.


----------



## chavez (Nov 18, 2004)

> Other than when he killed that one guy...


sorry, who did Sawyer kill?


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

Frank_M said:


> You know, I think people are missing Sawyer's con completely. The person being conned wasn't Locke or Jack... it was Charlie.
> 
> Charlie was the "long con." Remember... Sawyer explained that the object of the long con was to get the mark to ask YOU to do something. I think it is clearly implied that Charlie came to Sawyer wanting to get back at Locke.
> 
> ...


This all makes complete sense to me! Thanks for summing it up!


----------



## jschuman (Feb 20, 2001)

Delta13 said:


> But is he trying to help? Or just doing what he only believes is just? Jack has decided on several courses of action that only he has a voice in, and can be pretty inflexible. Guns, medicine, even such as chasing Michael across the island. Setting up an army. He clearly trusts no one anymore, and listens to no one's advice. Not a good prescription for a leader.


He IS trying to help BY doing what he thinks is just. Who else on the island has even attempted to step up and lead, or organize? It is much easier to sit back and _criticize_ than it is to actually make decisions and lead. And I think Jack HAS listened to people in the past and adjusted his thoughts accordingly. Also, yes, it appeared that Jack _was_ going to break the agreement (which, by the way, I thought was out of character for him.) But Locke basically beat him to it! And Jack does have an ego (we all do), but I don't really see him making decisions _just_ to feed his ego.

Again, just my .02, but I think Jack has performed admirably as the leader of the group when he was basically thrust into that position (almost) against his will - remember Locke talking him into being the leader in one of the first few episodes? He has done what HE thinks is right and best for the group. And since everyone else seems unwilling or unable to make these decisions, he has made them.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

newsposter said:


> He was busy  How long were they on the raft anyway?


1/2 of a day?


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

DLiquid said:


> - Go through with the original plan. Sawyer was too pissed at his partner to give him any money after the diner conversation.
> - Run away with the girl and hide forever. Not a great option.
> - Kill the partner. Sawyer's not a killer.
> - Con both the girl and the partner. Eureka, this way he lives up to his self-image of never doing anything nice. It's a win-win.
> ...


But Sawyer would still have to disappear from his parnter who will be trying to kill him once he finds out Sawyer has the money. If Sawyer can hide from the partner, then why can't he do it along with the girl?

I'm still not convinced he didn't share with the partner. I hope we'll get to see the conclusion to this thread.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

balboa dave said:


> Did anyone else see the Lost promo during the Super Bowl? Set to Robert Palmer's Addicted to Love, it integrated scenes from the show into the video, with the words changed to Addicted to Lost? I found it hilarious.
> 
> Here it is if you missed it. There are spoilers I guess, but only for episodes before this one.


What's funny is that I was at a SB party with everyone yakking and the sound turned down since the game was so poor, so I totally misunderstood the promo and expected to see Locke viewing the Robert Palmer video in this week's episode. Only now do I realize it's an "Addicted to Lost" spoof. DUH!

Another reason why I would only watch a New England Patriots SB with serious football fans.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

chavez said:


> sorry, who did Sawyer kill?


The guy who ran the taco (or whatever it was) stand in Australia. He was tricked (by Robert Patrick IIRC) into thinking that he was the man who had conned his parents which led to their deaths. But the guy really just owed Robert Patrick money. I believe the episode was "Outlaws."


----------



## writdenied (Sep 2, 2003)

Put me down as another one who believes that Sawyer and the partner ran through the con more or less as they had always planned.

The original plan: Sawyer seduces the girl; "mistakenly" reveals that he's conning her, knowing that she's the adventurous type that'll want in; they run a few short cons to whet her appetite; get her to ask to run a long con; get her money out and ready to go as part of the long con; then con her out of her own money by telling her she's in danger and getting her to flee with fake money while you "stay behind to defend her." (If you've seen David Mamet's play/movie "House of Games," this is *exactly* the plot.)

In the middle, Sawyer starts to feel bad and considers bailing out, but with a bit of convincing by his partner, he realizes that, at bottom, he's a con man and he carries out the plan as intended.

There's no partner in the car because there doesn't need to be one. He just needs the car there to convince the girl the partner is there. In case she's watching from the back yard, he goes out and gets in the passenger's seat to further maintain the illusion that the partner is there. Then, after he's sure the girl has left, he goes back, grabs the real bag, and heads off to split up the take with the partner.

I'll grant you that I don't pay much attention to the story arcs, so I've forgotten how Sawyer and the partner relate when they meet later in Australia (or wherever it is when we first learn Sawyer's story). Maybe there's something there that supports the belief that Sawyer conned the partner. But if not, the long con he ran is pretty typical for con artist movies, including the contemplated betrayal of the partner.


----------



## jeff125va (Mar 15, 2001)

writdenied said:


> Put me down as another one who believes that Sawyer and the partner ran through the con more or less as they had always planned.
> 
> The original plan: Sawyer seduces the girl; "mistakenly" reveals that he's conning her, knowing that she's the adventurous type that'll want in; they run a few short cons to whet her appetite; get her to ask to run a long con; get her money out and ready to go as part of the long con; then con her out of her own money by telling her she's in danger and getting her to flee with fake money while you "stay behind to defend her." (If you've seen David Mamet's play/movie "House of Games," this is *exactly* the plot.)
> 
> ...


If what happened was their original plan all along, then it makes absolutely no sense that he would tell BOTH the partner and Cassidy that he was falling for her and wanted to back out of the con. If telling her that he started out to con her but then really fell in love with her was part of the original plan, then it makes no sense for him to have said it to Gordy. And if that's true (I think it is) then the fact that he told her indicates that he changed the plan in some way.


----------



## writdenied (Sep 2, 2003)

jeff125va said:


> If what happened was their original plan all along, then it makes absolutely no sense that he would tell BOTH the partner and Cassidy that he was falling for her and wanted to back out of the con. If telling her that he started out to con her but then really fell in love with her was part of the original plan, then it makes no sense for him to have said it to Gordy. And if that's true (I think it is) then the fact that he told her indicates that he changed the plan in some way.


As for telling his partner, why not? I think Sawyer was honestly considering bailing out of conning her, until his partner convinced him that he was going against his fundamental nature.

Telling her that he was planning on conning her before he fell for her may have been part of the plan all along, it may have been a late addition to the plan, or it may have been Sawyer just feeling guilty. It doesn't matter either way, because she's in too deep by then. She's already put her confidence (which is where the "con" comes from) in Sawyer by then. He says "I was going to con you before but now I'm not." She says "Oh, I'm so glad to hear that," not "now I'm not going to trust you anymore." If anything, his "honesty" that late in the game just reinforces her (mistaken) belief that she can trust him. (If I'm not mistaken, telling the mark that she was the mark was part of the con in "House of Games," too.) It's not really any different than how he started off the con by popping open the briefcase to reveal the fake money, then telling her that he had been intending to con her. If she wasn't distrustful of him then, why would she be when he tells her he's conning her later?


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

This was by far my favorite episode of the series. But then again, I interpreted almost every important element differently.

1. The long con with the girl. I think he was still working with his partner. The reason he didn't stick to the original plan is because he wanted to confess to her so that she would hate him. He loved her but he hated himself. If he just cons her, he can't have that moment where he shows her that he is a bad person. This is part of his character, to be hated and have people perceive him to be a bad person when he actually isn't one. This is why he told her. He genuinely loved her. I think that he just gave up on saving both of them and went back into his self-destructive behavior. When his partner told him he had to go through with it, this was more or less an excuse for sawyer to self destruct. He loved her for sure in my mind. That is why he turned the picture upside down when he returned to the apartment. He is ashamed of himself, and hates himself.

2. The gun con. I think it is perfectly reasonable for locke to move the guns. The point is that even if they didn't get the guns at that moment, jack and the rest would continue to pester locke or find a way into the safe eventually and get the guns. We had reached a point where people wanted guns, and locke felt that it was too dangerous to let them have the guns. He moved the guns because it means that no one would know where they were and therefore no one could get them even if they distracted locke or similar. It wasn't necessary for the guns to be moved immediately, by the way. It's not like charlie has something else to do. It could have been days later, and the con would still have happened.

3. He did the long con on the island for the same reason he ultimately did the long con of his love. He has tremendous self hate and a desire to be hated by others to reflect his own self-loathing. This is a psychological issue kind of like people who do self injury. The guns were an excuse for him to be hated. But I also think that a part of him thought it was the right thing to do, and IT WAS. People were getting a little out of control knowing that the guns were there. Locke was right as well.

4. I think that sawyer and charlie are actually forces for good. I think Jack and Locke are the ones becoming more like the Others. Jack wants to build an army, and he wants to use the guns. To me, the guns are the symbol of moral degredation on the island. It's true that maybe no one would want the guns right now if not for charlie's actions, but they still would want them eventually. The army is still a real possiblity and one that in my opinion and I think maybe in the writers' opinions, is not a good choice, and one that will lead to something bad.

Charlie appears to be descending into darkness, but I don't think this is true. He has consistently been set up as a misunderstood hero, and I think he is just that. We have lots of evidence of this. First, he was not using. I think he keeps the statues as a symbol to himself. He kept getting more of them just to add to his own temptation which he is so easily withstanding. Those statues are the virgin mary, which is an important part of his life. To "break" the statue is to rescind his faith and decay into sin. The unbroken statues represent his triumph of character.

Secondly, knowing that he is not using, we can see that Locke is wrong. He is like the parent that assumes his child is doing wrong. This is a clear intent of the writers. Locke is judging charlie with an air of superiority. And even struck him. Good fathers do not strike their children.

Also, Charlie had actual visions. We saw them. People think he's "crazy" yet other people have had these weird visions. Including Claire.

Locke is kind of like a potential employer or a family member who always assumes the worst in a recovering drug addict.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

this is a weird coincidence. I just saw this very thing on another show. The con got in bed with the girl, then felt bad, told her about it and she just wanted more. At that point, i feel it's full disclosure and she deserves to be taken. Period.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

hefe said:


> Other than when he killed that one guy...


Oops, forgot about that . Still, if he loved her, and it kind of seemed like he did, killing the partner would be the easiest solution to the problem. I just figured he is not the murdering kind. Maybe when it comes to the real Sawyer (the guy that conned his parents), he makes an exception.



dtle said:


> But Sawyer would still have to disappear from his parnter who will be trying to kill him once he finds out Sawyer has the money. If Sawyer can hide from the partner, then why can't he do it along with the girl?


Good point. I still think he succumbed to his "I'm a bad bad man" self image. He started to feel cornered and decided to do something even more evil and sneaky (con both the partner and the girlfriend) than the original plan.

I'm surprised that many of you think he split the money with the partner.


----------



## mcdougll (Jan 27, 2003)

After reading the last few pages on whether or not Sawyer split the money with his partner or double-crossed him, I think the reason they (the show's producers) didn't show this is that it doesn't matter. 

I think the point was that Sawyer DID start to develop feelings for the girl (hence telling his partner over lunch), and yet still chose to take the money. Probably the reason for the partner threatening to kill him was to set up the viewer so that it wouldn't be known which way Sawyer had decided to go. The empty car revealed the fact that there was no threat of imminent death to either Sawyer or the girl, so Sawyer had chosen the con.

He chose to finish the con rather than admit feelings for the girl and act accordingly. This was symbolized by Sawyer picking up the picture of them looking happy together and putting it down and walking away.

Just my .02


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

DLiquid said:


> I'm surprised that many of you think he split the money with the partner.


I don't know whether he did or didn't. The point is there's no evidence either way.

As someone else mentioned:

Let's assume he conned them both. Sent the girl off so the partner would chase her. Eventuallly the partner would find her (and it wouldn't take long) and see she didn't have the money and he'd go after Sawyer. If so, then why wouldn't Sawyer have just taken her with him? I don't think Sawyer would want to be on the run from his partner for the rest of his life.

To me, the only logical conclusion is that he A) split the money with his partner or B) Killed his partner.

I think they would have shown us if he would have killed him, which leaves A.

But, I can see how any of the scenarios could have happened.


----------



## mitkraft (Feb 21, 2003)

jamesbobo said:


> Very well:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...





Spoiler



As someone else said...don't get fooled by this. This network is the King of misleading previews. I think even once before they showed us the clock running down to zero and they just happened to push the button at the last minute. They might actually let it run out this time, but I wouldn't take anything in the preview as proof.





chavez said:


> yeah i know he said that... but start pulling strips of skin off of his back and i bet he'd talk.


I wouldn't bet on it. I think like others said before, he has a deep seeded need to punish himself. This is textbook stuff. I think he on some level wants them to torture him. Its his penance, like the need to be hated.



Fool Me Twice said:


> That's hilarious!  Nice catch. This will encourage those who insist on believing that the characters are really dead--in spite of the producers saying that they're not.


Not necesarily. Purgatory references don't have to be fuel for the "they are dead" crowd. I can merely be a figurative purgatory in that all of the survivors need to atone for something. You don't have to be dead to pay for your crimes.

-----------------

As far as the "did he double cross his partner" debate goes. *Who Cares!* I don't see where it is pivotal to this story. I can live with the gray.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

spartanstew said:


> Let's assume he conned them both. Sent the girl off so the partner would chase her. Eventuallly the partner would find her (and it wouldn't take long) and see she didn't have the money and he'd go after Sawyer. If so, then why wouldn't Sawyer have just taken her with him? I don't think Sawyer would want to be on the run from his partner for the rest of his life.


I gave my opinion on this in the same post you quoted. I think he started to feel cornered. There was no easy way out of the situation, so he he succumbed to his "I'm a bad bad man" self image and did something even more Sawyer-ish than the original plan. By running with the girl he would become less Sawyer-ish.

When he starts to feel himself becoming a good person he needs to do something really bad to prove he is rotten. In the flashback, it was conning both the girlfriend and the partner. Bonus rotten points there for conning the partner. On the island it was taking the guns. Bonus rotten points there for tricking Kate into inadvertently helping with the plan.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I don't think it's bonus rotten points to con his partner. I think it's the opposite if he did that. They guy threatened him and his lover, and clearly did not care about sawyer. Which is why I think he didn't con the partner.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

TAsunder said:


> I don't think it's bonus rotten points to con his partner.


Well if it was a video game called Rotten Con Man I think there would be bonus points for it. 

I'll stop talking about the partner now.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

TAsunder said:


> 4. I think that sawyer and charlie are actually forces for good. I think Jack and Locke are the ones becoming more like the Others. Jack wants to build an army, and he wants to use the guns. To me, the guns are the symbol of moral degredation on the island. It's true that maybe no one would want the guns right now if not for charlie's actions, but they still would want them eventually. The army is still a real possiblity and one that in my opinion and I think maybe in the writers' opinions, is not a good choice, and one that will lead to something bad.


Well, I disagree with this. They are in an untenable situation. There are people on this island who have the means and ability to harm them, and have done so in the past. Simply sitting around and hoping they won't do so again is foolish. The only way the survivors of Flight 815 are ever going to be safe is if they take the island from these other people. They aren't going to be rescued. They have to take control over their own destiny or they will simply be sheep waiting to be slaughtered by the wolves.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Well, I don't want to get into a moral or political debate about it. My point was more that at this exact time, it is a bad idea to form an army and storm in there, and the writers seem to think so too. At the more personal level, I think it is wrong at any time, but I don't think the writers agree with that, so it is moot.


----------



## durl (Dec 1, 2005)

I believe the way to take the wind out of Sawyer's sails is to find some way to make him irrelevant. He wants control, not power. He will tell someone the sky is plaid if he knows it will get a rise out of them. I wonder what it would do to him to lock him in the vault for a month with no contact with anyone else. Don't torture him physically, he doesn't care about that. He'll go crazy if he can't find someone to ridicule or con.

Sawyer and Locke are from the same mold, in my opinion. Both want control of situations, of people's feelings and emotions. Locke does it by manipulating the internals, Sawyer manipulates the externals. At some point, Locke is going to be unmasked as a threat to them all. I believe in some ways he helped Sawyer pull off his con in order to gain some advantage of his own.

I still there has to be another purpose for Charlie's actions. He's been a "decent" character (except for his heroin addiction) who hadn't harmed anyone and tried his best to help Claire. I don't see why the writers would take him down this path unless it served a purpose later.


----------



## jasoncarr (May 3, 2002)

devdogaz said:


> We found out that Charlie helped Sawyer, that he did it merely to piss Locke off, and we got the foreshadowing of the "Bad Twin" novel and the 40's radio station.


It was the first time I liked the Charlie character. In all other scenes the Dear Wife and I keep hoping he dies.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

durl said:


> Sawyer and Locke are from the same mold, in my opinion. Both want control of situations, of people's feelings and emotions. Locke does it by manipulating the internals, Sawyer manipulates the externals. At some point, Locke is going to be unmasked as a threat to them all. I believe in some ways he helped Sawyer pull off his con in order to gain some advantage of his own.


Why all this suspicion and hostility towards my man Locke? A bias perceiving folks w/o hair as evil? (Not I - FWIW) Locke has his own agenda, given, but I do not see him as the evil or threatening force that so many here contend.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

For me, the Locke hostility is relating soley to his behavior towards charlie. I think the rest of his actions are neutral or good. His behavior towards charlie indicates to me that he has gone from island guru to island know-it-all. There was a time when he would have been keenly interested in Charlie's visions and had faith in charlie has a person. Instead he believes the worst in charlie, thinks he's on drugs, and actually hit him a few times.

Locke jumped to a conclusion about Charlie because he felt charlie had lied to him about the heroin. I don't think this is true, though, I think he if anything committed a white lie of "omission" by not telling locke about his stash.


----------



## Paul_PDX (Nov 12, 2002)

unfortunately now that Charlie has attacked Sun I feel he will be the next major Lost character that they will write out of the show with a death later in the season. Otherwise I don't see any way to ever redeem him if it comes out... (probably Sawyer or Locke will be the cause of the death). Just my guess....


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

Paul_PDX said:


> unfortunately now that Charlie has attacked Sun I feel he will be the next major Lost character that they will write out of the show with a death later in the season. Otherwise I don't see any way to ever redeem him if it comes out... (probably Sawyer or Locke will be the cause of the death). Just my guess....


He may die, but if he does he will probably be redeemed first.


----------



## Sir_Q (Jun 27, 2002)

PJO1966 said:


> He may die, but if he does he will probably be redeemed first.


I sure wouldn't mind seeing him dead, Again.


----------



## Vito the TiVo (Oct 27, 2003)

philw1776 said:


> Why all this suspicion and hostility towards my man Locke? A bias perceiving folks w/o hair as evil? (Not I - FWIW) Locke has his own agenda, given, but I do not see him as the evil or threatening force that so many here contend.


Granted part of it is simply the cues that the show gives us, whether music or performance, etc - and it all could be a big mislead. But Locke has consistently shown himself to be secretive, leading, somewhat manipulative, and frankly that he has a superiority complex. None of it definitively makes him a "bad guy," but certainly an arrogant and dangerous person. ...Not that Jack is necessarily a good guy...

Great drama has no black and white.


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

Locke knocked out Sayid and destroyed his radio. He knocked out, tied up, and drugged Boone. He's manipulative, and when that fails, violent. Both Boone and Charlie were drawn to him and he took advantage of their vulnerability, but discarded them when they were no longer any use to him. He'll take the moral high ground when it's convenient, but will take any action he feels is necessary to advance his cause. He's shown that he's willing to undermine the group on behalf of an entity that he doesn't even understand. 

Jack, on the other hand, has always acted on behalf of the good of everyone. With the exception of his former irrational fear of firearms, he's made logical decisions and has not allowed himself to be controlled by some island fancy. He's been too secretive at times, but never with the intention to use his secrets for an advantage over the group. He didn't arrogate his position of leadership, but had it thrust on him when he found others looking to him. I think part of the reason some people don't like him is because of the actor that plays him--nobody likes and angst-ridden pretty boy, but it's easy to like and identify (in fantasy) with the self-confident manly-men like Locke and Eko.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Remember, Locke underwent a gigantic change in his life once he hit the island.

It seems like a lot of things he does, is because of his new ability to walk.

He has a superiority complex, because for many years he had a major inferiorty complex.

He wants to do things, build things, hunt, track, that nobody would let him do before.

"The island" probably saw this and tweaked him just enough to have him go over the edge a little.

-smak-


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Holy Moley!!

Get a little bit busy and I end up with some reading to do!!!

Just finished reading through this thread......

*WHEW!*

I got myself laid up in a Hospital. Watched the episode in my hospital room the first time, watched it again on the TiVo when I got home. First episode available in HD in New Orleans post Katrina! :up:  The ABC affiliate is having some strange technical issue with the color going out of sync on their feed from the network, but it was still superior to that hospital TV. 

Anyway....

I find this comment particularly interesting:



TAsunder said:


> 4. I think that sawyer and charlie are actually forces for good. I think Jack and Locke are the ones becoming more like the Others. Jack wants to build an army, and he wants to use the guns. To me, the guns are the symbol of moral degredation on the island. It's true that maybe no one would want the guns right now if not for charlie's actions, but they still would want them eventually. The army is still a real possiblity and one that in my opinion and I think maybe in the writers' opinions, is not a good choice, and one that will lead to something bad.


I found it interesting because it is the antithesis of the prevailing opinion of almost everyone else.

And the reason I find the opposing opinions interesting is because _I agree with *both* or, if you will, *neither* of them_.

*None of the "lostaways" are forces for good or for evil!*

Almost every character in the show has done extremely unselfish deeds, only to do something really slimey later, or vice versa.

We have seen a mixture of very generous and very self-serving evil acts from Locke, Jack, Kate, Sayid, Charlie, Jin, Ana-Lucia... almost all the main characters.

This is an ongoing theme of the show. Just when we think we have figured out who is "good" and who is "bad", they'll throw us a curve.

Sawyer will be a hero in a future episode, mark my words.

Charlie's motivation is obvious. In his perception, Locke drove Claire away from him. Locke mistrusted him, and humiliated him. He's pissed at Locke, and wanted to humiliate Locke back.

My favorite line of the show, from Hurley, of course:

"Or any time....
Just kiddin' dude."

Another clever jab at us "overanalizers" on the part of the writers, IMHO.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

philw1776 said:


> Why all this suspicion and hostility towards my man Locke? A bias perceiving folks w/o hair as evil?....


Gosh, I hope not [looks into mirror longingly remembering days gone by....]


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

philw1776 said:


> Let Sayid go all "Jack Bauer" on him and we'll see about that.


Didn't Sayid torture Sawyer last season, when they thought he had the asthma meds? He didn't even have it, and he still didn't break...


----------



## bruinfan (Jan 17, 2006)

stevieleej said:


> or maybe he was trying to say "Con"


He said "Goth"


----------



## Vito the TiVo (Oct 27, 2003)

Fish Man said:


> *None of the "lostaways" are forces for good or for evil!*
> 
> Almost every character in the show has done extremely unselfish deeds, only to do something really slimey later, or vice versa.
> 
> ...


*Exactly.* The characters in this character-driven drama (more than it is sci-fi or mystery) are well-rounded and have good and bad aspects to them and aspects that seem "good" or "bad" depending on the viewer.

Strong drama have characters that are just simply unable to be classified as easily "good" or "bad". And the flipping continues the drama. See "ER".

My only real question is when are we going to become sympathetic towards the Others and when are we going to understand what Rousseau's "sickness" might have really done to people.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

newsposter said:


> this is a weird coincidence. I just saw this very thing on another show. The con got in bed with the girl, then felt bad, told her about it and she just wanted more. At that point, i feel it's full disclosure and she deserves to be taken. Period.


I assume you are talking about HUSTLE. Great show, and I just watched the episode you refer to earlier today. They managed to even put a twist on that twist.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

yes it was the 1st ep I watched..hope the rest are that good


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Instead of analyzing the actions of Sawyer for the moment, I want to stop and applaude the actors and that scene when Sawyer comes out shooting the gun off. I watched it three times now and it just gets better. 
Watch the faces of Jack, Locke, Kate and AL as Sawyer starts talking. There are some great expressions. Wooh doggie. They really seem to telegraph what is happening in their heads really well. I especially loved Locke saying to Jack "I didn't" (give him a gun) I LOVE the Locke man. But Sawyer is number two in my fan book. They both were excellent in The Long Con.
Another quick note - trivia - The diner was in Iowa. Thanks to tivo I caught a plate with the state and the word Iowa on it just as they pan over to Sawyer sitting there. So Kate is from Iowa.


----------



## PJO1966 (Mar 5, 2002)

betts4 said:


> Another quick note - trivia - The diner was in Iowa. Thanks to tivo I caught a plate with the state and the word Iowa on it just as they pan over to Sawyer sitting there. So Kate is from Iowa.


Maybe it was *supposed *to be Iowa, but the landscape through the window looked very Hawaiian to me.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

Maybe it's just me, but nobody in over 200 messages even thought it was possible that Sawyer took the guns because a few episodes ago he (and Jack, and Locke, and Kate) had an encounter with "The Others" and they obviously wanted guns. It seemed to me that they didn't just want them for the moment, just because they were all there, but they really wanted/needed firearms. Sawyer might see them, based in part on the stories of the tail end survivor stories, as the dominant force on the island and might be planning to try to get on their good side by providing them some of the weapons. Sawyer thinks outside the box sometimes. Maybe he see being their ally might have advantages. 

Sawyer analyzing the bag that had been put over Sun's face was an enormous stretch for me. "The weave is all wrong," indeed.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

PJO1966 said:


> Maybe it was *supposed *to be Iowa, but the landscape through the window looked very Hawaiian to me.


Well, since they FILM in Hawaii, that, um, makes sense. I was interested/curious that they would go so far as to put trivial tourist crap in the diner.....and not just pan right over to him.

Anyway, Hawaii, Iowa, Massachussetts, Ohio, they all have a Springfield in them too and its where the Simpsons live....


----------



## jzilla (Feb 14, 2006)

I like the show now...but I use to love it..
It is getting so unrealistic...but I let that slide because almost every other show sucks.

You know whats funny...they never run out of razors/hair trimmers.
I wonder if most women could go 40+ days on an Island without a razor and actually be able to pull of the tanktop look...lol

The Island is pretty good now...
They have music,power,food,water,guns,internet(a little faster than my charterI think)....
They should just start electing people, and form a small 3rd world country.


----------



## joits (Feb 8, 2006)

jzilla said:


> I like the show now...but I use to love it..
> It is getting so unrealistic...


lol... wot, u mean compared to people actually surviving a plane crash in the pilot? i think reality went out of the window two minutes into the series.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I still find the show fun. I just throw reality away and get lost in the fun of the characters. I still can't believe that they haven't actually 'elected' someone, but just let the main characters do whatever they want. 
I know Damon has said that Arzt was to show the common man, but he got blown up. I guess that tells us what we can do with our reality in the situation!


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

Anyone for writing up a declaration of independence from the Others?


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

BTW. if you don't like watching the previews, you may not want to listen to the Official Lost Podcast this week. Cuse and Lindeloff kind of criticize the ABC promo department because the ads show too much for the upcoming episode, but then they actually go and mention the things in the preview that are shown since everybody knows anyway...well, not the people that don't watch the previews or commercials!

Well, you could listen, just skip ahead about 30 seconds when they start talking about it.

Also mentioned for those interested...they said that by the end of the season we will know one particular thing definitively...


Spoiler



Why the plane actually crashed.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

jzilla said:


> You know whats funny...they never run out of razors/hair trimmers.
> I wonder if most women could go 40+ days on an Island without a razor and actually be able to pull of the tanktop look...lol


There were probably plenty of razors and scissors in both the luggage and the hatch. Plus they haven't been there that long and most of the men are not even clean shaven. Doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to me.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Maybe someone has a straight razor... those things last a long time.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

TAsunder said:


> Maybe someone has a straight razor... those things last a long time.


They've shown Locke with a straight razor lots of times.


----------



## Guindalf (Jun 13, 2001)

On the razor thing...wouldn't there be plenty of various types of razors in the luggage? Also in the bunker?


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

This razor thing is never going away, is it?


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Locke has been shown shaving with his knives before, hasn't he?

Assuming he has a whetstone (with all those knives, surely he does, probably more than one, in fact) he could keep several of them razor sharp indefinitely and people could shave with them.

A woman shaving her underarms with a large knife might be a little tricky, but she could learn to do it, I'm sure.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

DLiquid said:


> They've shown Locke with a straight razor lots of times.


Jack found a straight razor in the pilot episode, needed it to work on the Marshall.

Sawyer acted a little threateningly towards Sayid with one after he came back from Rousseau...










Locke, however, I think he prefers the knife...


----------



## Vito the TiVo (Oct 27, 2003)

I'm more amused how Jack's hair consistently stays clipped, at about setting three or four I reckon, and is never cut shorter or grows longer...


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

hefe said:


> Locke, however, I think he prefers the knife...


You're right. I was thinking that was a straight razor.

As for Jack's hair, I would think the hatch would have all kinds of personal grooming items including electric hair clippers. You have to give them a pass on the time before they found the hatch, since hair doesn't grow that much in a month and it would be ridiculous to expect them to cut his hair every week to approximate one or two days of hair growth.

This is not vital to the plot, so I don't see why anyone even cares. They showed Kate cutting Sawyer's hair, they show Locke shaving, so they have acknowledged it. That should be enough.


----------



## Vito the TiVo (Oct 27, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> But Hurley's comment about 'another time' really got me thinking too.
> 
> So it was Bad Twin? That makes it even more suspicious.


I know now everyone has to be talking about this week's episode...

But what is the deal with "The Bad Twin" carrying a hyperion publications date of 2001?

Is is another time? It should be 2004 from when they crashed, yes?


----------

