filmfodder
Updated Whenever
Coming Soon: The Filmfodder Newsletter! Click Here to Sign Up for Free
   [ News ] [ Movies ] [ TV ] [ Forums ] [ About Us ]


  Filmfodder Forums
  Lost
  Lost: Season 1 (Page 1)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Lost: Season 1
trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 11:11 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
So here it is -- the first thread in the new "Lost" forum.

For those of you who missed the first show, here's a quick recap in handy list format:

1. A big plane crashed into a deserted tropical island.

2. Around 48 people survived.

3. Survivors include: a doctor named Jack (Matthew Fox); a mysterious felon named Kate (Evangeline Lilly); a drugged out bassist from a semi-famous band (Dominic Monaghan); a freaky guy who eats oranges and plays backgammon (Terry O'Quinn); a father (Harold Perrineau Jr.) and his estranged young son (Malcolm David Kelley); a chunky wiseass (Jorge Garcia); a former soldier in Iraq's Republican Guard (Naveen Andrews); a pretty-boy lifeguard (Ian Somerhalder); the pretty-boy lifeguard's whiny sister (Maggie Grace); a chain-smoking bigot (Josh Holloway); a control freak (Daniel Dae Kim); the control freak's downtrodden wife (Yunjin Kim); and a pregnant woman (Emilie de Ravin).

4. A big ass monster thing is tromping around the island. The monster has yet to be seen, but it likes to knock down trees and tear the crap out of airline pilots.

5. A polar bear charged a group of survivors and was shot dead. Yes. A polar bear. On a tropical island.

6. A radio distress message originating from the island was picked up. The news wasn't good. The signal has been broadcasting for more than 16 years.

The official site has some good background information. If I missed anything, feel free to add to the list.

So here are my questions (also in handy list form):

1. What's up with the monster? What is it? Where is it from? Why does it insist on knocking down palm trees?

2. What's up with the polar bear? Did continental shift speed up?

3. When will the whiny chick be eaten by the monster? Can we start a letter-writing campaign to make this a reality?

4. How long until the freaky orange-eating guy heads off on his own to become the Island Troll?

5. What was Kate's crime?

[This message has been edited by trustno1 (edited 10-04-2004).]

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 11:17 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Follow up question:

Online debate is raging over this one. Apparently, one of the "survivors" may have already been on the island. True? Not true? If true, who?

IP: Logged

Deep Cover
Member
posted 10-04-2004 01:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deep Cover     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
So here are my speculative answers (also in handy list form):
1. What's up with the monster? What is it? Where is it from? Why does it insist on knocking down palm trees?

The monster is not the real riddle. The plane crash survivors find themselves on the edge of the mysterious. Just as in those medieval maps that portrayed unknown waters as guarded by sea serpents (“here there be monsters”), the issue isn’t ‘what kind of monsters’, but ‘what is beyond the monsters’?

The onion is going to be peeled back very slowly. This time next year, we’ll not be much closer to knowing than before, but we should have a lot more information to use for the purposes of wild speculation.

2. What's up with the polar bear? Did continental shift speed up?

The polar bear in the tropics gives us only one piece of solid data: there is no rational explanation based on known knowns. The key to this mystery involves discovering unknown unknowns (somewhere, Donald Rumsfeld is smiling).

3. When will the whiny chick be eaten by the monster? Can we start a letter-writing campaign to make this a reality?

I will oppose any such campaign with great vigor. She may be whiny, but she is an important source of gratuitous T&A, and I liked her gratuitous bikini shot better than the other gal’s gratuitous underwear shot, though I admit that personal tastes may vary. Myself, I dig blondes.

Besides, she displayed critical knowledge at a critical juncture. This fit in with what is apparently a broader theme for the show—that everyone has light and dark within their nature. I’m sure she will surprise us with more hidden strengths. Hopefully, her hidden strengths will involve more situations requiring her to wear her bikini.

4. How long until the freaky orange-eating guy heads off on his own to become the Island Troll?

Referring to your next post, I have a bet going with my wife (who is blonde, BTW) that the freaky bald guy (who looks like the mutant child of Marlon Brando and Peter Boyle) wasn’t on the plane. I came up with this one before I learned that there were people claiming insider knowledge that someone in the group wasn’t on the plan. Dang. Nothing new under the sun. Anyway, I assert that one way or the other, he’s going to turn out to be a key to the mysteries of the island.

Kid has a comic with a polar bear. Baldy gives the kid a backgammon lesson that’s light on strategy, but heavy on the melodramatic good vs. evil metaphors. Survivors shoot polar bear in the jungle. Links in a chain or misdirection?

5. What was Kate's crime?

She’s too young to be one of those fugitives from the Weather Underground. She’s surprisingly sociable for someone who fled to the other side of the world to avoid prosecution. That’s probably how she got caught, though. Just couldn’t keep a low profile.

I’m guessing she killed someone (though she obviously didn’t shoot them), but that we’ll find out that the situation was complicated (or even worse, nuanced, which would definitely explain why the feds think she is dangerous) and that there she will have a perfectly rational explanation/defense for why she jammed that guy’s head into the punch press, if only a pitiless society would listen.

Some other speculations of my own that probably aren’t original either:

The Korean woman speaks English. Mr. Control Freak wants to keep her apart from everyone else because he’s afraid of being treated as inferior if others find out she speaks English and he doesn’t.

Said (or is it Sayeed, or Sayid?) wasn’t coming to America to major in public management and return to Iraq as a humble public servant. OK, that’s not exactly a stretch.

Who gets the DTs first, Dr. Jack or the Rocker? The betting window is officially open. Double or nothing on this: something that the person going through withdrawal says manifests itself in monster-in-the-jungle form.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 01:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Ahhh, now we're talking! Just like the old days, eh DC?


I will oppose any such campaign with great vigor. She may be whiny, but she is an important source of gratuitous T&A, and I liked her gratuitous bikini shot better than the other gal’s gratuitous underwear shot, though I admit that personal tastes may vary. Myself, I dig blondes.

Yes, her year of drinking in Paris proved fruitful Can't diasgree with the blondes either. My wife is blonde.

Hopefully, her hidden strengths will involve more situations requiring her to wear her bikini.

Undoubtedly, but I'm partial to Kate the Felon.

Referring to your next post, I have a bet going with my wife (who is blonde, BTW) that the freaky bald guy (who looks like the mutant child of Marlon Brando and Peter Boyle) wasn’t on the plane. I came up with this one before I learned that there were people claiming insider knowledge that someone in the group wasn’t on the plan.

I believe you. I, however, did not come up with that before reading it online. My conspiratorial skills are a bit rusty.

Nonetheless, freaky guy (his name is Locke) does appear to be Candidate No. 1 in the Previous Inhabitant Sweepstakes. That makes me think it isn't him. A little too obvious maybe? I don't know. I can feel those conspiracy skills sharpening ...

Incidentally, the actor playing Locke (Terry O'Quinn) has an X-Files connection. He played Agent Darius Michaud in the X-files movie (he was the agent who blew up while sitting in front of the bomb/soda machine). He also had major roles on "Harsh Realm" and "Millennium."

But back to "Lost." This may prove fruitless, but I did see Locke in one of those flashback shots to the plane crash. That doesn't mean much though because his presence could always be explained away as distorted reality (one flashback came from a junkie; one came from a guy downing mini bottles of vodka; another came from Kate the Felon).

Dang. Nothing new under the sun. Anyway, I assert that one way or the other, he’s going to turn out to be a key to the mysteries of the island.

Agreed. I just hope he gets to hang around for a while. He's an interesting wild card.


5. What was Kate's crime?

I’m guessing she killed someone (though she obviously didn’t shoot them), but that we’ll find out that the situation was complicated (or even worse, nuanced, which would definitely explain why the feds think she is dangerous) and that there she will have a perfectly rational explanation/defense for why she jammed that guy’s head into the punch press, if only a pitiless society would listen.

It's looking that way. I'm hoping for a better revelation. Maybe she was a drug mule. Maybe she was inadvertently funneling money to Al-Queda through her charming bridal boutique. Maybe she teamed with a group of rogue hackers to bring down the evil computer system keeping humanity in a state of slavery.


The Korean woman speaks English. Mr. Control Freak wants to keep her apart from everyone else because he’s afraid of being treated as inferior if others find out she speaks English and he doesn’t.

Didn't see that one, but it makes sense. Mr. Control Freak is going to have his comeuppance relatively soon. It gives Dr. Jack a perfect opportunity to go High and Mighty on Old Cultures.

Said (or is it Sayeed, or Sayid?) wasn’t coming to America to major in public management and return to Iraq as a humble public servant. OK, that’s not exactly a stretch.

I think it's "Sayid." I'd be impressed if ABC let's that plot line go through in our current Climate of Fear. However, if a future episode centers around that notorious deck of Evil Iraqi playing cards and Sayid's picture appears on the Ace of Diamonds, we'll know for sure ...


Who gets the DTs first, Dr. Jack or the Rocker? The betting window is officially open. Double or nothing on this: something that the person going through withdrawal says manifests itself in monster-in-the-jungle form.

My vote goes to the Rocker (Charlie). Jack's DTs won't come until the second half of the season when Matthew Fox makes an Emmy bid with a Very Special "Lost."

[This message has been edited by trustno1 (edited 10-04-2004).]

IP: Logged

Deep Cover
Member
posted 10-04-2004 02:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deep Cover     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Something else I wanted to add:

What's the source of power for the distress signal they heard? How can their transceiver conk out after a few minutes use, but the broadcast they heard repeat continuously for 16 years?

There are four possible explanations:

1. If the nature of the island is to reflect your worst fears back at you, whether they be tree-bending, pilot-eating monsters or tropical polar bears, then the endless broadcast is actually a delusion generated from bikini-babe's worst-fear hindbrain (she, after all, was the only one who could understand it).

2. The broadcast is a deliberate mindjob from their unseen island captors (and if any of them try to get away, they'll be recaptured by a giant bubble).

3. The Energizer bunny is also stranded on the island.

4. Hollywood writers don't think about these kind of inconsistencies, even when they appear in the same scene.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 02:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

1. If the nature of the island is to reflect your worst fears back at you, whether they be tree-bending, pilot-eating monsters or tropical polar bears, then the endless broadcast is actually a delusion generated from bikini-babe's worst-fear hindbrain (she, after all, was the only one who could understand it).

I pray this isn't what happens. The Island of Nightmares thing rings hollow. I also hope JJ Abrams and his staff have a PLAN for the story arc. Please, Lord, let them have a plan. I don't want X-Files redux here.


2. The broadcast is a deliberate mindjob from their unseen island captors (and if any of them try to get away, they'll be recaptured by a giant bubble).

They're doing this on "Days of Our Lives" right this very moment. Wow. I can't believe I just admitted to watching "Days of Our Lives" in a public forum.


3. The Energizer bunny is also stranded on the island.

Did we every get a good look at that so-called polar bear? I looked a little pink. I think I saw a drum, too.


4. Hollywood writers don't think about these kind of inconsistencies, even when they appear in the same scene.

That's what I'm afraid of. This show has serious, SERIOUS, potential. I just hope they've got a true story arc.

IP: Logged

xedout
Member
posted 10-04-2004 03:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for xedout     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Trust, I admit to watching 'Days of our Lives'. I am hoping for a big payoff for that storyline.

More on this later.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 03:38 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm still hung up on the Character Who Was Already There thing. So let's break it down by the major players:

Dr. Jack: We clearly see him in 2 of the flashbacks. Plus, he's the star and stars generally don't do this sort of thing. In fact, major characters don't do this sort of thing, so perhaps I'm headed in the wrong direction (a la "Star Trek" characters who wear red shirts). Nonetheless, I'll continue ...

Kate: She was handcuffed and her law enforcement friend (captor?) was hit by a giant piece of luggage. Handcuffs were later found in the jungle by little Walt. Granted, they may have been different handcuffs, but probably not. Verdict: Passenger.

Boone: Lifeguard boy is there with whiny eyecandy girl, so they would both need to be island inhabitants. Possible? Sure. Likely? Uh, no. Verdict: Passenger.

Shannon: Eyecandy girl is there with her brother. See above for explanation. Verdict: Passenger.

Charlie: Charlie had a flashback scene, but he was higher than the plane when it happened so the whole thing could be made up. HOWEVER, Charlie did go back into the plane bathroom to presumably retrieve his "goods." He's also later seen partaking of such "goods." Charlie is also marginally famous (Kate recognizes him), so unless his band has been on hiatus for 10-plus years, the Verdict: Passenger.

Jorge: Chunky wiseass was not seen in flashbacks and he appears to be far too friendly given the current situation. He's well fed, which doesn't usually correlate with castaways -- unless he's a castaway who DINES ON POLAR BEAR EVERY NIGHT! Verdict: Probably a passnger, but perhaps not.

Walt: He's a nine-year-old boy whose Mom just died in Australia. His Dad is with him. His dog may be with him. Verdict: Passenger.

Michael: He's Walt's Dad. Wait, check that. He's Walt's estranged Dad. The entire situation may have been orchestrated by Michael to be some sort of sick "bonding" experience. He's been holed up on the island, waiting for the plane carrying his son to crash land. Walt's on-plane guardian was actually a doppleganger hired by Michael to accompany his son until the crash. Upon impact, the doppleganger was killed and Michael stepped in. Oh yes. It's all coming together now. Or not. Verdict: Passenger.

Sayid: He's handy with radios and doesn't take kindly to bigoted remarks. He appears to be aware of the post-9/11 mentality, suggesting he's been subject to the the post-9/11 mentality. However, given his proficiency with radios, he may have been listening to world events from his secluded perch on the island. Maybe he moved to the island following the '91 Gulf War? Verdict: Maybe a passenger.

Sawyer: He's a shady character. He appears to hate anyone of Arab descent. Both clues suggest he may be our guy. But there's a hitch. He's a chain smoker. Unless there's a tobacco field on the other side of the island (and a plant where tobacco is manufactured into filtered cigarettes), he's not the Island Inhabitant. Verdict: Passenger.

Locke: Everyone thinks it's Locke, but that leads me to believe it's not. Now, if we are to take the plane flashbacks at face value, Locke IS SEEN in one of them (I forget which character's flashback it is, but I do remember him being there). That suggests he's not the Inhabitant. But on the other hand, he's a freaky-ass kind of guy. Freaky-ass people generally become Freaky-ass deserted island trolls, so he might be the Inhabitant. But! Any Inhabitant would be tired of rain by this point and Locke goes out of his way to stay on the beach during a downpour. Verdict: Suspect, but a passenger nonetheless.

Jin: Control Freak Man is accompanied by his wife (or is she?), which, again, would mean that both would have to be Island Inhabitants. This is a possibility, but doubtful. HOWEVER. He did prepare some sort of seafood dish for the survivors, and he may have acquired knowledge of local waters by BEING A LOCAL. Then again, he may have carved up a dead jellyfish he found on the beach. Verdict: Passenger.

Sun: Jin's beat-down wife/companion is too willing to follow Jin's ridiculous orders. If these two have been stranded on the island for years, there's no way she'd take that kind of nonsense. In fact, she would have drowned Jin in a vat of dead jellyfish years ago. Therefore, Verdict: Passenger.

Claire: Pregnant Claire would seem to be the least likely Inhabitant candidate, which therefore makes her a possible candidate. But let's think this through for a moment. She's pregnant. Unless we're talking about an immaculate conception (or "Star Wars Episode I"), that could be a strike against any Clair-as-Inhabitant theories. Verdict: Passenger.

As it stands, none of the major characters appear to be the possible Inhabitant. But maybe that's what we're SUPPOSED TO THINK. Perhaps ALL of them Inhabitants. They've converged on the plane to acquire fresh meat for their cannibalistic rituals. But maybe not.

So if all the major characters are spoken for, that means the Inhabitant is a secondary character. To date, the only secondary character that has shown any ability to traverse the jungle with success is ...

THE DOG!

So there it is. Walt's Dog isn't Walt's dog at all. It's another labrador that's been living on the island for years. Bounding happily through the palm trees and playing (until recently) with his lifelong friend Otto the Polar Bear...

[This message has been edited by trustno1 (edited 10-04-2004).]

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 03:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Xed: My wife got me into it. The Island stuff is hilarious. I've been impressed with how long the "Days" writers have been able to draw out the serial killer/island storyline. They deserve special Emmys.

IP: Logged

Deep Cover
Member
posted 10-04-2004 04:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deep Cover     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Something just struck me as I was rereading your posts, TN1. The mysterious bald guy is named "Locke". As in the philospher who theorized that humankind is neither moral nor immoral, but that individuals the sum product of their life experience, and could be either moral or immoral individuals on that basis? The philosopher who theorized that knowledge was not absolute, but based solely on experience?

I have a hard time believing that's a random choice of name for this character. But I wonder if it's laden with symbolism or just a script writer's joke.

Is there a character named Hobbes?

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 04:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I tend to think the choice of Locke was intentional. Then again, we may be giving credit where it's not due

There's no Hobbes ... yet.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 04:25 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
As I think about it more, Locke the character is definitely in line with Locke the philosopher. Consider his actions: sitting in the rain; keeping to himself; appearing to live in the moment.

Judging by the preview clips, it looks like the next episode will take a closer look at Locke. Consider my curiosity properly piqued.

IP: Logged

Deep Cover
Member
posted 10-04-2004 04:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deep Cover     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
So far there are less than 20 idenitifiable characters out of a total of 40+ survivors. If Locke was on the plane, but there is supposed to be a character that wasn't, my bet is it's one that hasn't been introduced yet.

As you observe, most characters pair up, so there are precious few that could be a mystery non-passenger in the present set.

Take a different angle for a moment. What would be the purpose of hiding a spy among the survivors? If you are both powerful and depraved enough to control a secret island with monsters and polar bears, and you don't want it found, it shouldn't be any problem to kill the survivors, feed their corpses to the giant electric penguins and dispose of the pieces of the plane. The answer would appear to be that you want to study these people.

If that's the case, then there are two broad reasons why:

1. The folks who own and operate the island consider humans just another zoo species (i.e. are aliens).

2. The folks who own and operate the island are human, but arranged to crash the plane here in order to conduct some form of research on the survivors. They're either evil scientists or rich weirdos who got WAY addicted to "Survivor" and figured this was a cool alternative to 12 step meetings.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 04:43 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Coming in week 4: Special guest stars Jeff Probst and Richard Hatch drop by for a series of reward challenges. Hilarity and heartbreak ensue.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-04-2004 04:45 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
By the way, Giant Electric Penguins could very well be the coolest band name ever.

IP: Logged

Ittot
Moderator
posted 10-05-2004 01:05 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ittot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by trustno1:
Coming in week 4: Special guest stars Jeff Probst and Richard Hatch drop by for a series of reward challenges. Hilarity and heartbreak ensue.

Are you joking? You are joking. You must be. Richard *Hatch*?!

BTW, you guys have me rolling on the floor laughing my ass off (roflmao). I have all but the first 15 minutes on tape, and I still haven't popped the thing in yet. Too tired tonight, maybe tomorrow.

[This message has been edited by Ittot (edited 10-05-2004).]

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-05-2004 09:28 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hi Ittot,

Glad you enjoyed the back and forth. It's great fun for me to get back into doing this.

As for Richard Hatch, that comment was intended as a joke. Hopefully it never comes to pass.

The username/password situation is one of the annoyances that comes with this bulletin board system. Overall, I've been very pleased with its ease of use and administrator tools, but I'm sorry you're running into that obstacle. At some point I might bite the bullet and upgrade.

IP: Logged

Ittot
Moderator
posted 10-05-2004 03:05 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ittot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by trustno1:

The username/password situation is one of the annoyances that comes with this bulletin board system. Overall, I've been very pleased with its ease of use and administrator tools, but I'm sorry you're running into that obstacle. At some point I might bite the bullet and upgrade.

Don't worry 'bout it. I went back into the sign in page, signed back in -- I hadn't realized that the intial year had gone by, and I'd have to sign back on each time I wanted to post. But, I'm now signed back on, and no problemo. It's all there for me.

Are you going to take the time to write the synopis's down for us, like you did for X-Files? Plllleeeeeeeeeeeeease?

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-05-2004 04:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Ahhhh ... I don't know if I can commit to the full reviews (those buggers took 10-plus hours each), but I've been thinking about a variation on that theme for "Lost." Let me mull it over a bit.

IP: Logged

Ittot
Moderator
posted 10-05-2004 05:10 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ittot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by trustno1:
Ahhhh ... I don't know if I can commit to the full reviews (those buggers took 10-plus hours each), but I've been thinking about a variation on that theme for "Lost." Let me mull it over a bit.


Hey, even a capsule review in your snarky humor would be great.

IP: Logged

argonauta
Member
posted 10-05-2004 06:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for argonauta     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'll comment as soon as I watch the tape ... I need a new show to commit to. Have been enjoying the Amazing Race, but it's over for a while now.

Did anyone see a strange lil guy shouting "da plane! da plane!" ???

I see some good potential here ;-)

argo

IP: Logged

Deep Cover
Member
posted 10-05-2004 08:26 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deep Cover     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
At the risk of irking Mac by giving free mention to a competitor, if you pine for the old snarky review style, check out the Lost episode recaps at Television Without Pity. When I read those, I was sure Trust must be ghost-writing for those guys.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-05-2004 09:43 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
No irking at all, DC. I respect anyone who can crank that stuff out.

IP: Logged

Ittot
Moderator
posted 10-06-2004 01:09 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ittot     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Deep Cover:
check out the Lost episode recaps at Television Without Pity.


I've heard of that site, I think.

Here's the URL for anyone's who's interested. [URL=http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/]

And darn it, they don't review Stargate SG-1!

[This message has been edited by Ittot (edited 10-06-2004).]

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-06-2004 10:47 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well, I've thought about it and I've decided to give "Lost" reviews a shot. They won't be as long as the old "X-Files" reviews, but I'll still aim to make them fun. I'll be rolling out the first one later this week after the next episode airs.

Now then, here's another little "Lost" nugget that's been popping up (my friend Eva clued me into this). I know we've discussed the possibility that the "monsters" on the island are the physical manifestations of inhabitant fear. Makes sense, especially since Walt (the boy) was looking at a comic book featuring a polar bear then, BLAM!, a polar bear is charging through the tropical underbrush.

If that's the case, then what's up with the giant tree-stomping creature? Could it be the manifestation of Claire's kicking baby?

IP: Logged

Deep Cover
Member
posted 10-06-2004 12:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deep Cover     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
They seeded that first quasi-appearance of the monster scene with interesting little clues, which may or may not mean anything. Several of the survivors started a conversation about what it sounded like. It was significant to more than one because it sounded 'familiar'. Yet, none of them could actually describe the sound or place the familiarity. They didn't even agree that the sound was animal.

There's a similar ambiguity about "seeing" the monster. People start out by asking each other, "do you see that?", but that devolves into a general group realization that, no, they can't really see it. From there, it devolves into the inconclusive debate about what it sounded like.

Later, in the jungle, the smaller group of survivors never really see the monster either. They are left with a clear impression of hugeness, but each tells the other that, for some reason, they didn't really ever actually *see* it.

It is, perhaps, an unwarranted assumption that there must be a specific form for the monster-in-the-jungle to manifest into.

Related observation: on both occasions that the monster has been dispelled/defeated, it was when someone in the group conquered their fear. Monster goes away after Kat/Con counts to five; polar bear with thyroid condition proves surprisingly susceptible to modest stopping power of Sawyer's purloined gun. Was it the gun, or that Sawyer refused to back down?

Even if this is the somewhat shopworn monster-from-your-Id scenario, it's at least pleasant to know that the problem isn't going to be solved by sealing the rift in the timespace continuum with a well-directed tacyon beam (which better work, because of course, it will drain the last of the ship's power from the dilithium crystals to generate the beam). Inherent in the construction of the scenario is the promise that the solutions will be character driven, and not deus ex machina.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-06-2004 12:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You're selling me on this DC. Initially I was disappointed with the monster-in-your-brain idea, but now that I think about it I'd be even more disappointed with deus ex machina. In fact, I hate deus ex machina. It often feels like a cop out.

I forgot about the offhanded "it sounds familiar" comment. You're right. That's a big clue.

Another offhand clue -- the "monster" killed the pilot. It didn't eat him. It didn't dispose of him. It just killed him. I'm not sure if that adds up to anything, but there it is.

And finally,this "monster-in-the-brain" technique does open the door to the inevitable "funny" episode; a nice homage to the mind-created Stay-Puft Marshmallow man from "Ghostbusters" would fit right in

IP: Logged

xedout
Member
posted 10-06-2004 01:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for xedout     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have a lot to catch up on!

Except for humans, I don't think any animals kill for killing's sake (i.e. sport). Animals kill to survive.

IP: Logged

xedout
Member
posted 10-06-2004 01:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for xedout     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by trustno1:
[b]Xed: My wife got me into it. The Island stuff is hilarious. I've been impressed with how long the "Days" writers have been able to draw out the serial killer/island storyline. They deserve special Emmys.[/B]

They'll probably drag the thing out til at least February. November sweeps are coming up, so something big should happen soon. What I haven't liked is that except for the 'Stefano's back' clue at the beginning of that story, there was no real indication that the island/double Salem existed.

I'm also enjoying the Jan Spears storyline. What a hoot to play that character.

IP: Logged

Deep Cover
Member
posted 10-06-2004 02:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deep Cover     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
So far, these script writers have been guilty of some deus ex machina crimes. A certain amount of that in setting up the scenario is acceptable. [I.e. yes it is exceedingly unlikely that a plane can lose it's tail at 40,000 feet and any part of it safely land. Just accept that the million-in-a-one case happened and proceed.] Consistent use of this 'tool' is, as you say, a cop out, and one which would spoil the fun here in a hurry.

Biggest d/e/m crime to date: The pilot, who lived just long enough to deliver vital information. I was reminded of the scene from Wayne's World, where Wayne and Garth receive critical information on Mr. Big's itinerary, turn to the camera and say, "He was awfully well-informed for a security guard, don't you think?" I'm pretty sure Ebert has an entry on his list of bad film cliches for The Character Who Exists Solely to Impart Vital Plot Information. It's right up there with the evil villian pausing to explain all the details of his complicated schemes.

I'm not certain there's a big clue in the manner of the pilot's death. I tended to think of the shot of the mangled body as being the writers' attempt to ape The Sopranos' penchant for generating buzz via the Gran Guignol moment. Though the height of the body in the tree was clearly supposed to give us information about the size of the monster, so perhaps the fact that it wasn't eaten is also supposed to say something about it's nature.

I'm not *trying* to sell the idea of 'monster-from-the-Id'. I'm just spending some time on evaluating the consistency of the evidence. All available evidence is also consistent with the theory that the island is a base for aliens studying the earth. But that idea, the Island of Dr. Morreau theory, and others like it, don't require a lot of evaluation to determine their viability.

Or they could all be characters in the dream of a starfish. Or you could. But not me. I'm real, of course.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-06-2004 02:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I tend to believe I'm a figment in a lobster's imagination.

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-06-2004 02:27 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Oh I agree about the d/e/m stuff already in play (I like that abbreviation too). But I lump what has already come to pass into "suspension of belief," which is a necessity for any show or movie that deals with outrageous and/or sci-fi events. I'm willing to give the writers a mulligan on the introductury unbelievable stuff, but from this point forward I think they need to work by some sort of rule book.

IP: Logged

Deep Cover
Member
posted 10-06-2004 03:53 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Deep Cover     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by trustno1:
I'm willing to give the writers a mulligan on the introductury unbelievable stuff, but from this point forward I think they need to work by some sort of rule book.

Absolutely agreed.

Part of the challenge here is discerning whether they have one. One can string along a show like this for as many as four or five seasons without one, but eventually, the lack of an internal structure becomes obvious even to your most loyal fans and apologists, who then turn on you with the bitter rage of a pack of starving, crazed weasels.

Or so I've heard.

IP: Logged

xedout
Member
posted 10-06-2004 04:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for xedout     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
DC, sounds like you've paid a visit to the XF Official Site messageboard. Mudslinging is the order of the day...

IP: Logged

trustno1
Fearless Leader
posted 10-06-2004 04:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for trustno1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Amen to that DC.

I'm still bothered by the way the "X-Files" petered out. Carter had an opportunity to not only have a succcessful show, but to have a great show -- one that would hold up through the years. Instead, he dropped the ball, ruined the mythology and summed it all up with an incomprehensible conclusion featuring Ghosts of Characters Past.

I certainly hope that when all is said and done with "Lost" our reactions are more in line with "That was fitting" and not, "What the hell was that?"

IP: Logged


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are ET (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | http://www.filmfodder.com

© Filmfodder.com. All Rights Reserved. Don't steal our stuff.

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.45c

Coming Soon: The Filmfodder Newsletter! Click Here to Sign Up for Free

Home | News | Movies | Forums | Newsletter | About Us

© 2000-2005, Filmfodder.com. All Rights Reserved. Don't steal our stuff.