• As to how Shannon dies, the others are a definite possibility since the previews show her chasing after Walt. But, they also show Jack hiding in the shadows. I think possibly Jack kills her, or maybe he sees who kills her. If it is Jack, it could be an accidental/passionate killing/self defense if Shannon realizes Jack saved the young girl and not her father in the ER. If its not Jack or the Others, then my guess is Sayid. No real reason, other than either Jack or Sayid killing her for whatever reason would be certainly have you "talking about it the rest of the season." Then they will not answer for a long time why that person killed Shannon. Or, maybe we don't see who did it right away. I think ultimately Jack or Sayid kills Shannon because she has become an "Other", or has the disease, so they feel they must kill her for the good of the rest of the survivors. With Sayid's romantic relationship with Shannon, that would make it difficult for him to do the killing, which is why I'm going to say 41% Sayid, 39% Jack, and 20% Others as to who kills Shannon.


or maybe she bites it from a VD she contracts from sleeping with every guy on the island :)

Actually while I was rewatching season 1 dvds, I noticed they already did amnesia once with Claire when she got back from Ethan/Danielle.

We never did find out what happened to her while she was gone...

She remembered something about the crazy French lady being involved, and scratching her arm. Other than that, I don't think we know anything.

The corpse that Jin stumbled upon in the jungle with Mr. Eko had a wooden post (branch, spear, whatever) protruding through his chest. Mr. Eko identified the corpse by name, so I must presume he was a member of the tail section.

I would theorize that this person became ill thus becoming violent (like the folks that Mr. Eko and company were keeping an eye out for in the jungle) and had to be killed. A stake through the heart is what seemed to kill him and that rings of zombie-like behavior.

Also, the scene where we see these other folks (not necessarily "the others", but the legs we saw whilst Eko and Jin were hiding) could be characterized as zombie-like as well. And they leave no footprints...

Therefore, I also believe that the "people" whose legs we saw are some of the other 23 tail section survivors that have become ill.

EDIT: Does anyone recall the name of the corpse (Mr. Anderson?)


I was under the impress that Mr Echo had killed that guy in the same scene (while Jin was running Echo was out of the picture. Next thing you know, Jin sees the dead body with the stake in it and then Echo is there to say that the guy used to be one of them

Does the backstory of Sun and her "setup" date with the hotelier relate to Jin's previous backstory of going to America to give someone a watch? This was a setup contrived by her infamous father, and he may be mad enough to send his new family employee, Jin, to the states to go after him for making a fool out of his daughter.
Another connection to someone relating to another's death perhaps?

vegggas

good catch! Jin and Sun were on their way to America for one last mission from Jin's boss/Sun's father

MR plays the same character in every movie/show. I feel like I'm watching "The Lost and the Furious".

Doesn't anyone think that Michelle Rodriguez's character is extremely irritating? Why would anyone listen to any of her obnoxious commands. I find it extremely annoying. I roll my eyes everytime she's in a seen. She's ruining it for me.....

The writers do that on purpose. It makes it that much more satisfying when she finally "gets what's coming" :D Like when Kate kicks her obnoxious a$$! Whoo Hooo!! CATFIGHT!!!


Yep. Plus I am so distracted by her mustache I find it hard to watch.

That was just wrong. :eek:

MR plays the same character in every movie/show. I feel like I'm watching "The Lost and the Furious".

I'm perfectly willing to accept that MR is just obnoxious in general. In fact the first time I saw her was when she was promoting Girlfight on Leno. Charlie Sheen had just finished his interview and had moved down the couch. This was long before he was doing Two and Half Men. I think he was getting ready to take over for MJ Fox on Spin City?

Anyway, Leno was asking her about something random (can't remember what), and Charlie Sheen interrupted and told an anecdote about some girl he had dated once doing something similar. Michelle then said "What was she, like, girl #10,000?"

FLOORED Sheen. He was speechless. Leno said "That was cold!", Charlie then found his tongue and said "That was ICE cold, actually". Michelle just smiled at him. They moved on with the interview and Charlie didn't interrupt her again :-)

Did anyone else find it odd that Echo would go with Jin into the woods to help him and Michael? If "The Others" are to be feared like they are acting, why would he risk his life and getting separated from his group to help a stranger? I hope they offer a logical explanation for his actions. Maybe he just had to get away from the mega-biatch with the gun.


I just chalked this up to the fact that Echo had experience dealing with the "others" while Jin didn't, so Echo went along for protection and provide how to deal with them and how to avoid them if possible

And yes, we've seen this to a lesser extent with Jack. Being a leader, willing or unwilling, has caused him to become a bit of a whiny jerk.

Whiny jerk != Leader (willing, unwilling, or any other type)

A leader may become a whiny jerk, but the whiny jerk in charge is not a leader at that time.

v/r,
C-F

[QUOTE=Iteki][QUOTE=keenan]

Sadly, this show ain't on HBO ..... :(

fortunately it ain't Showtime either, otherwise the guys would be bottomless :eek:

[QUOTE=archiguy][QUOTE=Iteki]

fortunately it ain't Showtime either, otherwise the guys would be bottomless :eek:

HEY! Is it Friday already!? :p

MR plays the same character in every movie/show. I feel like I'm watching "The Lost and the Furious".

or how about "Blue Furious Swat"

Hogwash.

This episiode was nothing like any other earlier episode of this show. What did we learn about Sun and Jin? That Jin had a meaningless job working for the same company of the guy who Sun was "arranged" with? Yawn. We needed a whole hour-long show for that?

I'm all for character development and backstory, but this episode did what one flashback in any prior episode would do. I also don't need instant gratification, but I do tend to watch TV to -- you know -- be entertained. And this most recent episode was just not entertaining.

But maybe I'm just sensitive to this because I've seen other shows that I've really liked go downhill real fast after episodes like this. Pretty soon they're all like this. Anyone remember seargeant Cruz from Third Watch? Can we say Ana Lucia?

If you want to learn about other cultures, why not tune that big ole' HDTV of yours to Discovery HD Theater or INHD? There's constantly shows about other cultures on those channels.

To think that the only reason people didn't like this most recent episode is because they need instant gratification or they're the "ADD MTV generation" is not only closed minded, it's also insulting to those of us who tend to enjoy a plot every once in a while. This last episode, backstory or character development not withstanding, doesn't stand up to ANY prior episode of this show. I've just finished re-watching the first season on DVD again, and every episode -- even those with backstory and flashbacks and character development -- is compelling and powerful. This most recent episode was not. Stop trying to dumb down the people who say they didn't like it.

-jimThe producers have said all along that the real jist of the show is about the characters and their stories. If that is not your cup of tea you're in for a long haul of pain. And besides, the whole show was not just about the Sun/Jin backstory anyway. We had the tail section group moving out, Michael taking off, Jin/Eko following, discovery of a dead tail section member in the jungle, an encounter with a group of "others" (of some sort), the beginnings of spark between Sawyer/Ana, further indications of Kates feelings about Sawyer etc, etc. The ep leaned to the character side a bit but I thought it still had a good balance overall. If all you want is constant action/plot movement on the island it just isn't going to happen... BTW, I always wondered how anybody could have thought Third Watch was ever any good? But that was just my opinion. It wasn't my cup of tea for various reasons so I just stopped watching it after a few episodes.

I really don't understand why some people find the Anna character and her actions so unbelieveable. I've run across many women with major "tude" and/or a big chip of "women power" on their shoulder. Maybe if you just live in the wasp middle class burbs and never get out I guess...


ron

I thought it was so cool the way Jin silenced Ana with his catch of fish. And that compared nicely with seeing how desparate he had been to shake his fisherman's son childhood. The backstory showed how despite his desparation to shake his past, he was willing to lose his job (his chance for revalidation at the time) in order to give dignity to someone still in the class he was trying to shake. I really appreciated the depth that backstory added to Jin's character.

That frame capture of Jin, Mike, and Sawyer's captors may not tell us all that much. Being that it was shown for such a short time and was not lit up real well, those actors could've been extras/doubles used to simply complete the scene. Or maybe not.

I really don't understand why some people find the Anna character and her actions so unbelieveable. I've run across many women with major "tude" and/or a big chip of "women power" on their shoulder...I agree. I found here character to be entirely believeable, and I hope we get more of her backstory to help explain why and how she rose to leadership (despite her manner) of the "tailers".

Since so many have put down Michelle Rod. acting as Anna, I'll pipe in and say I also find her character to be believeable, entertaining, and a great match for Sawyer. If Sawyer is one of your favorite characters then I'm sure you can't stand the fact that he's gotten an a$s-whooping a couple times by her. But I honestly can't see where some of you are coming from. She may have man hands, she may be a biotch, but until coming across these comments in this forum, I've never thought about her acting as being sub-par or ruining the show.

Questions asked but still not overwhelmingly confirmed.

1) Did everyone hear a couple of screams while Jin and Eko walked in the jungle? (Not just one confirmation)

2) According to a previous response, Desmond had a rabbit and not a bear toy. Does anyone remember that specific bear? I think the writers are sending a message here. Did Claire get a baby toy after she gave birth? I don't think a teddy bear was shown anywhere else.

3) The guy shown on the beach picture previously seems to have dissappeared. I counted only 5 back plane people in the last episode but it seems to contradictorary in counting the new faces.

I am just curious what people's criteria for "bad acting". Personally, I didn't think Ms. Rodriguez' acting was bad. Well, at least, anything that _I_ can detact. I wouldn't find her attractive necessarily, but I didn't think her acting was bad or anything.

As for her character, Anna, I thought that was understandable if they were attacked a lot and that kind of efficiency was the only way for them to survive for that long, then they would know to listen to her.

Well, just my $.02.

Hong.

P.S. My wife and I enjoyed the last episode just because there were so many speaking Korean (badly AND well). I think Daniel Dae Kim has gotten a lot better with his Korean compared to the first season, but I just find his Southern (Korean) accent funny (his parents must have been from that part of Korea). I don't think it was intentional, but that works surprisingly well with Jin's "country origin".

I think it boils down to who is used to watching foreign movies and TV shows with subtitles and who isn't.

I myself am used to watching Korean movies and TV dramas with subtitles so I didn't have any problems with the Korean segments. I thought they captured the cheesy melodrama and the obsession with the class structure rather well.

Oh, and Korean sounds rather sexy when spoken by Yunjin Kim (Sun).

Oh, and Korean sounds rather sexy when spoken by Yunjin Kim (Sun).
Or is it more a case of someone rather sexy, speaking Korean? ;)

~Dan

I think Daniel Dae Kim has gotten a lot better with his Korean compared to the first season, but I just find his Southern (Korean) accent funny (his parents must have been from that part of Korea). I don't think it was intentional, but that works surprisingly well with Jin's "country origin".
I heard DDK is taking speech lessons so that he's better able to put a Korean accent on his English...

That's dedication to his craft; I hope the producers don't kill off his character! :eek:

~Dan

Since so many have put down Michelle Rod. acting as Anna, I'll pipe in and say I also find her character to be believeable, entertaining, and a great match for Sawyer. If Sawyer is one of your favorite characters then I'm sure you can't stand the fact that he's gotten an a$s-whooping a couple times by her. But I honestly can't see where some of you are coming from. She may have man hands, she may be a biotch, but until coming across these comments in this forum, I've never thought about her acting as being sub-par or ruining the show.


For me, It's not her acting, it's that curled lip facial expression she always has when she's trying to play that "tough" girly roll she's so use to playing. Drives me nuts.

Hey Hongcho-

If someone gave you a screencap of the Korean newspaper in the first scene of Jin's flashback, would you be willing to translate the headline? When we watched the episode I thought they lingered on the newspaper for an awful long time.

Hey everyone else
Can someone cough up a screen cap? It's in the scene where Jin was putting on his new tie before the interview.

At the end of the episode, when Jin runs into Sun, there is a banner on the bridge. What did that say?

1) Did everyone hear a couple of screams while Jin and Eko walked in the jungle? (Not just one confirmation)
I watched it again a couple of times and didn't hear anything that couldn't just be a "normal" jungle noise.

As far as the "others" walking by Jin and Eko, I agree with the statements about a poor cutting job. Here's what I saw:
(from Jin/Eko's perspective (1)) Brown long pants, then bare lower legs (female or adolescent)
(switch to looking at Jin/Eko (2)) bare lower legs (very briefly), then two with blue long pants
(angle 1) blue long pants, green shorts (male), then blue long pants
(angle 2) blue pants, bare lower legs (very dirty or male), then blue long pants - these are probably the same as the previous angle
(angle 1) brown long pants, then bare legs, then dark long pants with the bear
The brown long pants and bare legs at the end were the same ones as at the beginning. The dirt marks on the bare legs are identical. I'm not sure what the editors were trying to convey, or if they just screwed up. There were at most 9 people walking by Jin and Eko.

The Innocents is a movie based on a book called Turn of the Screw.

The "others" that walked by looked mostly like children or teenagers. What if the tail end survivors included some children who were taken away like Walt? You notice how of all the survivors weve seen, the only child still left is Claire's baby. And even Claire was snatched for a short time before giving birth. I'm wondering if we are seeing some element of "Lord of the Flies" being played out for whatever reason. Innocent child behavior turning into violent barbaric behavior. How this ties in with Dharma and the experiments might be slowly revealed, but we have seen a definite pattern of children being taken. And now there are hints that the tail end survivors are hiding from these children.

How this ties in with Dharma and the experiments might be slowly revealed, but we have seen a definite pattern of children being taken. And now there are hints that the tail end survivors are hiding from these children.

Look out! Nine Rivers!

v/r,
C-F

(or twelve, I did not count...)

edit: to add reference quote to apparently lame and quite possibly mute attempt at a joke...

------
If someone gave you a screencap of the Korean newspaper in the first scene of Jin's flashback, would you be willing to translate the headline? When we watched the episode I thought they lingered on the newspaper for an awful long time.
------

I could.

Although I rarely pause the recording to look at the details (my wife thinks it's... well, just geeky), I don't think I saw anything particularly interesting. If I remeber correctly, Jin's friend was looking at a horoscope section, I think.

Hong.

Well, he was telling Jin about horoscopes, so that would make sense.

Anyone know whether this will be a 22 episode season or will we get more than that like last year?

Look out! Nine Rivers!

v/r,
C-F

(or twelve, I did not count...)


Dude was that a Serenity reference? (sorry hadn't noticed it before)

Article from the Boston Globe this morning-

http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2005/10/23/whos_running_the_show/

No spoilers.

There was also a fluff piece in Parade about EL- it won't be online until next week.

***************
How's working in Hawaii? "When we began the first season, we were told, 'Good luck. Find your own place.' My younger sister flew over to keep me company. We had no sheets, no phone- just a rented car. We would curl up on the linoleum floor, trying to keep warm. I was working 12- to 15-hour days. Later we found a really nice place, and I've finally settled into Hawaii."
***************

Maybe the hobbit had a better room. ;-)

Markd

Dude was that a Serenity reference? (sorry hadn't noticed it before)

Yes. Apparently, a lame one. :P

v/r,
C-F

I can't wait till Lost is finally off the air, and "Lost: the Rescue", has left the big screen, and is available in special Director/Collector Editions.
We can all meet at the annual conventions, dressed as our favorite characters, and exchange losing lottery tickets.
We'll all tell the story, over and over again, of where we were, when we solved the mystery. I was in front of my HDTV replaying the final scene. Locke, eulogizing to Sawyer's urn, his child by Rambina at his feet, talking of faith, stops to push execute. Camera pulls back to show Locke is alone in a crumbling bunker, daylight streaming in from 40' above.
On the beach, the remaining survivors, are boarding Coast Guard inflatables, as F-15's streak overhead in formation. Jack, Kate and Sun are nowhere to be seen. Jin and Michael board an inflatable, clasp hands and look longingly into each others eyes.
Deep in the Jungle we see Jack, wearing nothing but old seat belts cinched into a tight harness, on his knees before Kate and Sun. They are wearing their old cotton tank tops, clean but threadbare. A downpour has just passed, and their clothes are soaked. They barely notice Jack as their gazes lock, and slowly, as their lips part, they embrace, and kiss. Softly at first, then harder and more passionately, as their hands begin to explore each others body. Fade to black.
Works for me.

Article from the Boston Globe this morning-

http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2005/10/23/whos_running_the_show/

No spoilers.

There was also a fluff piece in Parade about EL- it won't be online until next week.


That was a great article about how fans can influence the show and the endless speculation about what is going on. Thanks for sharing.

Look out! Nine Rivers!

v/r,
C-F

(or twelve, I did not count...)

Huh?

Huh?
It was a lame (and now evidently mute) reference to Firefly/Serenity.

Original post edited to add the quote that sparked the reference.

v/r,
C-F

In the last episode, Jack wakes up and discovers that the whole thing was "just a bit of undigestted meat".

Or like "Identity" - Hurley never actually was released from the asylum, and this was all in his head.

What's funny is there are people out there who like the show and don't even know about anything. Don't even notice the Dharma logos, numbers everywhere, etc....

It was a lame (and now evidently mute) reference to Firefly/Serenity.

Original post edited to add the quote that sparked the reference.

v/r,
C-F


His 9 Rivers reference was in re: River, a character on Serenity who was conditioned trained to be a weapon and had telepathic abilities.

By 9 he meant however many walked by Jin and Eko (or 12, he didn't count)

Duh, took me a while but I got it.

Great show by the way (not to hijack the thread). Movie did it justice.

Let's not derail the thread. But before it gets back on track ;)

I have to say I finally caught the series Firefly on DVD - and it's a crime that show didn't make it. Gonna catch the movie if it stays in the theater at least another week (sad it's not doing better).

.... sorry, back to LOST.

What's funny is there are people out there who like the show and don't even know about anything.
I guess "funny" depends on your perspective. I think the majority of folks do NOT pay attention to these details and we're funny to them. And they probably get just as much enjoyment or aggrevation as we do (and they have free time to spend on other things).
:D

Dharma Logos???

Crapola, what are they?

Not that I haven't noticed them...

What's funny is there are people out there who like the show and don't even know about anything. Don't even notice the Dharma logos, numbers everywhere, etc....

those would be the normal viewers :D

I have been lurking on this thread for some time now, but have never jumped in. A few things that I think most have missed.

1) When the tail section people say that they have "trust" issues, I immediately figured that they must have had there own "Ethan" who mixed in with them and then turned out to be one of the "others"....they don't trust because they aren't sure who is who. They probably did not have a manifest to do a census...especially since hurley had the manifest.

2) The pre-view....watch it again. It says "One of these survivors" will be lost forever....referring to the people on screen during the preview. We saw all the usual characters and the woman (forget her name) from the tail section. She is the red shirt who will die.....guaranteed.

3) The ring. Easy to figure out. I told my wife 5 minutes in that she lost it digging the hole for the bottle.


All this non-sense about back-stories being boring, etc. They are the essence of this show. The plot is revealed through the character development. The issues they face, the forces that made them who they are, and the connections they have to each other. This is all relevant, and without it this show is cancelled after one season.

I have no idea what the end result will be, but if I did what would be the point of watching? Simply sit back and enjoy the ride...you see its the journey thats important, not the destination.....(what a locke-ism that was)

All this non-sense about back-stories being boring, etc. They are the essence of this show. The plot is revealed through the character development. The issues they face, the forces that made them who they are, and the connections they have to each other. This is all relevant, and without it this show is cancelled after one season.

I have no idea what the end result will be, but if I did what would be the point of watching? Simply sit back and enjoy the ride...you see its the journey thats important, not the destination.....(what a locke-ism that was)

I agree, Ant. Maybe we should look at "Lost" not as an adventure/thriller, but as more of a drama/adventure. Instead of castaways being "lost" on an island, think of it as the characters being lost within themselves. You have to admit: all the characters have previous (or even current) complications in their lives that are somehow all linked to each other. I enjoy the backstories (some more than others, of course), and it gives us much more insight into why the characters respond to situations the way they do.

This is one show I'll watch to the very end, however many seasons it takes.

this thread is going to get pretty thin and slow for the next few weeks. When's the next new episode - Nov 2nd or 9th ?

11/9

this thread is going to get pretty thin and slow for the next few weeks. When's the next new episode - Nov 2nd or 9th ?

We could always rehash what is and isn't considered a spoiler.

THE “MR. TELEVISION” COLUMN
Lost Chances

By Marc Berman MediaWeek Magazine October 24, 2005

Considering there isn't a watercooler out there that isn't bubbling with conversation about ABC's Lost, you would think the future of the Emmy-winning drama would be paved with gold. Lost, after all, ranks No. 3 overall out of 130 shows this season, according to Nielsen Media Research`data in both total viewers (22.4 million) and adults 18-49 (9.0/22), with double-digit across-the-board year-to-year gains. It's the biggest scripted drama hit since CSI.

Pretty damn impressive, don't you think?

Although I could not figure out what creator J.J. Abrams meant when he told me last spring that Lost would look considerably different in season two, I'm now beginning to understand. Instead of focusing on the 48 bewildered castaways who scramble for safety on a mysterious Pacific island after a terrifying plane crash, the mystery of the hatch—the best serialized cliffhanger since "Who Shot J.R." on Dallas in 1980—has revealed an underground system of computers. And the return and ultimate capture of Sawyer, Jin and Michael reveals that the population is increasing on Lost.

If you think there were mysteries in need of solving in year one, just wait. There is now much more than meets the eye on Lost than 48 survivors, an unseen monster, wild boars, a marooned Frenchwoman, jinxed lottery numbers and a dangerous pack of "Others" who may, or may not, have kidnapped young Walt. With all the questions raised in season one, you might have thought we would have had some answers by now. Instead, an entirely new—and frustrating—can of worms has been opened.

Unlike Dallas, which revealed early in the season that troubled Kristin (Mary Crosby) pulled the trigger, satisfying the millions of viewers who debated all summer who did it, on Lost we still—five episodes into the season—don't have a definitive explanation for that hatch (or any of the other mysteries, for that matter). In fact, we've barely even seen the beach. Instead, a good portion of the action takes place in this subterranean habitat where a hermit named Desmond was assigned the bizarre task of saving the world by pressing a button every 108 minutes.

Who is Desmond? How did he get on the island? Are the plane crash survivors part of a large-scale experiment? Will Desmond, who ran off in episode two, be back?

As the survivors of Flight 815 continue to look for answers, viewers might begin to look for the remote, as Lost becomes increasingly difficult to follow. Instead of solving any of the first-season mysteries, season two has raised a ton of new questions that only add to the growing confusion. Even a Rhodes scholar might have a hard time understanding what is happening.

Where is Walt? What happened to Claire when she was kidnapped last season? Did Jack really see his father? How did Locke miraculously regain the use of his legs? Eventually, the answers to these first-season questions are going to have to be solved. After all, you can only tease an audience for so long.

Abrams once told me that his primary concern for any of his shows (dramas Felicity and Alias were his first two) was not the ratings. But what he and co-creator Damon Lindelof need to understand is that the initial appeal of Lost was the complexity of the characters and their situation, and the sense that, little by little, viewers would be let in on their, and the island's, secrets.

I am beginning to worry that Lost is traveling the same route as serialized drama Twin Peaks, which started out strong but ended prematurely just one season later.

After Twin Peaks exploded onto the scene in April 1990 as a must-see murder mystery from avant-garde filmmaker David Lynch, everyone speculated on who killed Laura Palmer. But when season two opened that fall—populated with oddities like dancing dwarfs and towering giants—viewers jumped ship by the millions, and the show was canceled that spring. While the initial success of both Twin Peaks and Lost came from creating a surreal world, you can only go so far without alienating viewers.

I can guarantee that Lost will not be canceled next spring. But unless the writers begin to start tying up some of the loose ends, Lost could very well live up to its title in season three. We need some answers, and we need them now.

Ahh, Mr. Berman is trying to use his journalism position to pressure the writers of Lost to reveal the secrets earlier than they intend to. Nice try! At least someone of *my* intelligence can follow the show, and I enjoy it quite well, thank you!

Yeah, the pressure does seem to be ramping up for them to "get on with it" and reveal some stuff. We're hearing/reading that all over the place now. But if they do, and people don't like the "answers" or it wasn't clever enough for them, then they risk alienating a segment of their audience that way as well. The producers must walk a fine line with this show. Me, I'm in for the long haul no matter how they handle it; I can't see this show self-destructing like Twin Peaks did.

Plus a lot of what he was complaining about is answered already if you bother to read the spoilers.

11/9

Damn.... I'm going to have to really drink a ton just to get by the next couple weeks.

Where's my blender! ;)

For all the whining (not you guys - but from the critics) about the lack of answers, there's a hell of a lot less speculation and theories about the remaining loose ends. If anything, I think they need to add in some more questions.

They really should have spread the bunker out a bit - maybe at least half the season - while slowly revealing some other issues - and of course, raising more.

For all the whining (not you guys - but from the critics)

Yeah, we've really been spared the whining on this thread. :rolleyes:

:D

Didn't want to start a flame war. ;)

Actually Mr. Berman makes some valid points.

I think dragging unanswered questions for one season is OK and possibly into the first 2 episodes of the new season. Any longer than that and you begin to lose the viewer's interest.

I'm sure there are a lot of folks out there that really couldn't care anymore about what happened to Claire simply because it happened so long ago.

Unless things change I do believe that it'll go the "Twin Peaks" route.

No flame wars intended either: just commenting on Berman's article.

There are many differences between "Twin Peaks" and "Lost". The main one is that Abrams says he's committed to more or less logical and scientific explanations for all the wacky things happening on the island. Lynch and the second season writers thought that overloading "Twin Peaks" with symbolism, dead end leads and completely supernatural explanations was the way to keep the audience interested for a whole season.

The Apparition of Walt appearing and speaking to Shannon was a bad sign. I was expecting him to tell her that "The owls are not what they seem!" I'm hoping that it was a quick way to get Malcolm David Kelley to appear in the number of episodes he's contracted for this season.

One of the major differences between Twin Peaks and Lost is I never watched Twin Peaks. :p
... and it wasn't in HD.

Plus if all the mysteries are answered what's there to look forward to???

CATFIGHT!!!

CATFIGHT!!!

CATFIGHT!!!

Wired Magazine has a little "What's Hot What's Not" meter in their mag called "Wired, Tired, Expired" It went something like this in reference to Lost:

Expired: Watching LOST
Tired: Complaining about LOST
Wired: Watching Surface and Invasion while thinking about LOST

Just thought it was kind of a funny little commentary about people's feelings for LOST.

Invasion is lame.

Sound like they're trying to do the same thing as Lost, which is to delay the mysteries for as long as possible.

Last week, they were still talking about the damn lights from the pilot.

We got very little answers last season and a boatload of questions. We still tuned in - in droves - to the Season 2 premiere. I'd like to have one new "answer" and two new "questions" each episode. Use the season finale to answer enough questions to keep things from getting too out of whack.

We've had several questions answered this season already and we are only 1/5 the way into it. Biggest ones are: what's in the hatch, did the raft secure a rescue for the survivors, and were there any back plane survivors. True, we've had more questions emerge from these events, but I see a lot of answers coming up (along with more questions) in the upcoming episodes.

I think the teddy-bear toting smooth-legged folk will be revealed soon (doubtful they are the same as the gun-toting group on the boat). The story of the back plane folks is sure to be told soon with Anna flashbacks or just as they tell their story to Mike, Jin, and Sawyer as they make their way across the island.

I sure hope it doesn't take all season for the back plane folks to reunite with the mid-section group. I'm optimistic they will get together in 3-5 episodes.

And don't forget we've got a death coming up in the next episode. That's sure to open a whole new can of worms, epecially if it is not apparent who killed the survivor nor what their motive was.

On second thought, maybe the questions are starting to pile up...

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

The story of the back plane folks is sure to be told soon with Anna flashbacks or just as they tell their story to Mike, Jin, and Sawyer as they make their way across the island.

I would love to see the actual crash and ensuing carnage of the tail section like we did in the pilot episode. Just how did they manage to get ashore if the tail came down in the water?

The main one is that Abrams says he's committed to more or less logical and scientific explanations for all the wacky things happening on the island. If indeed that is true (not doubting you at all Scowl), then I'm going to be disappointed. A "logical and scientific explanation for Locke's ability to walk? C'mon... :rolleyes:

I mentioned this earlier, but in the vein of unanswered questions, where is the security system this year? What is the nature of the "smoke"? I realize that these things still exist, and perhaps just have been overlooked in the storytelling as the writers concentrate on the new aspects of the saga, but I'm disappointed that the fantastical elements of the story seem to be taking a back seat to, for lack of a better word, realism.

If indeed that is true (not doubting you at all Scowl), then I'm going to be disappointed. A "logical and scientific explanation for Locke's ability to walk? C'mon... :rolleyes:

It's possible his paralysis was psycho-sematic, all in his head.

I mentioned this earlier, but in the vein of unanswered questions, where is the security system this year? What is the nature of the "smoke"?

That's been speculated on to a great extent earlier in the thread. My thought is airborne nano-bots (see Michael Crichton's Prey). In fact, that's the only "scientific" explanation that's even remotely possible, IMO.

I would love to see the actual crash and ensuing carnage of the tail section like we did in the pilot episode. Just how did they manage to get ashore if the tail came down in the water?

Swimming would be my guess, although I guess a MacGyver-type could have fashioned some sort of catamaran on the way down. :)

It's possible his paralysis was psycho-sematic, all in his head.



That's been speculated on to a great extent earlier in the thread. My thought is airborne nano-bots (see Michael Crichton's Prey). In fact, that's the only "scientific" explanation that's even remotely possible, IMO.

But come on Arch, all in his head? Isn't that too obvious and cliched (I don't intend to disparage your comment)? Wouldn't that explanation be a letdown?

Likewise with the nano-bots, isn't that just too much of a reach (again, not intended to disparage your thoughts)?

I guess I'll be most disappointed if only science is used to explain "things" because it will eliminate the fantastical element of the show. Put another way, Jack wins, Locke loses. And I think Locke might be my favorite character.

:D Well sure, Joseph, I could be all wet with both those theories. But if they want to stay out of the paranormal and "keep it real", those are the most logical explanations I can think of.

How about this one for our boy Locke: He's been exposed to "internal" nano-bots (think Fantastic Voyage) by the mysterious Dharma folks and which they control. They can "turn on or off" the bots at their whim, thereby making him paralyzed, or not...? It's a reach, right? ;) That's why we love the show. :)

I'm not so sure that someone casting a spell and curing him would be any more gratifying.

But come on Arch, all in his head? Isn't that too obvious and cliched (I don't intend to disparage your comment)? Wouldn't that explanation be a letdown?


Not really, in fact not at all, if you consider that Lost is primarily about the individuals themselves and not about the island.

Sure, it's about the individuals, but I hope it's not about mass hallucination. As was pointed out eons ago in the thread, several people have witnessed the "security system", at least Jack and Kate saw the "smoke" at the same time, so...I'm back to the hope that the paranormal can play a part in the explanation. It's just my personal preference, nothing more. As I said, I think Locke is my favorite character because he believes. I really like Jack's character, too, but again, if everything is logical and scientifically explained, Jack wins, Locke loses (and Rose loses, too).

I guess I'll be most disappointed if only science is used to explain "things" because it will eliminate the fantastical element of the show. Put another way, Jack wins, Locke loses. And I think Locke might be my favorite character.Well, they have said on a number of occasions that everything can be explained by scientific factors. I guess that doesn't mean they will be but it seems that is the way they have decided to point the show some time ago. Remember the mysterious changing of Locke's comment about the island from the preview to the actual show (saying he had looked in the eye of the island and it was "magical", then changing the word to wonderful or something like that)? I think that was the forebearer of things to come as far as the direction they decided on.

At first I was a little bummed about that too, but I'm enjoying it either way. As long as they come up with good explanations/reasoning I won't be disappointed. I still think there's room for a little of both perhaps though (or maybe just hopeful ;)).


ron

...He's been exposed to "internal" nano-bots...

OK, call me dumb; what exactly are nano-bots?

OK, call me dumb; what exactly are nano-bots?
Microscopic sized and/or biological robots.

Thanks keenan. At what stage is this technology currently, or is it just science fiction?

:D

How about this one for our boy Locke: He's been exposed to "internal" nano-bots (think Fantastic Voyage) by the mysterious Dharma folks and which they control. They can "turn on or off" the bots at their whim, thereby making him paralyzed, or not...? It's a reach, right? ;) That's why we love the show. :)

But what about the pilot?? I may have missed some of the post in this thread so this may have been covered, but what explanation would there be for the pilot? Wasn't he grabbed out of the cockpit by some sort of monster.

And speaking of unanswered questions, what did Locke see last season? They were being chased and he looked up and saw something, but they never alluded to what it was.

As for theories for Locke, I was going with the theory that if this is part of an experiment, maybe they grabbed him while he was unconcious, injected him with some kind of meds (steriods, etc. ala Desmond) and took him back to the crash site. (I know, it's stretching, but there's gotta be some kind of explanation.) :confused:

Tony

OK, call me dumb; what exactly are nano-bots?


Microscopic machines that can be programmed to do a variety of tasks in a swarm.

OK, call me dumb; what exactly are nano-bots?
Though it has its flaws, the articles at Wikipedia are usually a good place to start. The artclce on Nanorobotics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanobot) should answer most of your questions. (There's also one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_(TV_series)) for your favourite show.)

As for the pilot, there's probably more than one layer of security. It's also possible the pilot was a victim of a zoology experiment. We've got giant bears, giant boars, why not giant bobcats? (Well probably not bobcats, but I couldn't think of a better giant large carnivous animal starting with "b".)

As for the pilot, there's probably more than one layer of security. It's also possible the pilot was a victim of a zoology experiment. We've got giant bears, giant boars, why not giant bobcats? (Well probably not bobcats, but I couldn't think of a better giant large carnivous animal starting with "b".)

Sorry, but bobcats are actually rather small.

If I remember correctly, a member of the creative team (Damon himself I believe) shot down the "Nanobot Theory" in a Q&A session at one of the conventions this past summer. No nanobots on the island.

OK, call me dumb; what exactly are nano-bots?Won't call you dumb, but you must've slept throught Star Trek TNG ;).

Scientifically, I think it is obvious that something is seriously messing with the laws of probability, thus screwing up the quantum connections between Bayesian connected alternate worlds. This has often been referred to as some sort of 'magic' but only because it is not easily explainable or reproducible by our current technology.

However sci-fi writers usually have no problem with the idea.

- Tom

Scientifically, I think it is obvious that something is seriously messing with the laws of probability, thus screwing up the quantum connections between Bayesian connected alternate worlds. This has often been referred to as some sort of 'magic' but only because it is not easily explainable or reproducible by our current technology.
Arthur C. Clarke summed it up best: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."


However sci-fi writers usually have no problem with the idea.
That's the "Fi" part of Sci-Fi... :D

~Dan

Won't call you dumb, but you must've slept throught Star Trek TNG ;).

Never watched more than a few minutes of it.

If you can ever catch a re-run of the new Outer Limits episode "Small Friends", it has some neat looking nanobots.

hye guys just catching up on lost,

On the episode with sauer on the raft, did anyone see the LOGO on the shark.

Did anyone get a screen grab of that.

sorry if this has already been posted but found some pictures to show the logo.

Swimming would be my guess, although I guess a MacGyver-type could have fashioned some sort of catamaran on the way down. :)


If the front section had landed in the water, few if any of the survivors would have made it to shore- Locke and Jack were both knocked out and came to, Claire was in bad shape. It would be worth seeing.

If I remember correctly, a member of the creative team (Damon himself I believe) shot down the "Nanobot Theory" in a Q&A session at one of the conventions this past summer. No nanobots on the island.

Ha! I would expect such disinformation from those scurrilous knaves. They're merely trying to throw us off the scent, my boy. It's gotta' be nanobots; that's my story and I'm stickin' with it. :)

It's gotta' be nanobots
After reading Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanobot): Nanorobotics refers to the still largely theoretical nanotechnology engineering discipline of designing and building nanorobots. Nanorobots are typically devices ranging in size from 0.1-10 micrometres and constructed of nanoscale or molecular components. As no nanorobots have so far been created, they remain a hypothetical concept at this time.


I'm hoping for an explanation other than nanobots.

After reading Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanobot): Nanorobotics refers to the still largely theoretical nanotechnology engineering discipline of designing and building nanorobots. Nanorobots are typically devices ranging in size from 0.1-10 micrometres and constructed of nanoscale or molecular components. As no nanorobots have so far been created, they remain a hypothetical concept at this time.


Ah, none have been created that we know of.. Who knows what shadowy "black" projects have been created at Dharm....oops, I meant Darpa...? Our tax dollars at work. ;)

I have to agree with whomever it was that said Shannon will die. I think her character doesn't have anywhere at all left to go. As for who kills her, it seems it would be more dramatic if it were a female who does it as opposed to one of the guys, one of the regulars. Besides, the show could use a nice twist at this point.

If indeed that is true (not doubting you at all Scowl), then I'm going to be disappointed. A "logical and scientific explanation for Locke's ability to walk? C'mon... :rolleyes:
When scientific explanations can include science fiction then sure, there are all kinds of plausible ways to explain how Locke started walking again. What I think Abrams is trying to avoid are magic, miracles, and those mumbo-jumbo shortcuts that TV writers traditionally take because network television is free and viewers can't ask for their money back.

Remember the awesome alien invasion mini-series "V" (http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0085106/) from the 80's? Rmemeber how they ruined the sequel mini-series (http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0086823/) with the most ridiculous special-effects ending anyone could have thought of leaving viewers with no clue how humanity was saved? That's the kind of stuff I think he wants to avoid.

Sorry, but bobcats are actually rather small.
Of course, if size were any indication, a golden retriever would be a bigger threat. Of course, luckily, the golden retriever is more likely to lick you to death. On the other hand, a mongoose or a badger can be a really mean preditor when it wants to be. Obviously, neither would lift a man out of an airplane cockpit, but it shows that something deadly doesn't have to be large.

The boars were many times their common "natural" size. Remember we only saw the baby boars -- I think Locke had to look up when he saw the mama boar. Pump up that bobcat a couple of sizes and throw him in a tree and he could have that pilot right out of the tree.

Well maybe not.

Since we had passed Friday, I had drifted toward meaningless and trying to find a carnivorous "B" animal. You know, boars, bears, b... ? Hey, maybe that swarm is made out of intelligent bees? They played a role in X-files, no?

I think we've gotten a clue already about Locke and his cured paralysis. In the back story where he's involved with Katy Seagal, she tells him that his paralyzed in his life, afraid to move forward. I'll bet that we'll find out that they do break-up, after which Locke becomes psychosomatically paralyzed. Which is a metaphor for how he's leading his life. The plane crach then shocks him back to reality and let's him finally move on.

Now what we don't know is how long he'd been in the chair. People's legs atrophy very fast without use. But once on the island, he seems to be in pretty good shape. But I think my first explanation is a pretty good on for explaining his paralysis.

Best,
jeff

I think we've gotten a clue already about Locke and his cured paralysis. In the back story where he's involved with Katy Seagal, she tells him that his paralyzed in his life, afraid to move forward. I'll bet that we'll find out that they do break-up, after which Locke becomes psychosomatically paralyzed. Which is a metaphor for how he's leading his life. The plane crach then shocks him back to reality and let's him finally move on.

Now what we don't know is how long he'd been in the chair. People's legs atrophy very fast without use. But once on the island, he seems to be in pretty good shape. But I think my first explanation is a pretty good on for explaining his paralysis.

Best,
jeff


Nice theory, now how does it apply to Locke's loss of usage of his legs when Shannon's Bro was climbing in the Drug airplane?

Now what we don't know is how long he'd been in the chair. People's legs atrophy very fast without use. But once on the island, he seems to be in pretty good shape. But I think my first explanation is a pretty good on for explaining his paralysis.

In Locke's first flashback episode it was revealed that he'd been in the chair for 4 years, I think.

As far as muscle atrophy, he was very rigorous in keeping his muscles exercized in preparation for his walkabout.

If Shannon dies, I hope someone takes care of Vincent.. the dog is my favorite character in the show. :)

In Locke's first flashback episode it was revealed that he'd been in the chair for 4 years, I think.

As far as muscle atrophy, he was very rigorous in keeping his muscles exercized in preparation for his walkabout.

You can see the muscle stimulation machine he's hooked up to in the flashback scene where he is sitting up in bed talking on the phone. It's the big box sitting on the nightstand next to the bed. The DVD special features commentary specifically mentions this fact.

Bobcat's and feral golden retrievers aside, don't go pokin' no stick at no leopard:

http://www.billtilghman.com/hownottoreleasealeopardal.wmv

...a carnivorous "B" animal. You know, boars, bears, b... ? Hey, maybe that swarm is made out of intelligent bees? They played a role in X-files, no?

Carnivorous bees?

That's another thing they've seemed to have dropped.

Locke was losing his mobility again and then he was yelling at the island for betraying him and then the hatch lit up.

Now that the hatch has been revealed, there is no discernible connection to his mobility.

I guess the mystery about how Locke lost and then gained his mobility will be dangled indefinitely.

That's another thing they've seemed to have dropped.

Locke was losing his mobility again and then he was yelling at the island for betraying him and then the hatch lit up.

Now that the hatch has been revealed, there is no discernible connection to his mobility.


I was wondering about that too. Desmond seemed like he was surprised to find people up there right after the hatch was blown. Yet, the earlier light that you mention....how did that happen? It would have had to have been Desmond shining a flashlight (or something) up there. He could even have shined it on the mirror without having to actually step into the vertical part of the hatch-shaft. But Desmond was the only guy down there at the time, so he had to be responsible for the light.

Some things are better left unanswered - only because some things have no answer that will leave us satisfied.

But Desmond was the only guy down there at the time, so he had to be responsible for the light.

How do we know Desmond was the only one down there at the time. Desmond did tell us that Kelvin brought him into the hatch 3 years ago, and sometime after that died. For all we know, Kelvin died THAT MORNING.

How do we know Desmond was the only one down there at the time. Desmond did tell us that Kelvin brought him into the hatch 3 years ago, and sometime after that died. For all we know, Kelvin died THAT MORNING.

I believe you're mistaken. Didn't Desmond say he'd been down there alone for three years?

Desmond seemed like he was surprised to find people up there right after the hatch was blown. Yet, the earlier light that you mention....how did that happen? It would have had to have been Desmond shining a flashlight (or something) up there.Remember that big spotlight Jack saw up on the wall/ceiling when he came down the hatch? It was pointed in the direction of the hatch/mirror. There's your light source. I think it was just coincidence that it came on when Locke was up there before the hatch was blown.

How do we know Desmond was the only one down there at the time. Desmond did tell us that Kelvin brought him into the hatch 3 years ago, and sometime after that died. For all we know, Kelvin died THAT MORNING.
I always took what Desmond said to mean he crashed 3 years ago, then Kelvin died, then Desmond entered the numbers solo for some time. How long that solo time was was not revealed, but it was inferred it was much longer than just a few hours. So I'd say NO to Kelvin dying that morning.

I think it was just coincidence that it came on when Locke was up there before the hatch was blown.Boone and Locke sent quite a blow to the hatch, rung the hollow metal tube like a bell and Desmond most likely heard. When Locke came back afterwards bemoaning his fate and banging his fists, Desmond was probably a bit on edge and checking his entrances with his arc-light cannons...

Locke's paralysis being a topic of late, did he not have a large piece of metal thrown into his leg without feeling any-thing right before the trek where his legs gave way?

v/r,
C-F

Re-run last night? What's up with that?

Off 'til 11/9.

That's the problem with 22 episode programs trying to fill a 39 week season.

Off 'til 11/9.

That's the problem with 22 episode programs trying to fill a 39 week season.

ARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHH........

I need more to drink.... :p

Re-run last night? What's up with that?
From the week of Thanksgiving up to Jan 11 there are only 2 new episodes during that time. :(

Since this is a slow period.....and not much new Lost info to talk about, how about I throw this out.......

Last nights repeat episode of Lost, a very good one with all the inside the hatch stuff, and where we first saw the shark logo. Was it just me or did anyone else notice that the logo on the shark was not visable this time around. ?
Last night, I had it DVR'd, and the scene where the shark goes by, (when Saywer swam to the large pontoon) I didn't see any logo marking on the back part of the shark. I saw it very well when the episode originally aired a few weeks back, but this time when I went back and slowed it down frame by frame......... this time around, there was no dharma logo.
Do they edit reruns to see if we are paying attention?

Do they edit reruns to see if we are paying attention?

It sure wouldn't be the first time.

Since this is a slow period.....and not much new Lost info to talk about, how about I throw this out.......

Last nights repeat episode of Lost, a very good one with all the inside the hatch stuff, and where we first saw the shark logo. Was it just me or did anyone else notice that the logo on the shark was not visable this time around. ?
Last night, I had it DVR'd, and the scene where the shark goes by, (when Saywer swam to the large pontoon) I didn't see any logo marking on the back part of the shark. I saw it very well when the episode originally aired a few weeks back, but this time when I went back and slowed it down frame by frame......... this time around, there was no dharma logo.
Do they edit reruns to see if we are paying attention?

That would really p*ss me off if they did...similar to the Boone "what did he hear on the radio?" episode. I don't mind if they make things up as they go along, but you can't RETROACTIVELY rewrite episodes...it insults those of us who watch every week.

I recorded the ep but didn't save it as it was a repeat. Now I might just download it from iTunes to see if they pulled a fast one.

Since this is a slow period.....and not much new Lost info to talk about, how about I throw this out.......

Last nights repeat episode of Lost, a very good one with all the inside the hatch stuff, and where we first saw the shark logo. Was it just me or did anyone else notice that the logo on the shark was not visable this time around. ?
Last night, I had it DVR'd, and the scene where the shark goes by, (when Saywer swam to the large pontoon) I didn't see any logo marking on the back part of the shark. I saw it very well when the episode originally aired a few weeks back, but this time when I went back and slowed it down frame by frame......... this time around, there was no dharma logo.
Do they edit reruns to see if we are paying attention?

It is all part of the experiment. Now you had better start entering the magic numbers into your network PC every 108 minutes else your own private world will end. :)

That would really p*ss me off if they did...similar to the Boone "what did he hear on the radio?" episode. I don't mind if they make things up as they go along, but you can RETROACTIVELY rewrite episodes...it insults those of us who watch every week.

Recollections of "1984".

Was it just me or did anyone else notice that the logo on the shark was not visable this time around. ?
. . .

Do they edit reruns to see if we are paying attention?
No, it was there...

Were you watching it on the same TV as the first time? It was perfectly visible on my RPTV, but down at a friend's house, we had to crank up the brightness on his LCD TV to see it. It's a pretty low-contrast shot...

~Dan

Recollections of "1984".
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past. "

Carnivorous bees?
Carnivorous bees. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Carnivorous+bees&btnI=I%27m+Feeling+Lucky)

Does anyone know the official schedule more than a few weeks out?

Last season, I didn't catch the show in the beginning, but heard about it from many friends. During the holidays last year, ABC repeated the first six episodes (two per night for three weeks). That's when I started and it was a good way to catch up.

This year I have friends who have the DVDs of the first season and are watching them now. When they're done, they want to start season 2 from the beginning without having to wait till next year for season 2 DVDs.

How can I find out if/when they will do something similar to last year with this year's first few episodes? (The rerun this week was of episode 2, an odd choice)

No, it was there...

Were you watching it on the same TV as the first time? It was perfectly visible on my RPTV, but down at a friend's house, we had to crank up the brightness on his LCD TV to see it. It's a pretty low-contrast shot...

~Dan

Dan,
Yes, same TV. 61" HD. First time it aired there was no doubt for me seeing it. I even replayed it for friends. Very visible....but this weeks rerun, for whatever reason, I could barely see anything resembling a logo. I was just wondering if anyone had noticed. You say it was there ......then it's just me. I agree with the contrast....I felt the scene this time around was a little darker on my set too.

NorCal,

I'm leaning twoard your side, not there this time. I was looking for it, expecting it, knowing it was comming up, thinking how hard would it be to catch, how did someone see this the first time. See, I missed it the first time but had it on PVR. When I did not see it this time I re wound the dvr and did a frame by frame and still did not see it. This is on a 65 inch set, calabrated correctly.

NorCal,

I'm leaning twoard your side, not there this time. I was looking for it, expecting it, knowing it was comming up, thinking how hard would it be to catch, how did someone see this the first time. See, I missed it the first time but had it on PVR. When I did not see it this time I re wound the dvr and did a frame by frame and still did not see it. This is on a 65 inch set, calabrated correctly.
I did not see this epi when it originally aired, so I can't comment on any differences between this time and last. But I had to go back and watch that part of the scene in slo-mo on the DVR in order to see it. It wasn't plainly visible in real-time. But it was definitely there.

-jim

I did not see this epi when it originally aired, so I can't comment on any differences between this time and last. But I had to go back and watch that part of the scene in slo-mo on the DVR in order to see it. It wasn't plainly visible in real-time. But it was definitely there.

-jim

Maybe I just have my TV too bright, but I noticed it in real time right away, and so did the gf. (I then promptly rewound, confirmed, paused, posted....I'm a geek).

:-)

EDIT: On the original Ep, I didn't watch the repeat

Seemed less obvious and darker to me

Last night's Without a Trace had Korean siblings named Jin and Sun.

Are those popular names for Koreans, or did WAT just decide to ripoff Lost for character names?

I have been forced by my wife to watch the dreadful Donald on The Apprentice this season, but if anyone else is watching have you noticed Rebecca is a dead ringer for Evangeline Lilly?

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/8139/rebeccatopphoto3hw.jpg

Yes, maybe even hotter.

I have been forced by my wife to watch the dreadful Donald on The Apprentice this season....[/IMG]

Sounds like a clear-cut case of spousal abuse, if you ask me. You need to seek legal council immediately! :eek:

Sounds like a clear-cut case of spousal abuse, if you ask me. You need to seek legal council immediately! :eek:That isn't the half of it, I had to watch amazing race family edition this week too; the challenge was bird watching! DVRs are great, you can record almost everything which is what makes them evil at the same time. ;)

That isn't the half of it, I had to watch amazing race family edition this week too; the challenge was bird watching! DVRs are great, you can record almost everything which is what makes them evil at the same time. ;)

:D Yeah, I started a thread on that once called "The DVR - Blessing or Curse?" Lots of colorful comments from members similarly afflicted.

I have been forced by my wife to watch the dreadful Donald on The Apprentice this season, but if anyone else is watching have you noticed Rebecca is a dead ringer for Evangeline Lilly?
Wouldn't surprise me one bit if that's the reason she was chosen.

Last night's Without a Trace had Korean siblings named Jin and Sun.

Are those popular names for Koreans, or did WAT just decide to ripoff Lost for character names?

I saw that episode! I actually laughed out loud when they mentioned the two names. I'm sure it was just a "coincidence".

Whoa, this quiet is deafening!

Well, since no one else is discussing anything...

I know it's been brought up before, but I did finally rewatch the "adrift" rerun. I watched in on the same DVR, same TV, same lighting in the roome etc. and I COULD NOT SEE the logo on the shark this time. In the original airing, I was able to see it very clearly.

I frame by framed it and nothing. It was definitely darker or looked edited in some way and was just not there. I even played with the brightness and contrast to see if that made a difference. Nope. Is it possible, that the rebroadcast for some was just darker? Or edited? I know some have said they watched it and saw it again. But I did not see it.

Not sure if this was mentioned or anyone else got this feeling after the last non-repeat episode. When Jin and the big dude were in the bushes watching the Others walk by, I got a very 'Hippy' vibe from the way they were walking. I definitely think that the Others are the researchers and such that were on the island in the various bunkers/labs/whatever.

Not sure if this was mentioned or anyone else got this feeling after the last non-repeat episode. When Jin and the big dude were in the bushes watching the Others walk by, I got a very 'Hippy' vibe from the way they were walking. I definitely think that the Others are the researchers and such that were on the island in the various bunkers/labs/whatever.


Spoiler:
They are groupies heading to a Phish concert on the other side of the island.

Yahoo! Just got my Scientific Atlanta 8300HD box installed! This is the first Comcast has made it available in my area (I held out for it because I didn't want the 8000HD - heard it was buggy). Anybody have any pros/cons they'd like to share please PM me. All comments will be appreciated - thanks!

Well, since no one else is discussing anything...

I know it's been brought up before, but I did finally rewatch the "adrift" rerun. I watched in on the same DVR, same TV, same lighting in the roome etc. and I COULD NOT SEE the logo on the shark this time. In the original airing, I was able to see it very clearly.

I frame by framed it and nothing. It was definitely darker or looked edited in some way and was just not there. I even played with the brightness and contrast to see if that made a difference. Nope. Is it possible, that the rebroadcast for some was just darker? Or edited? I know some have said they watched it and saw it again. But I did not see it.
It was there.

Spoiler:
They are groupies heading to a Phish concert on the other side of the island.
Actually, Jerry Garcia has been seen wandering around the Island...

Yahoo! Just got my Scientific Atlanta 8300HD box installed! This is the first Comcast has made it available in my area (I held out for it because I didn't want the 8000HD - heard it was buggy). Anybody have any pros/cons they'd like to share please PM me. All comments will be appreciated - thanks!

This is a question for the HDTV Hardware forum, not the Lost thread.

This is a question for the HDTV Hardware forum, not the Lost thread.

As a "LOST" viewer from day one, it'll be a pleasure to view the shows I miss on a HD-DVR instead of a VCR, as I've been holding out for this box. Thanks for sharing my "happiness"...

Always, somebody has to try to "control" a thread as if it's their own personal property, bossing others around --- I see it over and over. The "question" was an add on having nothing to do with the show so I asked for any comments in the form of a private message. What exactly did your post have to do with the show, by the way?

Moderator: feel free to remove my previous post and this one as well if you feel they're out of line.

It was there.

We had friends over who are not losties, so I was trying to explain all the easter eggs and related lunatic fringe interests of the show. I had the epi on the PVR so I said "let's look at the shark logo, for example..." well son of a gun it was not really visible! We reracked the very short scene and watched it frame-by-frame several times. Finally, by temporarily boosting the brightness, it was JUST noticable, and not really legible as the "black bar" version (not Swan or Arrow) DHARMA logo.

I am convinced ABC darkened those 8-10 frames with the shark for the rerun, perhaps as others have mentioned, like the radio voice on the drug plane somehow changed on later hearings.

More stuff for us to ponder (and debate ad nauseum) while waiting for a new episode!

Moderator: feel free to remove my previous post and this one as well if you feel they're out of line.

Are you kidding, it's some of the only activity and drama available this past week in the venerable LOST thread. ;)

Enjoy the new HD-DVR, LOST is made for DVR viewing (and repeated viewing of various segments).

Are you kidding, it's some of the only activity and drama available this past week in the venerable LOST thread. ;)

Enjoy the new HD-DVR, LOST is made for DVR viewing (and repeated viewing of various segments).

And even repeated viewings of reruns just to see how they've been edited since orginally airing.

I still swear the logo on the Shark was MORE visible the first time I saw it than the second. I never could see it on the rerun, but on the original airing I saw it clear as day and I wasn't even looking for it then. Man I wish I still had the original airing on my DVR for comparison.

I should probably start a new thread in the HDTV Hardware forum but congrats to maxman on the DVR. Lost was the primary reason I got an HD Tivo because comcast did not have ABC-HD in my area.

Back OT, I watched the preview for Lost after MNF and the announcer said, "one of these survivors, will be lost forever". The survivors shown on camera during that voiceover were:

Kate, Hurley, Anna, Charlie, Locke and Claire's baby, group shot of Bernard, Michael, Jin and Blonde from Titus. My money is on the Blonde from Titus or Claire's baby (get ready to hit the mute button if Claire starts screaming).

Back OT, ........).

Is this the first sighting of OT meaning On Topic (instead of OFF Topic)?

Got to keep the thread active while LOST is MIA.

I agree - blonde from Titus... since she isn't even in the main credits of the show.

I agree - blonde from Titus... since she isn't even in the main credits of the show.No credits means the person is so insignificant that it wouldn't matter if the person died or not. The preview said something like "you'll be talking about it the rest of the season." Like Boone, it will be one of the main characters. ALL of them are fair game. They were all shown in the preview.

Looked at the original airing--the octagon is MUCH more distinct! dark and obscure in last weeks airing--

Looked at the original airing--the octagon is MUCH more distinct! dark and obscure in last weeks airing--

Assuming they did darken it, to the point that no one can notice it unless they freeze frame it and up the brightness of their tv, why would the writers do that?

It must be a reaction on their part to some of the speculation that appeared on the internet after the first airing of the episode, and I suppose for some reason they weren't happy with the speculation or perhaps they realized they made a mistake somehow?

Maybe the repeat was aired using a 2nd or 3rd generation copy because JJ took the original for use in his private home theater. :)

The shark logo may have been a little Easter Egg that they figured virtually nobody would see; CGI geeks havin' a little fun whilst swigging down their Mountain Dew.

Ha!

But now that it's all over the Internet and every last 'Lost' fan has heard about it or seen it thanks to the magic of DVR's, they've got to find a way to integrate it into the story (maybe involving the Dharma zoological station). And that may be difficult to do... so, they're trying to play it down now.

They're teasing the ratings for first Nov. sweeps ep. with, "someone is going to die."

With this kind of story, deaths could be pretty common every sweeps period. They did it with Boone (probably in Feb or May, can't recall), they faked it with Charlie.

But they could kill 3 survivors off each year (one for each sweeps period) from the survivors and go for a long time, not even touching the regulars.

They could still kill [Blonde from Titus] in an interesting way, or by an interesting character and generate folks "talking about it the rest of the season." There are folks still taking about the pilot, albeit the promotion is targeting the mainstream audience and not the detail-minded minority.

v/r,
C-F

Does "Lost Forever" necessarily mean "die"? Probably be considered a cop-out, but it could be some lame play on words.

I agree - blonde from Titus... since she isn't even in the main credits of the show.
Yes, she was, at least in the last episode, "...And Found." Look again, she's the last in alphabetical order: CYNTHIA WATROS.

She's also listed in the cast section on the ABC website:

http://abc.go.com/primetime/lost/cast/95875.html (http://abc.go.com/primetime/lost/cast/95875.html)

~Dan

Does "Lost Forever" necessarily mean "die"? Probably be considered a cop-out, but it could be some lame play on words.

That's exactly what I was thinking when I heard the phrase. It could be that Walt has been converted to an "other" and if that were true he could be "lost" forever.

The shark logo may have been a little Easter Egg that they figured virtually nobody would see; CGI geeks havin' a little fun whilst swigging down their Mountain Dew.

Ha!

But now that it's all over the Internet and every last 'Lost' fan has heard about it or seen it thanks to the magic of DVR's, they've got to find a way to integrate it into the story (maybe involving the Dharma zoological station). And that may be difficult to do... so, they're trying to play it down now.Agreed. They were just having a little fun....branding a shark would be nothing like branding a cow or horse.

Does "Lost Forever" necessarily mean "die"? Probably be considered a cop-out, but it could be some lame play on words.

You heard it here first!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6387248&highlight=lost+forever#post6387248

Post #10055

Wow - almost word for word. You might say we think alike, but I'd prefer to be accused of plagiarism. ;)

Wow - almost word for word. You might say we think alike, but I'd prefer to be accused of plagiarism. ;)

See you in court!

Did anyone else get the Oceanic-Air Inflight Magazine? They reveal stuff in there that I cannot say anywhere but the spoiler thread. :)

So off i go. :)

Yes, I received it.

That's exactly what I was thinking when I heard the phrase. It could be that Walt has been converted to an "other" and if that were true he could be "lost" forever.
Until a way is found later in the series to change the Others back to normal people, then Walt would not be "lost forever." :rolleyes:

Here's a thought. Claire dies (I know somebody already mentioned it), Charlie, lost in grief, begins doing massive amounts of heroin and eventually gets everybody on the island hooked. Think where the storylines could go from there.

Actually, I think Shannon bites it. The only way she stays is if she has to be constantly in a two-piece bikini.

Sorry if this has already been asked. How do you get everyone to show up on the seating chart at oceanic-air.com?

Buyer Beware... (from CNN):

'Lost' book becoming reality

LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- The ABC television network and sister publishing label Hyperion Books are taking the concept of product placement into a new direction -- by turning an imaginary product into a real one.

Producers of ABC's mega-hit castaway thriller "Lost" plan to introduce a new storyline centering on the discovery of a fictitious manuscript that will become the basis for a real-life novel that Hyperion will publish this spring.

The book will then be promoted as the work of an author, named Gary Troup, who supposedly delivered the manuscript to Hyperion days before perishing in the show's stage-setting event, a plane crash that maroons a group of survivors on a spooky island.

Plans for the convoluted cross-promotion, first reported Tuesday by Hollywood trade publication Daily Variety, were confirmed by a spokeswomen for Hyperion and production studio Touchstone Television, which like ABC, are owned by the Walt Disney Co.

Advertisers have increasingly explored novel product-placement schemes in the face of new technologies that allow TV viewers to skip over conventional commercials when watching their favorite shows.

But Variety said the "Lost" book tie-in may be the first to use imaginary TV events and characters as the basis for a real-life marketing campaign.

As part of the plan, Hyperion said it has commissioned a "well-known" mystery writer to anonymously adapt the fictitious manuscript into an actual, printed book it hopes will automatically appeal to the show's large and loyal following.

"Fans of the show are obsessive. We think a lot of them will be buying the book just to look for clues" to the series, Hyperion President Bob Miller told Variety.

The "Lost" novel, titled "Bad Twin," is described as a private eye mystery about a wealthy heir's search for his evil sibling.

"Lost," one of the several surprise hits that helped ABC bounce back from a lengthy ratings slump last season, currently ranks as the fourth most-watched show on U.S. television, averaging more than 20 million viewers a week.

That sounds less like product placement and more like a simple merchandising tie-in.

Just mean that with all the people that buy the books and other things on Lost just hoping for clues would be disappointed this time.

Yeah, not really "product placement" unless one of the survivors finds the manuscript in the debris.

Who are they calling obsessive!? :p

Here's a thought. Claire dies (I know somebody already mentioned it), Charlie, lost in grief, begins doing massive amounts of heroin and eventually gets everybody on the island hooked. Think where the storylines could go from there.

Everyone on heroin would lead to:

Taglines for
Trainspotting (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117951/) (1996)
Choose life. Choose a job. Choose a starter home. Choose dental insurance, leisure wear and matching luggage. Choose your future. But why would anyone want to do a thing like that?

Ok, talking about this definitely means they don't need to have anymore reruns! We need some new content to discuss.

Looks like the three week hiatus is making people do some strange things...

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/lost

That was quite amusing.

That was hilarious! I new it! I new the island was really on the back of a giant space exploring turtle! And when was Locke playing the tuba?

That was hilarious! I new it! I new the island was really on the back of a giant space exploring turtle! And when was Locke playing the tuba?

That had me rolling! I loved the giant Locke playing tuba looking over the mountain. Funny. :)

Maybe during the next set of reruns, they could play this instead of the rerun.

Reminds me of the old Monty Python days....well done...and now for something completely different.

Reminds me of the old Monty Python days....well done...and now for something completely different.


Truly awesome...thanks to the OP for bringing it to our attention!

Page 3?? I went searching for this "Lost - No Spoilers" thread and had to dig 3 pages deep to find it. I guess that happens when you go three weeks without serving up a fresh episode of our favorite castaways. Well get ready for this Wednesday, the start of a string of 5 brand new episodes By end of this week, I have a feeling this thread will be back on page 1.

For regular readers of the thread, I suggest using the "subscribe to thread" option up near the top of the page in the "thread tools". Then you'll be emailed direct links to this thread when it gets new posts.

IIRC from a couple weeks ago when I checked it on TVtome, I think there's only 3 new ep before a week off, followed by 2 more new and then another long 3 week hiatus...


ron

IIRC from a couple weeks ago when I checked it on TVtome, I think there's only 3 new ep before a week off, followed by 2 more new and then another long 3 week hiatus...


ron
I know R11, there is a lot of misinformation out there, apparently including mine.
I just checked around again, and I thought I saw something about starting this Wednesday, would be the first of 4 new episodes, then Dec 7th will not be, but back again on Dec 14....then no first run shows until 4 weeks starting on Jan 11.

Thanks 2828, I was unaware of the "subscribe to thread" option.

Yep, looks like they switched the date of the 12/7 ep back to 11/30 now...

ron

Page 3?? I went searching for this "Lost - No Spoilers" thread and had to dig 3 pages deep to find it. I guess that happens when you go three weeks without serving up a fresh episode of our favorite castaways. Well get ready for this Wednesday, the start of a string of 5 brand new episodes By end of this week, I have a feeling this thread will be back on page 1.

Um... after your post it was back on page 1. :p

For regular readers of the thread, I suggest using the "subscribe to thread" option up near the top of the page in the "thread tools". Then you'll be emailed direct links to this thread when it gets new posts.And come Friday you'll be unsubscribing after getting dozens of emails in your inbox alerting you to all the new posts. ;)

And come Friday you'll be unsubscribing after getting dozens of emails in your inbox alerting you to all the new posts. ;)
If you don't want email notification, go your "User CP" page and get to your list of subscribed threads. Put a check in the box to the right of the thread, then go to the "Selected Threads" pull down at the bottom and select "no email notification". Not quite as easy as subscribing, but it's not that tough, either.

Actually there is an option to only receive an email once when the thread gets a new post, and then after that it won't notify you of further new posts until you come look at the thread. That's the option I use, and I only get one email in my box all day no matter how many posts there are.

Actually there is an option to only receive an email once when the thread gets a new post, and then after that it won't notify you of further new posts until you come look at the thread. That's the option I use, and I only get one email in my box all day no matter how many posts there are.


If you only check when you get home from work, then subscribing works very well, it starts you off at the first new post. But if you check from work throughout the day, they can be overwhelming. :-)

But if you check from work throughout the day, they can be overwhelming. :-) Or, better still, check from work frequently but have emails sent to an address you cannot access from work. Of course, checking frequently obviates the need for emails, so I'm back to where I started (no email notification). :D

Actually there is an option to only receive an email once when the thread gets a new post, and then after that it won't notify you of further new posts until you come look at the thread. That's the option I use, and I only get one email in my box all day no matter how many posts there are.

That's what I used to get but now for some reason I receive an e-mail everytime someone posts. I can't find the option you mentioned...can you help me out?

Or, better still,
Better still than all previous better stills, :rolleyes: make a bookmark of the following link in your web browser:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=449662&goto=newpost

It takes you to the first new post since the last time you checked the thread (you need to make sure your browser auto logs you in).

That's what I used to get but now for some reason I receive an e-mail everytime someone posts. I can't find the option you mentioned...can you help me out?

If you are hanging about this forum endlessly all day, constantly clicking threads and reading, you will get a bunch of emails because the system thinks you are constantly logging in.

My advice is just come here once or twice a day and read everything, then leave the site. You should just get one email after that, and you can save it to use the next day.

Or alternately you can click on the "User CP" link at the top left of the page to go to your control panel. Unsubscribe from this thread. That will stop the emails. Then if you want you can resubscribe as I described, but this time don't choose "instant notification", but instead use the daily option or something.

If you are hanging about this forum endlessly all day, constantly clicking threads and reading, you will get a bunch of emails because the system thinks you are constantly logging in.

My advice is just come here once or twice a day and read everything, then leave the site. You should just get one email after that, and you can save it to use the next day.I wish it worked that way.

I have quite a few subscriptions. When I check my e-mail, I might have 10-15 notifications of new messages. So I go to the first thread and start reading. But once you access AVSForum to read one thread, the brain-dead system thinks you've read all of the messages in every thread to which you are subscribed! So if anyone posts to any of the groups you haven't visited yet, when you do get to them, you miss all the posts between the original e-mail and the newest post!!!! And when you check your e-mail, you'll have a whole new crop of e-mail notifications, even though you haven't gotten to those threads yet.

I tried asking that the e-mails include a direct link to the specific next unread message to work around this, but apparently this isn't an option for the software AVSForum uses. Does anyone know who writes the software so I could ask them to fix this?

Xesdeeni

All right folks, suit up and strap in, finally a new episode! I think most of us have figured out who's checking out tonight, but the more interesting story to me is Sawyer. He's getting sick from his wound. How much you bet the island "cures" him? (It can't be him that goes, because that's too obvious based on the previews, IMO. Besides, legions of pissed off women would march on ABC headquarters with torches and pitchforks.) And, when he's cured, will he "change" and become more Locke-like?

IDoes anyone know who writes the software so I could ask them to fix this?

Xesdeeni


On the bottom of every page:

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.6

I think that Sawyer is going to get back, Jack isn't going to have any pain killer, and Charlie is going to give him the heroine.. and then those two plot whole s will get closed. :)

Oh, and Shannon has her vision, throwing her in a fitful tizzy, and she throws herself off a cliff (lost forever!).

My theory. :)

Oh, and Desmond and Rousseu meet, hook up and make many babies.

Can't wait for the episode.

Oh, and Desmond and Rousseu meet, hook up and make many babies.

How do we know this has not already happened?

... I think most of us have figured out who's checking out tonight...
We have? Where was I?

The consensus opinion appears to be Shannon as the most expendable.

Well I guess it's not the guy they keep highlighting in the previews when the say one of them will be lost forever and show Sawyer :D

The consensus opinion appears to be Shannon as the most expendable.I agree. So it must not be her either.

My guess is Jin.

I think that it will be "woman from the tail section group" who gets it. But hey, I think that a shannon tizzy induced riot would work too. I can see her throwing a fit about how nobody is helping her deal with _____ (insert any lame reason here) and how they all suck. Everyone in the crowd starts to look at each other from the sides of their eyes as they all move in to finish this once and for all.

Next week, BBQ.

I think that it will be "woman from the tail section group" who gets it. But hey, I think that a shannon tizzy induced riot would work too. I can see her throwing a fit about how nobody is helping her deal with _____ (insert any lame reason here) and how they all suck. Everyone in the crowd starts to look at each other from the sides of their eyes as they all move in to finish this once and for all.

Next week, BBQ.

As long as they die by meteorite, I'm ok with whomever they 'lose' :-)

"Dude, not again!"

The consensus opinion appears to be Shannon as the most expendable.Expendable, my foot! It's sweeps period, and they need her for those ratings-boosting "lying (or running :p) on the beach in a bikini" scenes. They also need her around for the inevitable return of Boone in one of those flashback stories.

Please, please, please let them kill off Michael. I am oh, so tired of his petulant whining b*tch routine, and they've already done his lame backstory to death. Even if they haven't covered all of it, they could show it to us more from Walt's perspective in the future.

Michael deserves it, anyway, what with him chasing after Walt without any regard for safety. Nobody else from the original 48 has been that reckless - and for good reason. He needs to be made into an example of why you don't mess around with "the Others."

I think the whole "someone is gonna die" teaser is BS. If you want to surprise us, don't say a word, just do it. 24 did it right at the end of Season 1. Quite frankly, I kinda like the characters on LOST, that's why I watch it. Telling me you're gonna kill one of these characters (that I enjoy) is not a good thing IMO. One of them getting a battleaxe to the back of the head when I'm not expecting it would shock the hell out of me and more than make up for the loss of the character.

Telegraphing it, only makes me watch the whole show waiting for it to happen....dumb.

One of them getting a battleaxe to the back of the head when I'm not expecting it would shock the hell out of me...

Remember: "Ya got a little Ardtz on 'ya"... (HAH!)

Telegraphing it, only makes me watch the whole show waiting for it to happen....dumb.

Couldn't agree more. I hate spoilers and these sort of blatant teases that, sadly, are becoming more prevalent in an ever-increasingly competitive television landscape. Being shocked is fun! Having the suspense siphoned out by an over-eager promo department or a backstage snitch diminish the enjoyment of watching it all play out and being naturally shocked, SHOCKED by an unexpected plot twist.

Remember: Ya got a little Ardtz on 'ya... (HAH!)

Exactly....THAT'S the way to do it.

I think the whole "someone is gonna die" teaser is BS. If you want to surprise us, don't say a word, just do it. 24 did it right at the end of Season 1. Quite frankly, I kinda like the characters on LOST, that's why I watch it. Telling me you're gonna kill one of these characters (that I enjoy) is not a good thing IMO. One of them getting a battleaxe to the back of the head when I'm not expecting it would shock the hell out of me and more than make up for the loss of the character.

Telegraphing it, only makes me watch the whole show waiting for it to happen....dumb.

They obviously promo it to maximize ratings.

All shows have these events, like some kid losing his or her virginity, someone getting married, someone dying, someone going away. And they pimp it to death to get as many people to tune in.

The whole point of the death is to jazz up the sweeps ratings.

But for the #3 show, it shouldn't be necessary at the expense of the massive number of regular viewers.

What did Walt just say?

I think the quote we'll be talking about is "Did you see the children?"

Out-freaking-standing!

Ha, those writes are having way too much fun!

Next week: "Special Extended Edition"!

Wow! Didn't see Shannon getting shot by the other group of survivors. Congrats to the creators for pulling the wool over my eyes yet again.

ok, all I can say is WOW! I would say we nailed it on the Who get's Killed Poll!

Anna is about to get smacked down.

What did Walt just say?

Play it backwards.

Great episode tonight.

I'm sooo sick and tired of hearing Michael whine about losing Walt? "I lost my son!" "They took Walt!" BOOHOOO shut up already!!!!!!!!

Anna is about to get smacked down.

Can't wait for that!

I don't necessarily believe that she is dead.. She got shot, but that doesn't mean she isn't going to survive. That other woman is the character who is "Lost Forever"

I don't necessarily believe that she is dead.. She got shot, but that doesn't mean she isn't going to survive. That other woman is the character who is "Lost Forever"

I agree.

Play it backwards.

If what he was saying was backwards then wouldn't his "shhh" shouldve been "hhhhhs?"

Good episode! Can't wait for next week's extended episode.

no the first time he said something, not shhh. Thats obvious

If what he was saying was backwards then wouldn't his "shhh" shouldve been "hhhhhs?"

Exactly: pronounced "hush"

I will say this: Anna Lucia is really starting to become the most annoying character. I think she's a bad actress...

Next week: "Special Extended Edition"!

Tivo's showing next week's episode as having a duration of 1 Hr. even. :confused:

I will say this: Anna Lucia is really starting to become the most annoying character. I think she's a bad actress...

STARTING???

Yeah, a lot of agreement about the "bad actress" part.

Tivo's showing next week's episode as having a duration of 1 Hr. even. :confused:

Better make a manual adjustment. I wonder though if it will start at the regular time, or earlier (at 8pm eastern).

If what he was saying was backwards then wouldn't his "shhh" shouldve been "hhhhhs?"



You're right I should have been more specific. When Shannon was in the tent by herself, Walt came in and said something to her. That is what I am trying to find out.

Or it's a 1 hr episode extended by extra commercials :rolleyes:

Really loved the 4 minutes of commercials / 4 minutes of show / 4 minutes of commercials we got about 3/4 into the show. :rolleyes: :mad:

You're right I should have been more specific. When Shannon was in the tent by herself, Walt came in and said something to her. That is what I am trying to find out.


Wasn't trying to be sarcastic but just pointing out the lack of continuity between the scenes unless it really was Walt the second time. (doubtful tho)

Yes...Anna Maria is so freakin annoying! She can't play any other role than the fast and fursious/swat role.

Walt said something like (phonetically): swalluk ine nema

.... which backwards would be amenenikullaws ;)

Wasn't trying to be sarcastic but just pointing out the lack of continuity between the scenes unless it really was Walt the second time. (doubtful tho)



That's an interesting point. What if it actually was Walt the second time?

Walt said something like (phonetically): swalluk ine nema

.... which backwards would be amenenikullaws ;)

Thanks man. Now I can die happy. :rolleyes:

That's an interesting point. What if it actually was Walt the second time?

And because Sayid saw him too instead of just Shannon.

And because Sayid saw him too instead of just Shannon.

Exactly! Now if only Michael had seen him we wouldn't have to hear him cry about Walt every week.

Walt said something like (phonetically): swalluk ine nema

.... which backwards would be amenenikullaws ;)

(Doing Chris Matthews impression) HAH!!!!!!

Exactly! Now if only Michael had seen him we wouldn't have to hear him cry about Walt every week.

That's cold, dude.

Could be "I'm on a ......" and then whatever "swaLUK" is backwards.

Walt said something like (phonetically): swalluk ine nema

.... which backwards would be amenenikullaws ;)

Any significance that Walt's face was dripping wet? It wasn't raining....

Think Sayid was thinking something like "Once you go Iraqi, you never go backy" :)