'Six in Six': Six mysteries 'Lost' must solve in Season 6
We're continuing this week's "Six in Six" series by looking at questions that "Lost" fans need definitively answered in the show's final season. I'm going to try and ignore the obvious ones, such as "Who are The Others?" and "Why is the Island special?" and "Frogurt: The hell????" After all, I think we can all assume that the show to some degree or another will answer the big ones.
These questions are seminal to understanding the "Lost" universe, but risk staying in the murky, mysterious muck of the show's mythology without proper prompting from fans such as myself. So let's poke the writers of "Lost" with Eko's Jesus stick and make sure we get answers about the following in the final season. This is far from an exhaustive list, but it's a good place to start.
Richard's agelessness
Yes, it's all well and good that the Season 5 DVD definitively answered the pressing question of Nestor Carbonell's eye makeup. But we need to know why this dude doesn't age. We need to know when he stopped aging. We need to know who or what made him stop aging. I think I have an idea or two, but I need the complete picture. Sooner rather than later would be nice.
Walt's abilities
I'll lose my mind like a Justin Bieber fan unable to get to the mall the day he's performing if we don't learn anything more about Walt in Season 6. I don't necessarily even need Walt on my screen, although that would be preferable. It's bad enough that Michael got the narrative shaft on the show; don't let it happen to Walt as well, "Lost." There's too much mystery, too much narrative gold, too much importance surrounding Walt NOT to bring things back full circle this season in some fashion.
Desmond's "special" nature
Season 5 started off by telling us that Desmond Hume was "uniquely and miraculously special." Hmm. Sounds like Walt. And yet, like Walt, the show proceeded to treat the character like he had H1N1, not only doing damage to his epic romance with Penny but all but forgetting his character as the show turned Island-centric in the second-half of the season. We're told the Island isn't done with him; let's hope the show isn't, either. He can function either as the exception to the rule that allows major players off-Island to return (Walt, Widmore, Eloise) or as the sole person that remembers the world the way it was before Juliet detonated Jughead. Of all of Faraday's variables, he's perhaps the most important. Don't forget that, "Lost."
'The rules'
In "The Shape of Things to Come," "Lost" introduced the notion of "rules" that govern certain aspects of the lives of those that live on the Island. These "rules" go beyond mere morality and touch upon what a person can or cannot physically do. Ben and Widmore cannot kill each other. Neither, apparently, could The Man in Black and Jacob. It took a few centuries and one mother of a loophole for The Man in Black to circumvent the rules. But what are they? Who created them? Who enforces them? Does the answer lie in a certain book in Richard Alpert's possession? Help a brother out, "Lost"!
The fall of the statue
Ever since brain matter oozed out of my ear during the Season 2 finale "Live Together, Die Alone," I've wanted to know more about the statue. My desire to know actually prompted me to write my first lengthy article about the show. (Ah, so many things incorrectly diagnosed and/or predicted. Good to know things haven't changed since.) Did the statue naturally erode in the time since the arrival of The Black Rock? Seems unlikely. Also, "erosion" isn't terribly dramatic. I'm hoping for a combination of something that combines the Island's odd fertility issues, nominally dormant volcanoes, seemingly God-like entities, and one hard-to-find loophole. But hey, that's just me. Any ol' answer will do. So long as I get one. Hint, hint.
Aaron's importance
"Raised by Another" is in my All Time Top Ten episode list, although if the show doesn't ultimately answer why Claire raising Aaron is so important, it might drop out of my Top 50. So much of my love of this episode is ensconced in the long-term promise it held: that Aaron is central to the heart of the mystery of the show. Something about the Claire/Aaron combo is vital to The Island's ultimate state, a connection so primal that severing that bond was integral to The Man in Black's long con. While Kate's desire to reunite Claire and Aaron is noble, I am hoping for more than a mere mother/son bond to be at stake here. Understanding why Aaron is so vital is something I've waiting five seasons to learn. Hit me with the reason, "Lost."
Those are the questions I want answered. What are some of yours?
Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group.
Photo credit: ABC
What caused the pregnancy problems? Juliet?
Who does Juliet look like?
Why Jacob cured Rachel's cancer? Did he?
Here's a thought. Remember when Kate and Sawyer went to search Richard Alpert after Ben got shot in "WHH"? When Richard met them, this exchange ensued:
RICHARD: Hello there, James. [Walking out from the jungle.]
SAWYER: Where the hell did you come from?
RICHARD: You asked my people to bring you to me. Here I am.
I was wondering if Sawyer's question, in classic LOST fashion, functions as some ever-so-subtle hint as to who Richard is (or more precisely, what exactly met them in the jungle). Do you think Richard could be some sort of apparition? That would explain the agelessness.
Another thought, related to yesterday's post or the one before that:
You mentioned that proof that Ajira 316 had crashed in an alternate timeline could be found in the fact that Richard told Sun that he thought the Losties died. I thought that as well, but still, how could Richard have recognized Locke and said that it's been 3 years since they had met? In timeline #2, could MIB have been impersonating Locke to Richard all along, and then decided to disappear for 3 years until he "returned" with Ajira 316? That just seems overly complicated...
Another thought, of course, is that Richard somehow got to straddle the two timelines, making him able to exist in both simultaneously, or at least travel between both...But that just makes my head hurt.
But while we're talking about alternate timelines, how do you think Darlton is going to deal with how the alternate timelines affect Jughead's survivors on the Island? Was a duplicate copy simply created of each survivor in Timeline #2?
Answers, Ryan, give us answers!!!
I AGREE with your's! esp about Walt. additionally--
1) what/who is Smokey?(!)
2) how did the frozen donkey wheel get there?
3) what were the visions ppl saw on the Island? ditto for the whispers.
oh, i think my questions are kinda the obvious ones!
Two MAJOR plotholes that must be answered:
1) Why did Desmond's vision of Claire and Aaron getting on the helicopter in the Season 3 finale never come true. It basically killed Charlie for nothing, and it has driven me CRAZY that Desmond has never wondered about this.
2) What was Ben doing when he was "captured" in Rousseau's net? Was he really "coming for" Locke?
Those are the biggies for me, aside from the other obvious ones.
The big question is, how did ABC manage to keep anyone's interest in this half-baked program for six years?
I seriously think Aaron is important, because he grows up to become Jacob. It sounds crazy, but think about it. They have similar features, it was essential for him to be raised by his mother Claire, because he was going to eventually get a hold of power, and power corrupts even the best of men. It would explain why Claire is currently missing, because she is hanging out with her son, Jacob(Aaron). As far as I recall, he was the only child born on the island, that in itself might grant him some sort of powers.
Will frank and sawyer get hammered off some rum at some point? That would be the ultimate filler in a mid season episode :)
I agree with all of the above, especially BC.
But, to be honest, right now all I can think about is how depressed I am over Robert's recent comment (because I think it is likely to be true) that we're likely to have "alt-backs" all season, explaining (eventually) why and how the ten (or whatever number it is) utlimately decide and are able to "go back" to the island.
Not only does this seem extremely repititious after the last two seasons (starting with the finale of season 3), and smells like pointless filler (rather than compelling drama, mythology, or philosophy), worst of all it continues what I consider to be a poor "B movie" technique turn the show has taken the last two seasons.
That is, for the first three seasons (until the season three finale at least, but that was a noble suprise), we experienced the story as the main characters experienced it -- in their present tense, with flashbacks that they themselves might have thought about at the same time we were seeing them.
But starting with season 4 the show starting jumping back and forth during time periods for no reason except as a filmmaking technique (and I would say a poor "B movie" one at that) that didn't match the time as the main characters were experiencing it.
In fact, I've been thinking a lot lately how it would be nice of some fan out there eventually re-edits the whole show (and makes it available on DVD -- or even Blue-Ray) so that S4 and S5 don't skip back and forth -- we experience the scenes in the same sequence the main characters did.
And I've been assuming (if I thought about it at all) that the final season would be like the first three seasons, that we were back to experiencing things in the same order the main characters experience them. Which would mean if there is an alternate timeline, then we see all of that first, followed by what happens when they get back to the "normal" timeline.
But if Darlton plans to cut back and forth all (or most) of the season in order to (artificially I would argue) make things more "dramatic", I suspect (though I hope it turns out that I'm wrong) that I'm going to be mighty disappointed in them.
And I think I have a good litmus test we can all take now to determine where each of us stand on this issue -- assuming you've seen "Silence of the Lambs" anyway. (If you haven't and ever plan to please stop reading immediately -- SPOILER ALERT!!!).
Were you (like me) really pissed off when it turned out that the house the Jodi Foster character (it's been a long time since I've seen the movie) approached turned out not to be the house the filmmakers led us to believe it was? This was a classic "B movie" trick. (Some would argue the whole movie was basically a B movie with A level production values and actors.)
But I know that some people did not feel bad about this trick, and in fact were delighted by it. I suspect that those people don't mind all the artificial cutting back and forth between different time periods (or, as the case may be soon, different timelines). But I do, and thus I was hoping we were done with that.
Sorry I rambled on so long. But I feel better now that I got all this off my chest. Thanks.