Lost - Zap2it's Guide to Lost tag:blog.zap2it.com,2009-06-18:/lost//14 2010-03-17T04:34:14Z Read Zap2it's coverage of Lost on ABC. Discuss last night's episode. Talk about your favorite characters. Share your ideas and opinions. Movable Type Enterprise 4.31-en 'Lost': My recap for 'Recon' is live tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.52155 2010-03-17T04:24:30Z 2010-03-17T04:34:14Z So here's, the deal, "Lost" fans: I woke up yesterday morning to find that my basement looked like New Otherton in the sideways timeline. Water water everywhere, not a drop to drink. Water water everybody, boy did that sure stink. So to say I've had a rough few days is an understatement. Thankfully, I had the show to take my mind off things for a while. While it was a good diversion, it wasn't a spectacular one.That's not damning the show with faint praise. I found a lot of it very enjoyable, especially in the first half of the hour. But as the show dragged on, it definitely dragged a bit. I had sort of the same problem as I did with "Sundown": I could see where the show was going, as sometimes happens when the show has to emphasis plot over story. The story of the War of the Island? Interesting! This particular segment... Ryan McGee So here's, the deal, "Lost" fans: I woke up yesterday morning to find that my basement looked like New Otherton in the sideways timeline. Water water everywhere, not a drop to drink. Water water everybody, boy did that sure stink. So to say I've had a rough few days is an understatement. Thankfully, I had the show to take my mind off things for a while. While it was a good diversion, it wasn't a spectacular one.

That's not damning the show with faint praise. I found a lot of it very enjoyable, especially in the first half of the hour. But as the show dragged on, it definitely dragged a bit. I had sort of the same problem as I did with "Sundown": I could see where the show was going, as sometimes happens when the show has to emphasis plot over story. The story of the War of the Island? Interesting! This particular segment of plot points to set the stage? Not as much.

In essence: this was the logical sequel to "The Long Con," in which on-Island Sawyer learned to meld his ability to get people to fight each other with his newfound compassion for other people. Does that sound like a good episode? Yes, and for the most part, it was. But once you saw this episode's antecedent, the beats became a little predictable, and predictability is a death knell no matter what episode in what show.

Read my whole take here. This week's code word for questions to be considered in the next "Letters from the Flame"? SQUIRREL BABY! Because this ep might be that little bigger's swan song. Sigh. We hardly knew ye, squirrel baby.

Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC  ]]> The Great 'Lost' Debate: Parents, children, and Jacob's progress tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.52092 2010-03-15T23:53:01Z 2010-03-16T00:06:13Z ... Ryan McGee In the wake of "Dr. Linus," the Great "Lost" Debate is turning towards the topic of parents. As I talked about in last week's Course Corrections, we're starting to see a pattern emerge in the sideways timeline. That pattern? The primary source of malcontent amongst most of the show's characters - their mothers and fathers - seems to have softened somewhat. Have these relationships been completely fixed? Absolutely not. But the differences between the relationships we've seen throughout the past five seasons and the ones we're seeing in the new (and potentially improved) 2004 are striking. Moreover, they may be at the heart of what's about to happen on the Island.
 
How so? Let's get into the debate!
 
Ryan McGee: OK, Rick, let's look at the evidence. Sure, Christian Shephard's still AWOL. But we've seen Jack reach an understanding with him (through his son David) in a way that we've never seen with Island Jack. Ben's relationship turned from gassing his father as part of The Purge to changing his oxygen tank in the sideways universe. And Anthony Cooper, possibly winner of Worst Father Ever on Lost, gets invited to John Locke's wedding to Helen. I'm going to take a chance and put these three developments into the positive column for now.
 
If that were all that we took away from the sideways universe, though, those positives would be hollow. Jack's dad? Still missing. Ben's life? Not terribly great. Locke's situation? Once-again wheelchair bound. To call these lives lacking isn't to damn them, but rather point out that these aren't exactly fairy-tale endings for these characters. What interests me more is how these small changes affect the way these men see the world: rather than feeling isolated through their experiences with their parents, they feel more connected with the world around them. So Rick: Is that type of connection tied into the two sides of the war that's about to start on the Island?
 
Rick Porter: What was that season 1 episode called again? "All the Best Plane-Crash Survivors Have Daddy Issues"?
 
Oh, right - "Cowboys." But your point is well-taken - as is the one you made in this week's Letters from the Flame about the show becoming about "nature vs. nurture" almost as much as it's about "light vs. dark." The show has been obsessed with absent, bad, or otherwise not-so-great paternal figures for essentially its entire run - but if all we've been watching is a six-year-long group-therapy exercise, then I will be the first to be handing out the brooms when we all declare shenanigans on Lindelof and Cuse.
 
I think what we've seen so far of the father-child relationships of characters in the sideways timeline is playing, or will play, into what happens on the Island. As you said, Jack, Locke and Ben aren't in the best of circumstances in Sidewaysland - the Christian of that world, in particular, still sounds like a pill - but all of them have started to accept that they've been dealt a crappy hand and are trying to make the best of it. That seems to be what Ben and Jack are doing on the Island as well, with Jack finally accepting he's there for a reason and Ben, at least outwardly, coming to terms with the folly of much of what he did there.
 
What struck me the most in "Dr. Linus," though, were the scenes between Ben and Roger and the markedly different tone they had to any interaction the two had in the past. Roger still regrets joining the Dharma Initiative, but for a different reason - he genuinely thinks things could've turned out better had he and Ben stayed. Even more important, though, the regret is directed at himself, not out at Ben. For whatever reason Ben's mother isn't around, Roger doesn't blame his son. That seems significant to me - how about you?
 
RM: I think it's significant indeed, because parental involvement has more of an effect in shaping the capacity of these characters than anything Jacob could ever hope to achieve. As I said last week: Jacob can lead you to water, but can't make you drink. You have to decide to do that. But if Jack had a bad fishing trip with his dad when he was 10, well, he's not a big fan of water. OK, this example is prosaic and a bit reductive, but you get the point, I hope: When talking about the discrete, non-infinitesimal choices available to our characters, you have to go back (pun intended) to the source. And that source lies well past Jacob and resides in the homes in which these characters were raised.
 
There are a few ways you can try to look at the Island version of a character and the Sideways version. You could argue that they both started with the same building blocks, and merely had different ones accentuated or discarded depending on external factors. That doesn't mean that every character started off with the same set of blocks, but the two versions of Ben, for instance, always started off with the same POTENTIAL for love, hate, compassion, aggression, so on and so forth. If that's true, then his relationship with his parents couldn't have helped forge that final assembly of blocks to form the adult figure we see before us.
 
Now here's what's interesting: in the sideways timeline, we see Ben slowly start to revert to a more familiar version over the course of "Dr. Linus." That suggests that discarded aspects of one's core personality aren't truly discarded, merely subsumed. You could argue the same thing about Ben's confession on the Island. He didn't suddenly develop the capacity for compassion and regret: it was always there, just buried under the surface. So in looking at people's ability to change in Season 6, are we really looking at the road not taken, played out over the final 11 hours?
 
RP: I'm not convinced it will be that simple. I may be falling into the trap of not trusting what the show puts in front of me, but in Ben's case, for instance, I'm not sure whether I buy that the island version of him is really a changed man. I do believe the remorse he projected at the end of "Dr. Linus" was real, but I'm not certain it will be permanent.
 
What might be happening, though, is that the "progress" these characters are supposed to make is in recognizing the bad cards they've been dealt - because you can't tackle a problem until you acknowledge that there is one. It took Jack literally being shown that his arrival on the Island wasn't just an accident to convince him that there might be another way of looking at things, and even then he seemed to tip a little too far the other way. Sideways Jack still isn't really sure he can be a good father, only that he wants to be.
 
What I'm really hoping is that the next few episodes show us how the other characters - Sawyer in particular - behave in Sidewaysland. That's going to give us a clearer picture as to how the two realities reflect and diverge from one another, and (I hope) some more clues as to how they're connected. Sawyer seems, more than most of the characters, to have an idea that things aren't always black and white, and as such his experience in this new world could hold a key to understanding the bigger picture.
 
Which is kind of veering off-point, I suppose, so sorry about that. But I think once we see Sawyer's off-Island story, we'll get a (somewhat, anyway) clearer picture of how one version of a character - and the choices he or she makes - affects the other.
 
RM: I never meant to imply that "better parenting" is THE thing that will give "Lost" its path towards defeating Smocke, so my bad on that front. Yes, you're right, it would be a touch too simplistic to think that if Jack and Christian hug it out like Ari and Eric from "Entourage" then Smocke will starting screaming, "I'm MELTING! MELTING!
 
As for Sawyer: well, he's a great case study to figure out how well our theories about parents hold water, no? Hopefully, it'll hold lots of water...like my basement did this morning when I woke up. Ouch. (Home ownership, baby!) Of all the people that we saw on Oceanic 815, I wanted to know more about his changes than any other character. Sure, Hurley's "luck" was interesting, but I wanted to know what cards that version of Sawyer was holding. Does he know when to hold 'em? Fold 'em? If Anthony Cooper's invited to Locke's wedding, does that mean he never manipulated James' parents? Enquiring minds want to know! And hopefully, given the title of this week's episode, we'll find out sooner rather than later.

What do you think? What do the parent-child relationships in the sideways universe say about the nature of that timeline?

Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC

 ]]> 'Letters from the Flame': 'Lost' about 'Dr. Linus'? I have your answers tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.52032 2010-03-14T15:12:51Z 2010-03-14T18:13:05Z ... Ryan McGee We're coming up on another episode of "Lost," but it's not too late to go back to "Dr. Linus" and answer a few of your burning questions. In today's mailbag: Alex! Ilana! And a certain denizen of a certain sub. No, not the $5 foot-long variety. This isn't a "Chuck" blog, people. I thought we'd established this by now.

How did the principal know that Alex could be used as a bargaining chip against Ben? There are lots of students in that school ... Why choose Alex?
Artz
 
Given that there were only five students in Ben's after-school History Club, I assumed that Reynolds just kept tabs on those five in terms of being able to hold them over Ben's head.
 
Why do you think once Smocke came to Ben that he told Ben he should kill Ilana if he had the chance when I would think that Smocke could just as easily kill her like he did to all those who stayed in the Temple? This is the second chance that Smocke could have easily killed her...the first time being right after he came out of the statue and walked off with Richard into the jungle...so why hasn't he killed her yet considering she is a threat to him?
Jacoby
 
I went back to watch her scene with Jacob in "The Incident," and he doesn't touch her. Not sure if that's because he already HAS touched her, or the nature of her injuries in that Russian hospital make touching her impossible. Nevertheless, if Smocke COULD kill her, I feel that he would. It never occurred to him that Ben could change, because in his mind, people CANNOT change. His recruits so far have confirmed his theory, but Ben's the first to break with Smocke's plans. Not Claire. Not Sayid. Not Sawyer. (Maybe.) But BEN. Amazing.
 
Do we think that, had Locke gone through with his attempt to hang himself in "Jeremy Bentham," he would have failed (a la Richard's "I can't kill myself but you can do it for me")?
 
Also, is it possible that Jacob wanted to die at this point -- that this is the "progress" needed to get to the proper end?
Deb
 
I suppose you could look at Ben's entrance into the scene as proof positive that Locke's plan DID fail. After all, Jack's suicide was prevented by a car crash, not a physical inability to jump. But trying to "prove" this is impossible: The cause-and-effect cycle keeps circling back on itself in instances such as these.
 
As for the second question: Absolutely. Here's my take: Jacob needs people to stop needing him, plain and simple. He's lifted them up as far as he can take them, but for progress to reach the end point he clearly envisions, he needs to take himself out of the equation. It's the age-old saga of the wise elders removing themselves from the scene so the young hero might reach his/her full potential. See: Luke Skywalker, Harry Potter, etc.
 
When Alex was killed, it seemed to me that Ben was surprised. He seemed to believe that it was impossible for Alex to be killed there, and I think he said something like "he changed it." In this episode, he suggests he chose the island over Alex, indicating he knew she was going to die. Do you think we'll ever get an explanation for the "he changed it" line after Alex's death?
Tom
 
With Widmore's return to the Island, I think we'll start getting a download on what the "rules" are, both in terms of Ben/Charles, but also Jacob/The Man in Black. I bet that if Smocke had made Charles the offer he made to Ben as the latter dug his own grave, Ilana would have a hole in her chest right now.
 
Ben's shock in that scene was a matter of his shattering of faith over an intense, personal loss. He truly felt that by believing in the Island, in believing in his status as leader, in believing in the unseen entity of Jacob, that Alex couldn't die. Maybe he thought he could talk his way out of it. Maybe he though Keamy's gun would inexplicably jam. But he felt that his decision to save Alex was "blessed," if you will, by the Island, and with her death started the long, slow decay of faith that only ended with Ilana's forgiveness this past week.
 
But now that Charles Widmore's on the scene, let's look at a few questions readers had about his re-insertion into the "Lost" mix.
 
WHEN is Widmore coming from? We know Widmore got to the island via sub, don't know what for or who he'll join ... but when is he coming from? The original 2007 timeline? Or from the sideways timeline?
Jacobita
 
2007. For starters, I think introducing people from two different timelines would be a huge mistake. Secondly, only one person can "see" both timelines now, and that's Desmond. Maybe Des imparted what he saw to Widmore, which could be why Charles is there now. (Of course, who's to say that Des and others aren't in another part of the sub now? Penny? Eloise? Wait for it...wait for it...Walt? I know. The latter's a pipe dream. But it's a pipe dream I love. So give it to me for just a little while longer, thankee sai.)
 
Any takes on which side Widmore is on? Are we assuming he is the one Jacob said was coming? I guess he really didn't need a lighthouse.
Lisa
 
One thing I didn't see though ... we know Jacob sent Hurley/Jack to the "lighthouse" to put up a sign for someone who was coming to the island. After Jack broke the mirror he said that "they'll find another way" ... does this mean that since we saw the sub coming in with Widmore inside -- that Widmore is on Jacob's side?? If not, is someone else coming? I always thought/wanted that person to be Desmond and/or Eloise ... what do you think?
Lostie47
 
Well, the last time we heard about anyone coming to the Island, it was in "Catch-22," and I think we know that Naomi wasn't exactly summoned by Jacob. In any case, the lighthouse was not intended to guide whomever Jacob referred to in that episode to the Island: It was a fake-out designed 1) to get Jack and Hurley to safety, and 2) to let Jack understand his importance in the war to come. Whatever the lighthouse's previous purpose was, it was not employed during the episode "Lighthouse."
 
As for the question of whose side Widmore's on: I'd like to think that he's trying to be on the side of good, but ultimately will succumb once again to his baser impulses. It's just more interesting to watch him try to help while everyone questions his motives, then have him stab them all in the back once he's earned their trust. I think once the show fills in the gap that explains his attitudes toward Locke in "Bentham," then we'll have our full answer.
 
OK, this doesn't really have anything to do with this episode, but what do you make of Christian's ultimate role in this battle? From what you've said so far, it seems that Christian/Cabin Christian was just a temporary vessel for MIB to make his initial recruiting moves before morphing into Smocke. But I have to believe Christian has a bigger purpose here (especially considering his two kids are apparently the main peeps on both sides). Maybe I just don't want to believe Christian is simply a way for Jack to work through his issues and rise to his complete self, but I'm still waiting for his ultimate payoff.
A-Rob
 
I'll have a lot more to say about this in the next Great "Lost" Debate, in which Rick Porter and I are going to look at the history of bad parents in the show and how the sideways timeline might be attempting to rectify that. Instead of looking at the seemingly small triumph of Jack over his daddy issues, look at the way in which the elder generation(s) on the show have utterly failed their offspring. It goes well beyond a simple "my daddy didn't love me enough" and onto "my parents left me a world that was worse off than the one they inherited."
 
When the show talks about "destiny" and "free will," what it may be talking about is the age-old dichotomy of "nature" versus "nurture." It's difficult to see we have the ability to choose when so many things are out of our control. As my podcast compatriot Todd VanDerWerff pointed out in his recap of the episode, "We all have the ultimate decision over our own lives, but we're also limited by certain factors, by where we're born, by the kinds of people we have as parents, by the very makeup of our physical and mental beings." The people we see in the sideways timeline are recognizable, but still different due to the factors that Todd lists.
 
In some ways, Jacob's removal of himself from the playing field (with the small, yet notable exception of his conversations with Hurley) mirrors the need for people to remove the stigmas inherited from their parents, those roadblocks that have prevented them from evolving into the type of people needed for Jacob's work to truly end. But here's the catch: It's not merely Jacob who needs this work to end. It's humanity as a whole that needs it. That's the secret that The Man in Black cannot grasp, and that's why Team Jacob still has a fantastic shot to triumph.
 
Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC
 


]]> 'Lost': Live chat about 'Recon' on March 16 tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.52031 2010-03-14T14:48:30Z 2010-03-14T15:17:45Z How much do I love the title of the next episode of "Lost"? I love it lots. Now, I don't know the character around which this next episode is centered, but with the title "Recon," it seems like a Sawyer-centric episode. If you know for sure, don't confirm/deny it in the comments below. I already got burned by thinking "Sundown" was a Sun/Jin episode, so having the word "con" in here could just be a way for the Powers that Be to hide the fact that this is a Frogurt-centric episode.In any case, we'll be doing our weekly live chat again this Tuesday, March 16th, starting at 7:30 pm EST and ending just before "Recon" ends. Here's a brief rundown of all things "Dr. Linus"-related on the blog over the past week to ensure you're as caught up as possible before moving into the almost halfway point of the season. (Yes, halfway point. Unreal. I... Ryan McGee How much do I love the title of the next episode of "Lost"? I love it lots. Now, I don't know the character around which this next episode is centered, but with the title "Recon," it seems like a Sawyer-centric episode. If you know for sure, don't confirm/deny it in the comments below. I already got burned by thinking "Sundown" was a Sun/Jin episode, so having the word "con" in here could just be a way for the Powers that Be to hide the fact that this is a Frogurt-centric episode.

In any case, we'll be doing our weekly live chat again this Tuesday, March 16th, starting at 7:30 pm EST and ending just before "Recon" ends. Here's a brief rundown of all things "Dr. Linus"-related on the blog over the past week to ensure you're as caught up as possible before moving into the almost halfway point of the season. (Yes, halfway point. Unreal. I need a hug.)

"Dr. Linus" recap
"Dr. Linus" podcast
"Dr. Linus" Course Corrections
"Dr. Linues" Reader Q&A

Hope to see you here this Tuesday!



Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC 
]]> 'Lost': Course Corrections for 'Dr. Linus' tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51853 2010-03-12T01:28:04Z 2010-03-12T02:09:23Z ... Ryan McGee There's not been a lot of dissension in terms of opinion about the latest episode of "Lost." By and large, Zap2it readers seems to have loved it, and even those that didn't quite feel it didn't have the disdain they have had for previous episodes such as "What Kate Does" and "Sundown." But that doesn't mean that there's nothing to talk about concerning this episode. And that's why I'm here with this week's edition of "Course Corrections."
 
As always, this series is my attempt to amend, augment, or append my initial recap. Those suckers are long, written in the immediate aftermath of exposure to the episode, and usually take me late into the night to finish. By the time I post those, I'm sweatier than Ben after a day of grave digging (metaphorically speaking). So I enjoy the chance to soak in the episode a bit more, read up on reader comments, and look at the episode anew a little later on. So, as always, here are eight more things about "Dr. Linus."
 
***
 
Smocke's potential "take-over" of Sideways Locke put two interesting ideas into play in the "Lost" universe: one old, one new. First, the new: since the start of the season, I've suggested that there's an energy being passed between the two timelines. It's not unidirectional. But until last night, I never considered that this energy could be anything other than positive. With Locke's subtle suggestion that Sideways Ben angle for the principal position, I think we saw the first concrete instance of NEGATIVE energy flowing from one timeline to the other. Does this mean that Sideways Locke=Smocke? I don't think it's that simple. But if indeed this timeline is at least partly a byproduct of Smocke's leaving the Island, then he may have a failsafe or two in place over there to keep things "as is." I've hinted before that Hurley's good fortune MIGHT be a Smocke-provided luxury, itself something nominally positive but under the surface evil. But only in "Dr. Linus" have we seen such an event so literally presented onscreen.
 
***
 
Now, for the "old": with all the downloaded info about Jacob's Touch providing a type of invulnerability, I couldn't help but think of the dearly departed Michael Dawson. But not just for all his attempted suicides off-Island. No, I thought more about his conversation with Ben aboard the Kahana, a conversation that played out in interesting ways last night:
 
BEN: When I'm at war, I'll do what I need to do to win, but I will not kill innocent people.
 
MICHAEL: Ana Lucia and Libby... they were innocent.
 
BEN: You killed them, Michael. No one asked you to.
 
First of all, buuuurrrrnnnn. Secondly, this conversation highlights something currently in play in the "Lost" universe more than ever: personal actions that are attributed to fate, destiny, or some other higher power that in fact have no derivation in anything else other than personal choice. Free will still rules in the "Lost" universe, even if Jacob occasionally gives a candidate a push now and then. In both the Island and sideways timeline, Ben is presented with a choice. And the mere fact that he recognizes it AS a choice is a huge step forward. Assigning personal agency over the vagaries of "fate" is the first step towards stripping both Jacob and The Man in Black of their power. Somewhere, Jacob is smiling. And Smocke is sneering.
 
***
 
Speaking of energy passed back and forth, my friend wrote me this morning to point out that I ignored one way in which the energy could have worked last night. Rather than assuming the experience with Sideways Alex directly influenced his encounter with Ilana in the jungle at episode's end, it could be the latter than informed the former. To which I say: yes, and had I been semi-conscious when wrapping up the recap, I would have counted this as a possibility. I'm generally indifferent in which order this sequence happened, so long as it accounts for both timelines having an effect on the other. So long as that stays in play, I'm a happy, albeit tired, camper.
 
***
 
One nice thing about making Ben's sideways choice nominally innocuous is how it speaks to the benign nature of the inception of evil. I know I make a lot of "Lord of the Rings" references, but look: I run a "Lost" blog. You already knew I was a nerd. But as Ben pawed at Reynolds' nameplate, I thought to Gandalf tempted by the Ring in Hobbiton upon Frodo's offer to him: "Understand, Frodo. I would use this ring from a desire to do good... But through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine." In that ellipsis, Gandalf nearly succumbs to the temptation, but then backs away from the precipice. The old lesson remains: the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Evil doesn't always manifest itself in grand gestures. Just read Stephen King's latest novel "Under the Dome" to see the tyranny in small-town America.
 
***
 
Your homework assignment (and mine) between now and next week's episode: rewatch "The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham." Specifically, watch all things Widmore. Since this is "Lost," two scenarios are equally plausible: he sent Locke back intentionally to unleash Smocke, or was an unwitting pawn in a larger game he's now trying to amend off-shore while avoiding both mega-sharks and/or giant octopi. (Sorry, the periscope shot made me giggle, and not in the good way.) Watch the ep, come back, and tell me which scenario seems most plausible. Ben seems on the road to redemption: could Widmore be far behind?
 
***
 
In light of this week's episode, I think it's time to revisit two essays from September, in which I looked at Richard's possible death wish. Part 1 is here, and Part 2 is here. I'm not pointing this out to puff out my chest and say, "I told you so!" But I still think it's worth a second look, both for what has held up and what has been punctured by the events on the show so far. Biggest update/amendment I'd make? Suggesting Richard made a bargain for everlasting life. Clearly, Jacob's gift isn't something you can ask for. It's given to you, whether you like it or not. (Emphasis on the "not" in Richard's case lately.)
 
***
 
An aspect of the sideways timeline that I haven't given NEARLY enough time to: a generation of people passing on something positive, not negative, the one after it. Back in 2008, I came up with my "Sins of the Father" theory for the show, which essentially boils down to "Lost" as we know it being comprised of people that had been failed by their parents. No real "Greatest Generation" in the "Lost" world: just a steady stream of disappointment and passing the buck and the bill onto their kids. But in the sideways universe, we've seen at least two concrete examples of "Lost" characters adding something to the younger generation: Jack giving his son the love his own father didn't, and Ben giving Alex the chance to succeed at the expense of his own ambition to be more than he is. All part of Jacob's progress, and only possible by introducing this sideways timeline. Just brilliant.
 
***
 
OK, my favorite part of these "Course Corrections": your weekly "Lost" mixtape! For Ben: Peter Gabriel's "Digging in the Dirt," Bloc Party's "Price of Gas," Oasis' "Don't Look Back in Anger," and Michael Jackson's "You Are Not Alone." For Ilana: George Michael's "Father Figure" and Kansas' "Dust in the Wind." For Miles: Notorious B.I.G.'s "Mo' Money, Mo' Problems" seems appropriate. I'm sure Principal Reynolds listens to A Perfect Circle's "The Nurse Who Loved Me" on the way home from work. While walking back to the beach, I'm sure Jack Shephard hummed AC/DC's "T.N.T." when not whistling The Beatles' "Get Back." Richard Alpert couldn't hear him, what with The Hives' "Die, All Right!" in his brain, and Hurley was too busy thinking about Creedence Clearwater Revival's "Run Through the Jungle" after his sprint from the Black Rock.
 
***
 
Those are my thoughts 48 hours after "Dr. Linus": what are some of yours? Leave them below!
 
Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC 

 ]]> 'Lost': 'Orientation: Ryan Station' talks 'Dr. Linus' with special guest James Poniewozik tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51792 2010-03-11T01:19:42Z 2010-03-11T02:00:40Z We're back with another installment of our weekly "Lost" podcast, "Orientation: Ryan Station." The Chicago Tribune's Maureen "Mo" Ryan and myself had the distinct pleasure to welcome Time Magazine's own James Poniewozik to this week's discussion about "Dr. Linus." And Lord knows there was not a small amount to discuss about last night's fantastic episode.As always, there are several ways in which you can hear the podcast. There's an embedded file in this entry, just below the Hulu version of "Dr. Linus." In addition, just below that is a link that allows you to save the MP3 directly to your hard drive. Next to the download is a link to the podcast's feed. If you want to sync this podcast up to your iTunes player, make sure to go to this link or search for "Orientation: Ryan Station" inside the iTunes music store.If you use either of the latter two options, we'd love for you... Ryan McGee We're back with another installment of our weekly "Lost" podcast, "Orientation: Ryan Station." The Chicago Tribune's Maureen "Mo" Ryan and myself had the distinct pleasure to welcome Time Magazine's own James Poniewozik to this week's discussion about "Dr. Linus." And Lord knows there was not a small amount to discuss about last night's fantastic episode.

As always, there are several ways in which you can hear the podcast. There's an embedded file in this entry, just below the Hulu version of "Dr. Linus." In addition, just below that is a link that allows you to save the MP3 directly to your hard drive. Next to the download is a link to the podcast's feed. If you want to sync this podcast up to your iTunes player, make sure to go to this link or search for "Orientation: Ryan Station" inside the iTunes music store.

If you use either of the latter two options, we'd love for you to also rate us and provide feedback. The more ratings and feedbacks we receive, the more people that can find the podcast. While Mo and I do this because we absolutely have a blast doing it, sharing the fun with as many people as possible would be great as well.

(If this isn't enough "Lost" multimedia for you, then check out Zap2it's own Brill Bundy as she appears on AOL TV's "Instant Dharma"! Print, audio, video: we've got you covered here. Just don't ask us to bake. We're bad at baking. OK, I am bad at baking. You caught me.)

In this week's podcast installment: James makes the case for Leslie Arzt, Mo makes an unfortunate verbal flub, and I make an even more unfortunate costume suggestion for Richard Alpert. In between all that mayhem lies a fun and hopefully informative look at "Dr. Linus." You can follow along with us as we watch the episode, or simply download it and listen to our discussion on the go. We hope you enjoy listening to it as much as we had in recording it. Namaste!



]]> 'Lost': My recap for 'Dr. Linus' is live tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51749 2010-03-10T05:51:43Z 2010-03-10T06:12:04Z ... Ryan McGee I'm spent, "Lost" fans, after trying to encapsulate all the seismic events off- and on-Island that went down tonight. While ostensibly a Ben-centric episode, we got huge payoffs for Richard, a turning point for Jack, more intriguing hints about Ilana, and about ten great lines from Miles.

My full take is over here. As always, comment away on that entry and leave your burning questions here. The key word? AAAARRRRZZZTTT! Use that to be considered for this weekend's edition of "Letters from The Flame." I'll be back with a "Course Corrections" this Thursday, and a new podcast with a special guest Wednesday night. Until then, comment away!

 Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC 

]]> The Great 'Lost' Debate: Six down, 12 to go tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51672 2010-03-08T21:44:35Z 2010-03-08T21:52:54Z We're trying something just slightly different with this week's installment of The Great "Lost" Debate. Rather than discuss something specific in the most recent episode, "Sundown" -- because it would inevitably devolve into, "OMG Smokey! Kewl!!" -- we're panning back just a little bit to look at the first third of the season. Come on along as we consider what the first six episodes have shown us, what they haven't, and what it all means for the show going forward (T-shirts sold separately).Rick Porter: So we're now a third of the way through the last season of "Lost" -- and I have to say, typing those words bums me out a little. I'm trying not to let expectations for the end get too far out of whack, but it's safe to say that after six episodes, I'm pretty primed for good -- by which I mean surprising, possibly tragic, and not necessarily tidy -- things... Rick Porter We're trying something just slightly different with this week's installment of The Great "Lost" Debate. Rather than discuss something specific in the most recent episode, "Sundown" -- because it would inevitably devolve into, "OMG Smokey! Kewl!!" -- we're panning back just a little bit to look at the first third of the season.

Come on along as we consider what the first six episodes have shown us, what they haven't, and what it all means for the show going forward (T-shirts sold separately).

Rick Porter: So we're now a third of the way through the last season of "Lost" -- and I have to say, typing those words bums me out a little. I'm trying not to let expectations for the end get too far out of whack, but it's safe to say that after six episodes, I'm pretty primed for good -- by which I mean surprising, possibly tragic, and not necessarily tidy -- things to come.

But since we had a pretty definitive ending to Act 1 of the season with "Sundown" -- Smocke cleaning house at the Temple and gathering his newly infected minions -- it's probably a good time to assess where things stand in the "Lost" universe, and what's been set up for the rest of the season.

Obviously, we don't yet know exactly what the sideways timeline represents -- Ryan, you and I both have pretty strong opinions on it, but any and all theories are still on the table at this point. So let's set that aside for a moment and look instead at the most recent events: Smocke marching away from the Temple with a cadre of followers, and Ilana, Ben, Sun and Lapidus running the other direction. Something's a-brewin', to be sure -- but what, exactly? Is it throwdown time?
 
Ryan McGee: I think throwdown time starts in full in the final third of the season. The middle third will probably consist of a few big character downloads (I'm thinking people like Ben, Richard, maybe Widmore) in addition to establishing the two sides of the War of the Island. Right now, the odds seem hopelessly stacked against Team Jacob, which is the entire point. Things SHOULD feel dire. Smocke SHOULD seem invincible. If Dogen's Magic Dagger is not as powerful as Maxwell's Silver Hammer, what can harm Smocke?

So, in addition to establishing the sides, the second third should hopefully establish the context of this war. We know Smocke wants to go home, but we don't really know the import of that wish. Is that what creates the separate timeline? And if it has a hand in it, what does it say about Desmond's presence there as a Puck-like figure, a sprite that can pop in and out of the action by the whims of higher beings? Establishing the conflict on the Island should establish the nature of the sideways timeline more definitively. If we can't draw a fairly reasonable conclusion as to its nature by hour 12, I might dig up Nikki and Paulo only to bury them alive AGAIN to release my rage.

The purpose of the first third was to declare The Island a "no safe zone" -- what was once called "the last safe place on the Island" is now in smokey, Smocke-laden ruins. Nowhere to run to, baby. Nowhere to hide. Help is apparently on the way, in the form of a mysterious visitor alluded to by Jacob. But can his remaining acolytes/unwitting followers hang on long enough for the human equivalent of a Dharma pallet drop?
 
RP: It does sort of feel like the Temple was the Jacob-following equivalent of Helm's Deep, doesn't it? Only the outcome of the battle -- if you can even call it that -- was not nearly as positive as it was in "The Two Towers."

So in terms of the on-island action, I think we're going to see a lot of the ostensible good guys -- Ilana, Sun, Hurley, Jack, Ben (in an enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend sort of way) and Richard -- on the run, sort of like the survivors of Flight 815 were living in fear Others early in the series. Smocke, meanwhile, will be consolidating his power and setting his plan in motion by continuing to tell his followers whatever they need to hear to keep them in line.
 
What I want to see, though, is some of what you suggested: a couple of big fill-in-the-blanks stories involving some of the characters -- particularly Richard (Nestor Carbonell has promised that's coming soon) and Ben, who have both been on the Island a long time and thus and probably hold at least some keys to whatever the final battle might be. I also think we'll get a lot better sense of how the sideways timeline fits into the larger narrative, be it an epilogue or something that will converge into the Island timeline (and, by the way, I'm totally having "Team Convergence" and "Team Epilogue" T-shirts printed up).
 
So that's my best guess as to what WILL happen. My question to you, then, is what do you WANT to see happen?
 
RM: The issue with asking something like "What do I want to see happen?" is that the answer is insanely specific. What I want is nothing like what you want or what anyone else wants. But to answer it in a way that's as vague as possible: I want to see why this final chapter of the "Lost" saga matters. And I don't mean "last chapter" simply in terms of the events on the show, but the events on the Island. That sucker's been around long enough for ancient civilizations to erect massive statues upon it, and everything that's happened on the Island had led to the destruction of The Temple by Smocke.

In working through the back stories of people like Ben, Richard, and Ilana, I hope the show gives context to this battle in addition to giving us as an audience reason to fear Smocke leaving the Island. It's all fine and good to paint Jacob and Smocke as in varying shades of gray -- not simply "light" and "dark" -- but at some point, I want to root for someone! I'm pretty sure I should be siding against Smocke, but I need a more definitive reason WHY I should be doing so other than mere intuition.

More specifically, want I want to see in the next third: Ben finding a purpose. Ilana reminding Richard of HIS purpose. Learning the purpose of the mysterious visitor coming to the Island. And, yes, a "Team Convergence" t-shirt. Halter top, if you please.

RP: That's a good deal to ask -- but the thing is, I don't really see it as asking too much at this point. Inevitable ups and downs aside, these six episodes have done a pretty excellent job at setting the table for the conclusion of the series -- and going back and forth here has reminded me not just to look week by week at what's happening but to remember that what we've seen so far is part of a whole. With that in mind, I'm reasonably confident that "Lost" is going to give us what we need (if not exactly what we want) over these next 12 hours. (Oh, and one halter top, size extra small, coming up.)

Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed, as well as @Zap2itRick and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Related:

Letters from the Flame: 'Sundown' questions answered
More 'Lost' debates

Photo credit: ABC
]]> 'Lost': Live chat about 'Dr. Linus' on March 9 tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51609 2010-03-07T23:33:06Z 2010-03-09T20:30:33Z Admit it, "Lost" fans: the title of this episode makes you straight-up giddy. I'm not suggesting we all engage in a group squeal, because frankly, that's kinda weird. But history dictates that Ben-centric eps kick unholy levels of booty. "The Man Behind the Curtain." "The Shape of Things to Come." "Dead is Dead." I'll put that trilogy of character-centric eps against the three best of any other character.When last we saw Ben, he was separated from those that escaped The Temple via Jacob's secret door. Will he spend the episode on-Island in solitude? What is his seemingly mundane life in the sideways timeline all about? What familiar faces might we see recontextualized this week? Join us for a spoiler-free chat starting at 7:30 pm this Tuesday, March 9th. We'll chat about the first third of the season and theorize about the next leg of the show's final season up until gametime.Hope to see you here!Live... Ryan McGee Admit it, "Lost" fans: the title of this episode makes you straight-up giddy. I'm not suggesting we all engage in a group squeal, because frankly, that's kinda weird. But history dictates that Ben-centric eps kick unholy levels of booty. "The Man Behind the Curtain." "The Shape of Things to Come." "Dead is Dead." I'll put that trilogy of character-centric eps against the three best of any other character.

When last we saw Ben, he was separated from those that escaped The Temple via Jacob's secret door. Will he spend the episode on-Island in solitude? What is his seemingly mundane life in the sideways timeline all about? What familiar faces might we see recontextualized this week? Join us for a spoiler-free chat starting at 7:30 pm this Tuesday, March 9th. We'll chat about the first third of the season and theorize about the next leg of the show's final season up until gametime.

Hope to see you here!



Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC 
]]> 'Letters from the Flame': 'Lost' about 'Sundown'? I have your answers tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51607 2010-03-07T22:31:46Z 2010-03-08T14:22:09Z ... Ryan McGee After a recap, a "Course Corrections," and a podcast, there isn't that much more to say about "Sundown" at this moment. You could say I'm "Lost" for words, but naturally that isn't exactly true. Tomorrow, Rick Porter and I will be summing up the first third of the show's final season, but for today, let's answer a few more lingering questions from last week's episode.
 
So, where is Sawyer and did he become an active Smocker like Sayid and Claire or just a passive Smocker like the others from the temple?
sin laden
 
Here's the tally of those with Smocke right now: Sayid and Claire, infected. Kate, confused. Sawyer and Jin, unclear. It's also unclear if the Others now following Smocke are infected or just trend followers.
 
("Smockers" isn't a bad name for the remaining Others at this point, but I think I prefer "Smothers" and "Flocke's Flock" at this point. By all means, keep suggesting names though!)
 
How much was Sayid influenced by the infection he had when succumbing to the temptations of Smocke? Did he really exercise free will?
splinter
 
Did he exercise free will? Yes. Did he have all the faculties that man generally possesses when exercising free will? No. The creepiness of the infection lies not in that fact that it's Smocke taking over people so much as hollowing them out. He's removing elements that mark Jacob's notion of progress (such as compassion, morality, etc) in order to prove that underneath it all, we're apes with thumbs less hair.
 
Here's an interesting question though: what's the difference between him siding with Smocke and him siding with Ben after leaving the Island? Is the desire to rewrite reality in order to be with a lost love any better or worse than killing to avenge her demise? I'm not so sure, and that's why it'll be fascinating to listen to Smocke spin his tales and weave his words over the course of the season. If he didn't have a strong, compelling point of view, then Season 6 would fall apart. But his instincts aren't unfamiliar to us. Neither are Sayid's. Neither are Claire's.
 
Maybe Season 6 ends up not with someone doing something, but actually REFUSING to do something. They have to take that proverbial road not taken. And that will make all the difference.
 
I think the look that Smocke gave Kate at the end has to be discussed. Talk about creepy; it went from "What are you doing here, how did you survive and I'm going to kill you now" to "Hmmm, maybe you being here is something I can use in the future." I don't think things are going to go well for Kate next week if she sticks around, do you? Also, what about the fact that probably the 2 people Jack cares/trusts most on the island, Sayid and Kate, are now with Smocke? What will that mean for Jack?
JB
 
Using Kate as Jack-bait will probably come into play at some point. Especially considering the fact that Jack tried to detonate an atomic bomb in order to maybe kinda sorta have a shot with her in a world without buttons that you have to press every 108 minutes, this is a scenario I can see coming into play.
 
However, as I wrote in "Course Corrections" last week, Kate's entrenchment in Smocke's camp, however inadvertent it is, nevertheless makes her one of the five most important people on the show right now. Smocke might see her as mere bait, but she's got a LOT more power than The Artist Formerly Known as The Man in Black can imagine. At this point, unlike Claire, Sayid, Sawyer, or Jin, there's NOTHING that Kate wants for herself at this point. She's essentially unable to be tempted. All she wants is to reunite Claire with Aaron, and that clarity of purpose will make her extremely dangerous to Smocke.
 
Could what's happening in the sideways timeline give us a clue as to which side the characters are on? Characters who become less selfish and less self-destructive --thinking in particular about Jack-- have had more satisfying resolutions in the sideways world. Sayid, on the other hand, has lost the woman he loves and shown himself to be violent to the core. Does that show us that Sayid has really gone over to the dark side?
Courtney
 
It's not a bad theory, but it all depends on your feelings about actions in one life carrying over to the next. It's a pretty potent idea, which is where a lot of the epilogue theories in general have derived. The first few episodes showed us a rather comforting notion that the pain and suffering experienced by the Lostaways over the past few seasons would be "rewarded," for lack of a better word, with a happier outcome in the sideways timeline.
 
But I think Sayid's sideways story points out, more than ever, just how insidious such a scenario is actually playing out in the sideways "Lost" universe. If you get what you ostensibly want, but have forgotten the things you once had, is that a good thing? If you get what you want, but in a way that doesn't live up to promises/expectations, is THAT a good thing? I think the show wants us to answer questions such as this.
 
But this notion of the connection between the Island timeline and sideways timeline is also the topic of the last question this week, and in my answer to it, I delve into more of the moral implications of this new timeline's creation.
 
I get your whole MIB-created timeline theory, however my main challenge to that is, what about Locke? Locke was killed. So why would the MIB create a timeline/storyline/etc for a dead guy? Especially when he is evil incarnate. Seems awful nice, just isn't a seamless theory.
Say-id WHAT?
 
I definitely confused more than a few people with some potentially bad phrasing last week. Basically, I used a short-handed way to describe the manner in which the sideways timeline we've been watching all year could be simultaneously 1) the result of whatever's about to happen on the Island, making it a kind of epilogue, but also 2) a transitory timeline that could be prevented once experienced, thereby negating the existence of the timeline by negating Smocke's ultimate victory. In describing all this, I implied that in this scenario, The Man in Black has foreknowledge of the events in that timeline. And that's just not true.
 
So, in trying to clarify things, let me put it this way: the sideways timeline could have been created by the events soon to come on the Island, but Smocke is not the creator (nor Creator, depending on your religious preference) of that universe. I don't think he has a CLUE what's going to happen by leaving the Island, other than he'll be free. And that's all he cares about. If the man whose body he inhabits lives again, what does he care? He's free! If Jack gets the son he never had, what does he care? He's free! So on and so forth. The devil may be in the details, but as the closest thing to a Devil that "Lost" has, he's not really concerned about them. They are as harmless as Dogen's dagger as far as he's concerned.
 
In a weird way, Smocke is acting like Giles in the incredible episode of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" called "The Wish." In it, Cordelia makes a wish that Buffy had never come to Sunnydale to a demon named Anyanka. It's granted, and Cordelia wakes up to a world she doesn't recognize: without Buffy, it's literally Hell on Earth. By episode's end, Buffy's Watcher Giles realizes that he can smash Anyanka's amulet to erase that existence in favor of one he's never experienced. In essence, by smashing that amulet, he'll erase the only reality he knows. Before he does so, the demon screams at him.
 
Anyanka:  You trusting fool! How do you know the other world is any better than this?
 
Giles:  Because it has to be.
That's Smocke's general outlook. He might have only a vague sense of what will happen if he leaves, but as far as he's concerned, it HAS to be better. But only for him. If Locke returns walking, in a wheelchair, or stuck watching Celine Dion's Vegas show for 40 years is irrelevant. He might be sincere in offering these recruits what they want, but he doesn't have authorship over those promises: just suppositions supported by his own thesis that leaving will reset things to a world without Jacob.
 
What Smocke cannot fathom is that such a world could be undone. That remnants of the Island timeline would remain. That a figure like Desmond could hop back and forth between the timelines. That anything at all can stand in his way now that his nemesis is gone. And that hubris will be his undoing.
 
How have your feelings/theories about the sideways timeline evolved since "LA X"? Leave your thoughts and comments below!

Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC 

]]> 'Lost': 'Orientation: Ryan Station' talks 'Sundown' tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51453 2010-03-04T04:53:05Z 2010-03-04T04:59:09Z Maureen "Mo" Ryan from The Chicago Tribune couldn't wait to talk about this week's episode of "Lost," so we quickly scheduled a podcast in order to rehash the episode. While we liked the episodes to varying degrees, we found plenty of common ground upon which to base our weekly podcast. I could probably spend most of my waking hours picking her brain about the show, and I'm lucky to spend a little time each week doing so. Hopefully you've enjoy our discussions to date.A few programming notes: as I mentioned last week, this podcast is now available on iTunes. It's also available for download just below the embedded player at the end of this entry. I wouldn't necessarily recommend listening to us on the treadmill as a way to keep your adrenaline pumping, but both are still great ways to listen to the podcast on the go. While Mo and I discuss the episode as... Ryan McGee terry-oquinn-lost-s6-320-2.jpgMaureen "Mo" Ryan from The Chicago Tribune couldn't wait to talk about this week's episode of "Lost," so we quickly scheduled a podcast in order to rehash the episode. While we liked the episodes to varying degrees, we found plenty of common ground upon which to base our weekly podcast. I could probably spend most of my waking hours picking her brain about the show, and I'm lucky to spend a little time each week doing so. Hopefully you've enjoy our discussions to date.

A few programming notes: as I mentioned last week, this podcast is now available on iTunes. It's also available for download just below the embedded player at the end of this entry. I wouldn't necessarily recommend listening to us on the treadmill as a way to keep your adrenaline pumping, but both are still great ways to listen to the podcast on the go. While Mo and I discuss the episode as we watch it from our respective abodes, these podcasts work both as audio commentaries for the eps as well as general discussions of "Lost" in general. I've embedded the Hulu player for "Sundown" below, but you need not have to watch along with it to enjoy the podcast.

(One last programming note: don't miss my latest "Course Corrections" article, also about "Sundown." Apparently, there was a lot to talk about concerning this week's hour of television.)

Next week, we'll have another special guest in the virtual booth with us. But for this week, it's just Mo and I. As she says at the start of the podcasts: "Two Ryans enter. Only one leaves." Sadly, she got Dogen's dagger, so I think I'm a goner. But listen for yourself and see!



]]> 'Lost': Course Corrections for 'Sundown' tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51442 2010-03-04T00:49:09Z 2010-03-04T02:46:10Z ... Ryan McGee Recapping is a tricky business, especially when it comes to "Lost." The order from on high isn't "Do it as quickly as possible!" But it isn't, "Eh, take your time, whenever is fine," either. There's a fine balance between giving people something to read as soon as possible and the desire to craft as complete, honest, and fair a summary as possible.

In some ways, I like the deadline structure for recaps: without it, I'm not sure I'd EVER finish one. But clearly, having a deadline to post a recap the night that the show airs means that either thoughts are left unfinished, emotional reactions can overwhelm rational thought, and worst of all, what I mean to write doesn't always come across in the cold light of a computer screen.
 
Am I leaping for joy over "Sundown" 24 hours later? Definitely not. My problems with the episode still remain. Still, for Metacritic to interpret my recap as giving the episode a 40 out of a possible 100? That's more than a little much. When I declared it my least favorite episode of the season, I was barely damning it with faint praise. I certainly wasn't drowning it in a pool and then slashing its throat. Many elements worked within the episode, but as a start-to-finish piece of work, it didn't live up to the other five hours I've seen this season. But a 40? Come on. That's "Stranger in a Strange Land" territory. Not "Sundown" territory.
 
So that's why I created the "Course Corrections" series in the wake of "LA X." It's a great opportunity not only for me, but for you the readers as well, to look at the episode with a little time to think and breathe. Less reaction, more introspection. This series is about fine-tuning my initial review more than overhauling it. I quite like most of the recap, thankee kindly. But this series gives me the chance to augment it when it's not 1 a.m. and I see the ghost of my father in the man cave with me. That's straight-up weird, mostly because he's not dead.
 
So, eight more things about "Sundown"...
 
***
I'm not sure there's a character I enjoy more whose character-centric episodes I enjoy less than Sayid. I recognize that's part of the problem here. But it's a WEIRD problem. Who's cooler than Sayid? He's cooler than the other side of the pillow. He's cooler than being cool. (ICE COLD!) But aside from "Solitary," I'm not sure I've ever really liked the off-Island action in a Sayid-episode. To my mind, his last three -- "The Economist," "He's Our You," and "Sundown" -- all deal thematically with the exact same issue, and largely come to the same darn conclusions.

I find it odd that people rail against Jack's constant daddy issues but are fine with Sayid's constant killer instincts. I understand that Sayid's inherently much cooler than Jack, but that doesn't let his episodes off the hook for being equally repetitive. He's a killer: I GET IT. I also get that Jack's sideways flash last week broke new ground for his character; Sayid's did not. In fact, nearly ALL of my interest in anything L.A.-centric derives from Smocke's promise to reunite Sayid with Nadia. Seeing Keamy? Cool. But I'd rather watch the spinoff "Cooking With Keamy!" than this sideways story again.

***
Having said all that, I'd be remiss if I didn't explicitly state the irony in me actively rooting for a killer to be a good guy. In any other show, he'd probably be the villain, or at least the charismatic rogue that eventually got his comeuppance during sweeps. When I said in the recap that I pray this repetitive streak of "Sayid is a killer and that's all he'll ever be" stories ends with him making a breakthrough in which he realizes he's more than that, I don't want that breakthrough to wash his sins away. I want him to atone for that past through an act that doesn't necessarily redeem his life but provides potential redemption for someone else.

Another example: his sparring partner Dogen. Does that man who killed his son in a drunk driving accident deserve a second chance with his son? I'm not sure that he does. I'm not sure that he doesn't, either, and therein lies the complex and fascinating nature of the sideways universe in general at this point in the show. Nothing's easy, which means that the show's doing its job.
 
***
I desperately tried to make my Schrödinger's cat analogy work last night in trying to explain how the "parallel timeline" camp and the "epilogue" camp had individual elements right, but didn't account for their fusion creating a third option that no one had even considered until this most recent episode. But in reading the comments, it seems I came up short in that attempt. What we MIGHT be seeing is something akin to Smocke's promise to people, but it never actually has to happen chronologically AFTER Smocke's victory in order for it to either have happened or matter. That's the thought experiment at play here. On an Island in which mind turns into matter, the Lostaways can experience what that New Smokey World Order would look like: paradise on the surface, malice underneath it. Think David Lynch's "Blue Velvet," with its stunning opening shot of a seemingly idyllic suburbia panning down to see the worms and the insects infesting the ground beneath it. Think "Buffy the Vampire Slayer's" "Superstar," in which a wish changes the world but also infects it. The world is WRONG.
 
The notion that this is a place our characters are supposed to live in feels more wrong to me than ever. But I've shifted from feeling that way on a meta level about the show and turned into a dramatic engagement with a Smocke-authored happily never after. It LOOKS like sunshine and smiles, but it's actually insidious. The work that has to be done? Waking people up from the nightmare of this world and foiling Smocke before it can happen. People are already glimpsing into what's been lost: in mirrors, in remembered names, in chance encounters. They will need to wake up sooner rather than later. When they do, that information will pass back to their counterparts on the Island, Smocke will be foiled, and that future no longer exists. Thus endeth the thought experiment.
 
***
You have to love the irony of a man who espouses personal freedom yet enslaves people more than Jacob would ever dream. Just as it's silly to assign Jacob/The Man in Black one color (white/black), it's silly to assign either one the embodiment of "destiny" and "free will." Jacob clearly favors the former, but isn't above getting involved at critical points in order to allow people to achieve their potential. The Man in Black decries Jacob's supposed puppetry, but has done almost NOTHING except get people to do things for him. And if he's indeed responsible in some way for the creation of the sideways timeline, then he's the ULTIMATE manipulator: creating a world not unlike that in "The Matrix" for the sole purpose of achieving his own touch of freedom.

***
Above all else, we need to look at "Sundown" as the end of Act 1 of the show's final season. We saw the Temple, learned about the candidates, and saw the battle lines being drawn. The next few hours will see people shore up their sides, with the final third unleashing the mother of all battles for the heart and soul not only of the Island, but humanity itself. Awesome.
 
***
One thing I've thought since last week, but I am not sure I've actually expressed out loud: Infection is NOT mind control. Claire, Sayid and the dozens of Others now working for Smocke (readers are calling them Smothers and Flocke's Flock, both of which are great names) aren't zombies. Claire and Sayid still have most of themselves intact; they just lack important elements such as hope, compassion and selflessness. They don't blindly and willingly follow every action that Smocke lays out for them -- they just no longer possess the capacity to understand the implications of their selfish, singular outlooks. They, like Smoke, only understand things in terms of their primal needs, and "infection" just removes the moral compass that would prevent these people from following through on Smocke's will.
 
***
One thing I definitely did not mention in the recap: Kate's approximately 1,000 times more important after that episode than before it. Before, her goal of reuniting Claire with Aaron was noble but amorphous in nature; even she wasn't sure how to achieve it, or even how go about it. (I mocked her return to the Temple in the recap after her stated goal to avoid it in "Lighthouse"; methinks there's a scene on the cutting room floor of Kate wandering around, completely lost, unable to find a trail, and simply deciding to double back despite her words to Hurley and Jack.) But now? She's the only person in the thick of Smocke's Army. She's embedded, alongside two friends she doesn't understand are no longer the people she knew. Not only will this provide some great tension going forth, but it also offers her a chance to rescue Claire in the most dramatic way possible while nipping at Smocke's Achilles heel. More than ever, Kate's mission to reunite Claire and Aaron has direct and MONUMENTAL implications for the overall endgame of the show. Just brilliant.

***
All right, we'll wrap up with your weekly "Lost" mix tape, full of songs inspired by this week's episode. For Sayid: The Smashing Pumpkins' "Disarm" seems appropriate, as does The Who's "Drowned" and Radiohead's "Knives Out." For Claire, Alice in Chains' "Down in a Hole" seems about right, along with U2's "Mothers of the Disappeared" and Ryan Adams' "The Rescue Blues." Smocke? Well, he was in the jungle, a mile south of the Temple, grooving to The Vines' "Get Free," Bad Religion's "Infected," Disturbed's "Down with the Sickness," Björk's "Army of Me," Peter Gabriel's "Red Rain," and given his wish-fulfillment angle, let's throw in Christina Aguilera's "Genie in a Bottle" for fun.

Those are my thoughts 24 hours after "Sundown": what are some of yours?

Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC
]]> 'Lost': My recap for 'Sundown' is live tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51394 2010-03-03T05:56:49Z 2010-03-03T06:05:02Z I didn't think, in the aftermath of watching "Sundown," that it would yield one of my longer recaps ever. To me, it felt like a straight-forward episode with one wrinkle (the complicated new addition to the sideways timeline). And yet, in composing it, I found myself struggling to makes heads or tails of what I'd just seen. In other words: I felt "Lost." Recapping an excellent episode? Easy. Recapping a terrible one? Just as simple. Recapping a decent episode? Terribly difficult. Because "Sundown" was a decent episode: nothing terrible, nothing mind-blowing, just...there. Had some great ideas, and individually cool elements, but as an hour of TV? It didn't stand up alongside its compatriots here in Season 6. And I felt compelled to explain why I felt that way. Which took...well, it took a while. As you'll see. Read my whole take here. As always, leave your comments there and your burning questions below. This week's... Ryan McGee I didn't think, in the aftermath of watching "Sundown," that it would yield one of my longer recaps ever. To me, it felt like a straight-forward episode with one wrinkle (the complicated new addition to the sideways timeline). And yet, in composing it, I found myself struggling to makes heads or tails of what I'd just seen. In other words: I felt "Lost."

Recapping an excellent episode? Easy. Recapping a terrible one? Just as simple. Recapping a decent episode? Terribly difficult. Because "Sundown" was a decent episode: nothing terrible, nothing mind-blowing, just...there. Had some great ideas, and individually cool elements, but as an hour of TV? It didn't stand up alongside its compatriots here in Season 6. And I felt compelled to explain why I felt that way. Which took...well, it took a while. As you'll see.

Read my whole take here. As always, leave your comments there and your burning questions below. This week's key word for inclusion in Sunday's "Letters from The Flame"? KEEEAAAAMMMYYYY. Only questions that start with that will be considered. Namaste. And now to sleep.

Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC
]]> The Great 'Lost' Debate: Analyzing the sideways universe tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51318 2010-03-02T00:53:12Z 2010-03-02T00:55:54Z ... Ryan McGee Zap2it's Rick Porter and I stepped into the metaphorical ring this week for another round in our Great "Lost" Debate series. This week's topic came from you, the readers, after last week's entries about "Lighthouse" set off a spirited discussion in the comments about the nature of the sideways universe. Rick and I had planned to debate the nature of mirrors in Season 6, but after making a few Michael Jackson jokes, we were stuck.
 
So bravo to you all for bailing us out with your passionate takes on the sideways universe. I've already talking about this on my weekly podcast and this week's "Letters from the Flame," but there's no harm covering it a bit more in depth here before the next episode airs. Away we go!
 
Ryan McGee: OK, Rick, we're going to be dealing with a touchy issue today. After all, it deals with how the show might end, and when it comes to the end of "Lost," there are a lot of emotions that go into thinking about it. Jacob tells us that "It only ends once," which may or may not be true. But in any case, the show as we know it will be over this May. And many people think we've already seen, to use the title of the Season 4 premiere, the beginning of the end.
 
The theory, as I understand it: the flash sideways are not parallel to the action on the Island in terms of their relationship to it, but in fact show us the EPILOGUE to the series. In other words: much in the way that Season 5's premiere showed a scene that chronologically didn't happen until much later in the season, what we've seen in these flash sideways are the events that happen after the conflict with The Man in Black on the Island ends. Once this conflict is "resolved," a series of events kick off that ends with Jack and Company landing in LAX in the timeline created by their actions on the Island.
 
Now, here's where my big disclaimer comes in, and it's an important one. I don't think this theory is correct, but I am NOT saying it's not possible. Anything I talk about in this debate doesn't negate this theory's existence. I literally can't disprove it, because it's a definite possibility. Anyone who says it isn't is completely wrong.
 
But I have been struggling to clearly articulate why I have such a problem it. Anything and everything I say in this discussion will be an attempt not to sway anyone's opinion this way or that: reaction to a piece of artistic output is necessarily varied, and that's a GOOD thing. I'm less interested in trying to figure out who is right (a stupid attempt, 5 hours into the season) and more interested in getting at the heart of the two camps, and the personal viewpoints on life that each theory suggest. But before I get into my reservations about the epilogue theory, Rick, I'm curious: what's your take on the subject?
 
Rick Porter: Well, I suspect my take isn't that different from yours. I agree that there's no way to say with any certainty that what we're seeing isn't a coda to "Lost," but as a fan and a self-styled student of how shows choose to end, I'm hoping rather hard that it's not.
 
My primary objection to the idea is that, given what we've seen thus far of season 6, it feels like a bit of a cheat to me. We're only just starting to see pieces move into place for whatever final conflict is taking place, and to hint now that it's all going to work out in the end (more or less) really kind of pops the suspense balloon for the rest of the season.
 
For argument's sake, let's say that the glimpses of Sidewaysland we've seen are actually the epilogue to our characters' journeys. Frankly, I have no problem at all with the idea of a still wheelchair-bound Locke making peace with his lot in life, or Jack discovering that he's capable of being a good dad despite his own upbringing. My issue comes with seeing that NOW -- if it turns out that we are glimpsing the end of the series, I think that when I look back, the big moments that are taking place on the island will have less meaning if it turns out I was watching fragments of a happy(-ish) ending all along. It just doesn't feel earned yet.
 
All the mystery and weirdness of "Lost" has been in service of its characters discovering things about themselves. Since the sideways stories have, thus far, contained an element of that as well (albeit on a smaller scale), I'm more inclined to interpret them as scenes that will bear on the on-Island versions of the characters.
 
There are also specific things I'd point to as evidence to support my/our interpretation. But before I go too Comic Book Guy, I'll turn it back over to you. How do you see this fitting into the larger design of the show?
 
RM: There is something to the fact that the end not being shown at the end is a little off-putting. If we're denied the catharsis of seeing Jack overcome his issues with his father because it was shown in the 5th hour of the 6th season as opposed to the 18th, I think that's problematic. But I think that's less problematic than the implications inherent with the sideways timeline being the final chapter in these characters' lives.
 
Now, granted, we've only seen glimpses into this timeline, and nothing's close to either defined or definitive. But if this IS the epilogue, then shouldn't the fact that so many characters end up happy ring...false? "Lost" is not a very forgiving show, either in terms of giving its characters happy endings or painting its protagonists in a very appealing light. Nearly every one of our heroes could in fact be a villain in another drama.
 
If this were indeed an epilogue, having everyone happy would be the way to go. But they are NOT all happy. They still have issues to work out. Structurally, I'd be more inclined to believe the sideways timeline were true if everyone were in Hurley's predicament. Instead, Jack still has a missing father, Rose still has terminal cancer, and Locke's still wheelchair bound. I'm not suggesting that an epilogue in which things revert to the way things "should have been" sans Jacob/The Man in Black/Island interference need be all rosy, but why give these characters an epilogue in which they must overcome obstacles that can be solved in hours as opposed to years.
 
Two more things I have against the "sideways timeline as epilogue" theory, one rather mundane but one rather vital. First up: tons of characters that died in the original timeline are now alive. When I asked readers to explain how this phenomenon fit into the epilogue theory, one replied that it answered the question, "What happens to these characters?" While I acknowledge there's something poetic about Charie's sacrifice for Claire on the Island timeline giving him a shot at them being together in the sideways/epilogue, what did Artz, Frogurt, Boone, Shannon, and others do to deserve it? I don't mean to sound cruel, but the creation of an alternate reality for EVERYONE seems a bit pat. Everybody can't matter equally.
 
Secondly, and more vitally: what's up with Des? If this is an epilogue, then Des' purpose in showing up on Oceanic 815 boils down to, "Aww, ain't this nice, brutha?" I think his mission is much more vital: he's a unifying factor, not between the past and the present, but between the two worlds created in the aftermath of the end of Season 5. He's unique, to quote Faraday, and while he may be a deus ex machina when all is said and done, he's still the one person that can not only see both timelines, but ultimately connect them.
 
What evidence stands out to you? And are we as fans supposed to be rooting for "happy endings", or "resolution"? I realize the two aren't mutually exclusive, but they aren't mutually inclusive either.
 
RP: I'd pretty much say "ditto" to all that, but that doesn't make for a very spirited conversation. So I would add this: To my eyes, the show is dropping too many hints that the timelines are connected for Sidewaysland just to be an epilogue.
 
The cut on Jack's neck in "LA X," Claire blurting out Aaron's name as she's giving birth, the flash of recognition between Jack and Kate, even Locke accepting his lot as a man in a wheelchair -- they're not huge things individually, but collectively they add up to a whole lot of support for the notion that what happens in one place will eventually affect the other. And if it is just an epilogue, I'm assuming that Jack wouldn't suddenly have a teenage son and Locke wouldn't be (as far as we can tell) on good terms with his dad, which in turn could mean that he didn't end up in a wheelchair after his pops shoved him out a window.
 
As to what we're supposed to be rooting for, that's up to each of us individually. You want everything to be OK in the end? Cool. You want answers to every last mystery? Great. Here's what I want to see, though: an ending that, as I mentioned up above, is earned. I honestly don't care about the specifics of that ending yet, but my fervent hope is that the series finale will leave me feeling good about where the show leaves its characters, good, bad or somewhere between the two.
 
It can happen any number of ways: "Six Feet Under" kind of demanded the closure it delivered so brilliantly, while "The Shield" gave its antihero a more open-ended but totally deserved fate. Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse have promised they won't just cut to black (though I thought that was a pretty great way to end "The Sopranos"), and as long as they give us an ending that stays true to the spirit of the show and the paths its characters have taken, I'll be happy.
 
RM: Here's the good news, I suppose: according to those that attended the "Lost" panel at PaleyFest this past weekend (semi-spoilery info here at KorbiTV), it looks like we're going to get a lot more concrete answers about this sideways universe sooner rather than later. And perhaps my long-lost Scottish friend will likewise be making an appearance on my television screen before I lose anymore of the five remaining hairs on my head. And hopefully, bringing the nature of this timeline to light will bring the true nature of the show's final conflict into light. After all, it's all well and good to have people looking into mirrors. I'm waiting for the image in the mirror to look back. That will be the moment in which everything in the final season of "Lost" changes.
 
 Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC]]> 'Letters from the Flame': 'Lost' about 'Lighthouse'? I have your answers tag:blog.zap2it.com,2010:/lost//14.51271 2010-03-01T01:45:58Z 2010-03-01T01:52:50Z ... Ryan McGee Ryan here, back with answers to your burning questions about "Lost." Quick programming note: if you missed the latest "Orientation: Ryan Station" podcast, make sure to click here and listen. You can even subscribe to it on iTunes! I know. We've boldly gone where tens of thousands have gone before.

In the time since "Lighthouse" aired, I've started to see certain camps get entrenched online, much in the way that certain camps are getting entrenched on the Island. In fact, we're getting not into Season 1 territory so much as Season 4 territory on the Island. In Season 4, we had Team Locke and Team Shephard. Now? Team Jacob and Team Smokey. Sure, Smokey had to infect and corrupt people to join his side, but all's fair in love, war, and loopholes.

So let's all remember to play nice as the next few weeks roll out. Onto your questions!
 
Who is "Wallace"? It was the name next to the number 108. Someone already on the island? The person Jacob referred to that needed to find the island? Someone we already know? David Wallace? Richard Alpert Wallace? Justin Wallace? I'm lost.
John
 
While the idea that Michael Scott's old boss on "The Office" is a candidate makes me giggle tremendously, I think the answer to the question is, "No one important." Having Hurley turn the compass to 108 was a fake-out for both him and the audience. We're trained to view a number like 108 as paramount in the "Lost" universe, and I think Darlton used that information against us in order to distract from the importance of the mission. The entire point of the mission was 1) to get Hurley/Jack away from the Temple before Smocke attacks, and 2) give Jack another push to realize his importance. The Artist Formerly Known as Wallace is a red herring. Or, he's Braveheart. One of the two.
 
Ryan: I find it odd that Jacob only seems to appear and speak to Hurley. Especially when Dogan questioned Hurley and Jacob only appeared to Hurley. It seemed almost as if Jacob is trying to get Hurley to assert himself and by appearing only to him will Hurley be able to be more assertive and more confident...what do you think? I mean out of all the people he could communicate with...why is Hurley the Man?
Jacoby
 
On a purely mechnical level, having Hurley interact with the maybe-god Jacob punctures the potential pomposity of these interactions. (If only someone could puncture MY pomposity after constructing that sentence.) Look: how many times have we seen "human interacts with deity" in dramas, only to see these interactions stilted, grave, and overall boring as hell? "Dead Like Me" is an exception to the rule, but a lot of times shows refuse to have fun with these types of pairings. So I dig a laconic god ambling about with the show's on-screen proxy waxing both philosophical and amusingly on my television. This is 1000x better than Charles Heston interacting with a burning bush, I tell you.
 
But on a dramatic level, Hurley's the most trustworthy person on the Island. Others may be more loyal to Jacob's cause, but Jacob trusts Hurley to do the right thing more than anyone else. The Others might worship Jacob, but that means they place him on a pedestal. I'm not sure Jacob is the important player here. If Jacob and The Man in Black were indeed all-powerful, then they wouldn't need all these people to achieve their endgame. And since Hurley treats Jacob like a person, not a god, he's an ideal person with whom the latter can communicate.
 
Do you think Jacob's manipulation of Jack means that Jack is "the" candidate?
splinter
 
My sense of the series of candidates is that they were not selected to do what The Man in Black claims they are supposed to do. Just as Jacob is keeping Jack's true purpose from him, he's kept the true nature of his search hidden from The Man in Black. Since TMiB is operating under a false premise (the three choices laid out to Sawyer), he can't possibly know how to defeat his nemesis. Do I know what this true purpose is? No. But Jacob thinks one of these final candidates does.
 
With the word "candidate" popping up more and more, does one tend to look at the island conflict not as a "war", but as a long, drawn-out, selection process? And has UnLocke found a way to insert himself into the process?
Brian of the North
 
I'm not sure Unlocke/Smocke/The Lockeness Monster has inserted himself into the process so much as found a way to end the continuous cycle. But I like your use of the word "war," since it reminds me to bring up a potentially key scene from Season 5. IN "The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham," Widmore warns Locke, "[T]here's a war coming, John. And if you're not back on the Island when that happens, the wrong side is going to win." The $64,000 question: did Widmore knowingly send Locke back at the behest of The Man in Black or Jacob? Because one of those two had to give him his marching orders. Answering that is like answering "Who staged the Oceanic 815 crash at the bottom of the Sunda Trench?" during Season 4. You've got two equally plausible scenarios that can't be answered definitely at this point. Either The Man in Black told Widmore to send him back to create the loophole, or Jacob WANTED the loophole to be broken in order to make the final leap of progress.
 
As people have pointed out, the Tic-Tac-Toe game almost always ends in a tie. Someone was ready for the tie to be broken. Hell, I bet BOTH Jacob and The Man in Black were ready. Game on, people.
 
Ryan, it bugs the bejacob out of me that the timelines aren't concurrent. Seems that if Jack is indeed making some sort of connection with his "other" self, shouldn't it be 2007 in the alt-timeline as well? Is there any reason for this, other than the writers needing to fool us into thinking that the "LA X" flight 815 was in fact the new reality?
technotard
 
When the producers use "sideways" to describe the new timeline, and yet put it three years behind the on-Island action, yes, it can get confusing. Originally, many thought having Oceanic 815 land would be an exercise to show exactly what you describe: what would have happened afterward. But clearly, events BEFORE Oceanic 815 landed also changed: in some ways subtly, in some ways radical. But I think it's a bit unfair to discuss the ways that Sideways versions of people SHOULD interact with their Island selves. It's a fictional construction created by the writers: there's no "should" here, only what is. They interact in a specific way, and as long as that way stays consistent and holds up in hindsight once revealed, well, that's fine by me.
 
And here we're getting into THE hot topic lately on this sight: is the sideways timeline an epilogue? Rick Porter and I have a LOT to say about this in our upcoming "Lost" debate, and I discuss the issue in my next podcast, but let's answer a few questions about that now as well.
 
Do you think Jacob realized, either before his death or during it, that his efforts to enlist people into his plan to advance humanity to the next step has actually contributed to it's continued corruption, much like how the Man in Black sees it? I only ask because all season we're seeing a world that turned out differently, in many cases what appears to be free from the Island's (and Jacob's) influence, and that's on top of the whole free will vibe Jacob's been tossing around in his appearances thus far.
Other Sean
 
All depends on how you view the sideways timeline's relationship to the Island activity. If you're a fan of the epilogue there, then yes, that timeline is "free" from the Island, even though there are remnants of that other life clinging about (Claire downloading "Aaron" from said previous timeline as an example). However, if you think that the timeline was created as a direct result of Juliet's actions at the end of Season 5, then the sideways timeline is infinitely more influenced by the Island than the Island timeline itself. It's the freakin' baby of the Island, really, birthed in the white light of Season 5's finale.
 
So, my perception of last season's finale was that they shouldn't have detonated the bomb. That doing so would erase all of the progress that they had made. That they'd be going back to lives without purpose.
 
However, we're seeing a multitude of happy endings in the sideways timeline. Why do you think this is?
Jesse
 
That perception is key, because that's what's fusing the various camps when viewing the sideways timeline. Had they called it the "Mirrorverse," maybe there would be less confusion. Then again, maybe not. At the heart of views concerning the alternate timeline are personal perceptions about what function it's supposed to serve. Perception can sometimes be wrong, but at this stage in the game, you have two overarching ways to look at what's going over there.
 
1) Due to Juliet's actions at the end of Season 5, two timelines were created. The second timeline has an entire history built into it, but we're only catching up in September 2004. This timeline is intimately related to the Island timeline, with both being viable realities that will impact one another through glances, interactions, physical items, and moral choices. This interaction is not unidirectional, but rather passes "energy" (for lack of a better word) between the timelines in order to come to a singular ending.

2) Juliet's actions did nothing except send the heroes 30 years into the future. The sideways timeline is the epilogue of the show, the result of whatever denouement happens at season's end on the Island. When all is said and done, we can look back on every flashsideways as the culmination/reward/final life of those that struggled for so long on the Island. In this construction, the sideways timeline is the life they should have lived all along.
 
Both are oversimplifications. Necessarily so, and just as I talked about before with Widmore's "war," both are viable at this point...depending on your perception. Because how you view the epilogue speaks a lot about the type of ending you want the show to have. Let's take a specific example from "Lighthouse": Jack making peace with his son David after the latter's recital. If you're a fan of Example #1 above, then that interaction will get passed to Island Jack as he stares across the water, looking for answers before his big confrontation with some version of his father on the Island. If you're a fan of Example #2, then Jack's breakthrough with his son directly ties into the experiences he will have after staring out at the ocean and accomplishing whatever task he has yet to do in order to land in the sideways timeline.
 
Both are perfectly valid perceptions at this time. Here's my biggest problem: only one viewpoint will ultimately be right. Normally, creating multiple perceptions in the audience's mind is a good thing for a mystery show to engender. But we're talking about much more than after-the-fact bragging rights (which I always hate, since it essentially amounts to bragging that you picked the right door in "Let's Make a Deal"), it's a concern. Because being wrong might aversely affect certain fans perceptions of the show as a whole. The example above says a lot about the type of person you are, so having your perception proved wrong might be construed on some level as a condemnation of you as a viewer, not just your theory.
 
Maybe I'm overworried here. I hope that's the case. Wouldn't be the first time, wouldn't be the last. Epilogue people know I am not in their camp. But I want them to know I am on their side. That side? Being a "Lost" fan. Being part of a community here that welcomes debate and hates attacks.  Being part of a discussion that uses the show as a base to better understand both the show and the world around us. As Smocke told Sawyer last week, "You're so close. It would be such a shame to turn back now."

Ryan invites you to join the hundreds already in Zap2It's Guide to Lost Facebook group. He also encourages you to subscribe to the Zap2It's Guide to Lost Twitter feed and Zap2it's main feed for all the latest TV, movie and celebrity news.

Photo credit: ABC

]]>