ABC's "Lost" Discussion (2004-2010)

[Zvi]

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

See, I had thought that too - but many things accomplished that - John was certainly the anchor for "faith" in the early episodes - but ultimately, it was his death that really affected Jack; however, his death was Smokey's idea and John actually had nothing to do with his own death (he wasn't able to go through with his own suicide).

His death did affect Jack, however, later in S5 Jack was sure it was wrong to come back to island and even detonated nuclear device to undo all that. The subsequent events in S6 made him change his mind.

[CYMBOL]

Originally Posted by Zvi

His death did affect Jack, however, later in S5 Jack was sure it was wrong to come back to island and even detonated nuclear device to undo all that. The subsequent events in S6 made him change his mind.

I know it affected Jack - my point was that even that wasn't John's doing. It's not like he sacrificed himself for the island to make Jack rethink his position etc.

John got killed. So, like I was saying, I was trying to figure out what the writer's wanted me to take away from John's story. He didn't seem to do anything except preach about faith to everyone, then fail, and then get killed.

If Jacob had told John he would have to die - and then John sacrificed himself and the rest played out as it did - that would have been heroic - but instead, his character came off as a tragic failure who accomplished nothing in the end.

So again - my big question, what the writer's wanted me to take away from John's story.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

I know it affected Jack - my point was that even that wasn't John's doing. It's not like he sacrificed himself for the island to make Jack rethink his position etc.

John got killed. So, like I was saying, I was trying to figure out what the writer's wanted me to take away from John's story. He didn't seem to do anything except preach about faith to everyone, then fail, and then get killed.

If Jacob had told John he would have to die - and then John sacrificed himself and the rest played out as it did - that would have been heroic - but instead, his character came off as a tragic failure who accomplished nothing in the end.

So again - my big question, what the writer's wanted me to take away from John's story.

"Turns out he was right about almost everything. I just wish I could have told him that while he was still alive."

The story of John Locke is tragic. But his death did accomplish something. It put Jack on the right path. It doesn't matter that John didn't know that would happen. Directly or indirectly, he is the reason for Jack's transformation.

[Zvi]

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

I know it affected Jack - my point was that even that wasn't John's doing.

My point was the effect was short lived and even less important in the grand scheme.

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

So again - my big question, what the writer's wanted me to take away from John's story.

Beats me, tragic it may be, but why make a puppet who screws up everything out of the major character.

May be the lesson was, blind faith will make you easy to use/manipulate and might get you killed eventually, serving your enemies cause or something like that.

[CYMBOL]

Originally Posted by Aragorn84

"Turns out he was right about almost everything. I just wish I could have told him that while he was still alive."

The story of John Locke is tragic. But his death did accomplish something. It put Jack on the right path. It doesn't matter that John didn't know that would happen. Directly or indirectly, he is the reason for Jack's transformation.

Like I said, I understand that his death changed Jack's path - but John had nothing to do with it. In fact, it was Smokey's plan. So, no one made a sacrifice to get Jack to that point - it was seemingly blind luck that it happend to go that way.

I'm just bummed out that John's character, who was such a major player in the story from the beginning, did nothing in the end. In fact, he was a complete failure.

So, I completely understand how John's death affected Jack.

I've read many books that had tragic characters, but I'm usually left with a sense of what the writer wanted me to take away from it. (They failed because of their ego, they failed because of pride, or vanity, or were blinded by greed or anger, etc) - but with John I simply didn't get what the writers presumably wanted me to take away from his story - and I assume they wanted me to take something away from it cause John was one of THE major characters.

I'm seriously wondering if I missed the message or moral. . . John's story to me seems to be that he was used by both sides - and failed both sides miserably - the end. Am I missing something?

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

To each his own, I suppose. Personally, I don't see how Jack could possibly have become the man of faith he ultimately became without John Locke.

[ts0323]

Originally Posted by Aragorn84

To each his own, I suppose. Personally, I don't see how Jack could possibly have become the man of faith he ultimately became without John Locke.

+1

For me, LOST was perfect, because everything WASN'T spelled out.
Rather than spoon-feed us the answers, I much prefer the approach of answering the big mysteries and letting us come up with our own explanations for the smaller ones.

[Zvi]

Originally Posted by ts0323

Rather than spoon-feed us the answers, I much prefer the approach of answering the big mysteries

I'm just curious, at what point, or when/how, "answering" makes transition form just an answer to "spoon fed answer"?

Originally Posted by ts0323

and letting us come up with our own explanations for the smaller ones.

Hmm, "statue was old(unknown date +- 5000 years) and built most likely by ancient Egyptians", (or someone else who we never see in Lost anyway)... I don't think that really counts as an explanation, for obvious reasons.
Besides, most of the "our own explanations" are the same - "it was unimportant".

[CYMBOL]

Ok - on to the next one.

Richard.

Richard was always a mystery figure on the show. Slowly, as the show headed towards the conclusion, more was revealed and we were even treated to an entire episode which revealed his backstory.

Richard followed Jacob blindly - but when Jacob died, Richard lost all faith, feeling he had no purpose and had been led astray.

I was VERY interested in Richard's story and seeing this enigmatic character's story arc and final conclusion - but like many characters in Lost - the characters seemed like they were being set up for a much being part in the conclusion then they actually played.

In the end, I didn't really see Richard have much of an effect on anything. He never blew up the plane, he didn't assist in fighting MiB, and then got on a plane and flew away.

I was really surprised to see such a big figure (big enough to get his own episode), do nothing to help, and then get on a plane and fly away. I would have figured he would take over for Jack (certainly not Hurly).

Anyone else shocked to see his character reduced so much? Or, am I missing something.

As always, let's just have a fun discussion - people should feel free to disagree.

Thanks,

[NeoCortex]

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

Ok - on to the next one.

Richard.

Richard was always a mystery figure on the show. Slowly, as the show headed towards the conclusion, more was revealed and we were even treated to an entire episode which revealed his backstory.

Richard followed Jacob blindly - but when Jacob died, Richard lost all faith, feeling he had no purpose and had been led astray.

I was VERY interested in Richard's story and seeing this enigmatic character's story arc and final conclusion - but like many characters in Lost - the characters seemed like they were being set up for a much being part in the conclusion then they actually played.

In the end, I didn't really see Richard have much of an effect on anything. He never blew up the plane, he didn't assist in fighting MiB, and then got on a plane and flew away.

I was really surprised to see such a big figure (big enough to get his own episode), do nothing to help, and then get on a plane and fly away. I would have figured he would take over for Jack (certainly not Hurly).

Anyone else shocked to see his character reduced so much? Or, am I missing something.

As always, let's just have a fun discussion - people should feel free to disagree.

Thanks,

I don't think Richard ended up having a huge impact on the main storyline of the show, but I still think he was important to the overall mythos of the island. He was the start of the Others. Sure, there were other people on the island prior to Richard, but it was Richard that started to lead on Jacob's behalf and with some sort of (if vague) goal of being good people.

I'm starting to think Locke was the ultimate example of misdirection/Red Herring in television. The whole series they make him out to be the ultimate savior or redemption story, only to have him become a tragic figure. If that was intentional from the beginning, I have to give the producers credit for having the cajones to follow through with it and not go for the obvious plot direction most shows would have taken the character. If nothing else, I think his full character arc was an interesting one from a writing standpoint (for better or for worse).

[Lacit170]

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

See, I had thought that too - but many things accomplished that - John was certainly the anchor for "faith" in the early episodes - but ultimately, it was his death that really affected Jack; however, his death was Smokey's idea and John actually had nothing to do with his own death (he wasn't able to go through with his own suicide).

So again, John personally, didn't do anything really - except, be tragic. I was sad that his character end up doing nothing except being a tragic sidenote, since he was my favorite.

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

I know it affected Jack - my point was that even that wasn't John's doing. It's not like he sacrificed himself for the island to make Jack rethink his position etc.

John got killed. So, like I was saying, I was trying to figure out what the writer's wanted me to take away from John's story. He didn't seem to do anything except preach about faith to everyone, then fail, and then get killed.

If Jacob had told John he would have to die - and then John sacrificed himself and the rest played out as it did - that would have been heroic - but instead, his character came off as a tragic failure who accomplished nothing in the end.

So again - my big question, what the writer's wanted me to take away from John's story.

ok, im just skimming through some posts and havent watched Lost since it ended... but i have to give my input on this...and its quite simple and answers all your questions....

the writers strung us along the WHOLE time! now,dont get me wrong... most people will read that and think no! they knew what they were doing and this and that.... no, they clearly didnt...they had an idea of how they were going to end it... but didnt know how to get there... they kept adding and adding and adding to the mystery, story, characters without a clear idea of how to connect them all. if you cant see that they had no clue for much of the show by the way we were given many answers, well then you are just too in love with the show to even see it....

now, i LOVE Lost... from the beginning... to its lackluster ending.. this is still my favorite show of all time and i dont think it can be topped... the mystery, characters and suspense from episode to episode is unmatched...i just really wish they could have had 2-3 more seasons to fully figure out how to tie EVERYTHING together and not give us cop out answers to most things...

but, i cant wait to watch the whole series over this year now that i know everything... even though, most of the beginning episodes are essentially pointless after knowing the ending

[ts0323]

Originally Posted by Zvi

I'm just curious, at what point, or when/how, "answering" makes transition form just an answer to "spoon fed answer"?

When the minuscule mysteries are explained, that's when I consider them spoon-fed.
I suppose you hate Inception since there are so many unanswered questions. Hell, the mysteries left unexplained in that movie are much bigger than the ones in LOST, but for some reason (most) everyone loves it.

But hey, it's just my opinion. You're free to disagree. I just personally don't need every single mystery answered.

[thePhoenix]

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

Haha, so, "Everyone has the right to their own crappy opinions.", but the ones who disagree with you should go away?

Umm, that's obviously not what I meant.

[Lacit170]

Originally Posted by ts0323

When the minuscule mysteries are explained, that's when I consider them spoon-fed.
I suppose you hate Inception since there are so many unanswered questions. Hell, the mysteries left unexplained in that movie are much bigger than the ones in LOST, but for some reason (most) everyone loves it.

But hey, it's just my opinion. You're free to disagree. I just personally don't need every single mystery answered.

exactly which mysteries WERE answered... the voices in the jungle... THATS a big mystery we needed to know lol.. .that was something i could care less about...

[CYMBOL]

Originally Posted by thePhoenix

Everyone has the right to their own crappy opinions. There's no use in arguing with the haters. Maybe if we ignore them they'll go away. Who's down for another re-watch?

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

Haha, so, "Everyone has the right to their own crappy opinions.", but the ones who disagree with you should go away?

Originally Posted by thePhoenix

Umm, that's obviously not what I meant.

Yeah, not sure how I misinturpreted that one.

[The_Basterd]

Originally Posted by The_Basterd

I stopped watching Lost after the Pilot for some reason and caught random episode along the years, but didn't understand after one or two so I quit lol.

So I finally started watching my Lost" The Complete Collection blu-ray around last Tuesday and I am already on episode 34. Holy shizz I LOVE THIS SHOW! I am super pissed at myself for quitting so early.... Seriously I'm addicted and engrossed in the story. I tell myself, I have to go to bed so let me finish this episode and then they leave you with a cliffhanger or something you haven't seen yet that you were anticipating, but they didn't get to it yet which takes you to a position where you just cannot help yourself from going to the next episode. EPICNESSS....!

One thing awesome about not seeing the episodes before is watching them continuously and witness awesome episodes nonstop. No week waits, or season/year breaks; just me and the blu-rays. It's such an awesome way to watch one of the best shows of all-time.

Lost: The Complete Collection Blu-ray is the best blind buy I've ever made!

Ok a little over a week later I am just starting Season 4, episode 73. Gawd, I love this show.

I'm going to try to finish the series by January 2nd. Hopefully earlier? I only started the show mid-/near the end of November.

To the people who waited year after to find answers and continue watching this awesome show. Jealous?

All I have to do is open the foldable box and pop in another disc.... hahahaha.

[Zvi]

Originally Posted by ts0323

When the minuscule mysteries are explained, that's when I consider them spoon-fed.

So, the whispers mentioned by Lacit, how does that qualify, spoon-fed or a big one?

Originally Posted by ts0323

I just personally don't need every single mystery answered.

Well, good for you I personally felt the need that the questions I considered big/important were intelligently answered. Warm fuzzy light mixed with water which somehow keeps the world going and at the same time provides teleportation functionality was lame, cheating, etc.
However, I believe Lost S6 critics have exactly the same rights to express their opinions as S6 fans. I am not sure, why would somebody feel that the critics need to go away, after all this thread is named "Lost thoughts and theories", not "Lost S6 worshiping shrine".

For that matter, discussing/picking apart episodes, clues and theories is what made Lost so interesting, not "that wasn't important enough to bother with".

[CYMBOL]

Originally Posted by Zvi

For that matter, discussing/picking apart episodes, clues and theories is what made Lost so interesting, not "that wasn't important enough to bother with".

I think the same thing - the Lost thread on this site was filled week after week of people talking about the mysteries, and debating new answers (which usually led to new questions) - but I guess the show was never about the mysteries.

[CYMBOL]

So, anyone else have any thoughts on this one - very interested to see what others think.

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

Ok - on to the next one.

Richard.

Richard was always a mystery figure on the show. Slowly, as the show headed towards the conclusion, more was revealed and we were even treated to an entire episode which revealed his backstory.

Richard followed Jacob blindly - but when Jacob died, Richard lost all faith, feeling he had no purpose and had been led astray.

I was VERY interested in Richard's story and seeing this enigmatic character's story arc and final conclusion - but like many characters in Lost - the characters seemed like they were being set up for a much being part in the conclusion then they actually played.

In the end, I didn't really see Richard have much of an effect on anything. He never blew up the plane, he didn't assist in fighting MiB, and then got on a plane and flew away.

I was really surprised to see such a big figure (big enough to get his own episode), do nothing to help, and then get on a plane and fly away. I would have figured he would take over for Jack (certainly not Hurly).

Anyone else shocked to see his character reduced so much? Or, am I missing something.

As always, let's just have a fun discussion - people should feel free to disagree.

Thanks,

[Zvi]

Originally Posted by CYMBOL

I think the same thing - the Lost thread on this site was filled week after week of people talking about the mysteries, and debating new answers (which usually led to new questions) - but I guess the show was never about the mysteries.

Yeah, imagine how long this thread would've lasted if everyone was posting the same "OMG! such a good show, let's rewatch"...

BTW, even in this thread filled with "character development theory" proponents, there are not that many character development related posts. So, mysteries are not the major point, not even worth explaining, and character development apparently isn't much of the interest (purely based on the posts related to that subj here), what made lost so interesting in that case is yet another unexplained mystery...