My Smallville column should be posted on PrimeTimePulse by tomorrow morning. I'll provide that link once it's available. And by the way, that "memories" title is pretty appropriate, given the events of that episode.
But no, I actually wanted to briefly discuss ANOTHER Thursday night staple: ER. For the first time in, what, over a decade, we had classic characters like Doug Ross, Carol Hathaway, Peter Benton, and Carter in one episode.
Last January, I criticized ER for falling into a lazy writer's trap. It seems like many writers are incapable of making happy characters interesting. As a result, you rarely ever see characters get a happy ending until they're written off of the show entirely. I find this to be a cop-out, and really unfair to the audience that becomes emotionally invested in the character's happiness. I mean, we were there for all the drama, depression, and miscellaneous crap, but we only get a fleeting glimpse of the happy moments?
What's even worse is when a character gets that less-than-ideal, but better than nothing happy ending before getting written off, and then makes a guest appearance where we discover the character's life went to the crapper (like with Jeanie last year). This episode was the antithesis of this. We learned that Peter and Cleo are still together. Reese is apparently a happy and well adjusted teenager. Peter has also grown significantly as a doctor and a man. Likewise, Carol seems to have achieved great success, as has Doug. And the two are still living happily ever after. Carter seems like the exception, except his misery is part of an ongoing story arc that remains true to his character. That's not lazy writing, in my opinion.
I also LOVED the coincidental connections, many of which went undiscovered by the characters. The hospital that Carter was sent to ended up being the one that Benton works at. The kidney that he received came from the facility where Carol and Ross work, and was delivered by Sam, who was there for an unrelated transplant.
And while I loved the way this went unnoticed by practically everybody involved (which is true to life), I'm glad that the one reunion they did give us was Peter and Carter. These two are so fantastic together. I just loved the brief, pained expression on Carter's face when Peter unknowingly asked him if he has any children. I also enjoyed how Carol walked into the room immediately after -- and therefore missing -- when Sam mentioned "County" to Nela.
As expected, there wasn’t much feedback from last week’s episode of Lost. That’s cool – it wasn’t really a theory-heavy episode. Of course, there is one thing on everybody’s mind: Which character will be revealed as the baby that was born on the island?
Over on my blog, Kyle has echoed this very sentiment:
I read an interview with the actress who played Amy responding to a question about whether the baby was "someone special" by saying that yes, the baby was someone special, but we don't find out who in the first episode.
Any thoughts on who it could be? My initial crazy theory was Jacob since we saw Horace with the cabin building plans, and Jacob has always struck me a little bit as someone or something that didn't quite grow up (the poltergiest stuff almost seemed like a temper tantrum). But someone pointed out that Alpert reacted to Jacob's name when dropped by Locke back in the 50s, so that's probably out.
Click the "Read More" link for the full column.
Jacob seems like a distinct possibility. While the math doesn’t add up, the whole time traveling aspect could clear that up. Consider two particularly interesting points: As alluded to by Kyle, Horace was the person who built Jacob’s cabin. Secondly, as far as we know, this baby is the only person to be conceived and born on the island. Sawyer theorizes that perhaps the incident that kills impregnated women hasn’t occurred yet, but that’s pure speculation. After all, there must be some reason why they perform the births on the mainland. So, this distinction alone certainly makes the child “special.”
Two other interesting possibilities: One is Ethan. Perhaps no other “Other” has so consistently appeared in character flashbacks. What’s his story? But if that’s the case, how does he become an Other? And why would Ben spare his life?
Second prospect is Desmond. As far as I can remember, we don’t really know anything about his parents. Along with that, Daniel has made it clear that Desmond is unique and that the rules don’t apply to him. And he seems strangely drawn to the island more than virtually any other character.
We have another week before there’s a new episode of Lost, so I have two homework assignments for you. Provided that enough people participate, I’ll do an ADDITIONAL Revisited column next week before the new episode. If not, well, I guess I’ll just report the results in the regular Lost column.
The first assignment: Who do you think the baby is? I’m not really looking for responses like “I THINK IT’S JACK HOW KEWLZ WOULD THAT BE?!?!!?” No, I want some thought out ideas. This baby just HAS to be somebody special. And they went to such lengths to avoid revealing his name. What we do know: It’s a boy and he was born in 1977. Like I mentioned before, the whole time traveling thing could offer us some leeway in the age department. We can safely assume he was conceived on the island, and we know he had a successful birth.
Other considerations: We’ve seen Ben’s birth and we’ve seen Locke’s birth, so it’s not either of them. They’ve also made it a point of revealing Daniel’s mother, and it’s not Amy, so it isn’t him either.
Sound off people. E-mail me or comment on the blog.
Speaking of the blog, I will also be posting TWO polls. Another talked about topic of discussion was the whole Sawyer/Juliet/Jack/Kate thing. Since the beginning of the series, everybody has been debating: Who will Kate end up with? When she returned to the island, she was giving Sawyer the gooey eyes. Yet she had just slept with Jack the night earlier. And for that matter, pretty much every time Kate and Sawyer had an island romp, it was immediately after she got jealous because Jack was paying attention to somebody else (honestly: Twisted woman).
One poll will ask: Who do you THINK Kate will end up with? From a story telling standpoint, who do you think the writers will ultimately decide upon. It doesn’t matter which relationship you like more, or which character is your favorite. I am merely wondering who you think she’ll end up with, if you were a betting person.
The next poll, as you can probably predict, asks who you WANT Kate to end up with. In a perfect world, who would you have her live happily ever after with. Which relationship do you think is stronger? Which do you prefer?
Visit my blog to vote. And please, only vote once (we want an honest perspective).
Like I said, if enough people send me their thoughts on the mystery baby and vote in the polls, I’ll write another Revisited column before the next new episode. So get to it people!
And, of course, enjoy the latest installment of Lost! Untangled:
WWE Raw: Another stellar edition of Raw, with the true highlight being the absolutely incredible opening promo with Shawn Michaels and The Undertaker. This may not be particularly surprising, but this match is the absolute attraction of this year's event. I really am looking more forward to this match than any other. And that includes both World title matches.
I loved everything about the promo. I thought it was great how Shawn Michaels knew that Undertaker was standing behind him, and remained steadfast and confident despite 'Taker's attempts at intimidation. I also like how they're not attempting to make Undertaker the underdog, despite the fact that his streak is on the line. Unlike years past, they're openly admitting that Undertaker has the advantage here, and the burden is on Shawn Michaels. Best of all, they've managed to allow both men to remain faces and respect each other, without hindering the intensity of their feud. An absolute homerun. Watch it below:
Speaking of the World title match, does anybody else find it odd that John Cena -- the company's top star -- is being placed in such a throwaway match? Yes, it's for the World Championship, but it's taking a HUGE backseat to Triple H/Randy Orton. And with the Big Show now involved, the match just seems significantly less special.
And how's this for making your titles look prestigious? One title match is centered on the challenger attacking the champion's wife, while the other match is focused on the wife of the champion cheating on him with one of the challengers.
Come to think of it, that's actually quite fitting considering that 20 years ago, the WrestleMania main event was also about the champion and challenger fighting over a woman.
And, of course, there's the Koko B. Ware thing. I'm going to jump on the bandwagon and say that this is a pretty ridiculous Hall of Fame induction. Koko was a glorified jobber. I actually can't think of a single one-on-one match that he's won against an actual name wrestler. Making matters worse is that the guy inducting him -- the Honky Tonk Man -- is completely deserving of a Hall of Fame spot. What's going on here?
I really don't get to go to the movies as often as I'd like to, but with a new season approaching and summer just a few months away, there are a whole lot films on the way that caught my eye. Here are the top ten movies that I'm looking most forward to.
Click the "Read More" link for the list.
10. Land of the Lost (6/5/09)
I'm not dying to see this movie, and it'll probably be a "wait for it on DVD" situation. But I needed ten movies, and this was the only other film I could think of. Will Farrell does look pretty funny in it, though. Can't be any worse than Bewitched.
View the trailer:
9. Terminator Salvation (5/21/09)
To be honest, I was never a huge Terminator guy. And since I have never seen the series -- although I hear it is very good -- the only character I really felt any sense of attachment to was Arnold's. And he's not in the film. That being said, it does look really cool, and I do enjoy Christian Bale's work. I think it'll be very enjoyable, but I'm not sure I'd go out of my way to see it.
As a side note, I heard the Director of Photography on the film was just fantastic. A real pro.
View the trailer:
8. The Last House on the Left (6/13/09)
I'm a horror movie/thriller buff, so this is the type of movie that might catch my interest. But the thing that intrigues me the most is the apparent role reversal. For those who are unfamiliar, basically this group of criminals leave this teenaged girl for dead, and coincidentally end up finding refuge at her family's home. However, it turns out that the girl survived, and she alerts her family that the people staying with them are the ones who did this to her. From there, the family begins to systematically terrorize and eliminate this group of murderers. Sounds like a fun movie that doesn't strictly adhere to the typical storytelling formula of victimizing the innocent family.
View the trailer:
7. Bruno (7/10/09)
I never really watched this particular character, but I found Borat utterly hilarious. That's enough of a reason for me to look forward to this flick.
6. I Love You, Man (6/20/09)
With all due respect to Seth Rogen and Jonah Hill, I actually consider Paul Rudd and Jason Segel the most hilarious of the Apatow crew. Although this movie seems to be experiencing that odd "changing the story in TV ads" syndrome. The previews used to indicate that the movie was about Paul Rudd's character not having any close male friends, and unable to find a suitable best man as a result. He then goes on a crusade to meet that one true friend, and comes across Jason Segel's character. The two go through a courting process leading up to Rudd popping the big question. Now -- out of no where -- the ads suggest that the movie is about Rudd asking Segel to be his best man, and his soon-to-be-wife disapproving of his decision (after a series of hilarious comedy of errors). Personally, I find the first plot funnier (and, as such, that's the trailer you're getting).
View the trailer:
5. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (6/24/09)
I have to admit that I was a bit disappointed with the first Transformers film. I saw the movie to watch kick ass robots, not Shia LaBeouf. And I would think most of the target audience would agree. And I think this did a disservice to the movie, as the climatic battle was between the robots, and the "lives" that were lost belonged to the robots as well (the "Fallen" that the title alludes to, I presume). Anyway, overall I felt myself not feeling any sense of emotional investment or attachment to any of the robots. While the visual effects were still awesome, the emotional aspect was lacking. And I think the climax of the film really suffered as a result. I do hope that the sequel focuses more on the actual robots.
View the trailer:
4. X-Men Origins: Wolverine (5/1/09)
While X-3 killed a bit of my excitement over the X-Men franchise (although I thought the other two films were phenomenal), the previews for this Origins tale looks pretty bad ass. It's a bit disheartening that they've completely reinvented their version of the Sabretooth character with a new actor altogether, but I suppose that's a necessary evil for the story they want to tell. And hey, we get to see GAMBIT! Finally!
View the trailer:
3. Star Trek (5/8/09)
I've always been a Trek fan (don't try to rope me into a "trekkie" vs. "trekker" argument here), so I probably would have seen it no matter what. The fact that one of the minds behind Lost is icing on the cake. The very impressive and almost eerily-appropriate cast leads me to believe that this movie isn't purely hype, either. With the huge CGI strides that have been made since the last original Star Trek flick, I'm very curious to see what sort of technological advancements we'll be seeing. I also appreciate that while they've made subtle, welcome improvements to the original uniforms, they've managed to stay loyal to the basic design. And I hope that's the model the movie, as a whole, follows: Staying true to the original, just with a lot of improvements that are now avaiable through the magic of time.
View the trailer:
2. Watchmen (3/6/09)
Yeah, yeah, I know it's already out, but I haven't seen it yet, and it's one of the only two genuine "must see" movies on this list. I have absolutely no familiarity whatsoever with the Watchmen graphic novel, but amazing visual effects and intriguing premise caught my eye. And I absolutely love the line: "The world will look up and shout, 'save us!' and I'll whisper, 'no.'" Such beautiful contempt.
As a side note, I absolutely hate the phrase "visionary director." Isn't that a bit redundant? I mean, doesn't one need to have a vision in order to be a director? That's like calling somebody a "wordy writer."
View the trailer:
1. GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra (8/7/09)
I mean, c'mon, was there any doubt here? Following stellar adaptations like Spider-Man, X-Men, the Dark Knight, and most recently Watchmen, popular comic books and cartoons are now treated with a great deal of respect and sincerity when it comes to making them into movies. So I've got pretty high hopes. It helps that the trailer kicks ass, as well. Not to mention that the Baroness looks pretty damn hot.
I am admittedly skeptical about two things, though: A silver maskless Destro, and the kid from 30 Rock from the Sun playing Cobra Commander (really?) I understand that this movie is supposed to explain the formation of Cobra and the GI Joes, but I think it's fair to say that most people who go to this movie want to see the characters they've grown up watching, in the form that they're familiar with.
So for the second year in a row, I decided to attend the St. Patrick's Day celebration (10 days early) in Hoboken. And, thankfully, this year I avoided any drunken verbal altercations. I'm not sure the same can be said about the others in my group.
I will say this, though: There are a whole lot of drunk jackasses that deserve a nice ass whoppin'. Typically drunk people are only annoying when you're sober. So when you're a drunk person annoying other drunk people, you must be something special. I took the train home, and while waiting in the train station, there was one idiot who kept yelling "WHOO!" at the top of his lungs. Yeah, that was fun. Then once we boarded the train, there was one d-bag who was calling everybody and everything a "bitch." What a class act.
Stumbling around and knocking stuff over is one thing. But when alcohol turns you into a complete asshole, maybe you should lay off the booze.
In my latest Lost: Revisited column (thanks to Josh for posting on my behalf), I excused the apparent “botched” timeline between Locke’s departure from the island and his death by suggesting that several weeks may have passed between his suicide and his interaction with Jack at the hospital. After rewatching the conclusion of last week’s episode, I’m a little reluctant to make that excuse, since all of the cuts and scratches from the car accident still looked pretty fresh. I’m pretty certain that those wounds would have healed, at least somewhat, in a month’s time.
Enough about last week. Onto this week.
Click the "Read More" link for the full column.
The flirtatious interaction between Sawyer and Juliet over the first twenty minutes of the episode is the perfect illustration for why this relationship should continue to flourish instead of resorting back to the tired Jack/Kate/Sawyer love triangle. Why not allow this budding romance to develop, while allowing Jack and Kate to resolve their issues so that they can end up together? I’m an admitted rooter of Jack and Kate (obvious much?) but I truly feel that these two need to end up together. I don’t deny that Kate feels a certain amount of sexual passion with Sawyer, but I feel like that’s lust. I have trouble imagining her saying to Sawyer, “I love you.” I can completely envision her saying that to Jack. And when Jack proposed to her and she said “yes,” it seemed right. To me, that scene would seem unnatural if it were shared with Sawyer.
And actually, during much of that period, they reminded me of a hardened version of early Jack and Kate. You had the reluctant leader forced into making difficult decisions, and the woman by his side who promised to always have his back. It’s just that these two were more….bad ass-y. Their “give me two weeks” talk was phenomenal, as well.
So, by episode’s end, we did learn that these two kids do indeed end up together. In fact, Sawyer even confesses that he barely remembers what Kate looks like, and that he’s “absolutely” over her. Yet at the conclusion of the episode, when Jin reported that the Jack, Kate, and Hurley had returned, Sawyer kept mum. And he was staring directly at Kate as the episode closed.
Honestly, I do hope that they continue with Sawyer and Juliet, because I think they have tremendous chemistry. Along with that, heroic-island Jack is the Jack that Kate originally fell in love with. I think the show owes it to the viewers to have them shack up together in that surrounding.
Anyway, there were some other interesting tidbits within this episode.
I absolutely loved how Sawyer used all he had learned about the island to construct this brilliant lie about how they arrived in the first place. I especially love that he brought up the Black Rock. Awesome. His interaction with Richard was great as well. Interesting that Dharma refers to the Others as “hostiles,” yet they have a truce with each other. And I have to wonder: When does Alpert go from a well groomed guy wearing a button down shirt to shaggy haired with tattered, dirty clothes?
We also learned that whatever happened that causes pregnant women to die hasn’t transpired yet. Great news for Kate if she is indeed preggers.
Anyway, I’m sure that if there’s one thing people will dislike bout this episode, it’s the possibility that they’ve made Sawyer too “soft.” I personally don’t mind a little character development, so I’m willing to see where this goes. Along with that, I’m not convinced we saw enough to make a solid judgment.
Oh, and who didn’t get wide-eyed when they saw the fully erected statue at the beginning of the episode. I suspect it’s possible that the final “flash,” which felt like an earthquake, may have been responsible for the statue crumbling in the first place. I have to admit, though, when Miles indicated that they had arrived someplace “a long time ago,” I got a little nervous that we’d see a dinosaur or something.
Anyway, this episode was more about letting us know what happened with the Left Behinders over the past three years, so I don’t have any “topics of conversation” questions prepared like I have for the past couple of weeks. But I do encourage everybody to send me their thoughts and theories. I’ve been very fortunate to receive a lot of feedback for the past few episodes, which have made my Revisited columns a lot easier and more interesting. So, keep ‘em coming!
A few people pointed out a huge thing I had missed (nobody’s perfect), which is that Flight 316 didn’t land on THE island, it landed on the smaller island that houses the Hydra station. Here are some comments regarding that:
We didn't see a plane because they were on the main "We crashed flight 815 over this island" island. The island that Caesar, Locke, Ilana, Ben, Lapidus (maybe Sun?) were on was Hydra Island, which we know because Caesar was rummaging through the Hydra station from Season 3. They must have taken those canoes from Hydra Island over to the "main" island at some point, and that's when they encountered future-traveling Sawyer, Locke, Juliet, etc.
And, courtesy of Andy…
I'm going to write a more thorough e-mail a little later, but I wanted to at least mention one thing first. Flight 316 didn't crash on the Island... it crashed on Hydra Island. Specifically, it landed on the airstrip that Kate and Sawyer were working on back at the beginning of season 3. Cesar was rooting around in Ben's office in the Hydra station (shown in a season 3 deleted scene) when he found those maps. Lapidus and (presumably) Sun took one of the canoes — the same kind used by Kate and Sawyer when they left Hydra Island, and the same kind that the Losties found on the beach shortly before they were ambushed by the people shooting at them. So yes, I believe the people shooting at them were the 316ers, especially b/c an Ajira Airlines water bottle was found in one of the canoes by Sawyer. That said, it looks like the 316ers (with the exception of those who "flashed" out of the plane) aren't traveling through time, and are in fact in the present. When the Losties came upon those canoes and got attacked, they had flashed ahead to their future, which is actually the present. I think I just made my brain bleed
I am a bit ashamed for having missed something so “obvious” (relatively speaking), but sometimes you can’t see the forest for the trees. I often find myself so occupied with identifying the “Easter eggs” that I miss the softballs they lob at us.
Click the "Read More" link for the full column.
I think Andy is right on with his assessment of the Flight 316ers, though. For Sawyer and them, their “present” is 2005, I believe. For Jack, the Oceanic Six, and the 316 survivors, the “present” is 2008. So when Sawyer, Juliet, and the freighter folk were getting shot at, they probably “flashed” to 2008, which is ahead of their time, but actually the “real” present-day.
Wow, that really does make your brain bleed.
Another interesting tidbit: Some people may have noticed that there was a runway near the plane. If you recall, while Sawyer and Kate were being held captive by the Others, they were forced to do some grueling manual labor. Juliet would later reveal to Sawyer that they were working on a runway. This seems to suggest that Ben somehow knew that a plane would be landing there. How did he know?
Over at my blog, Kyle writes:
#1, I totally agree on the Bentham thing, I was thinking the exact same thing.
I believe this refers to the fact that Locke rarely referred to himself as Bentham, and actually never even told the Oceanic Six to refer to him as such. However, I think it’s worth noting that, at Locke’s memorial service, Jack indicates that Locke visited him a month before his death (I had forgotten this). That seems to suggest that a lengthy amount of time passed between the events of the episode and what happened during the climax, when Ben killed Locke. This show has never felt the need to hold the viewers’ hands when it comes to clarifying a timeline, but I have to admit that this seemed like some messy editing work. Consider that Ben implies that Jack just bought his first ticket to Australia, yet when Jack sees Kate at the airport (just days after Locke’s death), he tells her he’s been traveling every weekend.
In a lot of ways, I felt like this was the antithesis of “Meet Kevin Johnson.” That episode seemed like it had an unrealistic amount of story to tell in a short timeline (didn’t Michael recover from a severe car accident in, like, a month?), while this episode had trouble filling the gaps of a longer timeline.
#2, not sure if that confirms they were the ones doing the shooting, but it does seem likely to me that Sawyer and crew time jumped to a spot after this crash. Although, like you said, there didn't seem to be a plane...but the boats were there anyway.
#3, I'd have to guess the "woman" is Sun. Sayid's location is a big question mark too though.
#4, I kind of assumed that the plane crash people were in the present day, and that's why the plane and everything is there. Jack, Hurley, and Kate (at least) seemingly got picked up by one of the time flashes to the point where they disappeared right off the plane before it even crashed. So I figured the rest of them just crashed on the present day island. But then again I really don't know how the whole thing works yet, so maybe they can't actually crash on the present day island because the island itself is jumping through time too? But then the Others should be as well...well, that's time travel for ya.
I touched upon the whole Flight 316 crew above, but it is interesting that the Others are nowhere to be seen. We know they haven’t vanished, since Alpert has appeared numerous times. Very odd.
#5, I was also thinking it was interesting that Locke wasn't paralyzed. That means the island actually healed his back as opposed to just temporarily allowing him to walk.
This is certainly an interesting distinction.
#6, I'm fairly certain that Eloise Hawking is Ellie, the Other that Daniel and crew met. Remember that Daniel told her they were from the future...I'd bet that gave her an interest in it, which she passed on to her son.
I don’t think there’s any chance that Eloise Hawking ISN’T Ellie. It is interesting, though, that Christian (as a conduit for Jacob) dropped her name. Yet he seems to have disdain for Ben, and his order to move the island was seemingly a method to get away from the freighter folks, who were on Widmore’s payroll. How did she manage to leave the island unscathed?
#7, finally, I don't get the Oceanic Six having to return either. Like you said, the wheel was causing the flashes. I can see Ben lying about that so he can get back to the island by recreating the original circumstances as best as possible, but Christian says they needed to come back too. And why not Walt? I can somewhat accept Aaron since he wasn't born when the plane crashed, but the Six (or, I suppose, Five plus Ben and Undead Locke) weren't enough to recreate all the circumstances anyway. Say Sayid never showed up...would it have made a huge difference? They didn't have proxies for everyone anyway. And hell, why did they need Locke's corpse anyway? I can accept the idea that Ben only begged Locke to not kill himself because he needed to pump him for information (about Widmore and Eloise perhaps, Ben killed him as soon as Locke named Eloise) before he died, but even if Ben is the "good guy" (or, as you put it, lesser of two evils), I'm having a hard time believing he actually wants Locke to go back and lead the Others. So why not get a different corpse? Or did it have to be Locke specifically that acted as the proxy, and if so, why?
For the moment, I’m going to keep my hands clean from the whole “proxy” thing. What I do find interesting is that we KNOW that Jack, Kate, and Hurley “flashed” to the past, yet it’s been confirmed or suggested that Locke, Sayid, Sun, Frank, and Ben did not. Why? What makes the three of them so special?
I don’t know, but there is one thing about them that I find interesting. Of the Oceanic Six, as far as we know, they’re the only three that have seen ghosts/apparitions. Jack was visited by his father, Kate saw Claire, and Hurley has communicated with Charlie, Ana Lucia, and a host of other dearly departed friends. To the best of our knowledge, Sayid and Sun haven’t experienced such visions. Again, that doesn’t answer why they’re special, but it does possibly tell us what sets them apart.
Kyle then adds…
It was Charles Widmore who arranged for Locke to crash on the island.
Which implies a lot of things. First he must have known where the island was at that time to arrange for Locke to be on the flight. He must have had a good idea it would crash (because of our time traveling heroes perhaps? Even if he remembered Locke talking to Richard, that really shouldnt have meant much to him until now, when Locke reappeared in the present day). He must have some idea that Locke is needed for something.
Does this also lend itself to the idea that Charles might be the "lesser of two evils" over Ben? Both are claiming they want Locke to lead the Others, but Charles actually arranged for Locke to end up on the island, and gave him the files for the Oceanic Six, while Ben has screwed Locke over time after time after time. On the other hand, Ben did bring Locke's body onto the plane with him. And the fact is he could have had Locke move the island in the first place...unless he knew events would unfold the way they have and knew that the wheel would be knocked off its axis, moving the island himself doesnt seem to fit in with the idea of Ben simply trying to get rid of Locke so he can go back to running things.
One thing I can't remember though...did Widmore order anything as it pertained to any survivors of 815? I know he sent the freighter people essentially to get rid of Ben, but I can't remember if he wanted Keemy to get rid of any survivors or if he just went crazy on his own. Widmore's actions there might go a long way toward figuring out his overall motivations, because I'm having a hard time remembering Widmore actually doing anything bad besides being a crappy father and threatening Ben. I mean, it seems like most of the bad we've heard about concerning him came from Ben, who is about the least trustworthy person ever.
It is interesting that Widmore claims to not know where the island is, yet played such a large part (through Abaddon) to have Locke on the flight that crashed onto it. Does Widmore know more than he’s letting on? Or is Abaddon privy to information that his boss isn’t?
An interesting point is made regarding how Widmore’s encounter with Locke when he was 17 shouldn’t have been significant. In a lot of ways, this is true. It reminds me of how people are constantly saying, “Shouldn’t Locke remember meeting Alpert when he was little?” Why should he? I certainly don’t remember one-time interactions with people when I was a virtual infant. So, why does this memory register so deeply with Widmore?
I also like the argument about how Widmore – arguably twice – played a role in bringing Locke to the island. Yet Ben has attempted to kill Locke countless times.
My recollection of Widmore’s orders regarding the island was essentially to “burn it down” by killing everybody there.
Another interesting tidbit to consider: In the “real world” Widmore is exceptionally wealthy and powerful. And when Ben spied Locke in New York City, he was decked out in a nice suit. I find it intriguing that these two former Other leaders can integrate themselves into a normal society and go on to live such luxurious lifestyles. How did they achieve their riches?
Now, onto some other matters.
This comes from regular contributor Dan:
Jack would have known what Locke was going by because of his hospital chart. As far as why they need to return to the island, it could have something to do with either winning the war and protecting the island or rescuing everyone who was left behind. Locke had to be the one to turn the wheel, and getting everyone to come with him was the only way to get back. Did Richard say it had anything to do with stopping the time jumps?
The hospital chart would explain how Jack would know that Locke is going by Jeremy Bentham, but I still have issue with this. First off, why wouldn’t Jack ask Locke why he’s going by that name? Secondly, unless Jack was the one working on Locke (in which case, I think it would have been a lot more fun for us to see Jack’s reaction to Locke being brought into the emergency room from the ambulance), how would he know that Locke was even in the hospital in the first place?
I have come to realize that the reasons why the Oceanic Six must return haven’t been revealed to us yet. It just never seemed clear to me why Locke felt they needed to be brought back.
Here are a few comments that appeared on the EW website that I found particularly interesting: I couldn't help but notice the Ben/Widmore parallels last night. Both had been leaders of the Others. Both turned the wheel and left the island. Both had people shadowing the O6 to "keep them safe". Both wanted the O6 back on the island. Both claim to have a great interest in the future of the island. Both seem to be very wealthy. Both have/had a daughter. Maybe that's what Ben meant when he said Widmore changed the rules. He took away one of their similarities, so Ben has to even things up.
There is a fun little arms race between these two characters, with one constantly one-upping the other as they attempt to get vengeance on what the other had taken. When you consider Ben’s comment that Widmore “changed the rules” and the fact that he had the foresight to create a runway makes me wonder how much he knows about the future.
Regarding Helen’s death:
The death date was April 8 or 4-8 as in two of the Numbers.
It’s been a while since we’ve heard anything about the Numbers, huh? I’m not sure if it’s significant in any way, but the most interesting thing I found about that scene was how Locke seemed to believe, in his subtle manner, that if he had stayed – or if he had returned earlier – he could have saved her. An interesting hypothesis considering that she died of a brain aneurism (and not something “preventable” like murder or a car crash).
Things I think: I think The war is the Ben War where he kills everyone. They went back in time during Darma. I think Widmore needs locke there to change things. I also think Ben is not to go back but found out about Eloise Hawkings from Locke in the the 3 years worked his way into her confidence The line that the future can not be changed is wrong. They are using Locke and the 6 to minipulate history.
I think this is an interesting take on the whole “who’s the lesser of two evils?” debate. It’s certainly very interesting that the Oceanic Survivors have essentially stationed themselves during a period where the seeds are set for a young Ben to take control of the island. Perhaps the “war” is referring to Ben’s purge, and Widmore is attempting to manipulate events to prevent that from happening.
Many are making assumptions here that I don't see evidence for. If you find some, please let me know. A. We are assuming Ben knew (when he killed Locke) that he would need to bring his body back to the island. B. We are assuming Ben knows that bringing dead Locke back to the island means Locke will be alive again. C. We are assuming Ben knew that Locke had to die.
This is an excellent, excellent, EXCELLENT point. I was one of the many people who said “why would Ben bring back Locke when he knows he’ll be resurrected?” Well, how do we know he knows that Locke will be resurrected? Is there any indication that he’s even aware that Christian is a ghost on the island and acting as Jacob’s voice? I don’t believe there is, and as such, there’s no reason to believe that he could predict that the same thing would happen to Locke.
Further, I also think it’s worth noting that Ben likely had no reason to believe he’d need Locke’s dead body when he killed him in the first place.
By the way, I can't help but laugh about how every time we're introduced to a new adult, male, black character, everybody jumps up and claims that it's Walt all grown up. It's happening with Abaddon, and it happened when we first met Eko.
Enjoy the new episode tonight.
Also, enjoy the latest installment of Lost! Untangled:
WWE Raw: For the past few Raws, I've been stating that WrestleMania is beginning to take shape. After last night, I think it's fair to say that the shape has officially been taken. We now have the two main events more-or-less set in stone (more on that in a bit), and the big attraction match has been made. It's official: At WrestleMania XXV, it'll be the Undertaker vs. Shawn Michaels! While I sincerely doubt that Michaels will actually end the streak -- nor do I think he should -- I do hope they focus on the fact that just one year ago, HBK ended Ric Flair's career. Now have him promise to end the streak. If they want to intensify things to a personal level, they can also bring up the fact that Undertaker is somewhat responsible for the debilitating back injury that ended Michaels' career for four years. Anyway, it should be a great match. These two have always had incredible chemistry, and it's really astonishing how much the Undertaker has improved in the last decade. I'm psyched.
So, as expected, it's going to be Orton vs. Triple H at WrestleMania for the WWE Championship. Over the past few weeks, I've been complaining about how this angle has been about the McMahons, when it SHOULD be about Orton wanting to win the title by defeating his one-time mentor. Just to prove how much that's true, in the past three weeks Triple H has appeared on Raw to confront Randy Orton. He hasn't brought the WWE Championship with him once.
After last night, they WANT us to believe it'll be Edge vs. the Big Show for the World Heavyweight Championship at WrestleMania. I don't buy that for a second. And while the smart money is on a triple threat -- with Cena being added -- I'm actually going to go out on a limb and predict that the Big Show's involvement is merely a red herring, and that in the end it'll be a one-on-one contest between Edge and John Cena. To be honest, throwing Big Show in there will not only bring down the match quality, but it'll also seem like the writers were backstage and just suddenly realized they don't have a match lined up for Big Show yet, so decided to squeeze him into the main event.
And to be honest, I LOVE the idea of the two World title matches being a Smackdown champion vs. a Raw challenger. That's one thing they haven't done yet.
I have to admit that I'm a bit surprised that Rey Mysterio didn't qualify for the Money in the Bank match, because I pegged him to win the damn thing! With most of the upper midcard already involved in their WrestleMania feuds/angles, who could he face? Actually, why not put HIM in a match with Big Show? They've really been pushing the underdog aspect of his character, what better way to accentuate that?
Despite my initial skepticism (denial?), recent paparazzi photos of Rachel Bilson have indicated that she is, indeed, engaged to somebody other than myself. Really, Rachel? Really? It may sound petty but it's worth repeating: MADE DARTH VADER INTO A WHINY BITCH! How is that even possible? I wish you happiness, but give me a call when you realize you can do better (i.e. ME!)
In other news...
So TMZ has been patting themselves on the back for "exposing" Northern Trust for throwing a series of lavish parties and concerts in Los Angeles, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars, after having received $1.6 billion in federal bailout money.
On the surface this probably seems a bit unsavory, but when you really look at the situation, it feels like we're beginning to tread in some really dangerous waters.
It should be noted that Northern Trust didn't even ask for the bailout money. Isn't there something a little unsettling about the government giving independent organizations money (which they didn't ask for), and then dictating what they can spend it on?
On top of that, isn't the whole point of this stimulus plan to boost the economy? If certain individuals and institutions are not suffering in the midst of this financial crisis, isn't it a good thing if they're funneling money into various companies and organizations?
I just think it's a bit disingenuous to accuse a company that didn't need to be bailed out of being irresponsible with their finances.
Matt Basilo is a television correspondent who has been writing for InsidePulse.com since April 2005. He's also a ghost writer for a major consultant firm, with articles published in several reputable financial magazines. Matt currently resides in New Jersey.
![[a case of the blog]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrdW6m_GKpkUaPi56fHU6TFDQPOe1Rd_Lu0S_T5NgEIvzR2rJYBvUU6yRIyH7xtuBt0hVMDAcuqSlLEu9ooq2iwOOnskdsfS9BMjPZJsFJMVIlMJopdnOVjxqeNRR9etLlOY9wUNdSpW6D/s1600/newblogheader19.gif)
My Smallville column should be posted on PrimeTimePulse by tomorrow morning. I'll provide that link once it's available. And by the way, that "memories" title is pretty appropriate, given the events of that episode. 
