The Hangover

So last night I was spontaneously given the opportunity to see The Hangover, and since it didn't look like much else was going on, I decided to go. As some of you may have gathered, I don't go to the movies as much as I'd sometimes like. And even though I'm a huge fan of comedies, I typically don't see them in theaters. So going to see this was a bit out of the ordinary. But being a big fan of The Office, and with Ed Helms (Andy Bernard) in it, it just seemed right.

My review? Basically, just to GO SEE IT. This was an absolutely hilarious film. I went with five other people, and our brand of humor ranges across the spectrum. Yet every single one of us were in stitches. In fact, one of the six us of had just seen it the night before, and was simply going again because he thought it was so funny. And I might have a second opportunity to see it tonight, and I'm tempted to take it.

My suggestion is to not blow this movie off as just stupid sophomoric humor. Much like its predecessor Old School, there's some heart and emotion behind the characters. All of the characters are flawed, but I wouldn't distinguish one as "the asshole" and other as "the nice guy." And hey, there's a fun little mystery going along with it (not to mention great cameos). This is definitely worth seeing.

Read more!

Fret not, loyal blog visitors

I know that this blog has always primarily focused on popular television shows. And with summer upon us, and those programs on hiatus, I'm sure a number of frequent visitors are visiting less frequently.

But worry not!

I'll get into the details this weekend or early next week, but I have some fun ideas planned for the summer, including the return of Top Ten Cases. So if you promise to keep coming, I'll be sure to keep the material fresh and entertaining. Deal? Good.

Check back later for more information.

Read more!

Just my luck

So this weekend was an odd combination of "good" luck, bad luck, good luck in a bad situation, and then downright bad luck again.

Friday was one of my co-workers' birthdays, so I decided to take my camera with me to work. While not completely unusual, it was out of the ordinary. Before leaving for my morning commute, I also made the last minute decision to grab a can of soda, as I was a bit drowsy. So as I passed through the kitchen to go to the basement, I look out the back door and see four deer walking through my yard. In addition to being a lovely sight, it was also completely unexpected. My house is no where near any words whatsoever. In fact, it's surrounded by three heavily trafficked and residential streets. So where the hell did these things come from?

Anyway, I hopped in the car and realized I needed to get some gas. So I drive to the local gas station. But as I pull into the lot, my car hits something, making a really loud sound. I check to make sure there's no damage. Thankfully, there's not. Except for the punctured wheel and completely flat tire. That was pretty crappy. But I suppose if you have to get a flat tire, a gas station isn't a bad place for it to happen. So they fixed it right there and then for me, and it only cost me 20 bucks. While they were doing this, I investigated what I hit. Turns out the entrance to the lot isn't a "real" entrance, where the curb neatly declines to a flat level. Instead, they just discontinued the curb at the sewer grate. And the edge of the grate is sticking out, which you can't see when heading in from the left side (which is what I did).

Fast forward to Saturday night. I'm supposed to head into Hoboken. Normally I would crash at my brother's place in the city, and just head into Hoboken from there. I wasn't really feeling that, though. Fortunately a friend of mine is living in Jersey again, so we were just going to take the train there. Except my friend fell off the face of the Earth, and may or may not be in Ireland right now (jury's still out on that one). Finally I decided I would just take the train myself. So I buy my ticket from the machine, but I only had 20's on me. So the damn thing gives me $14 in dollar coins as change. What in the blue hell am I supposed to do with that? Other than lose it?

Making matters worse, the damn train never showed up! Turns out the rail road is being repaired, so you have to take a bus to another train station, which will then take you to Hoboken. Well the event I was going only has a three hour open bar -- and I'd be missing the first two hours. In the end it just wasn't worth it. So I wasted six bucks on a ticket and was stuck with $14 in dollar coins.

How's that for luck?

Read more!

A Case of the.... Lost - Your Definitive Guide to Season 5

I present to you – EXCLUSIVELY – Your Definitive Guide to Season 5 of Lost. Season 5 may have come and gone, but here is your chance to relive every single episode review, "Revisited" column, and Lost! Untangled episode. This is also the perfect companion guide to those who prefer to watch Lost when it comes out on DVD.

And let's be honest, 2010 is a long way off, so you might want to revisit (hehe) this page to brush up on the season that was, before the (final) season to come. For your convenience, a link to this page will remain on the right column of this blog. Enjoy:

Episodes 5-1 & 5-2 – “Because You Left” & “The Lie”

Episode Review – Revisited

Episode 5-3 – “Jughead”

Episode Review – Revisited

Episode 5-4 – “The Little Prince”

Episode Review – Revisited

Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-5 – “This Place is Death”

Episode Review – Revisited

Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-6 – “316”

Episode Review – Revisited

Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-7 – “The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham”

Episode Review – Revisited

Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-8 – “LaFleur”

Episode Review – Revisited: Part 1 – Part 2

Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-9 – “Namaste”

Episode Review – Revisited

Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-10 – “He’s Our You”

Episode Review

Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-11 – “Whatever Happened, Happened”

Episode Review – Revisited

Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-12 – “Dead is Dead”

Episode Review – Revisited
Watch: Lost! Untangled




Episode 5-13 – “Some Like it Hoth”
Episode Review – Revisited
Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-14 – “The Variable”
Episode Review – Revisited
Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episode 5-15 – “Follow the Leader”
Episode Review – Revisited
Watch: Lost! Untangled

Episodes 5-16 & 5-17 – “The Incident”
Episode Review – Revisited

Read more!

Star Trek

While I won't be revealing anything that I would categorize as a "spoiler," I will vaguely refer to certain plot points. If you're one of those people, like myself, that prefer going into a movie completely fresh, you may want to avoid reading this until after you see it.

Last weekend I went to see Star Trek, and as expected, I really enjoyed the film. Actually, it was one of the best movies I've seen since The Dark Knight. While I only ranked it at number three back when I posted my Top Ten Cases entry regarding the movies I'm most looking forward to, this is the first of the films on the list that I've actually gone out of my way to see. When they were released, I felt somewhat indifferent to Wolverine and Terminator, and ultimately realized I'd be just as content waiting for it to come out on DVD (although I did end up seeing Wolverine, but only because it was for free). But Star Trek was something I really wanted to see in the theater.

While I've always been partial to The Next Generation, I must admit that the rebellious nature of Captain Kirk makes him a far more alluring character to center a prequel behind. And overall, I was really pleased with the film, and would certainly recommend it to anybody who is a fan of the franchise. Of course, what makes this movie great is the fact that it appeals to those who haven't followed the series, but I do think the average Trekkie/Trekker (two nicknames I detest....the former is demeaning, the latter is pretentious) will approve of this exciting reimagining. The overall look and design of the film improved, but stayed consistent with, what we saw in the original series.

I think the strongest aspect of the film is that the actors wisely decided to play the characters in their own vision. For example, Chris Pine wasn't playing William Shatner playing Captain Kirk. He was simply playing Captain Kirk, and in my opinion he did a phenomenal job. I was never a huge Kirk fan (like I said, I grew up watching The Next Generation), but after seeing this movie, I completely understand why the character has such a huge following. If you knew him, he'd be that guy who's impossible to hate, even though you really want to. He has the nerve to casually sit in the prestigious Captain's chair when the ACTUAL Captain is right there on the bridge. But then he backs it up by coming up with a brilliant plan. A brilliant plan that works. Following this film, I have absolutely no problem comparing Captain Kirk to Han Solo. The movie also featured several clever "wink, wink" moments that, thankfully, weren't over the top.

The movie wasn't perfect, though. This may surprise many, but I actually thought Zachary Quinto's Spock the most disappointing portrayal. I'm sure it has a lot to do with the fact that I've grown tired of seeing the internal struggle of Quinto's Sylar, but I really didn't want to watch Spock's difficulty in relating to his human side. The reason Kirk was such a highlight in this film was because we got the cocky, confident, charismatic character the series was built upon. By contrast, I feel like the Spock everybody clamored for was virtually absent. Additionally, I didn't completely buy the "surprise" relationship revealed about halfway through the episode (although the facial expression was another character made the discovery made it all worthwhile). I'm also torn on the repercussions of the central plot. On the one hand, I appreciate the fact that the sequels won't be tied down by events that we know will have to transpire (and it was also neat seeing how one event led to Spock being Captain, and Kirk being First Officer), but on the other hand I feel a bit robbed: Does this mean that everything we've watched for the past four decades now doesn't happen? Or happens in a completely different fashion? I also fall into the category of people who found the lens flare distracting at times.

Nevertheless, this movie is highly recommended, and I think people who view it as a "Star Trek movie" are doing it a disservice. It's not my review style to assign grades, but if I were, I'd say this is a solid B+

Read more!

Please tell me this isn't real

The following message from Linda (Bollea) Hogan's PR team has apparently been posted on the Perez Hilton website:

Perez, if Brooke continues to spew lies on behalf of her father's lame attempt to distance himself from the reality that he is no different from the homicidal OJ Simpson, Charlie will be forced to put aside his paramedic/firefighting career path and release an album called "Redemption" which will easily surpass any of Brooke's records sales.

Brooke has always had a problem telling the truth. If it is her claim that her breasts are natural or she hasn't been banging the crap out of the pot head $tack for the last 3 years, then her comments of Charlie being a year and a half younger than her are again a complete fabrication (they are 4 months apart). She only judges Charlie because of his long hair and age, Linda doesn't judge.

Here are some cold hard facts; these people who say Linda is doing drugs are friends of Hulk Hogan. Brooke is Hulk's only remaining mouthpiece and a pawn in his game of control. Linda will walk into any drug testing facility and take a random test and the truth will be she is clean. Put your money where your mouth is Brooke aka Hulk. Brooke "thinks" she's doing drugs is a hypocrisy when her father and $tack are rolling and Smoking joints together in Brooke's recording session, and Brooke knows it. As for Charlie, he is an accomplished Spring board diver (4th in the Nationals), eagle scout and certified captain in commercial boating with his bigger goal of joining the fire
department. Linda's definition of a good time is hitting a 8:30 am mass at St Max's grabbing some Cuban food at Versailles (her fav). We aren't here to kiss anyone's ass but Linda would love spend a fun California day with Perez with or without that famous garlic chicken, but you have to go to mass.

Gary Smith on behalf of Linda Hogan
Global PR Inc

I'm a little skeptical, mostly due to the many spelling and grammatical errors, overall juvenile language, and the fact that this individual refers to Linda as "Linda Hogan" and not her actual name. Nevertheless, if this IS real, then my immediate issue is with the opening sentence, which states that Hulk Hogan is no different from OJ Simpson.

Even if Hogan's comments WEREN'T misinterpreted, and he really does want to kill his soon-to-be-ex-wife, there's still one major difference between the two of them. OJ killed his wife. Hogan hasn't. That's a pretty big difference from where I sit.

And honestly, who threatens to release an album in a war of words?

Read more!

Any math majors out there?

Is anybody else familiar with this Kidrobot stuff? Basically, they produce interesting looking collectible plastic figurines, but package them in a "blank" box, so you don't know which character is actually inside. They manufacture a number of different varieties, like Lost, Hello Kitty, and the ones I'm collecting -- the Simpsons. Anyway, there are certain odds that will determine which character is inside the box (Homer, for example, is 2/24).

So I've purchased five since discovering these cool little things, and so far I've received two Homers, two Apus, and one Fat Tony. Now, if there's a 2/24 chance I'm going to pick Homer, and I've already come across two of them, does that mean I won't be getting another Homer over the next 19 purchases? Naturally I know it's not that cut and dry, but is that the gitz of it?

Here are the cards with the actual odds. If anyone fancies themself a statistics expert, let me know what the chances are that I come across any other duplicates:

Read more!

Compare and contrast

Last September, I posted an edition of Top Ten Cases focusing on what I considered the best television deaths. Well, this past April, Popeater over on AOL.com featured a similar list, compiling what they considered the SADDEST television deaths. My criteria was slightly different, as I considered the scripting and direction of the scene in addition to the emotional impact. Nevertheless, for what it's worth, we agreed on three memorable television deaths.

Here's their list:

http://www.popeater.com/television/article/saddest-character-deaths-on-tv/418554?icid=mainmaindl8link4http%3A%2F%2Fwww.popeater.com%2Ftelevision%2Farticle%2Fsaddest-character-deaths-on-tv%2F418554

And here is mine:

http://acaseoftheblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/top-ten-cases-best-television-deaths.html

So, which one do you find more agreeable?

Read more!

A Case of the.... Lost - Episodes 5-16 & 5-17 Revisited

“So, Lost is basically one huge Spy vs. Spy episode?” – EW.com comments section

Love it.

Welcome to the final Lost: Revisited of the season! First and foremost, let’s get these nagging matters out of the way. In response to “What lies in the shadow of the statue,” Richard said, “Ille qui nos omnes servabit." This is Latin for, "He who [or that thing which] will save us all.” Also, the title of the book Jacob was reading while Locke was thrown out of the hotel window was “Everything That Rises Must Converge,” a collection of short stories by Flannery O’Connor that focuses on morality and human weakness. And, finally, here is the exact dialogue between Jacob and the Nameless Man in Black, who I believe to be Smokey D. in his human form (most people refer to him as Esau, the biblical figure, for future reference):

NAMELESS: You're trying to prove me wrong.
JACOB: You are wrong.
NAMELESS: They come, they fight, they destroy, they corrupt. It always ends the same.
JACOB: It can only end once. Everything before that is progress.

Good? Good.

Since I was fortunate enough to get a nice chunk of feedback and material for the finale, I’m going to forego the usual “here’s one e-mail, here’s my response” format for a more topic-oriented column. Therefore, certain comments and e-mails may be split up throughout the column. I think this will allow things to flow a little more smoothly.

Click the "Read More" link for the full column.

JACOB AND HIS NEMESIS:

In my review of the episode, I noted the obvious allusion to God and Satan gambling over the nature of mankind. I most certainly got that sense here after reading the exact wording of their interaction, as well. I also got a Matrix-vibe here, that this process continuously happens until humanity finally “gets it right.” Does this perhaps suggest that Jacob’s visits to various Oceanic survivors were to ensure that they arrive at the island acting a certain way and believing certain things? One person on the EW review message board offers this idea:

Jeff and AVClub seems to be assuming that Jacob is the good/white half, but I have my doubts. First, his "touching" of the lives of Kate, Sawyer, and Sayid have serious repercussions. By bailing Kate out, she continues her life as a thief. By giving Sawyer the pencil, he is encouraging Sawyer to nurture his hatred, and by distracting Sayid...well, perhaps he saved Sayid while allowing Nadia to die. Just a thought...

There’s definitely a conflicting mentality regarding Jacob’s “interference.” Indeed, what sort of lesson did he truly teach Kate? Was his intention to set her on the straight and narrow through kindness and compassion, or did he show her that you can always avoid the consequences, no matter your actions? Further, did he save Sayid’s life because he had a destiny to fulfill by returning to the island? Or did his actions lead to Nadia’s death (one could easily argue that had Nadia and Sayid been walking together, she never would have come to a halt when she found her sunglasses, and thus would have never been struck by the car)?

Personally, I’m in the mindset that Jacob IS the good guy here. As we approach the final season, which I believe is only 16 episodes long, I think they’re (for the most part) done with the unexpected character twists. We’ve spent the last few seasons wondering whether Jacob was good or bad, and I’m not sure what they benefit from misdirecting us once we are finally formally introduced to him. While his interactions with Kate, Sawyer, and Sayid are open to interpretation, he also sends Hurley on a path that doesn’t really lead to any dark character repercussions (not yet, anyway). Same goes for Jack, Jin, and Sun. Another thing to consider: They’ve softened the Others considerably over the past few seasons, and they’re Jacob’s main worshippers. The review over at EW.com provides this interesting theory:

Jacob was “quibbling” during his flashbacks; he was building loopholes and failsafe devices into each castaway’s life that will allow them to cheat death by Jughead. By physically touching each of them, he marked them in a magical way. And now, he’s going to draw them to himself, i.e., the Island, just like the electromagnetic anomaly at the Swan site started drawing anything metal into is powerful singularity. Perhaps they will all be immediately beamed to the Island in reincarnated bodies. (The promo for next season seemed to imply as much, what with Jack’s eye shooting open and reflecting back the jungle.) Or maybe it will be like this: the souls of the annihilated castaways will migrate into their bodies at the point in time that Jacob touched them. And more, I’ll bet you that they will retain all the memories of their past lives. Which means, for example, that Young James Ford will have knowledge of his fate — and can choose to try to change it, if he wishes. This is part of the great gift Jacob has given them: Not only new life, but the capacity to create their own destinies — a destiny which could include, if they wish, to go to the Island of their own free will. And they will. Remember Jacob’s last, bloody sputter: “They’re coming.”

The idea that they’re beamed back to the point that they were touched, but with their memories preserved, is very interesting. This would have severe repercussions, for the simple reason that if these characters heed Jacob’s advice, they’ll never end up on the island in the first place.

Consider this: Jack may come to realize that his father wasn’t reprimanding him. Instead, he’ll learn a valuable lesson that he’ll turn to at crucial moments in his life. This, in effect, could easily prevent the downfall of their relationship. If Jack and his father never have a falling out, his father never dies in Australia, and Jack doesn’t end up on that fateful flight.

Likewise, if Sawyer’s memories are retained, he’ll realize that the person he’s going to see in Australia is not responsible for his parents’ deaths. As such, he avoids 815 as well. I can also imagine Jin and Sun choosing the preservation of their relationship over power and wealth. As such, they become independent of Sun’s family, meaning that they don’t end up on the plane either. I’ll spare you from every single example, but you get the point.

Although I’m not quite sure I buy the whole idea that they’d be going to the island based on their free will, because the Oceanic Six and Ben are ALREADY there by choice. To an extent, so are the Oceanic survivors-turned Dharma folks. My personal prediction is that they didn’t change the past, but instead played their part in ensuring that the Incident occurred. And, in turn, the Incident sent all of them back to their natural timeline.

Adding to the idea of Jacob’s visits, long-time reader Creed e-mailed me this point:

A quick note to close - 4 of the 5 people Jacob visited were Jack Shepherd, Kate Austin, Hugo Reyes, and James Ford ... you know him as "Sawyer". Isn't that the list of names Michael was given in Three Minutes, that he was supposed to bring back? (And the 5th person who came anyway was the 5th person Jacob visited, Sayid Jarrah) That can't be coincidence.

For the most part, yes I do think this is coincidence (sorry!) Only because in this case, the easiest explanation is the best one: Ben needed Jack to save his life. He knew Jack wouldn’t do it voluntarily, so he included Kate to act as a pawn. Likewise, Sawyer was there to use as additional leverage in order to ensure that Kate would cooperate. Hurley only came along to act as a messenger. Further evidence that this is merely a coincidence: Jacob also visited Locke, Jin, and Sun, yet they weren’t summoned by the Others. Nevertheless, I seem to recall that one of the Others once mentioned that Jack wasn’t even on Jacob’s list.

I actually fully expect to learn that Jacob visited even more people than was indicated this episode. The Lost method of storytelling typically focuses on the people in that given episode. Would it have made sense for us to learn that Jacob visited Desmond, for example, when he didn’t even appear in the episode?

Before moving onto the next topic, I’d like to touch upon the complex relationship between Jacob and his nemesis. I’ve already stated that I believe the Man in Black is the natural human form of the Smoke Monster. It’s also been hinted that Christian is the Smoke Monster as well. Does this infer that Christian is a messenger for the apparent bad guy? Or is Christian the Mr. Nameless himself, using the dead body as a clever guise (as he did with Locke)? Creed offers this theory:

Christian told Locke to move the island, which would have taken him out of the picture. When Ben moved the island instead, Locke was sent to bring back the people who'd left, including Ben.. and Esau (as Locke) told Richard to tell him that he might have to die. This means Locke leaves the island believing he needs to bring everyone back (including Ben) and would probably die to accomplish this.

But Why?

I believe Esau was on his way to convincing Ben to kill Jacob - 35 years of frustration - until the 815ers showed up. Eko and Locke were both a threat somehow, and they were either killed directly or via Ben; perhaps because they were both 'men of faith' who might have believed in Jacob, or in Locke's case, because John had taken over the leadership of the Other. I believe Ben has been the pawn all along, led by a series of events to think he was doing good work, with the ultimate goal of Jacob's murder.

I’m going to discuss Christian in my next section, so for the moment I’ll just focus on the Jacob/Nemesis/Ben aspect of the e-mail. I’m not quite sure what to make of Ben’s relationship with Nemesis. On the one hand, Ben seems to have some sort of alliance or understanding with the Smoke Monster, based upon the fact that he was able to summon the beast when the freighter mercenaries attacked the barracks. On the other hand, Christian seemed to openly voice his disapproval of Ben during his final talk with Locke at the donkey wheel.

Part of me believes that Locke was always the end game for Nameless. The Smoke Monster has repeatedly showed him mercy, when he hasn’t others, and Christian in particular has taken an interest in him. With that in mind, I think perhaps Locke was the pawn all along, and he simply took advantage of an opportunity with Ben.

JACOB’S CABIN:

There’s been a lot of questions revolving Jacob’s cabin. Was it ever his house? Was it a ruse all along? Frequent blog visitor Kyle offers this on Jacob’s cabin:

So was Jacob's cabin ever Jacob's cabin, or was that always a lie? I think Jacob's enemy from the beginning was the one in that cabin, maybe imprisoned by the ash (hence why the fact that the circle of ash was "broken"...allowing him to get out). And maybe he was the one asking for help back when Locke and Ben visited the cabin.

Which then raises the question...does this mean Christian Shephard is working for him and not Jacob? Or is he in fact disguised as Christian? Because while we dont know his motivation in terms of Sun, Christian trying to get Locke off the island and telling him he had to die now seem like a plan by Jacob's enemy all along.

I’m inclined to believe that, at one point, the cabin belonged to Jacob. My main reasoning is that Ilana somehow knew to check it when trying to find Jacob, and her comment that he hasn’t been there in a long time seems to imply that he was there at one point.

The Christian factor is a very interesting one, because I daresay that much of what has happened is turned on its head if it turns out that Doc Shephard Sr. is actually working for the bad guys. We’ve seen Ghost Christian interact with Jack, Locke, Claire, Sun, and Frank (am I missing anybody), and each of those encounters have led the character down a very specific path. To discover that they were essentially led astray, after all this time, would be rather significant.

As it relates to the ash and the person inside being imprisoned, Creed adds:

On the cabin - when I first saw the ash circle in Curtain, it made me think of a binding, especially when we heard 'Help Me'. But Richard said Jacob lives in the statue, and Ilana said Jacob hadn't been there in a very long time. Which makes me think Esau was the one living in the cabin, and that he asked Locke for help to free him from the binding.

To answer both of you: I’m also leaning towards the theory that the Man in Black was living in the cabin and that the circle of ash was some sort of force field, but I can’t quite recall when we first discovered the circle had been broken? Was the circle intact when Locke visited the cabin for the first time? Because if it was, that might poo-poo on the theory that Smokey and the Man in the Black are one in the same. But yes, I do think that “Esau” – and not Jacob – was the one who said, “Help Me.”

THE INCIDENT:

So we finally found out what happened to Dr. Chang’s arm. But the question remains: Did Jack’s actions cause the Incident, or did it successfully rewrite history? Of course, we won’t know the answer until next season, but long-time reader Dan e-mails:

I'm glad Miles pointed out that setting off the bomb could cause the incident. I was thinking Faraday had this planned out all along, but that would mean everyone is now dead for good. Plus, Miles' dad dying means he couldn't have made the video talking about the incident, the village would have to have been rebuilt exactly the same, etc, so I guess they did change the future, at least somehow. Or did the force suck in all the energy from the bomb and leave everyone outside ok? That would explain why Daniel said it had to be as close as possible.

I also appreciated the fact that Miles recognized the possibility that they were actually causing the very thing they’re trying to prevent, especially because that’s all they’ve really done since arriving. Sayid shot Ben to prevent him from becoming the monster he turns into, which ultimately led to him losing his innocence. My understanding of the hydrogen bomb’s detonation was that the intense electromagnetic activity would contain the blast to that specific point. That is to say, the explosion would prevent the electromagnetism, but wouldn’t harm anybody outside of the well. Which is why it had to happen at that specific time (if it didn’t, why not just blow the damn thing up at any moment?) Regarding the success of the mission, Creed adds:

So part of me is really hoping that they stick with the simple, less-convoluted "What Happened, Happened" philosophy and Miles is right - this IS the Incident and they didn't change a thing in history. (Although it leaves the unpleasant thought that while the journey to Dharma Days was fun, what was the point? Other than perhaps bringing those stranded in 1974 back to the present, if The Incident resolves by sending Jack, Kate, Hurley, Sawyer, Jin, and friends back to the present day)

Actually, I disagree with the notion that the Dharma days will prove inconsequential if they don’t successfully change the future. On the contrary, I love the idea that their actions set forth the obstacles they’d face later (earlier?) in life. Case in point, consider this cool observation from the EW website:

WHAT IF : The radiation from the bomb mixed with the electro magic is what causes women to die during pregnancy. It would be prety ironic that Juliet has responsible for the very thing that she was brought to the island to fix. How's that for loophole

I absolutely love this idea. It’s right up there with how Ethan played a part in recruiting Juliet, which caused her to come to the island, which ultimately led to Juliet going into the past and preventing Ethan from dying during his birth. Most people complain about these apparent paradoxes (that can’t possibly be the right plural form, can it?), but I find them a lot of fun.

MOTIVATIONS:

A lot of people have been irked by the apparent character motivations for blowing up the future Swan Station. Long-time reader Dan sent this observation:

I'm not really getting some of the characters motivations. Juliet and Jack both wanted to set off a nuke so they don't have to deal with a breakup, and Eloise tried to set it off so she could kill Daniel a second time?

I don’t think avoiding the break up was the main motivation for Jack or Juliet – a lot of people seem to be making this mistake (if you read the latest edition of Entertainment Weekly, there is one article – written by the same author who pens the episode reviews on their website – criticizes Jack for his incorrect assumption that he wants to blow up the island for a “second chance with Kate”). In his e-mail to me, Creed echoes this sentiment:

And Jack is a bad person, in my opinion - when asked why he wanted to change the past, no mention of Boone, Shannon, Eko, or any of the other people who died... just a regret about a relationship he messed up with bad choices. Wow.

This is incorrect. When Jack first discusses the plan with Kate while being held captive by the Others, the first thing he mentioned was all the lives that would be saved. In my eyes, THAT was always his intent. Wiping the slate clean and preventing the pain caused from Kate, in my opinion, was only his emotional attachment to the situation. I think Juliet was in much the same boat. Things had gotten to the point that her happy little life with Sawyer was a virtual impossibility. Preventing all of this from happening in the first place was the lesser of two evils.

What I find interesting, though, is that everybody chastises Jack and Juliet for wanting to rewrite history because of the relationships in their lives, while Kate and Sawyer want to retain the timeline for the very same reason. For all intents and purposes, Jack’s plan saves 50 plus people who were on the Oceanic flight and, conceivably, prevents the Purge. Even if they may be motivated by the fact that they won’t be spurned, there’s a lot of good that can come from rewriting history. Meanwhile, what argument do Sawyer and Kate have? It’s only personal gain for them. Sawyer is living a relatively honest life with the woman he loves. Kate met two cute boys, avoided jail, and got to become a mother. Neither of them want to give up what they have, even if it means good, innocent people they had lost get to live.

I think the EW review again points out the bias for Sawyer and against Jack. The author twice mentions Jack's weak excuse for wanting to reset history because it will give him a possible second chance with Kate, but never once does he mention the fact that Sawyer was perfectly willing to let everybody on the island die. Including Hurley, who never hurt a fly and was basically a bystander in all of this. And Jin and Miles, who he had spent the past three plus years getting to know. And, presumably, he would have left Kate behind too. It was actually Juliet who made the decision for them to go back.

For that matter, I also think Juliet’s insecurities proved to be pretty baseless. Sure, Sawyer laid his eyes on Kate a few times, but if you think about it, Juliet’s got her on a pretty short leash. Like I said above, he was willing to leave Kate behind if it meant leaving safely with Juliet. And even when Kate joined them in the sub, he continuously rejected her attempts to stop Jack. It wasn’t until Juliet intervened that he decided to join in. Likewise, he gave up fighting Jack when Juliet indicated that the best thing to do would be to let Jack proceed. And finally, when Kate urged everybody to go help Jack, Sawyer turned to Juliet for her thoughts on the matter. Everybody seems to be wondering who Kate’s in love with. It may be a moot point, because it seems pretty obvious that Sawyer is head over heels for Juliet (which in and of itself could be a moot point, if she’s dead).

This brings up a legitimate question: What’s more selfish? Preventing your unhappiness or ensuring your happiness no matter the consequences?

And the more I think about it, the more I enjoyed the scene in which Jack spilled his heart out to Sawyer. We rarely see Jack so emotionally vulnerable, and he rarely explicitly expresses his feelings for Kate. It was nice seeing him be honest with himself, and pouring out to his perceived competitor, no less.

KATE’S CHOICE:

Television relationships can be crazy sometimes. Take The Office, for example. For the first few seasons, everybody was all about the Jim/Pam relationship. Now that the characters are actually together and happy, there’s a legion of viewers who literally want their characters to die. We’re in a similar situation here. In the beginning, most people loved the complex Jack/Kate/Sawyer love triangle. Now heading into the series’ sixth and final season, a lot of fans just sit back and annoyingly ask “Still?” whenever this subject is hinted upon. One reader at the EW website says:

I strongly dislike Kate as well, but I think there were multiple points in last night's episode when she could've redeemed herself a bit just by making a choice. Either by not supporting Jack (= not choosing him) or by telling Jack she loved him (when she hesitated before he took off with the bomb). So I'm guessing my dislike will continue into next season.

I’ve stuck up for Kate a fair amount this season, but I think this is a fair argument. What’s the expression? “It’s time to crap or get off the pot”? A bit crude, I know, but I think it fits the bill. They’ve been riding the “Who will Kate choose?” fence for five years now, and as I noted, a lot of people are getting impatient and frustrated.

I find it funny that the person who commented used these exact examples, because I totally expected her to say “no” when he asked if she’s with him (which would have been a first, I believe). Then when she didn’t, and they shared that long stare as he walked away, I expected her to say she loves him (which would be the first time she openly expressed her feelings for one of the guys in front of the other). But neither happened. Nevertheless, Creed notes in his e-mail:

So at this point, with the show progressing to deeper levels of 'good versus evil', small matters like "Who will Kate choose?" become insignificant. Though personally I wish Kate had gone down the whole instead of Juliet, she seems to just cause misery and sadness wherever she goes. I really liked Juliet, even when she got out of that 'I have information you want, and I won't share it" mode. It was nice to see James find happiness past Kate and move on, a shame that either way that is over.

The thing is, even when Kate “chooses,” she doesn’t really. When she first hooked up with Sawyer, it was for convenience (Sawyer was in the cage next door, while Jack was living underwater) and then jealousy (Jack was buddying up with Juliet). And then when she was with Jack during her post-island years, she was sneaking around doing favors for Sawyer. It’s never been a solid decision on her part, and I think the writers are taking a risk if they plan on holding that off until the very last episode.

A lot of people seem to be riding Kate because she essentially forced Sawyer and Juliet into helping her stop Jack, only to end up helping him, which ultimately got Juliet killed. I can see why that might make some sneer at her, but I don’t really question her actions. People have coined this episode a “Game Changer,” and I’m going to use that phrase to explain Kate’s behavior. She and Jack had a philosophical difference. He thought they should use a hydrogen bomb to rewrite history, and she felt they should preserve the timeline. Both would have severe repercussions if they were wrong. So what changed?

Basically, Jack laid it all out on the table. Instead of arguing about fate and destiny, and hurting her with his harsh belief that it is worse to have love and lost than to never have loved at all, he told her how right this felt and how he just knew he was supposed to do this. And then he asked her that seemingly simple question: “Are you with me?” And that was a very powerful and purposeful question. He’s asked her this question in the past, and she’s always said yes (even when she’s initially resisted). And when they got off the island, she made this specific assurance. That question, coming from him, was a real game changer for her. And I think it was perfectly consistent for her character (for better or worse) for her to say yes, despite how strongly she had felt otherwise.

What I find interesting about this threesome is that, in the season two episode “What Kate Did,” Kate reveals that she’s fighting her feelings for Sawyer. Yet I find her far more emotionally guarded around Jack. That photo of Jack and Aaron in her home is very telling. To me, that’s her dream. Perhaps she’s hesitant to openly, fully fall in love with in out of fear that she could lose that dream should things not work out.

As a side note, I think it's somewhat appropriate how when Jack got knocked out, Kate immediately ran to his aid. However, while tending to him, she attempted to rescue Juliet, which required Sawyer's assistance. Unfortunately, they failed. But when Jack woke up, what does he see? What appears to be Kate assisting Sawyer. In actuality, she had run to Jack. Her being by Sawyer's side was happenstance.

To close out the season on a light note, here are two tongue-in-cheek observations (I’ve come across this on various sites, so I don’t have a proper credit): The episode started with Jacob gutting a fish and throwing it on a fire, and ended with him getting gutted by a Pisces and then thrown on the fire. And the fish that Jacob caught was a Red Herring.

I want to genuinely thank everybody who has contributed to this column. Writing the Revisited articles would not have been as fun or successful as it was without all of your e-mails and blog comments. Thanks so much, and continue visiting my blog with some exclusive tidbits on Lost and other shows over the summer (and don’t hesitate to leave your comments there as well!) See you next season!

Read more!

A Case of the.... 24 - Episodes 7-23 & 7-24

That was a pretty risky ending to 24, huh?

I don’t really mind the open ended conclusion, because things typically don’t tie up in a neat little package in exactly 24 hours, but considering that in a lot of ways this was the “make it or break it” season (after a disappointing Day 6), I expected a more explosive, conclusive finale.

As many people have noted, this season kicked off with Jack vs. Tony and after spending much of the day working side by side, it all came full circle. However, as it turned out, Tony WASN’T playing with the bad guys after all. Not completely, anyway. His motivation the entire time hasn’t been for power or money, or even to take down the government he’s grown to resent. Instead, everything he’s done has been to get close enough to the man who orchestrated his wife’s death.

http://primetimepulse.com/2009/05/19/24-episodes-7-23-7-24-review/

Read more!