TV: Lost - Season 5

[Transformer]

I would guess the dead Locke. The alive “Locke” is almost certainly “Esau” from the first scene - Jack put his father’s shoes on Locke’s real body before the flight.

 

[dranzal]

OMGOSH I just had a revelation!

They DID change the past!

Think back… way back to Season 3… when Hurley, Jin, and Sawyer find a van with remains of 3 people. One was wearing a Dharma jumpsuit that said “Roger - Workman” and Sawyer popped open a beer and called the guy “Skeletor”… REMEMBER THAT?!?

THAT WAS HIMSELF (SAWYER)!

In the last episode Sawyer and Sayid are leaving and quickly grab some jumpsuits to “blend in” before they get away - Sawyer grabs Roger’s jumpsuit!

But since they DIDN’T die in that position (in the van) then they DID change the past. If they had sat at the van and not been noticed then they would have died in that location due to the “energy pocket” explosion. But instead Jack was noticed by the Dharma guys, and the gun fight began, and Sawyer was down near the hole when he lost Juliet when the bomb went off… not in the van.

What do you think???

The reason Roger (Roger Linus–Ben’s daddy) was in that van is that is where Ben left him after he killed him during the “PURGE”.

The jumpsuit Sawyer grabbed was one of Horace’s.

Personally, and I’ll elaborate in another post, I think the bomb doesn’t go off and the final flash we see is our Losties flashing to the present.

This would coincide with dying Jacob saying, “They’re coming.”

 

[dranzal]

This suggestion of yours is particularly insightful in light of the fact that you made it weeks before season five’s finale revealed Jacob to be a Christ figure.

But Aslan rose from the dead; can you really see that happening with Jacob? They already tricked us with a fake resurrection once.

This is an interesting perspective that I need to consider. I felt the opposite about Locke being raised from the dead, and was shocked and mortified to learn that it was a lie forged by an evil being for the execution of his dark purpose.

But if you’re right - and I so hope you are - then maybe there is still hope.

On another forum, they have taken to calling the “dark man” “Anti-Jacob” like “Anti-Christ”. Part of the Anti-Christ mythology is that he will seem to resurrect.

 

[dranzal]

No, the van where Sawyer popped the Beer with “Skeletor” was not in the same location as where Ben killed his father (in the open planes - he sent the bus careening down the hill).

When Juliet set off the bomb Sawyer (wearing Roger’s jumpsuit) was not sitting by the bus - he was down near the hole crying because he had just lost her.

Pretty sure that Ben just left the van there. It was Hurly who sent it careening down the hill after making a terrific monologue about “If we die we die, let’s make our own luck” or something like that.

 

[dranzal]

Like Narnia, I don’t think this is intended to be so overtly biblical/theistic that your average athiest/agnostic can’t go along for the ride.

That said, it is certainly Christological now. Did you hear Richard respond to the code question “What lies in the shadow of the statue?” It was in Latin and translates as “He who will save/protect us all.” Interesting as Jacob lives in the statue.

I have more to add, but my little one is ringing the bell at the dairy farm (wants to nurse–only 2 months old).

 

[dranzal]

I thought it was Jack and Sayid that grabbed the jumpsuites.

Yes, I just watched that scene and it is Jack and Sayid. Jack already had a jumpsuit and says something about Sayid “hiding in plain sight”. Then he grabs Horace’s jumpsuit for Sayid.

 

[dranzal]

The opening scene and closing scene with Jacob also have hints of the Book of Job.

Consider that in Job, Satan sets out to prove that Job is only faithful because he has been very blessed. He implies that man is basically bad but can be “bribed” to be good.

This is similar to the opening dialogue between Anti-Jacob and Jacob.

Anti Jacob: You brought them here. Still trying to prove me wrong.

Jacob: You are wrong.

Anti Jacob: They come, they fight, they destroy, they corrupt. It always ends the same.

Jacob: It only ends once. Everything before that is progress.

not exact quotes

Then, Job spends the majority of the book defending his faithfulness to his friends in light of his apparent “punishments”. Much of it has a “woe is me” tone. Then God questions Job. He basically says, “And just who do you think you are? Where were you when I created everything?”

God loves Job and cherishes his faithfulness, but, like a child has no right to “talk back” to his parent, Job has no right to “talk back” to God. Job’s response to God? “You’re right.”

Compare/contrast that with the scene between Ben and Jacob. Ben whines about his life and finishes with “What about ME???”

Jacob looks at him and replies, “What about you??”

I’m not saying that Ben is supposed to BE Job in the series, just pointing out the similiar tone in the situations.

Jacob is decidedly Christ-like.

Some have taken issue with the fact that Jacob was at the scene of Nadia’s death. I agree with the poster that thought Jacob was there not to ensure Nadia’s death, but to save Sayid.

As Catholics, we believe that God has a PLAN. This plan will come to pass. Period.

As Jacob said to Jack when he gave him the candy bar, “Just needed a little push.”

 

[wjp984]

What I dont understand is that in Ben’s flashbacks, his dad hates Ben since he blames Ben for the death of Ben’s mother. Now with these events Roger realizes how important Ben is to him and is devastated at losing him. This appears to change Roger’s attitude. It just doesnt make sense. Assumedly Ben has to come back and then Roger will continue to treat him bad and forget his birthdays all the time and this just does not make seem to fit.

 

[dranzal]

I think the Roger hating scenes from other seasons were chronologically earlier than the scenes with Ben being shot this season. That would make sense because the young actor playing Ben has become a young teen.

Yeah, we know that Ben lives with the DI people, but, as Richard stated to Kate, he will always be an “other” now that he has been healed. Even with Roger’s apparent change of heart and behavior toward his son, Ben goes on to kill him in the purge.

 

[Dandelion_Wine]

If Flight 815 never happened, then the circumstances that led them to Ajirwa Flight 315 never happened–therefore, they would not make it back to the island to detonate the hydrogen bomb. Therefore, Miles is exactly correct and they are causing what they are trying to prevent.

This is the classic catch-22 in time travel.

Let’s say I go back in time to before I was born. I kill my father. Thus I can’t be born. I can’t be born, I can’t go back in time and kill my father, which means he’s still alive. He’s still alive, I’m born, I go back in time…

That’s why they’re always saying you can’t change anything. It would create a paradox.

Then you come to the “Back In The Future” philosophy that there are many different threads in time so you’re just chaning the direction. But then remember when Marty starts to fade

 

[Joe_5859]

Roger “Workman” was Ben’s dad. I think the skeleton in the van, is from when Ben kills his dad in the van, but leaves him there. Richard asks if Ben wants them to go get him and put him with the others, but Ben says no leave him.

That would be my thought as well.

I really don’t think Sawyer is dead just yet. The majority of the principal cast was right there when the bomb went off. I don’t think they’ll all be dead at the start of the next season, even if it is the final season.

More likely to me is that the bomb serves as the catalyst to finally send them back to the present time. But I guess we have 8 months to discuss it before we know for sure.

I have noticed, though, that there’s lot’s of use of the “fade to white” to signify changes. When the island moved and whenever they “time-jumped”, it would fade to white. The same thing happened when the bomb went off.

 

[Appleby]

I quit watching Lost about the middle of Season 3 as I became convinced that they had no idea in the world where they were going with it, and when they dragged in Time Travel my theory was proved.

The original premise was exciting and even spooky at times, but when they opened up the Time Travel Box (the old term for this kind of nonsense is But Little Did He Know), I decided while I would read about it, I was not going to follow it anymore.

I wish someone would have knocked the Frat Boys in the head and confined the story to the Dharma Initiative storyline. Throwing in everything in the junkyard in hopes something would stick just wore me out.

 

[JuliaT]

*"I quit watching Lost about the middle of Season 3 as I became convinced that they had no idea in the world where they were going with it, and when they dragged in Time Travel my theory was proved.

The original premise was exciting and even spooky at times, but when they opened up the Time Travel Box (the old term for this kind of nonsense is But Little Did He Know), I decided while I would read about it, I was not going to follow it anymore.

I wish someone would have knocked the Frat Boys in the head and confined the story to the Dharma Initiative storyline. Throwing in everything in the junkyard in hopes something would stick just wore me out."*

But that’s what makes it so fun!

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

That would be my thought as well.

I really don’t think Sawyer is dead just yet. The majority of the principal cast was right there when the bomb went off. I don’t think they’ll all be dead at the start of the next season, even if it is the final season.

More likely to me is that the bomb serves as the catalyst to finally send them back to the present time. But I guess we have 8 months to discuss it before we know for sure.

I have noticed, though, that there’s lot’s of use of the “fade to white” to signify changes. When the island moved and whenever they “time-jumped”, it would fade to white. The same thing happened when the bomb went off.

I think you are absolutely right. Directly before “Esau” kicked Jacob into the fire, which was right after Ben stabbed him repeatedly in the chest, Jacob muttered something. “Esau”/“Locke” then told him he couldn’t hear him, and Jacob repeated, "They’re…coming."

I think he must have been referring to the imminent temporal arrival of Sawyer, Hurley, Jin, Jack, Kate, etc. to the present.

I quit watching Lost about the middle of Season 3 as I became convinced that they had no idea in the world where they were going with it, and when they dragged in Time Travel my theory was proved.

While it was true that during Season Two they didn’t know where they were going with it because ABC executives hadn’t given them an end date, they did receive one during the third season (the whole 2008-2010 mini-seasons timetable) and therefore have been planning ahead since that time, no matter what you say.

I find it particularly and deliciously ironic that you try to use time travel to prove your point when it actually refutes it.

Why? Because they foreshadowed it numerous times in the series and slowly introduced it.

In the first draft for “Solitary” in the first season, there was a line of dialogue in which Sayid asked Rousseau what she and her team had been researching in this area. She apparently had responded “Time,” but ABC wanted LOST’s producers to remove anything that smacked of science fiction this early in the series.

Then there was the way Desmond’s consciousness seemed to travel back through time for a short period of time when the sky lit up (just like it did after the wheel turn) after he turned the hatch key at the end of season two.

Then in season four, after flying to the freighter for the first time, Desmond’s consciousness began to experience dangerous temporal shifts. This was the episode when he would erratically travel between 2004 and 1996 unwillingly.

THEN and ONLY then, in this fully foreshadowed context, was full-fledged time travel introduced in the beginning of season five.

Furthermore, time travel fits in extremely well with the recurring theme on LOST of fatalism vs. freedom. The whole “Can you change the future if you wanted?” question is a good opportunity to explore that issue further.

Because of the fact, then, that time travel on LOST was foreshadowed constantly and also is thematically a perfect fit, I can conclude only that you are wrong.

Let’s be honest. You should have just said, “I don’t like time travel and wish they hadn’t brought it onto the show.”

 

[Appleby]

Thank you for that patronizing examination of what I said, and the conclusion that in fact I meant something else.

I guess that means there is no need for me to have any original thoughts anymore. If anyone wants to know what I think, they can ask you.

 

[AmberDale]

I think the directors did know where they were going with the show. They only intended on 5 seasons, period. Whether it was a hit or not, they would only do 5 (but if it failed then obviously less). Unfortunately with the strike, they had to split season 5 into 5 and 6 (thus giving us shorter seasons).

It kind of looks like they don’t know what’s going on. I suppose I have the advantage of watching seasons 1-3 all on DVD and then watch 1/2 of season 4 on the ABC website to catch up. It all made sense watching back to back like that.

 

[dranzal]

It is my understanding that they knew their overall story “arc” from the very beginning, but had to invent filler stuff when ABC wouldn’t give them an end date. They knew they didn’t intend for it to last for an indefinite amount of time, but couldn’t really plan without knowing the end date.

 

[Lurgid]

Furthermore, time travel fits in extremely well with the recurring theme on LOST of fatalism vs. freedom. The whole “Can you change the future if you wanted?” question is a good opportunity to explore that issue further.

I like this idea and am of the camp that Jacob and “Esau” don’t represent good and evil but rather destiny and free will, which was also the real dichotomy between Jack the “Man of Science” and Locke the “Man of Faith.”

 

[zerocrossing]

Dumb question here (which I was thinking about as I fell asleep last night INSTEAD of praying AARGH)

If Flight 815 never happened, then the circumstances that led them to Ajirwa Flight 315 never happened–therefore, they would not make it back to the island to detonate the hydrogen bomb. Therefore, Miles is exactly correct and they are causing what they are trying to prevent.

Actually, it’s more complicated than that.

If 815 never made it to the island then NONE of the events of which they were a part ever happened. Richard never met Locke in 1954. Faraday was never shot by his mother in 1977. Ben was never shot by Sayid and so was never healed by the island and so may never have become a part of the Others and so may never have become leader of the Others.

If 815 never made it to the island, it’s likely that the hydrogen bomb would have continued to leak radiation and would have killed Richard’s group - which in turn might have made the island uninhabitable for the Dharma Initiative - which in turn might have prevented the Incident from ever happening.

In other words, without 815, we potentially have an infinite regress - or at least a regress dating back to 1954.

How Jacob and “Esau” figure in to the dynamic is not entirely known at this time. Even without 815, either one of them could presumably have mitigated the effects of the radiation poisoning and Dharma may still have drilled its way into electromagnetic catastrophe.

The existence of Jacob and “Esau” creates a variable that the regress cannot fully account for. So we cannot say for certain whether the Incident would or would not have happened. But if 815 never landed, I find it unlikely that the explosion of the hydrogen bomb would have caused the Incident.

Now I do think that if 815 DID crash, it is possible that the explosion of the hydrogen bomb could have been a factor in the creation of the Incident.

Does this make sense? (I mean, in a science-fictiony sort of way - not in terms of the real world, of course).

 

[zerocrossing]

But for some reason, the Jacob/Christ parallels don’t annoy me. Maybe because Jacob does not seem like a mere human, as Locke did. With Locke, I thought they were saying that Jesus created his own hype, the way people sometimes will say. Jacob at this point seems more like a character that is working toward God’s perfection than Locke ever did.

I was baffled, but never really annoyed, by Locke seeming to come back from the dead. I assumed that the island raised him (just as Jesus raised Lazarus), not that he raised himself. So I never saw it as a parallel to Christ. Also, Carlton Cuse is a practicing Catholic, so I trusted that while we may not have seen where the plot was going, it would not ultimately have turned Christ into a mere man.

As it turns out, the plot shows that it was Locke (not Jesus) who was creating his own hype - egged on by the “Esau” character, who later assumed Locke’s identity.