LOST (spoilers probably)

[Tigerlily]

Anyone watch LOST? The new season starts January 31st.
What do you think is happening? Is this all a dream or are they indeed on the island?

 

[Jive A Turkey]

I forgot about that show. Those guys take long breaks don't they? I'm not sure what's going to happen. I'm lost. I hope that they kill off Jack and Kate.

 

[Tigerlily]

I forgot about that show. Those guys take long breaks don't they? I'm not sure what's going to happen. I'm lost. I hope that they kill off Jack and Kate.

Pffft, yeah! I need a job like theirs!

 

[Jive A Turkey]

Pffft, yeah! I need a job like theirs!

Are they still looking for scabs?

 

[Tigerlily]

Are they still looking for scabs?

No, I think the issues have been resolved. Plus I am not interested in relocating.

 

[Totenkindly]

LOST - Season #4 (spoilers probably)

Wow...!

I forgot how much I missed all of this.

The flash-forwards are an interesting spin. I'm wondering if only Six survived to get off the island, because they keep referring to the Oceanic Six. That's not a good sign for most of the people involved. If there are only six left, we know that group includes Kate, Jack, and Hugo. The other three? Undetermined as of yet.

I found myself really pissed at Jack. He's been spiraling down morally in the last number of episodes, imploding/exploding/lashing out; at the end of last season, he beat up Ben; and now we see in the flash-forwards that his life is ruined and he wants to go back to the island. But I have always respected him even when I found him judgmental, arrogant, hot-headed, and stubborn. He seemed a mottled mix of both good and bad, I could not really "judge" him...

... until he pulled the trigger on Locke. Locke would have been dead if the gun had been loaded. Jack's an ass.

I found Locke true to his personality. He took Jack's action in stride, never raised his voice, never lashed back, just again was the "voice of reason." Typical Locke. Things like that are probably why he seems more INTP than INFP; I doubt an INFP would have emotionally been able to accept how much Jack hated him, but Locke sees the big picture and understands why Jack would have done it... and accepts that and in a sense forgives him by not arguing with him or punishing him. He accepts it as just an inevitable consequence of the way things are, and moves ahead, making the most "reasonable" decision.

Best Moment: When Charley insists he's there, and Hugo says, "Prove it."

 

[kelric]

Wow...!
I forgot how much I missed all of this.

Same here. At the end of last season, I thought that the flash-forwards wouldn't work anywhere near as well as the flashbacks they'd done before, but I enjoyed them in tonight's episode. I was happy to see Hurley play a much larger part - I've always enjoyed his character the most, and although he's definitely struggling, I'm ready for a little focus on something other than the Sawyer-Kate-Jack-Juliet screwy love quadrangle, the whole Ben storyline, or Locke's creepy mysticism. Give me more Hurley, Sun, Jin, and Sayid!

Hurley's anti-baptismal cannonball was the highlight of the episode for me. It sure did take him on a turn for the worse, but it was good seeing a nicely done scene focus on him for once.

 

[cafe]

Hurley's anti-baptismal cannonball was the highlight of the episode for me. It sure did take him on a turn for the worse, but it was good seeing a nicely done scene focus on him for once.

The pessimist in me totally freaked out when I saw that happy scene. Hurley's character isn't really allowed to have unadulterated good happen to him. Happily, the sequence of events wasn't as bad as I feared. I thought Charley's body would be floating on the water when he surfaced.

 

[Ivy]

ME TOO cafe! I thought he was going to see Charley when he opened his eyes underwater.

I actually sympathized with Jack when he pulled the trigger. From his perspective, Locke has actively sabotaged his chances to leave the island multiple times now. I think I'd have a little hostility too.

 

[kelric]

The pessimist in me totally freaked out when I saw that happy scene. Hurley's character isn't really allowed to have unadulterated good happen to him. Happily, the sequence of events wasn't as bad as I feared. I thought Charley's body would be floating on the water when he surfaced.

ME TOO cafe! I thought he was going to see Charley when he opened his eyes underwater.

Ack, I didn't think of that . Talk about morbid! Probably powerful though - maybe a bit too much (I bet it was suggested by at least one of the writers). I agree about Hurley not being allowed to have really good fortune. He's the guy who's decent, a little taken for granted, the one you want to pull for - even though he's probably never going to get satisfaction. One thing he does get is the almost universal friendship and consideration from others - he's just a good guy.

Oops... now it's *really* late - gnight.

 

[cafe]

Jack is getting pretty frayed and starting to act erratically, but I can't blame him either. Locke has acted like a nut job pretty much the whole time. Highly unpredictable and often dangerous.

What bothers me about both of the knuckleheads is that they can't ever discuss anything or compromise, let alone lay out all the information they have and let people make up their own dang minds. Is it really that hard?

 

[Totenkindly]

I actually sympathized with Jack when he pulled the trigger. From his perspective, Locke has actively sabotaged his chances to leave the island multiple times now. I think I'd have a little hostility too.

Ivy IS a J! She IS! She IS!!!!

What bothers me about both of the knuckleheads is that they can't ever discuss anything or compromise, let alone lay out all the information they have and let people make up their own dang minds. Is it really that hard?

That is sort of funny... that two grown men just can't seem to get on the same page, if they would just communicate a little more clearly. (I mean, really: Just actually put all your cards on the table!) Then again, I can see why their personalities just conflict so much and why they see things so differently.

 

[Ivy]

Ivy IS a J! She IS! She IS!!!!

I don't see the connection.

 

[Tigerlily]

I don't see the connection.

Neither do I.

I'd go with Jack. Moving forward seems like a better plan to me given their situation. Nothing ventured, nothing gained and all that good stuff.

 

[Totenkindly]

J = wants to accomplish, reach closure, have a plan and enact it. Movement, not stagnation. Jack is very J. He knows what he wants, he gets mad when he cannot make it happen, and he takes definitive action. It's hard for him to live without closure.

P = Find the right answer, willing to not take definitive action if not enough information is clear, wants to explore and be sure of what is being done before doing it. Locke has taken some definitive steps, but only when he was either led to by revelation (something outside himself), and only what seemed to make sense by signals from his environment. He is not imposing his own personal ends on others or what is going on, he is constantly evaluating and reevaluating and changing what he's doing, and NOT locking himself into a particular end. Locke hates closure.

(Another case in point: Jack hated his father unfairly, drawing conclusion after conclusion about him too early, and missing most of who his father was... "He's evil/awful." Locke gave his father far too much leeway, constantly putting off making a decision about him, giving him chance after chance even when it should have been obvious that a valid conclusion could be drawn. "He's done lots of bad things, but he's good too and I just can't commit yet.")

It would be interesting to see how many self-professed J's side with Jack, and how many P's see more value in Locke's approach.

How many people stayed with Jack and Kate? I couldn't tell, at the end.

 

[Ivy]

J = wants to accomplish, reach closure, have a plan and enact it. Movement, not stagnation. Jack is very J. He knows what he wants, he gets mad when he cannot make it happen, and he takes definitive action. It's hard for him to live without closure.

P = Find the right answer, willing to not take definitive action if not enough information is clear, wants to explore and be sure of what is being done before doing it. Locke has taken some definitive steps, but only when he was either led to by revelation (something outside himself), and only what seemed to make sense by signals from his environment. He is not imposing his own personal ends on others or what is going on, he is constantly evaluating and reevaluating and changing what he's doing, and NOT locking himself into a particular end. Locke hates closure.

(Another case in point: Jack hated his father unfairly, drawing conclusion after conclusion about him too early, and missing most of who his father was... "He's evil/awful." Locke gave his father far too much leeway, constantly putting off making a decision about him, giving him chance after chance even when it should have been obvious that a valid conclusion could be drawn. "He's done lots of bad things, but he's good too and I just can't commit yet.")

It would be interesting to see how many self-professed J's side with Jack, and how many P's see more value in Locke's approach.

How many people stayed with Jack and Kate? I couldn't tell, at the end.

It's not that I "side" with Jack. I kind of think he's a humorless ass most of the time, actually, but I like him when he turns on the deadpan humor. I don't "side" with Locke either- in fact I don't really like either of them. I prefer Sawyer. But in terms of the gun incident, holy hell, they've been stuck on an island for, what, three months? I don't think it's necessarily a J thing to want to get off the island, or to be angry with someone who is actively sabotaging that effort. First he blows up the submarine, then he kills (kills! the thing you're upset with Jack for trying to do to Locke!) Naomi to keep her from contacting the boat which they think can rescue them.

I also wonder why it was so easy for Locke to toss a dagger into Naomi's back when he had to get Sawyer to do his dirty work for him re: his dad.

 

[MacGuffin]

I also wonder why it was so easy for Locke to toss a dagger into Naomi's back when he had to get Sawyer to do his dirty work for him re: his dad.

Cause she was going to let them leave the island. Locke will kill to prevent that. Up till then, all he had to do was blow up a submarine.

 

[Ivy]

Cause she was going to let them leave the island. Locke will kill to prevent that. Up till then, all he had to do was blow up a submarine.

Why wasn't his father enough of a threat to him to kill him as easily as he killed Naomi, though? He couldn't really get off the island but he sure as shit had ruined everything for Locke at every opportunity before.

 

[MacGuffin]

Why wasn't his father enough of a threat to him to kill him as easily as he killed Naomi, though? He couldn't really get off the island but he sure as shit had ruined everything for Locke at every opportunity before.

Yeah, but that's more like revenge - not taking away the life he's built on the island. He's very threatened by that.

 

[Totenkindly]

Cause she was going to let them leave the island. Locke will kill to prevent that. Up till then, all he had to do was blow up a submarine.

I see Jack's animosity as personal and directed; Locke seems to be more goal-oriented that way.

Locke could have killed Jack numerous times (he has certainly been his greatest opponent) but considered it wrong. Naomi was an outsider with malevolent intent (to John). Jack seems to personalize things.

I think a sign to me of Jack's obsession is simply that, after the problems with Ben, being captured by the Others, etc., he suddenly trusts Naomi... just because she offers the possibility of rescue. But if he was being balanced, he would have not trusted her either.

Locke didn't kill his father... because he was his father.
He wanted his father to love him. It was probably the largest wound in his life. If Sawyer had not killed his father, I am betting John couldn't have done it. Too much closure; too personal.

What is really interesting between the two: Locke seems willing to kill for impersonal reasons, not personal ones, while Jack seems willing to kill for personal reasons, not impersonal ones.

Jack hates specific people. Locke doesn't really "hate" people the way Jack does.