Lost season 5 part 3

[Werthead]

[quote name='McCloskey' post='1710959' date='Mar 6 2009, 20.04']How do we know they are still in 2007 and not 1977?[/quote]

Because they find the Hydra Station unmanned (we know it's manned in 1977 as the security guards at the start of the episode are talking about keeping an eye on the polar bears, which were kept at the Hydra Station) and because Caesar finds a bunch of the maps that Ben drew in Season 2 and 3 in his office. The office is also in the same state that we saw it in Season 3.

[Eelia]

[quote]She was scheduled to be shipped back to civilization before giving birth, but labour started sooner than predicted.[/quote]

Oh that's right, thanks.

[quote post='1710812' date='Mar 6 2009, 19.25']Well, Charlotte has already told Faraday that someone like him has already warned her not to return to the Island. Whether ot not it does any good, he'll have to do it anyway because he's already done it. As for Faraday learning some new tricks, he may only delude himself into thinking he change her fate; He's not the most dependable of decision makers.[/quote]

Yes, but why do we think one can't change the past? I thought it was only because of Faraday's conviction? So if he chages his mind...

It's just that he was muttering when the others found him how he's not going to tell Charlotte not to come back, and he is still assured there is nothing anyone can do to change the past. So... trying to save her doesn't fit in with that, but him not telling her to come back also doesn't fit in with that because he already knows it happened; whatever he does doesn't make any sense! Well, you are right, unless he completely lost it and then everything makes perfect sense. :P

[Fatuous]

[quote name='elje' post='1711052' date='Mar 6 2009, 16.11']Yes, but why do we think one can't change the past? I thought it was only because of Faraday's conviction? So if he chages his mind...

It's just that he was muttering when the others found him how he's not going to tell Charlotte not to come back, and he is still assured there is nothing anyone can do to change the past. So... trying to save her doesn't fit in with that, but him not telling her to come back also doesn't fit in with that because he already knows it happened; whatever he does doesn't make any sense! Well, you are right, unless he completely lost it and then everything makes perfect sense. :P[/quote]

So far, the proof of an unchangable past is the events in John Locke's life that he had a direct hand in shaping has already happened to him; Richard being there for his birth, the test and so on. He was not able to change any of that but that may be because he didn't want to change them. I understand what you're getting at, that if someone who knew something about the past that they wanted to directly and consciously change, shouldn't they be able to work their Free Will as they want?

Problem 1: Faraday wouldn't be trying to change his past directly, he would be trying to change Charlotte's past which he doesn't know.

Problem 2: There has been a character, Desmond, who possibly can change the past but he's a special case. I'm pretty sure that Ms. Hawking talked Desmond out of marrying Penny during the first time jump of the series in Season 3 not just to get him on the Island but because he can change the past. This was also seen in Desmond's "flash ESP" ability. As far as we know, Faraday isn't as unique as Desmond but we also know that Faraday knows about Desmond's ability.

Problem 3: As we saw in Desmond's attempts at preventing Charlie's death, there are limits to what can be changed even for those who can do it and know which facts to change.

So if all facts remain constant :idea:, Faraday tells someone else that they must get off the Island and never come back and Charlotte thinks that he was talking to her.

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote]So if all facts remain constant , Faraday tells someone else that they must get off the Island and never come back and Charlotte thinks that he was talking to her.[/quote]

Somehow I suspect that Faraday, despite what he's said about not trying to change the past, will attempt to do so by NOT speaking to Charolette yet somehow by trying to not do anything he'll end up doing something anyway...

[oneeye]

It seems like any change will have to happen in the future not the past if faraday is right

but good point on desmond

[Quijote Light]

As far as we know, Aaron and the unnamed boy are the only two children other than Alex born on the island, right? Aaron's brother was Moses. So thats another tie to Egypt. Sorta. I'm really curious to see who that baby is.

[Samalander]

Does anyone else think that Jack sucks in his role as "Leader"? I mean, from the start of the show he's been portrayed as the leader of the survivors but he manges to lose/forsake/abandon most of them over the show. He also seems to mostly care about his close friends. In fact, as far as leaders go, on the show I'd say everyone sucks but John Locke. Jack is reluctant, whimpy, misguided. Ben turns his own people against each other and gets them killed in droves. I'm surprised people still listen to him. Richard Alpert, while wise and reasonable, seems unable to be no. 1 and needs someone to tell him what to do (though he does go behind their backs when he wants to, like giving John info despite Ben's misgivings). Jacob, the supposed Supreme Leader can only barely convey himself to a very limited number of people. The fact the "Others" actually believe he exists and follow the orders of this unseen unknown entity is a mystery to me. As for Penny's father, he's just a mean bully bastard, using his money and power as a club. Sawyer actually showed some nifty leadership skills in the last episode but Locke is probably the best : Knows what to do, willing to sacrifice himself for the welfare of his people, unafraid to act. Sadly, only when people are depending on him does he act this way. On his own, through the show, he was full of doubts and misconceptions. Ironically, on his own, without anyone to lead, Jack actually shines : using his medical skills and reasoning to great effect.

[awesome possum]

Locke has been a terrible leader so far. He keeps asking [i]Ben[/i] for advice. Ben! I wouldn't be surprised if he continues to do so.

[Caligula_K]

[quote name='Samalander' post='1711850' date='Mar 7 2009, 15.25']Does anyone else think that Jack sucks in his role as "Leader"? I mean, from the start of the show he's been portrayed as the leader of the survivors but he manges to lose/forsake/abandon most of them over the show. He also seems to mostly care about his close friends. In fact, as far as leaders go, on the show I'd say everyone sucks but John Locke. Jack is reluctant, whimpy, misguided. Ben turns his own people against each other and gets them killed in droves. I'm surprised people still listen to him. Richard Alpert, while wise and reasonable, seems unable to be no. 1 and needs someone to tell him what to do (though he does go behind their backs when he wants to, like giving John info despite Ben's misgivings). Jacob, the supposed Supreme Leader can only barely convey himself to a very limited number of people. The fact the "Others" actually believe he exists and follow the orders of this unseen unknown entity is a mystery to me. As for Penny's father, he's just a mean bully bastard, using his money and power as a club. Sawyer actually showed some nifty leadership skills in the last episode but Locke is probably the best : Knows what to do, willing to sacrifice himself for the welfare of his people, unafraid to act. Sadly, only when people are depending on him does he act this way. On his own, through the show, he was full of doubts and misconceptions. Ironically, on his own, without anyone to lead, Jack actually shines : using his medical skills and reasoning to great effect.[/quote]

Isn't that the whole point, though? Jack is supposed to have all the qualities of a leader, and everyone looks to him as one; but he's never wanted to be one, and he's actually quite bad at it. I think Matthew Fox said in an interview that his character arc in the first four seasons is essentially about him failing. That's what's made the character more interesting than most heroic main characters on TV. Then again, I'm one of the few people that likes Jack (most of the time anyway), so maybe this is interpreted differently by others.

Oh, and Locke is an awful leader. He tries to play himself up as less autocratic than Jack, but at least Jack doesn't constantly threaten his followers (like Locke does throughout all of season 4, pretty much) or do things like blow up submarines and Dharma stations, or manipulate the castaways into doing what he wants (ie, when he manipulates Sawyer into killing his father). I like Locke, but until season 5 his leadership skills were pretty lacking.

[Slurktan]

[quote name='Brahm_K' post='1711948' date='Mar 7 2009, 18.12']Isn't that the whole point, though? Jack is supposed to have all the qualities of a leader, and everyone looks to him as one; but he's never wanted to be one, and he's actually quite bad at it. I think Matthew Fox said in an interview that his character arc in the first four seasons is essentially about him failing. That's what's made the character more interesting than most heroic main characters on TV. Then again, I'm one of the few people that likes Jack (most of the time anyway), so maybe this is interpreted differently by others.[/quote]

I agree with that. Jack can certainly be annoying but thats kind of the point. He has failed, completely and utterly. At this point in the show Jack is broken. I'm interested in seeing how Kate and the other members of the original castaways compare Jack to the seemingly successful leader in Sawyer.

[Mya Stone]

[quote name='Brahm_K' post='1711948' date='Mar 7 2009, 18.12']Isn't that the whole point, though? Jack is supposed to have all the qualities of a leader, and everyone looks to him as one; but he's never wanted to be one, and he's actually quite bad at it. I think Matthew Fox said in an interview that his character arc in the first four seasons is essentially about him failing. That's what's made the character more interesting than most heroic main characters on TV. Then again, I'm one of the few people that likes Jack (most of the time anyway), so maybe this is interpreted differently by others.

Oh, and Locke is an awful leader. He tries to play himself up as less autocratic than Jack, but at least Jack doesn't constantly threaten his followers (like Locke does throughout all of season 4, pretty much) or do things like blow up submarines and Dharma stations, or manipulate the castaways into doing what he wants (ie, when he manipulates Sawyer into killing his father). I like Locke, but until season 5 his leadership skills were pretty lacking.[/quote]

I happen to like Jack a lot, much to Kal's dismay I'm sure.

And FWIW, Locke was pretty awesome in S1. Even if he was leading people to their deaths and shit. He was at least leading. And being very Yodaesque. It wasn't until late Season 1 - Season 2 and the Hatch that he started going bonkers and making piss poor decisions.

[Werthead]

[quote name='Slurktan' post='1712013' date='Mar 8 2009, 01.26']I agree with that. Jack can certainly be annoying but thats kind of the point. He has failed, completely and utterly. At this point in the show Jack is broken. I'm interested in seeing how Kate and the other members of the original castaways compare Jack to the seemingly successful leader in Sawyer.[/quote]

There's something quite gloriously [i]right[/i] about Jack and Locke totally sucking at leadership and Sawyer being the best leader out of the three of them, and managing it for three years on the trot without apparently having a breakdown, becoming an alcoholic, dying or growing a disturbing beard.

[Mya Stone]

[quote name='Werthead' post='1712035' date='Mar 7 2009, 21.07']There's something quite gloriously [i]right[/i] about Jack and Locke totally sucking at leadership and Sawyer being the best leader out of the three of them, and managing it for three years on the trot without apparently having a breakdown, becoming an alcoholic, dying or growing a disturbing beard.[/quote]

Wait, Wert...tell me you noticed the change in Sawyer's facial hair randomly in last week's eppy. One minute, super dark and thick, the next....light and scattered. It was distracting. (And no, it was not after he shaved for Dharma I'm talking about. I mean during the first few scenes.)

And for a more revelvant post...I agree with your assessment. It's nice to see Sawyer taking charge and kicking ass at it.

[Slurktan]

[quote name='Werthead' post='1712035' date='Mar 7 2009, 21.07']There's something quite gloriously [i]right[/i] about Jack and Locke totally sucking at leadership and Sawyer being the best leader out of the three of them, and managing it for three years on the trot without apparently having a breakdown, becoming an alcoholic, dying or growing a disturbing beard.[/quote]

Well to be fair to the fictional character of Jack, there was significantly more pressure put on him than there is on Sawyer. I mean regular leading issues aside you still got to deal with the personal, and Sawyer gets a nice content Juliet with no distractions, whereas Jack has to fight for the girl he wants with some punk bad boy wannabe that tries to show him up all the time and the rest of the time is steealing waterbottles and getting shot at.

[Samalander]

[quote name='Brahm_K' post='1711948' date='Mar 8 2009, 01.12']Oh, and Locke is an awful leader. He tries to play himself up as less autocratic than Jack, but at least Jack doesn't constantly threaten his followers (like Locke does throughout all of season 4, pretty much) or do things like blow up submarines and Dharma stations, or manipulate the castaways into doing what he wants (ie, when he manipulates Sawyer into killing his father). I like Locke, but until season 5 his leadership skills were pretty lacking.[/quote]
I would say that at the time he manipulated Sawyer into killing his father, and blowing up the submarine he wasn't actually leading anyone. Only when he and Jack split over the whole Ship off the Coast issue, and poeple actually chose to go after him, did he become a leader.
As for listening to Ben... it seems everyone but Hurley have that problem.

[The Man]

I don't actually think any of the leaders are intended to be viewed as particularly competent. Especially the ones with inflated egos, which is pretty much all of them.

[Gertrude]

Me and my friend are split - he's a Jack man and I like Locke. Interestingly enough, he's the spiritual one and I'm the one who likes science.

John was best in season 1 when he was all one with the island and leading by quiet example. His faith was tested hard and he faltered along the way, but he's coming back stronger. His problem is that he knows things about himself and his relationship to the island that makes him 'right' in his mind, but he has really done nothing to explain or even really try to persuade others that he is doing what he thinks best.

When he kills Naomi - that's out of the blue. No one knows what he's been up to or why he feels the way he does. His only explanation is basically trust me, I know what I'm doing. Uh, yeah ... right. You just killed the person who said she's going to rescue us. The only reason anyone even stayed with him is because of Charlie, but that was not Locke's doing. People are now seeing that Locke does have a special relationship with the island, but again - Locke has not been able to lead them there. They had to have 'proof' rather than following on faith. Even his breakthrough with Jack seemed like an afterthought rather than an active attempt at persuasion.

Jack has always had this scary out of control edge to him that keeps me from really liking him. As has been mentioned, they both have potential, but neither one has fully realized it yet. Very interested to see where this relationship goes.

Speaking of relationships - I've been doing a few rewatches of the first few seasons and I really don't like Kate. I didn't mind her so much as the show was airing normally, but seeing the episodes in a condensed time frame I realized what a selfish little twat she is. I do not need to see this frigging triangle/rectangle get played out again. Sawyer - you better leave her alone.

[Isis]

[quote name='Mya Stone' post='1712038' date='Mar 8 2009, 02.10'][b]Wait, Wert...tell me you noticed the change in Sawyer's facial hair randomly in last week's eppy. One minute, super dark and thick, the next....light and scattered. It was distracting.[/b] (And no, it was not after he shaved for Dharma I'm talking about. I mean during the first few scenes.)

And for a more revelvant post...I agree with your assessment. It's nice to see Sawyer taking charge and kicking ass at it.[/quote]You mean kinda like Eowyn in TTT where her hair was up, down, plaited, loose, from scene to scene? Me, I was just wondering why Sawyer had taken to blow-drying his hair straight. :unsure: Doesn't he know I prefer my men to err on the scruffy side?

Much as it is irritating for things to be 'derailed' by the love triangle effect, I think it is pretty true to life. Love and all its lesser variants can throw a spanner in the works in a whole range of situations. It's unrealistic to pretend otherwise. However, I maintain that what Kate really needs (for her own personal growth and for my own satisfaction) is for someone to tell her no, they aren't interested. Otherwise the whole lot of them are essentially just being led around by her muff.

I thought that the 'can't even remember what she looks like' speech from Sawyer was a touch overdone too. It screamed 'trying really hard to convince myself but not really succeeding' to me.

[Fatuous]

[quote name='Werthead' post='1712035' date='Mar 7 2009, 22.07']There's something quite gloriously [i]right[/i] about Jack and Locke totally sucking at leadership and Sawyer being the best leader out of the three of them, and managing it for three years on the trot without apparently having a breakdown, becoming an alcoholic, dying or growing a disturbing beard.[/quote]

James was given a few leadership lessons from Hugo in the areas where he had problems which would have helped John and Jack tremendously.

Suckage at leadership question? It's an interesting topic so I'll give some of my impressions for each "leader":

Jack Shepard, surgeon and reluctant hero/leader. Many of the things that made Jack a natural leader, the ability to make quick decisions as well as to make the hard choices, were the type of things he learned in the operating room; All he had to do was reapply them in a new area. The reluctant part comes into play because Jack didn't want to have to be responsible for all of them or maybe even any of them. He wanted off the Island but once off, he never once thought "Time to get the rest of them off or my name isn't Jack Shepard."; hence the drinking/oxycontin problems. He wasn't even the leader of the Oceanic 6 in the end so I'm not too sure about the "Hero" name myself.

John "Don't tell me what I can't do" Locke, paraplegic gamehead/office drone who desires to be special. A love of games has infused Locke with the natural ability to be a follower which he has shown throughout his life. His first real command action as a leader without prior instructions was when he took his crew back to the Orchid station so he could get off the Island to save them from the time jumps {Season 5}. What he needs to learn is what Mikhail told him about the computer chess game: In order to win, you have to learn to cheat. Coming back to life is a start, I guess.

James Ford >A>K>A a lot of other names, confidence man. His biggest flaw? He doesn't think he special or even worth worth anything. People have never looked to him for guidance but whenever the chance comes up, he always takes the leadership role, by force usuallly. His other flaws are that he has a short temper and he's overly gruff with people who disagree with him or waste his time. A good man but not at all nice.

Ben Linus, evil puppetmaster/genius that seems to have gotten lost from whatever Bond film he came from. Excellent leadership potential but with horrible, secretive motives. Completely amoral in the short term, he could in fact be a good guy in the end if he ever gets over his selfishness.

Richard Alpert, I have no idea what he is. The only thing I can think of is that he gave up a direct leadership role for some reason as he seemed quite capable as a leader in 1954.

Charles Widmore, ruthless corporate type. Seeks to buy his way everywhere and he's overwhelmed with feelings of ownership. He's not necessarily evil but he lacks the natural charisma that even Ben has.

Hugo Reyes, "dude". Loads of charisma and common sense. More of a leader's mascot than real leader now, he has more potential than any of them. He just needs a little confidence. Ok, a lot of confidence.

Horace Goodwin, Mathematician. Worst leader, easily. It's amazing he gets respected at all but I guess it's more out of pity that anything.

[Samalander]

[quote name='Fatuous' post='1712450' date='Mar 8 2009, 21.09']Horace Goodwin, Mathematician. Worst leader, easily. It's amazing he gets respected at all but I guess it's more out of pity that anything.[/quote]
So, if his name is Goodwin, does that mean Juliette helped birth her own future lover?