I am writing from Interstate I-91, on Bolt Bus, a bus line run by Greyhound and Peter Pan. My ticket cost me $15.00, I am sitting in a very comfortable seat, my laptop is plugged in, and the Bolt wi-fi has worked without a glitch since I boarded at 34th and 8th in Manhattan. First thing I noticed when I came on board was the "new bus" aroma. Probably the leather seats. This bus is probably still in its first week of service. There are plugs in the seat backs of about half of the seats. Was able to switch my seat when I realized that I had initially chosen a seat that did not have one.
I came down to New York on Friday morning on Acela Express. Had tickets to a couple of Mets games at Shea, so made my plans accordingly. My ticket on Amtrak cost $102. No wi-fi and the scheduled 3 hour 30 minute trip took about 3 hours 50 minutes. This bus is scheduled to arrive 4 hours after our 11:00 AM departure. As I mentioned, my ticket cost $15, but there were $10, and $1 seats available. Lovin' this trip so far. And those of you who know me well know I don't spend much time raving about bus trips. In fact, normally I won't even take one.
This could be the best option for low cost travel to and from the major eastern cities. Bolt serves New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and Washington D.C. The trip from Manhattan to Boston South Station is non-stop. Seems I have a new option for my frequent travel between New York and Boston. If you have the need to travel in the megalopolis, I recommend it. So far, so good.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Friday, May 11, 2007
O Yeah!
Credit goes to my friend Nicole for the inspiration for the title of this post. Twice Thursday I sent her a text message about Lost. First one posed the following question.
Me: You watched Lost yet?
Her: O Yeah!
Second Message:
Me: Wasn't it amazing?
Her: O Yeah!
I think that pretty much sums up everyone's opinion about the episode "The Man Behind the Cutain". Really quite amazing what they pulled off in this episode. They even managed to, in retrospect, make the "Hurley Drives a Car" episode seem relevant, which may have been the writers' greatest feat.
But, I digress.
First off, I loved getting a back story on Benjamin Linus. He has become too important a character, as just an incredible villain, that a back story could only add to the depth of his nature. Going in, I wondered would it make him seem more or less evil? Would he be painted sympathetically or would his villainy be shown to be more dastardly.
Well, I think that the obvious answer to the first question is that seeing his back story showed him to be more evil than we might have imagined. I don't know about you, but I was starting to wonder whether he was truly evil or just "mis-understood." The writers have done a masterful job lately sewing those doubts into the viewers' heads. (And I guess some of those doubts remain.) But seeing him murder his father in cold blood and be complicit (at least) in the mass murder of the Dharma Initiative population pretty much erases those doubts. At least for me. Then he goes and lures John Locke to said mass grave and, after again insulting John's intelligence. puts a slug in his chest. Not the actions of a nice man. (Understatement of the day.) But, let me ask, knowing what he knows about the island's powers, and John's communion with the island; if he really wanted to kill Locke, wouldn't he have put more than one bullet in him? Think about that and get back to me. (My two cents: Expect Locke back.)
So, what was it about his past that made him so evil? Let's break down the back story a little, shall we? First off, I loved the opening scene that made it appear to us viewers (we viewers?) that Ben was being born on the island deep in the jungle. But as Ben's parents ran for help, they quickly emerged onto a busy road, apparently 32 miles from Portland. I figure that this is Portland, Oregon. One, I've been to Oregon twice and that forest that Ben was born in looked damn familiar, and two, Ben, Richard, and Ethan lured Juliette to the island from Miami, through Oregon, to the island. Perhaps the Dharma inititiative was based out of Portland, and later Ben's group used Portland as a mainland base as well. Note that Ben's mom died seven months into her pregnancy with Ben. Isn't that around the same time period in a pregnancy that women on the island run into problems?
Next we saw a very shy, quiet Ben Linus and his father Roger having disembarked from the submarine and being welcomed to the island by Mr. Goodspeed who represents the Dharma Initiative. I'd like to comment on the casting of Harry Potter as young Ben Linus. I loved it. Now we know why everyone on the islands has amazing magic powers, the island is really wizard school. Interesting details of the friendship between young Ben and Annie. Annie is super sweet and they seem to have a genuine bond. Knowing that few things are thrown in to Lost, I assume we will see her again at some point. How I do not know.
As Ben's father sinks into alcoholism and continues to blame his son for the death of his beloved Emily, Ben's like gets more and more miserable. When he starts seeing visions of his mom, he runs away to find her in the jungle. She tells him it is not time and that he must be patient. I think this is more fodder for the island being somehow connected to the afterworld. He wants to join her, but she say it is not time yet. Was she referring to him joining her in the afterworld, but not anytime soon? The same type of patience is required of Ben when he asks Richard to take him away from Dharma and back to Richard's people.
Then we get the purge. All those dead Dharma folks, including Ben's dad, who is killed with poison gas, by a very calm, cold, and calculating Ben, who comfortably puts on his gas mask, watches his dad die, and proceeds back to the Dharma camp where the others wait for him. Was his friend Annie killed in the purge too? Like I said above, I doubt it. Ben probably arranged to have her saved if she was still around. Ben has proven to Richard's hostiles, much the way he challenged Locke to, if he wanted to join them in the present.
One point on the scene in the cabin where we met Jacob. Michael Emerson's acting is just so good. I loved how he interacted with Jacob. Totally convincing. He brings so much subtlety and creepiness to his portrayal of everyone's favorite villian.
OK: Two more points on this scene. Did you see Jacob when you went back and watched it in sl0-mo? Looked a lot like Locke with hair to me. Hmmm.
What was that ashy substance that Locke was looking at on his way to the cabin? My guess: The residue of the smoke monster, who is clearly Jacob in another form. In other words Locke is the smoke monster. Cool, eh?
The side plot involving Naomi, and Jack and Juliet got interesting too. Clearly, things are coming together for a "crash survivors" vs. the "others" battle on the beach to end the season, reminiscent of the brilliant first season finale. Will this "Mother" of all battles be interrupted by a certain act of nature, which if you think of the time line, that is about to affect the Indian Ocean? Hmmm.
Me: You watched Lost yet?
Her: O Yeah!
Second Message:
Me: Wasn't it amazing?
Her: O Yeah!
I think that pretty much sums up everyone's opinion about the episode "The Man Behind the Cutain". Really quite amazing what they pulled off in this episode. They even managed to, in retrospect, make the "Hurley Drives a Car" episode seem relevant, which may have been the writers' greatest feat.
But, I digress.
First off, I loved getting a back story on Benjamin Linus. He has become too important a character, as just an incredible villain, that a back story could only add to the depth of his nature. Going in, I wondered would it make him seem more or less evil? Would he be painted sympathetically or would his villainy be shown to be more dastardly.
Well, I think that the obvious answer to the first question is that seeing his back story showed him to be more evil than we might have imagined. I don't know about you, but I was starting to wonder whether he was truly evil or just "mis-understood." The writers have done a masterful job lately sewing those doubts into the viewers' heads. (And I guess some of those doubts remain.) But seeing him murder his father in cold blood and be complicit (at least) in the mass murder of the Dharma Initiative population pretty much erases those doubts. At least for me. Then he goes and lures John Locke to said mass grave and, after again insulting John's intelligence. puts a slug in his chest. Not the actions of a nice man. (Understatement of the day.) But, let me ask, knowing what he knows about the island's powers, and John's communion with the island; if he really wanted to kill Locke, wouldn't he have put more than one bullet in him? Think about that and get back to me. (My two cents: Expect Locke back.)
So, what was it about his past that made him so evil? Let's break down the back story a little, shall we? First off, I loved the opening scene that made it appear to us viewers (we viewers?) that Ben was being born on the island deep in the jungle. But as Ben's parents ran for help, they quickly emerged onto a busy road, apparently 32 miles from Portland. I figure that this is Portland, Oregon. One, I've been to Oregon twice and that forest that Ben was born in looked damn familiar, and two, Ben, Richard, and Ethan lured Juliette to the island from Miami, through Oregon, to the island. Perhaps the Dharma inititiative was based out of Portland, and later Ben's group used Portland as a mainland base as well. Note that Ben's mom died seven months into her pregnancy with Ben. Isn't that around the same time period in a pregnancy that women on the island run into problems?
Next we saw a very shy, quiet Ben Linus and his father Roger having disembarked from the submarine and being welcomed to the island by Mr. Goodspeed who represents the Dharma Initiative. I'd like to comment on the casting of Harry Potter as young Ben Linus. I loved it. Now we know why everyone on the islands has amazing magic powers, the island is really wizard school. Interesting details of the friendship between young Ben and Annie. Annie is super sweet and they seem to have a genuine bond. Knowing that few things are thrown in to Lost, I assume we will see her again at some point. How I do not know.
As Ben's father sinks into alcoholism and continues to blame his son for the death of his beloved Emily, Ben's like gets more and more miserable. When he starts seeing visions of his mom, he runs away to find her in the jungle. She tells him it is not time and that he must be patient. I think this is more fodder for the island being somehow connected to the afterworld. He wants to join her, but she say it is not time yet. Was she referring to him joining her in the afterworld, but not anytime soon? The same type of patience is required of Ben when he asks Richard to take him away from Dharma and back to Richard's people.
Then we get the purge. All those dead Dharma folks, including Ben's dad, who is killed with poison gas, by a very calm, cold, and calculating Ben, who comfortably puts on his gas mask, watches his dad die, and proceeds back to the Dharma camp where the others wait for him. Was his friend Annie killed in the purge too? Like I said above, I doubt it. Ben probably arranged to have her saved if she was still around. Ben has proven to Richard's hostiles, much the way he challenged Locke to, if he wanted to join them in the present.
One point on the scene in the cabin where we met Jacob. Michael Emerson's acting is just so good. I loved how he interacted with Jacob. Totally convincing. He brings so much subtlety and creepiness to his portrayal of everyone's favorite villian.
OK: Two more points on this scene. Did you see Jacob when you went back and watched it in sl0-mo? Looked a lot like Locke with hair to me. Hmmm.
What was that ashy substance that Locke was looking at on his way to the cabin? My guess: The residue of the smoke monster, who is clearly Jacob in another form. In other words Locke is the smoke monster. Cool, eh?
The side plot involving Naomi, and Jack and Juliet got interesting too. Clearly, things are coming together for a "crash survivors" vs. the "others" battle on the beach to end the season, reminiscent of the brilliant first season finale. Will this "Mother" of all battles be interrupted by a certain act of nature, which if you think of the time line, that is about to affect the Indian Ocean? Hmmm.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
3 More Years!
ABC announced the other day that they would continue Lost for three more 16 episode seasons. I had mixed emotions when I first heard this but having read about the plan, and thought about it, I think a good decision has been reached.
To start, I was hoping that they would do two more seasons and then wrap it up. I thought that was about as long as they could sustain the show at a high level and be within a time frame that ABC would be happy with revenue wise. So, when I originally heard that there would be three more seasons, I was a little worried. But, by limiting the seasons to 16 new episodes, that will be shown in consecutive weeks, I think they have found the right balance. My hope is that the producers will make every effort to present 16 great episodes every seasons, no throwaways. For example, who among us could have lived without this year's two throwaway episodes, "Hurley Finds a Car" and "Nikki and Paulo Build a Sand Castle"? Answer: All of us.
So the questions we are left with are, how are they going to keep things going for three more seasons and how will they resolve all of the mysteries (too many to count) they have thrown out there at us? After watching the last 4 or 5 episodes, I have this to say. I have complete faith in the shows writers, producers, and creators, to provide us with 3 more great seasons that will keep us in inevitable suspense as they unfold and that we will remember long after the series final in May of 2010. (By the way, party at my house that night. If you are reading this, you are invited. Will let you know the details as we get a little closer, but please save the date.)
Why do I have such faith? Well, I guess its because the show has been so great for the first three seasons, and there is so much to build on. The key in my opinion to a successful series like Lost, is the strength of the characters. No matter how good a concept is for a show, a lack of interesting, diverse characters that drive the drama would still manage to sink it. Lost has more than its share of fantastic characters. There are plenty who have been on the show from episode 1, but the genius of the casting and writing is how they have brought new characters in. (with the obvious exception of Nikki and Paulo). Think about how much Mr. Eko added to the show. And what about Ben Linus and Juliette? Apparently Ben was not supposed to be a recurring character and was to be limited to only 3 episodes. The writers saw what they had with him though and smartly kept him on and developed him. Can you imagine Lost without him? And Juliette has added a lot to the show too. Who among is not intrigued by the mystery of her allegiance and how it will play out?
So, in summary, I think there are enough mysteries to be solved and great characters to develop to keep the show going strong until May 2010. I really hope my faith is not mis-placed.
To start, I was hoping that they would do two more seasons and then wrap it up. I thought that was about as long as they could sustain the show at a high level and be within a time frame that ABC would be happy with revenue wise. So, when I originally heard that there would be three more seasons, I was a little worried. But, by limiting the seasons to 16 new episodes, that will be shown in consecutive weeks, I think they have found the right balance. My hope is that the producers will make every effort to present 16 great episodes every seasons, no throwaways. For example, who among us could have lived without this year's two throwaway episodes, "Hurley Finds a Car" and "Nikki and Paulo Build a Sand Castle"? Answer: All of us.
So the questions we are left with are, how are they going to keep things going for three more seasons and how will they resolve all of the mysteries (too many to count) they have thrown out there at us? After watching the last 4 or 5 episodes, I have this to say. I have complete faith in the shows writers, producers, and creators, to provide us with 3 more great seasons that will keep us in inevitable suspense as they unfold and that we will remember long after the series final in May of 2010. (By the way, party at my house that night. If you are reading this, you are invited. Will let you know the details as we get a little closer, but please save the date.)
Why do I have such faith? Well, I guess its because the show has been so great for the first three seasons, and there is so much to build on. The key in my opinion to a successful series like Lost, is the strength of the characters. No matter how good a concept is for a show, a lack of interesting, diverse characters that drive the drama would still manage to sink it. Lost has more than its share of fantastic characters. There are plenty who have been on the show from episode 1, but the genius of the casting and writing is how they have brought new characters in. (with the obvious exception of Nikki and Paulo). Think about how much Mr. Eko added to the show. And what about Ben Linus and Juliette? Apparently Ben was not supposed to be a recurring character and was to be limited to only 3 episodes. The writers saw what they had with him though and smartly kept him on and developed him. Can you imagine Lost without him? And Juliette has added a lot to the show too. Who among is not intrigued by the mystery of her allegiance and how it will play out?
So, in summary, I think there are enough mysteries to be solved and great characters to develop to keep the show going strong until May 2010. I really hope my faith is not mis-placed.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
You're Welcome
I got off the train this morning at Hunterspoint Avenue in Long Island City. I have been taking the train there recently to break up the monotony of my commute and to save a few minutes. When I was getting off the train, I noticed that there was a huge gap that I had to hop over. Because, I am a nice guy I turned to the gentleman (I use the term loosely) behind me and said, "Be careful there is a huge gap here." He said "Thanks, I appreciate it." Or so I thought he might. What he actually did was give me a blank stare and no verbal acknowledgment. Pissed me off. Maybe I am being petty, but I thought I was being helpful, and a little acknowledgment would have gone a long way.
So Mr. Grumpy Train Commuter (that's his name, I saw it on his corporate ID card he had around his neck) I have just a couple of more things to say to you.
1. I am glad you did not fall in the gap, and
2. BITE ME!
So Mr. Grumpy Train Commuter (that's his name, I saw it on his corporate ID card he had around his neck) I have just a couple of more things to say to you.
1. I am glad you did not fall in the gap, and
2. BITE ME!
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Hello Again
Sorry to all of my loyal readers that I have dropped the ball on writing new posts lately. There has been so much going on that I didn't even know where to start, or what to really write about. When considering what to write about the Imus situation, I heard the voice of an "msn.com headline" warning me to steer clear of certain controversial topics in my blog if I ever wanted to work again. Don't worry, though, I won't steer clear of all controversial topics obviously, but I thought the Imus issue might be a good one to sit out, since my analysis clearly could have been tainted by the fact that I woke up and listened to the show on and off for the last 18 years or so.
This week, clearly the main news story is the shooting deaths that occurred at Virginia Tech. Since you have already surely read and watched a lot about the story, I will not re-cap the facts. What I will do, is take the opportunity this platform affords me to say that the people of the United States of America need to do something about its gun laws. It is just way to easy in many states, to just walk into a store and buy a lethal weapon, much like the shooter in this case did. One of the best ways to start making a dent in the amount of guns around and in use would be to begin to cut into the lobbying power of the National Rifle Association. For how long have they had the political lobbying power to scare everyone into not calling for gun control? They are so out of control, defending rights that go so far beyond what many reasonable people, gun owners and non-gun owners alike, could ever feel are protected by the Constitution, specifically the Second Amendment.
To demonstrate a little about why I think the N.R.A is out of control, I am including this link to a story about an "Outdoor Sports" writer and N.R.A member who dared wander off the N.R.A. reservation on one issue and how they came down on him like a ton of bricks. He wrote his first column for "Outdoor Life" in 1962. Here is an article from the Washington Post about what happened to him.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/23/AR2007022301709.html
Here is the column from the Editor-In-Chief of "Outdoor Life" magazine describing how Zumbo and the magazine parted ways after approximately 45 years.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/23/AR2007022301709.html
There is a Presidential election coming up. Those who want to avoid more campus shootings and the gun murders and gun crime should force the issue into the forefront as the campaigns continue.
The hypocrisy of the N.R.A can also be seen in the fact that they like to quote only the second half of their hallowed Second Amendment. You'll see it quoted a lot like this: "...the right of the people to bear arms, shall not be infringed."
In the interest of fairness, let's take a look at the amendment in full, eh?
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Why do they not quote the amendment in full?
This week, clearly the main news story is the shooting deaths that occurred at Virginia Tech. Since you have already surely read and watched a lot about the story, I will not re-cap the facts. What I will do, is take the opportunity this platform affords me to say that the people of the United States of America need to do something about its gun laws. It is just way to easy in many states, to just walk into a store and buy a lethal weapon, much like the shooter in this case did. One of the best ways to start making a dent in the amount of guns around and in use would be to begin to cut into the lobbying power of the National Rifle Association. For how long have they had the political lobbying power to scare everyone into not calling for gun control? They are so out of control, defending rights that go so far beyond what many reasonable people, gun owners and non-gun owners alike, could ever feel are protected by the Constitution, specifically the Second Amendment.
To demonstrate a little about why I think the N.R.A is out of control, I am including this link to a story about an "Outdoor Sports" writer and N.R.A member who dared wander off the N.R.A. reservation on one issue and how they came down on him like a ton of bricks. He wrote his first column for "Outdoor Life" in 1962. Here is an article from the Washington Post about what happened to him.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/23/AR2007022301709.html
Here is the column from the Editor-In-Chief of "Outdoor Life" magazine describing how Zumbo and the magazine parted ways after approximately 45 years.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/23/AR2007022301709.html
There is a Presidential election coming up. Those who want to avoid more campus shootings and the gun murders and gun crime should force the issue into the forefront as the campaigns continue.
The hypocrisy of the N.R.A can also be seen in the fact that they like to quote only the second half of their hallowed Second Amendment. You'll see it quoted a lot like this: "...the right of the people to bear arms, shall not be infringed."
In the interest of fairness, let's take a look at the amendment in full, eh?
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Why do they not quote the amendment in full?
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Creepy and Interesting...
...but in the end a tad bit disappointing.
When it became apparent last night that the episode was going to focus on Nikki (and Paulo) my expectations fell from the sky like a Oceanic flight. I could not possibly care any less about these two losers and the last thing I wanted was an episode focusing on them. Then not only do we find out that they are annoying, but they are also cold-blooded killers. Great. Next time I hit turbulence on a flight I am going to look around me and guess how many people on the plane have committed murder. I mean, look at Oceanic 815. Sawyer, Kate, Anna Lucia, and Nikki and Paulo, all could be convicted of first degree murder. And Mr. Eko wasn't afraid to spill his enemies' blood either now, was he? Anyone I am leaving out? I don't think Jin ever killed anyone, although he certainly came pretty close. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Anyway, the episode was a lot better than I though it was going to be. It had its problems though. First off, it did basically nothing to advance any of the story lines we are all following. Secondly, it was not terribly original in that everyone from Shakespeare to Edgar Allan Poe, and more have written episodes with similar themes. (I've never actually read any Bill Shakespeare, but I am guessing he wrote stuff that explored similar themes. Especially in the comedies.)
But, as an hour of television, it was good. I walked away from the TV feeling appropriately creeped out, wondering what more they might do with the characters, (hopefully nothing) and enjoying the flashback scenes that integrated Nikki and Paulo into the crash scene and seeing Ben and Juliette in the Pearl Station discussing their plan to have Jack so Ben's surgery. I thought Billy Dee Williams cameo was a little weak. Also, the way they weaved Nikki's life as an actress, being shot on the set and coming back to life served its allegorical purpose quite well.
News aside: Apparently this episode set another all-time record for Lost viewership with 11.5 million viewers tuned in. I hope that the downward trend in ratings does not cause the network to panic. I think that further netword intervention could really kill the show. Instead, I think, that for the integrity of the show, the producers should probably do just one more season. Get through this season and spend next year writing kick-ass episodes and wrapping things up. All but the shows most hardcore fans have some level of frustration with the show, and knowing that things were heading towards resolution would help everyone involved (with the exception of all the actors and crew).
That's all folks. Here's hoping next week's episode is better AND advances the plot. I want to see Jack and Locke going at each other the first time they have chance to speak about the whole "submarine episode." Will Jack be more pissed off that he can't go home or that his chances of getting it on with Juliette took a bit of a hit? Tune in to find out. Point your browser here afterwards for the my innapropriate commentary. :)
Thanks for reading everyone. Talk to you soon.
When it became apparent last night that the episode was going to focus on Nikki (and Paulo) my expectations fell from the sky like a Oceanic flight. I could not possibly care any less about these two losers and the last thing I wanted was an episode focusing on them. Then not only do we find out that they are annoying, but they are also cold-blooded killers. Great. Next time I hit turbulence on a flight I am going to look around me and guess how many people on the plane have committed murder. I mean, look at Oceanic 815. Sawyer, Kate, Anna Lucia, and Nikki and Paulo, all could be convicted of first degree murder. And Mr. Eko wasn't afraid to spill his enemies' blood either now, was he? Anyone I am leaving out? I don't think Jin ever killed anyone, although he certainly came pretty close. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Anyway, the episode was a lot better than I though it was going to be. It had its problems though. First off, it did basically nothing to advance any of the story lines we are all following. Secondly, it was not terribly original in that everyone from Shakespeare to Edgar Allan Poe, and more have written episodes with similar themes. (I've never actually read any Bill Shakespeare, but I am guessing he wrote stuff that explored similar themes. Especially in the comedies.)
But, as an hour of television, it was good. I walked away from the TV feeling appropriately creeped out, wondering what more they might do with the characters, (hopefully nothing) and enjoying the flashback scenes that integrated Nikki and Paulo into the crash scene and seeing Ben and Juliette in the Pearl Station discussing their plan to have Jack so Ben's surgery. I thought Billy Dee Williams cameo was a little weak. Also, the way they weaved Nikki's life as an actress, being shot on the set and coming back to life served its allegorical purpose quite well.
News aside: Apparently this episode set another all-time record for Lost viewership with 11.5 million viewers tuned in. I hope that the downward trend in ratings does not cause the network to panic. I think that further netword intervention could really kill the show. Instead, I think, that for the integrity of the show, the producers should probably do just one more season. Get through this season and spend next year writing kick-ass episodes and wrapping things up. All but the shows most hardcore fans have some level of frustration with the show, and knowing that things were heading towards resolution would help everyone involved (with the exception of all the actors and crew).
That's all folks. Here's hoping next week's episode is better AND advances the plot. I want to see Jack and Locke going at each other the first time they have chance to speak about the whole "submarine episode." Will Jack be more pissed off that he can't go home or that his chances of getting it on with Juliette took a bit of a hit? Tune in to find out. Point your browser here afterwards for the my innapropriate commentary. :)
Thanks for reading everyone. Talk to you soon.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
John! What Were You Thinking?
Oh John, what the hell did you do that for? I knew something was up with you, but did you have to go and blow up the submarine? Jack was about to get lucky in a navy bunk with Juliette, the blonde bombshell AND get to go home. That is called leaving the island in style.
What a great episode of "Lost" we were treated to last Wednesday. I was truly on the edge of my seat for most of the episode. Just awesome. But sickening in some ways too. Can you imagine how Jack is going to look at John Locke from now on? Ten minutes from hopping on the submarine to freedom (and get lucky) and his friendly nemesis blows the thing up. Ouch. That is not going to help these two strong-willed alpha males make nice after their earlier disagreements. In fact I think it MIGHT even make things more difficult. Ya know? Where was the spirit of the late Boone to talk some sense into Locke.
Things we learned this week:
1. How John Locke became paralyzed: "I'm a con artist, not a murderer." After he speaks those words, Locke's father grabs him and throws him out an eigth story window. This scene was so brilliant. Came out of nowhere, and all of the sudden Locke is plunging down to the ground. How can one man cause so much pain, in this case to his son. Loved the conversation between Ben and John before we got to that scene in the flashback. "Did it hurt, John?" Linus asks. And later, Ben's statement that he wasn't talking about the broken back, which obviously hurt, but was talking about almost being murdered by his father.
2. Turns out that Ben Linus was born on the island. Cool, I wonder how much time he has spent off of the island in his life time. Does he know what life is like in the rest of the world and how that knowledge or lack thereof effect him? It also turns out that the "Island" is not helping him heal from his surgery as quickly as he thought. AND, how did he get such a bad tumor in the first place if the island has such healing poweres? I loved the discourse between Locke and Linus when they debated who, between them, understood the island better. The currently wheelchair bound Linus who has spent his whole life on the island, or the formerly wheelchairbound Locke, having spent only 80 days there, but immediately upon his arrival on the island could suddenly walk again? Great stuff.
3. John Locke's father is on the island. (Holy Cow) How did Ben, the ultimate manipulator, pull that one off. Maybe he manipulated Locke's father the way he manipulated Locke the son, and convinced him to come to the island.
My sister Maggie tells me that there is hot speculation on the "Lost blogs" that Locke's father, now firmly established as a con-man AND a murderer" is the original Sawyer. The con artist who drove James Ford's father over the edge and made him the "Sawyer" we know and hate now on the island. Very interesting and having heard the theory, I do see it playing out that way. It makes sense. Sure it would test plausibility, but what on this show hasn't stretched plausibility since all of our favorite characters walked away from the plane crash in the pilot episode. Exactly nothing.
But here is my question. Where are they going to from here? It seems like a lot of what has made the show great has sort of been covered? Many of the mysteries that made the others so scary and intimidating have seemingly been dispelled, a truce between the plane survivors and the others seems to be in place, and the submarine has been blown to Smithereens. Certainly there are things left to explore, but I hope the writers have thought this out.
One last thing. I really am enjoying having a new episode every week. For me it was worth it to have one long break so that we could get 16 (or however many there are) episodes back to back to back etc...I feel a really good flow going in this "second" season.
And one more last thing. I really like Alex. Cool character. Adds a lot to the show.
Peace out yo.
What a great episode of "Lost" we were treated to last Wednesday. I was truly on the edge of my seat for most of the episode. Just awesome. But sickening in some ways too. Can you imagine how Jack is going to look at John Locke from now on? Ten minutes from hopping on the submarine to freedom (and get lucky) and his friendly nemesis blows the thing up. Ouch. That is not going to help these two strong-willed alpha males make nice after their earlier disagreements. In fact I think it MIGHT even make things more difficult. Ya know? Where was the spirit of the late Boone to talk some sense into Locke.
Things we learned this week:
1. How John Locke became paralyzed: "I'm a con artist, not a murderer." After he speaks those words, Locke's father grabs him and throws him out an eigth story window. This scene was so brilliant. Came out of nowhere, and all of the sudden Locke is plunging down to the ground. How can one man cause so much pain, in this case to his son. Loved the conversation between Ben and John before we got to that scene in the flashback. "Did it hurt, John?" Linus asks. And later, Ben's statement that he wasn't talking about the broken back, which obviously hurt, but was talking about almost being murdered by his father.
2. Turns out that Ben Linus was born on the island. Cool, I wonder how much time he has spent off of the island in his life time. Does he know what life is like in the rest of the world and how that knowledge or lack thereof effect him? It also turns out that the "Island" is not helping him heal from his surgery as quickly as he thought. AND, how did he get such a bad tumor in the first place if the island has such healing poweres? I loved the discourse between Locke and Linus when they debated who, between them, understood the island better. The currently wheelchair bound Linus who has spent his whole life on the island, or the formerly wheelchairbound Locke, having spent only 80 days there, but immediately upon his arrival on the island could suddenly walk again? Great stuff.
3. John Locke's father is on the island. (Holy Cow) How did Ben, the ultimate manipulator, pull that one off. Maybe he manipulated Locke's father the way he manipulated Locke the son, and convinced him to come to the island.
My sister Maggie tells me that there is hot speculation on the "Lost blogs" that Locke's father, now firmly established as a con-man AND a murderer" is the original Sawyer. The con artist who drove James Ford's father over the edge and made him the "Sawyer" we know and hate now on the island. Very interesting and having heard the theory, I do see it playing out that way. It makes sense. Sure it would test plausibility, but what on this show hasn't stretched plausibility since all of our favorite characters walked away from the plane crash in the pilot episode. Exactly nothing.
But here is my question. Where are they going to from here? It seems like a lot of what has made the show great has sort of been covered? Many of the mysteries that made the others so scary and intimidating have seemingly been dispelled, a truce between the plane survivors and the others seems to be in place, and the submarine has been blown to Smithereens. Certainly there are things left to explore, but I hope the writers have thought this out.
One last thing. I really am enjoying having a new episode every week. For me it was worth it to have one long break so that we could get 16 (or however many there are) episodes back to back to back etc...I feel a really good flow going in this "second" season.
And one more last thing. I really like Alex. Cool character. Adds a lot to the show.
Peace out yo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)