Lost Season 4 -- Oceanic 6 -- or was that 7?

Mikester71

Well-Known Member
I agree 100% with those two statements... definitely...


The more I think about it to and read some site (lostpedia.com... where I got the Panoptican/Jeremy Bentham thing) I'm beginning to think more about last night's show and find more interest in it too...

I knew what you were trying to say about the show though in your previous post. Almost every show reaches a point where it peaks and then starts to tail off at some point (referred to as the "jumping the shark" syndrome). But I think LOST will remain interesting right til the very end. They have left so much untouched still. The more you read about it in the coming days and probably just re-watching the finale sometime down the road here will probably make you appreciate last night's episode that much more.

Your previous post also reminded me of me after I watched the series finale of Seinfeld (my all-time favourite comedy) and was disappointed for quite some time. I felt really let down by it. After some time had passed and I happened to catch it again in reruns, I realized that it wasn't as bad as I first thought. My expectations were just too high, being my favourite show and all, and I didn't try to appreciate it for what it was. I actually don't mind the episode now and think it tied the show up rather nicely.
 

k.hunter30

New Member
I thought I read an interview of one of the writers a few months back saying not only would we get find out who was in the coffin, but we'd have an explanation of the foot statue...?

Question for those who have seen it: Why would Locke have had to leave the island? Think he had to move it again or something?
 

Dukeblue1016

New Member
I thought I read an interview of one of the writers a few months back saying not only would we get find out who was in the coffin, but we'd have an explanation of the foot statue...?

Question for those who have seen it: Why would Locke have had to leave the island? Think he had to move it again or something?


My take:

Ben said the island was like... "falling apart" or something; I don't remember his exact wording now, but essentially the Island was dying... and so Locke knew that he needed all six of them to come back to the island to make everything better and fix all the problems... so he came back to convince the six of them to go back... and somehow he died... :shrug:
 

Disneyfalcon

Well-Known Member
Okay, I think it's safe to post spoilers now. Anyone opening a Lost thread the day after the show airs has got to expect spoilers. Are they even really spoilers the day after?:lol:


I agree Dukeblue. I also think that since Locke took over Ben's postition, he can now come and go freely from the island.
 

k.hunter30

New Member
Okay, I think it's safe to post spoilers now. Anyone opening a Lost thread the day after the show airs has got to expect spoilers. Are they even really spoilers the day after?:lol:


I agree Dukeblue. I also think that since Locke took over Ben's postition, he can now come and go freely from the island.
But didn't Ben come and go by means of the submarine?
 

Disneyfalcon

Well-Known Member
I was thinking he had other ways but maybe not? Maybe I was thinking that because of the episode where he seemed to have left the island through the room in his closet.

But after last night, those seem to have just been flash forwards. I'm a little confused...:lol:
 

Dukeblue1016

New Member
But didn't Ben come and go by means of the submarine?



My original theory on what happened has since... changed because I thought they woulda proved otherwise BY NOW...

but... When Locke blew up the submarine... he was all wet...

so... my take was... he moved the submarine... swam back to the dock... blew up the dock to make it look like he blew up the submarine...

:shrug:



but... i woulda thought by now they would have told us that...
 

k.hunter30

New Member
I was thinking he had other ways but maybe not? Maybe I was thinking that because of the episode where he seemed to have left the island through the room in his closet.

But after last night, those seem to have just been flash forwards. I'm a little confused...:lol:
ah... hmmm.. yeah, I don't know.

My original theory on what happened has since... changed because I thought they woulda proved otherwise BY NOW...

but... When Locke blew up the submarine... he was all wet...

so... my take was... he moved the submarine... swam back to the dock... blew up the dock to make it look like he blew up the submarine...

:shrug:



but... i woulda thought by now they would have told us that...
Great theory!

I think there's got to be some reason Ben did what he did to move the island. I mean, he definitely didn't do it for the good of any other person. What benefit would he get from moving the island and never being able to come back?

To where do you think the island was moved? Or.... when?:lookaroun
 

Disneyfalcon

Well-Known Member
Okay I'm trying to place something in time. We saw Frank off the island once (with Michael), and I'm pretty sure that was after the sub had blown up or "blown up" as the case may have been.

Is that right?
 

dandaman

Well-Known Member
I was thinking he had other ways [to leave the island] but maybe not? Maybe I was thinking that because of the episode where he seemed to have left the island through the room in his closet.

I figured it would have been his self-proclaimed "time-travelling bunny" microwave. :lol:
 

Dukeblue1016

New Member
I'm not sure if it's nailed down exactly when the events in that flashback take place in relation to the sub blowing up.


exactly... i had the same thought... but...


all we know is that locke "blew up" the sub after michael left... and after michael left Tom came to visit him...


so... Tom could have definitely visited him first...
 

Pongo

New Member
Also of note is his advocacy of utilitarianism ( in a nutshell, "sacrifice the few to save the many").

I was going to mention that -- his philosophy that supports the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people.

Which is interesting, because the philosopher John Locke believed in a "natural state" in which all people were equal and independent, and had no right to harm one another. But, he also believed that human nature allowed people to be selfish, thus preventing this "natural state" from ever occurring.

I don't think these names were arbitrarily chosen, just like Faraday.
 

dandaman

Well-Known Member
I knew about Locke, Rousseau and (now) Bentham, but what's the significance of Faraday?

P.S. I got the C.S. Lewis ref with Charlotte right when Ben said it. :lol:
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom