I don't know about "not good," It was pretty much what it meant to be. A lightweight, "lets have fun withthe afterlife" kind of movie. It's not fantastic, but I'd still put it on the "good" side of the good/bad divide.

Step off on the Beetlejuice disrespect! This is insano crazytalk. It's like you don't even understand the virtue of wide stripes in production design.

I'm in the liking-Beetlejuice camp. I even bought the DVD.

Sean, these two paragraphs:

I still think it's way too early to say that Locke will be an advisor to Jack. And I don't see Locke as a visionary at all. He's too much of a pragmatist. A meat and potatoes kind of guy, who doesn't believe in magic, even though he thinks the island is special in that regard.

In fact, I think this last episode, and Locke's interaction with Jack, strongly hint that, if they divide into two sides, Jack will be leading (in an army commander fashion) the "we need to get the hell out of here side," and Locke will lead (in a high-priest fashion) the "let's stay and worship the island" fashion.

seem highly contradictory to me. If he's worshipping the island, he's not a pragmatist. Also, considering his wanting to bring along his 1-900 girl on his walkabout, I don't think he's a realist at all. He's a visionary, or at least the world he sees isn't the one most other people see.

What about the Evil Look at the end of Kate's episode, as he looked jealously at Michael and Walt after having letting Michael take the credit for finding Vincent?

There was no evil look! There was an ambiguous look, to make us sure we get that he's mysterious and sexy magical/mystical.

Plus, he initiated the backgammon metaphor. He told Walt there were two sides, but he didn't say which side he was on.

Pfft. Of course he's on the white side, even if he's not. He's not the type to believe he's wrong.

As for being called mister in the hotel, I don't think he'd correct them. It wouldn't be important to him when he's thinking about his dad. Most people are misters. He would have said his name, they would have called him the default.

What if Jack is the surgeon who worked on Locke four years ago and couldn't fix his spine? Okay, long shot, but still. Jack's a spinal surgeon, Locke had a spinal injury.

Ashtareth, you said that was unlikely because they hadn't met (so far as we can tell), but what if Jack was an emergency room doctor? He might not have registered the patient's face. The patient might never have met him. OR, being 4 years ago, he just doesn't remember Locke, but Locke remembers him. It wouldn't be outside of Locke's character to not tell anyone he knows the doctor already.

Re: the flashback to the airport check-in. I think the absence of Sun from the line-up isn't significant.

Ouise, I agree. He would have stashed her somewhere while he did his manly business, keeping the real world/other people away from her as he's trying to do now.

I'm not sure why people think they're not married. I thank Greg for things and he says that's just what husbands do all the time. I don't think that's an indicator that they're not married, just Jin shrugging off her thanks, and/or obliquely reminding her that she belongs to him.

Also, considering his wanting to bring along his 1-900 girl on his walkabout, I don't think he's a realist at all.

Yeah, his little "I'm a meat and potatoes man" speech struck me oddly because it seemed so clearly contradictory to what we've already seen of his life pre-crash: playing games, pretending to be a colonel, actually believing Helen would go to Australia with him. I'm not sure what to make of his possibly-evil look at the end of the Kate episode. He has such an interesting face--when he breaks out into a smile, he's genuinely beautiful, and yet he looks so creepy sometimes. I don't think I could love this character more if I tried. Lovelovelove.

I rewatched this week's ep yesterday with some friends. I think the first scene with Jack's father was written kind of heavy-handedly (heavily-handed?), but in general it was a great episode. I had no idea that it would be Boone who'd taken the water. He's becoming one of the most intriguing characters to me. One of my friends said she couldn't stand either him or Snicker Bitch because they seemed so immature, but I wonder if that's at least partly because we've mostly seen them interacting with each other rather than with other people. I find it really believable that being around each other brings out the worst in both of them.

I'd like for Sawyer to be a little less despicable. I liked his moment in ep. 3 when he shot the marshall, and then Jack had to go and finish the job. It was a nice vulnerable moment for the character, and I thought he played it really well. But otherwise he's just really annoying (also? not hot). Meh. (Also, did we all know that he was in the very first Angel episode?? He's one of the vamps that Angel stakes in the first scene. I just watched it last night--got the DVDs for my birthday--and my housemate and I were all OMGWTFSAWYER!!)

Re: the empty coffin, I figure it was empty when they loaded it onto the plane in Sydney. For some reason, I am loathe to believe that Jack's dad was actually raised from the dead on the island. That takes the mystery of the island one step too far, IMO. Plus, as previously mentioned, nobody else could see him when Jack saw him, so I believe pretty firmly that he was a hallucination.

I love Charlie and Claire together. And her scene with Kate folding clothes was great too. "Geminis." hee!

Oh, and one thing I noticed in this last episode was how many people were wearing white (Kate, Jack, Sayid, Boone). I don't know what the symbolism of that might be, but it was visually striking. Maybe it was just meant to accentuate their sexay new suntans.

Which would also redeem that schmaltzy single tear he cried while telling his story, as it may have been bitter aching regret rather than being moved by how touching and inspirational his own story was.

Well, I'm kind of inclined to chalk it up to the pain of having someone sewing up a huge bloody gash in your skin. It didn't even occur to me that it might be in relation to the story. But put me down on the side of those hoping that the story actually has a darker ending than the way he told it.

I'm loving the WD speculation, by the way. I haven't read the book in ages, but I'm intrigued enough to want to search out my old copy and skim through it again.

Re: the flashback to the airport check-in. I think the absence of Sun from the line-up isn't significant. Jin's behaviour on the island indicates that he considers it is his job to take care of Sun, particularly by taking over any interaction with others.

That's what I thought too at first, but don't you have to be present and have photo ID in order to check in? How could he check in for her?

considering his wanting to bring along his 1-900 girl on his walkabout, I don't think he's a realist at all. He's a visionary, or at least the world he sees isn't the one most other people see.

Thanks for reminding me of his Helen idea, Deena. Your last statement is why I find him such a fascinating character, and really wonder how it'll end up. I know you think he's on the white side, but my point is he'll think he's on the white side too. Like you said, he doesn't see the same world as everyone else. He could act subjectively good in a way that is objectively bad. I do agree with Sean that he may end up leading a "worship the island" cult. Locke's speech you love identifies him as a pragmatist, but then also notes that the island is special. He may have been a pragmatist, but I can see this island winning him over to the other side.

(Also, did we all know that he was in the very first Angel episode?? He's one of the vamps that Angel stakes in the first scene. I just watched it last night--got the DVDs for my birthday--and my housemate and I were all OMGWTFSAWYER!!)

Whoa! Dude! I'm going to pull out my DVDs and check that out.

(Dude! I wasn't sure because his hair was so short, but I think you're right. It's more apparent when he speaks.)

I'm kicking myself now for not taping Lost from the beginning. There's too much stuff that needs to be double-checked!

This is me. But I'm not going to start copying now, especially because my VCR is crap. I guess I'll just have to wait for the DVDs to really get the detail.

I'm not convinced that Jack's not a doctor, but I'm certainly intrigued.

I hadn't even thought of this, Wolfram, but am also intrigued. I'm with the camp that he lost his license over some sort of misconduct or something, and that might be why his dad went AWOL.

What if Jack is the surgeon who worked on Locke four years ago and couldn't fix his spine? Okay, long shot, but still. Jack's a spinal surgeon, Locke had a spinal injury.

It could be. Possible spoiler: I read that there were connections that even the characters might not know about. Or perhaps Jack injured Locke in a drunk-driving accident, for which he lost his license as well. But you'ld think they'ld know each other's names though. Hmm...this requires more thought I think.

I just watched it last night--got the DVDs for my birthday--and my housemate and I were all OMGWTFSAWYER!!)

!!!!

rewatched this week's ep yesterday with some friends. I think the first scene with Jack's father was written kind of heavy-handedly (heavily-handed?), but in general it was a great episode.

The first scene with Jack's father bugged me, too. Mainly because I couldn't understand what the hell he was going on about. "Don't decide. When you fail, you just don't have what it takes." The hell? Was he saying Jack was too emotionally involved? To soft? Lacked character to weather hardship? What? But then, a friend of mine commented on my LJ that this statement was in line with something that could come from a compensating drunk, with his own internal logic and context that's clear to him, but NSM to others.

I know there's been lots of The Stand allusions, both from the board and TPTB, but I don't think the divide is gonna be as black/white as in that book, no matter what Lock's backgammon rules say. I think Jack's too messed up to be Stu Redman, and Locke's got too much humanity in him to be a Randall Flagg equivalent, who was plain unadulterated evil. Which is fine, because I dig ambiguity.

I cannot wait for next week's episode. Is the writer for that ep someone we know?

Mainly because I couldn't understand what the hell he was going on about. "Don't decide. When you fail, you just don't have what it takes."

Vonnie, I didn't get it the first time, and I couldn't get it the second time either. I'm not sure what he meant by "Don't decide." And then is "When you fail" supposed to mean "after you fail" or "if you fail"? What does "what it takes" entail? Not failing, or dealing with the failing? I think I like the He's Drunk answer. Makes me not have to think about it.

I cannot wait for next week's episode. Is the writer for that ep someone we know?

Javier Grillo-Marxuach. Which is a no. But word is, it's amazing.

The first scene with Jack's father bugged me, too. Mainly because I couldn't understand what the hell he was going on about. "Don't decide. When you fail, you just don't have what it takes." The hell?

Yeah, that speech was pretty incoherent. Possibly realistically so, but as flashbacks go, it wasn't the most useful.

(Though it was pretty perfectly timed, right after Jack was asked a Seemingly Innocuous Question and started to look longingly into space, causing DH to say, "Not now, I have to have a flashback.")