Michael! That was really bad!

[boonian androphile]

Michael, why did you have to go and do something like that? I know that brainwashing and mind control were involved, but still. What will Walt say? He will never take you to parent-teacher conferences after this! Or baseball games! Or anything!

I wish generally that you had a different script fate than coerced executioner. I wish that you had shot this year's writers instead! They do have so much to answer for!!!:pissed:

[Hodgepodge]

I saw it coming BA! And I can't say, presented with the same circumstances, I wouldn't have done the same thing. Not sure if you have any children, but I know there's nothing I wouldn't do to protect mine.

[YouFirst]

Michael, why did you have to go and do something like that? I know that brainwashing and mind control were involved, but still. What will Walt say? He will never take you to parent-teacher conferences after this! Or baseball games! Or anything!

I wish generally that you had a different script fate than coerced executioner. I wish that you had shot this year's writers instead! They do have so much to answer for!!!:pissed:

Well said, boonian. I got over the Locke hitting Charlie incident, but this is just one major character arc I can't stand! :mad:

[LostHorizon]

I saw it coming BA! And I can't say, presented with the same circumstances, I wouldn't have done the same thing. Not sure if you have any children, but I know there's nothing I wouldn't do to protect mine.

I don't know, there is always a line that one crosses, even if it is to protect your kids ( I mean, for example, would you destroy the entire world to save your child? Think about that for a moment....Logically, and not emotionally.. )
But I admit don't have any children ( that I know of.... :) ) and I don't plan to anytime soon, so I can't really say what I would do honestly in that situation.
Who knows, maybe I'd would probably would have killed Ana ( because of past history what she did to the Rafties ),If I was in Mike's place, but Libby seemed like a accidental situation.
Honestly, I can understand if he personally raised Walt from a foetus, but come on!
The shootings were the result of probably a combination of "Other" brainwashing / blackmail, "The Sickness ", and deep psychological absentee parental guilt which made him do it... :(

[Hodgepodge]

I don't know, there is always a line that one crosses, even if it is to protect your kids ( I mean, for example, would you destroy the entire world to save your child? Think about that for a moment....Logically, and not emotionally.. )
But I admit don't have any children ( that I know of.... :) ) and I don't plan to anytime soon, so I can't really say what I would do honestly in that situation.
Who knows, maybe I'd would probably would have killed Ana ( because of past history what she did to the Rafties ),If I was in Mike's place, but Libby seemed like a accidental situation.
Honestly, I can understand if he personally raised Walt from a foetus, but come on!
The shootings were the result of probably a combination of "Other" brainwashing / blackmail, "The Sickness ", and deep psychological absentee parental guilt which made him do it... :(It's good to have you back LostHorizon! Let me tell you a little story.

An eight-year old boy was molested by a previously convicted pedophile. After the molestation, the man left the jurisdiction of the attack. The authorities found the man and was bringing him back for trail.

The boys father, waited in the airport, like he was talking on a payphone. The authorities brought the criminal back in manacles. Escorting him through the airport, by the payphone being used by the boys father. Once they passed his location, the father took out a gun, walked up the the manacled prisoner, and shot him in the head. Killed him instantly. I clapped, because I would've done the same thing!

[boonian androphile]

First of all---since I have been trying to post this idea all day!!!:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: ---I think that Michael and Rousseau should start a support group for people who have killed at least two other people and whose child has been abducted. I think it would also be cool dramatically but horribly tragic if Michael ended up as insane and isolated as Rousseau. That was, in fact, a fate that I had predicted for Locke, but he tricked me by burrowing into the hatch and taking on the position of the island's dish-doer.

That said...

Now if I had a kid I would protect him/her the best I could. However, in Michael's case I just wonder how much free will is involved. Is there brainwashing? Is there a suggestion statement, sound, or even (dare I say?) thought? To me, Michael didnt act as though he were in a Do This Or Else scenario. He looked like Claire must have looked after her ordeal. She had no memory. Michael was, as far as I can tell, squeezed into blinding focus. We'll see what happens...

[azteclady]

Do this or else... we will kill your child

Do this or else... we will torture your child

Do this or else... we will (fill in the blank) to your child.

For those without children, it may seem supremely illogical that anyone would seriously entertain the 'destroy the world or else...' To most parents, logic doesn't even make an appearance in a situation like that.

[uhavemel]

Michael wasn't under any form of mind control. He apologized to Ana Lucia before he shot her. He knew what he was doing. The question is why.

Most likely he DID find the others and they forced his hand by threatening Walt. I guess it is also possible (but I don't believe) that he DID NOT find the others and was desperate enough to see what NonHenry knew and needed to get everyone out of the way to get the information.

I don't even think that this was out of character for Michael. I am not saying I wasn't surprised, because I was --- But from his actions this season, he has been a time bomb waiting to go off.

I could be wrong here because I didn't tape the epi...but was NonHenry staring at an adjacent wall instead of the door when Michael opened it. I know he had to have heard the gun shots. Was he not surprised that Michael was there?

[Hodgepodge]

...Now if I had a kid I would protect him/her the best I could. However, in Michael's case I just wonder how much free will is involved. Is there brainwashing? Is there a suggestion statement, sound, or even (dare I say?) thought? To me, Michael didnt act as though he were in a Do This Or Else scenario. He looked like Claire must have looked after her ordeal. She had no memory. Michael was, as far as I can tell, squeezed into blinding focus. We'll see what happens...I didn't get this impression at all BA. Michael asked Ana-Lucia for the gun. This was conscience thought. I knew at that point what was going to be the outcome. Now I'm not so sure he was told to kill Ana-Lucia. That may've been something TPTB decided to add at the last minute (if you get my drift). I'm convinced, he was sent back to free non-Henry, with the proviso, they'd free Walt. And we both no that ain't going to happen.

[boonian androphile]

My preference is that Michael was at least extremely coerced. Perhaps all they wanted was a freed Fenry (who ever thought of this name, I really like it) and Michael would have killed whoever was in the hatch at the time. Plus it would sound as though part of the plan was maybe to trade moles.

Meanwhile

Michael's apology to Ana-Lucia wasnt as convincing to me as Michael's astonishment when Libby arrived and he automatically shot her. The Ana Lucia shooting seemed as though he was struggling with something, whether that be conscience or identity. The shooting of Libby was obviously a mistake but I wonder if the reasons were simple there.

Also if the plan was to bring about Fenry's escape, the question is why? On face value, Fenry doesnt seem that important, unless of course he is, meaning that he is either HIM or a dopey-seeming lieutenant. I mean, for someone as seemingly insignificant and snivling as Fenry is, he sure pushes buttons well.


eta: this is an event that is at least for me open to some interpretation. and to that I say at least the writers added something of significance to the moment. I am merely just hoping that Michael fought a little before giving in, and by that I mean that he wasnt acting entirely in free will. I would feel better, I guess. but protecting his kid? I have been arguing for that much of the season. this, however, is not the way that I would have anticipated. the act itself was dramatic. but a true rescue, without all the other characters loitering in purpose, would have been better. but I will take this as the new Ana Lucia shot Shannon replacement ethical dilemma.

[uhavemel]

Fenry--I like it!

I'll go along with extremely coerced. :) And it was very shocking to have him shoot Libby. And, yes, he did seem to be working on auto-pilot there...BUT I think it was just the shock of having just killed Ana Lucia instead of having someone else in his head. He had to have no witnesses for his plan to work. Which was to make it look like Fenry got the gun and shot up the place and then escaped. So if he wants Walt back bad enough (and we know that he does) he will do unconscionable things.

Come to think of it... nearly all of our Losties will.

[MJBinNC]

For those without children, it may seem supremely illogical that anyone would seriously entertain the 'destroy the world or else...' To most parents, logic doesn't even make an appearance in a situation like that.
I would do ANYTHING for my children. ANYTHING. I believe that I would have run of LONG before Michael did.

He seemed to know what he was doing - and genuinely seemed like he didn't WANT to do it. But he did. The only logical reason can be that the others have threatened Walt in some way. As for Libby - he was nervous and jumpy.... and seemed to react rather than think of that shooting. He also appeared shocked that he had shot her. After that - what else could he do, but go through with whatever the original plan had been?

I do feel a bit cheated though. I certainly didn't see this coming from Michael.

[vincentstuntdbl#23]

Boonian Walt would say Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad!!!:ImLost:

[LostHorizon]

It's good to have you back LostHorizon!

Thanks! I've never really left though.....:)



Let me tell you a little story.

An eight-year old boy was molested by a previously convicted pedophile. After the molestation, the man left the jurisdiction of the attack. The authorities found the man and was bringing him back for trail.

The boys father, waited in the airport, like he was talking on a payphone. The authorities brought the criminal back in manacles. Escorting him through the airport, by the payphone being used by the boys father. Once they passed his location, the father took out a gun, walked up the the manacled prisoner, and shot him in the head. Killed him instantly. I clapped, because I would've done the same thing!

Wow, if that is your Idea of a story, I can only imagine what you would write if you were one of the writers on LOST! :D
Anyway,call me a New York Liberal , but I am not a big fan of Vigilante Justice. This may sit well and good for you out in the Wild West, but I'm one of those who believe in Due Justice, no matter how henious the crime. Yes, the guy killed the pedo, but his kid is still alive. And now the guy is going to jail probabaly for a long time,away from his kid that needs him, so where is the sense in that? Satisfaction? Laws are the only things that seperates us from savages and total anarchy. Yes,I know that is not a very popular line of thought here,especially among parents, but hey! Laws are set up to protect everyone, like it or not.....
Anyhoooooo, going back to the subject of Micheal, I think that there is more at play the the hatch shootings than just blind maniac parental love....


First of all---since I have been trying to post this idea all day!!!:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: ---I think that Michael and Rousseau should start a support group for people who have killed at least two other people and whose child has been abducted. I think it would also be cool dramatically but horribly tragic if Michael ended up as insane and isolated as Rousseau.

I really don't know about the support group thing (!) but I really believe that this may hold some water, so to speak. I can imagine a crazy Micheal wandering and rambling around the Island, screaming "WALT!", and trying crazy ways to somehow get him back.




That said...

Now if I had a kid I would protect him/her the best I could. However, in Michael's case I just wonder how much free will is involved. Is there brainwashing? Is there a suggestion statement, sound, or even (dare I say?) thought? To me, Michael didnt act as though he were in a Do This Or Else scenario. He looked like Claire must have looked after her ordeal. She had no memory. Michael was, as far as I can tell, squeezed into blinding focus. We'll see what happens...

This may just seem to be the case....Micheal's mind may have been in such a state that he would be easy to program into a "Manchurian Candidate" type agent, not exactly a "sleeper", but they ( the Others ) could have easily have gotten info about Micheal via Goodwin, and those Dharma people, lured Micheal to them, captured him, used their Pysche Mojo on him. As for Walt, I am sure that he is doing well, and in no danger, but was made to seem as he was to Mike. ( I also am of the school that Rousseau's daughter, Alex, was acting for the benifite of Claire down in the Medical Hatch.. )



Michael wasn't under any form of mind control. He apologized to Ana Lucia before he shot her. He knew what he was doing. The question is why.

Most likely he DID find the others and they forced his hand by threatening Walt.

That is the question...
Anyway, I think that You can have post hypnotic suggestions to do something bad, and still yet apologize beforehand. And it does not have to be exactly like dictionary definition "Mind Control", Pyschological coercion and mental breakdown can do the trick too..


I guess it is also possible (but I don't believe) that he DID NOT find the others and was desperate enough to see what NonHenry knew and needed to get everyone out of the way to get the information.

I don't even think that this was out of character for Michael. I am not saying I wasn't surprised, because I was --- But from his actions this season, he has been a time bomb waiting to go off.

I am of the school that he in fact did find the Others....I mean, it was a done deal!
But Micheal has definitely got "The Sickness".. or Whatever Rousseau has....


I didn't get this impression at all BA. Michael asked Ana-Lucia for the gun. This was conscience thought. I knew at that point what was going to be the outcome. Now I'm not so sure he was told to kill Ana-Lucia. That may've been something TPTB decided to add at the last minute (if you get my drift). I'm convinced, he was sent back to free non-Henry, with the proviso, they'd free Walt. And we both no that ain't going to happen.

It is possible to be delusional crazy and yet lucid at the same time. I am sure that Micheal was "told" that if he does "A", they, the others will do "B". His state in which this happened could have been Dharma- enforced Mental Brainwashing reinforced by his current mental state. Yes, Micheal asked Ana for the Gun, I mean, there was a good opportunity(sp?) for him to either free / Kill Henry and at the same time, make sure that there was no witnesses.
Yes, Micheal was a tool.



My preference is that Michael was at least extremely coerced. Perhaps all they wanted was a freed Fenry (who ever thought of this name, I really like it) and Michael would have killed whoever was in the hatch at the time. Plus it would sound as though part of the plan was maybe to trade moles.

Meanwhile

Michael's apology to Ana-Lucia wasnt as convincing to me as Michael's astonishment when Libby arrived and he automatically shot her. The Ana Lucia shooting seemed as though he was struggling with something, whether that be conscience or identity. The shooting of Libby was obviously a mistake but I wonder if the reasons were simple there.

I believe that Micheal was probably "told" to kill Ana ( she is a threat to the Others - Jack can't build his Army without her!:p ) Libby was just a reactive accident - the case of being at the wrong place at the wrong time, It could have been anyone, Locke, Hurley, Kate, etc....But who knows now?


Also if the plan was to bring about Fenry's escape, the question is why? On face value, Fenry doesnt seem that important, unless of course he is, meaning that he is either HIM or a dopey-seeming lieutenant. I mean, for someone as seemingly insignificant and snivling as Fenry is, he sure pushes buttons well.

I don't think that Henry is HIM, or else he would have been out of there a long time ago. I do believe that he is a important member of the "Others" though, not quite doopey lieutenant....


eta: this is an event that is at least for me open to some interpretation. and to that I say at least the writers added something of significance to the moment. I am merely just hoping that Michael fought a little before giving in, and by that I mean that he wasnt acting entirely in free will. I would feel better, I guess. but protecting his kid? I have been arguing for that much of the season. this, however, is not the way that I would have anticipated. the act itself was dramatic. but a true rescue, without all the other characters loitering in purpose, would have been better. but I will take this as the new Ana Lucia shot Shannon replacement ethical dilemma.

I totally agree with you, Boonian!
I can't wait what happens next week.....

[Son of Locke]

I don't know, there is always a line that one crosses, even if it is to protect your kids ( I mean, for example, would you destroy the entire world to save your child? Think about that for a moment....Logically, and not emotionally.. )
LH, this isn't one of those "well I'm a parent and you're not" responses, but now that I have one...

On the premise that "the entire world" means all the other people in it, not the substance of the planet itself, it's not entirely absurd or insane to consider for a moment. Economically speaking, killing everyone else would be bad. Morally speaking, bad again. Bad again for TV and sports, and that'd pretty much be the end of happy dinners for this burger-phile.

However, from an evolutionary p.o.v., my child is the world. My world, anyway. If it were my only child, my only chance to submit an entry into the survival of my particular genes, and it wasn't really everyone else but say, almost everyone else, I'd think about it. Critically.

Sacrifice my child to save the world? Don't sit me near The Button, then--unless sacrificing myself instead is another option...

/rant :)

[LostHorizon]

LH, this isn't one of those "well I'm a parent and you're not" responses, but now that I have one...

On the premise that "the entire world" means all the other people in it, not the substance of the planet itself, it's not entirely absurd or insane to consider for a moment. Economically speaking, killing everyone else would be bad. Morally speaking, bad again. Bad again for TV and sports, and that'd pretty much be the end of happy dinners for this burger-phile.

However, from an evolutionary p.o.v., my child is the world. My world, anyway. If it were my only child, my only chance to submit an entry into the survival of my particular genes, and it wasn't really everyone else but say, almost everyone else, I'd think about it. Critically.

Sacrifice my child to save the world? Don't sit me near The Button, then--unless sacrificing myself instead is another option...

/rant :)


I can see it now....

"Dad, where is everybody?"

"I choose to kill them all, the entire world, everyone, just for you, my son/daughter! Heheheehe!"

"Uh...Uhmm....Thanks alot , Dad!"
:rotfl:

Of course, I'm sure there would be quite a different reaction if people found out that someone besides themselves would make that decison, would one say, "It's ok, I'm a parent myself, I understand why you would kill all of us off. I don't like it, but hey. You gotta do whatcha gotta do!"
Or would you try your damndest to stop that person?
I know what I'd do!
Remember that thing that Spock used to Yap about on Star Trek ( not that I ever watched that show....;) ), " The Needs of the many outweigh the Needs of the few, or the one"?
Anyway, I love moral thought experiments like this! But how it relates to LOST and Micheal's actions in the Hatch may be a stretch though......:)

[Vahan Solar]

I can see it now....

"Dad, where is everybody?"

"I choose to kill them all, the entire world, everyone, just for you, my son/daughter! Heheheehe!"

"Uh...Uhmm....Thanks alot , Dad!"
:rotfl:

Of course, I'm sure there would be quite a different reaction if people found out that someone besides themselves would make that decison, would one say, "It's ok, I'm a parent myself, I understand why you would kill all of us off. I don't like it, but hey. You gotta do whatcha gotta do!"
Or would you try your damndest to stop that person?


Yeah to understand why Michael is doing it from a character motivation standpoint is one thing but to agree with it but to say "yeah sure Id murder a couple of women who had nothing to do with my problem and let a dangerous possible murderer loose who is in league with the people that took my child and ... what the heck ill even give the guy my gun!"

What Michael is doing is unequivocably wrong and he must be stopped. I wouldnt be at all suprised if Walt ended up not being "My Boy" to Michael anymore when Michael does find him and the betrayer is betrayed by his own flesh and blood. That would be a very poetic way to end Michaels stay on the island.

[boonian androphile]

Yes, as I implied at the beginning, I dont think that Walt will or did approve of Michael's actions. I dont approve of them either per se, but information I contend remains at the interpretive more than at the factual level. If Claire's flashback, for instance, had any validity, then we cant discount the possibility of someone messing with Michael's mind. As obsessed as he was to find Walt, I dont think that he would have just stopped at a supposed hatch door with only two guards with two guns. His story just didnt ring true. He would have threatened them or killed them to gain entry. However, I also would have taken other people or the dog at least from the beginning. Michael may have been nuts but I think that the writers forgot that he wasnt entirely stupid.

[Celtic Ceilidh]

The Others wanted AnaLucia dead because she killed Goodwin, one of them. I think that was part of the Other's plan all along --to have Michael rescue Fenry, get rid of AL and lure the Losties to the Other's camp.

[Hodgepodge]

...As for Libby - he was nervous and jumpy.... and seemed to react rather than think of that shooting. He also appeared shocked that he had shot her. After that - what else could he do, but go through with whatever the original plan had been?

I do feel a bit cheated though. I certainly didn't see this coming from Michael.
...And it was very shocking to have him shoot Libby. And, yes, he did seem to be working on auto-pilot there...BUT I think it was just the shock of having just killed Ana Lucia instead of having someone else in his head. He had to have no witnesses for his plan to work. Which was to make it look like Fenry got the gun and shot up the place and then escaped. So if he wants Walt back bad enough (and we know that he does) he will do unconscionable thingsMJBinNC, glad to see you on the C&CD board. And I couldn't agree with you and Mel more. That's exactly how I saw the events of Two for the Road.


...Anyway,call me a New York Liberal , but I am not a big fan of Vigilante Justice. This may sit well and good for you out in the Wild West, but I'm one of those who believe in Due Justice, no matter how henious the crime. Yes, the guy killed the pedo, but his kid is still alive. And now the guy is going to jail probabaly for a long time,away from his kid that needs him, so where is the sense in that?...Where have you been hiding out, if you haven't been gone?

The father in my story received 5 years for the murder. And I believe like you, the only thing that keeps us above the fray, are laws. And I would hope I wouldn't go the route that father took. But again, I applauded his actions.


...What Michael is doing is unequivocably wrong and he must be stopped. I wouldnt be at all suprised if Walt ended up not being "My Boy" to Michael anymore when Michael does find him and the betrayer is betrayed by his own flesh and blood. That would be a very poetic way to end Michaels stay on the island.I can see this happening! Remember, TPTB have to explain Malcolm David Kelly's growth spurt. I can see them writing this into the season finale.


The Others wanted AnaLucia dead because she killed Goodwin, one of them. I think that was part of the Other's plan all along --to have Michael rescue Fenry, get rid of AL and lure the Losties to the Other's camp.I'm curious CC! Who told the "Others" it was Ana-Lucia who killed Goodwin?

And, welcome back SoL! :)

[Brian]

For those without children, it may seem supremely illogical that anyone would seriously entertain the 'destroy the world or else...' To most parents, logic doesn't even make an appearance in a situation like that.
I couldn't have said it better, Az. :)

[LostHorizon]

I would do ANYTHING for my children. ANYTHING.
Anything?
If that's the case,Well then, take a look at what SalSpalden posted on a similar subject thread in General Discussion Area , in the Was Michael killing necessary? (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18664&page=8) thread....
Remember, you did say anything......
;)





As for Libby - he was nervous and jumpy.... and seemed to react rather than think of that shooting. He also appeared shocked that he had shot her. After that - what else could he do, but go through with whatever the original plan had been?

I do feel a bit cheated though. I certainly didn't see this coming from Michael.
And it was very shocking to have him shoot Libby. And, yes, he did seem to be working on auto-pilot there...BUT I think it was just the shock of having just killed Ana Lucia instead of having someone else in his head. He had to have no witnesses for his plan to work. Which was to make it look like Fenry got the gun and shot up the place and then escaped. So if he wants Walt back bad enough (and we know that he does) he will do unconscionable things.

MJBinNC, glad to see you on the C&CD board. And I couldn't agree with you and Mel more. That's exactly how I saw the events of Two for the Road.

Now If you are talking about how the story is as is now, Libby's shooting does not seem premeditated, more along the lines of surprise / elimination of witnesses on Mike's part. But if you are talking about behind the scenes scriptwise, shooting Ana was a abrupt but masterful way of taking her character out of the picture, but It was a rather clumsy way to get rid of Libby's character...






Where have you been hiding out, if you haven't been gone?


Mostly General Discussion and Theory and Speculation threads, mostly. Haven't really had a chance to post in the Character Threads as much though.But I will try to remedy that as soon as I can...
:)




Anyway,call me a New York Liberal , but I am not a big fan of Vigilante Justice. This may sit well and good for you out in the Wild West, but I'm one of those who believe in Due Justice, no matter how henious the crime. Yes, the guy killed the pedo, but his kid is still alive. And now the guy is going to jail probabaly for a long time,away from his kid that needs him, so where is the sense in that?
The father in my story received 5 years for the murder. And I believe like you, the only thing that keeps us above the fray, are laws. And I would hope I wouldn't go the route that father took. But again, I applauded his actions.

I don't applaud premeditated murder though. It's one thing to possibly applaud his actions if he was actually caught red handed in the "act" by the father and more so if his kid was actually killed by that pedophile. I am of the "An Eye for an Eye" school of thought, so there would be no need to kill him......If you think about it, that man unintentionally did him a favor...Where he would be going, I don't think life would be very nice....





What Michael is doing is unequivocably wrong and he must be stopped. I wouldnt be at all suprised if Walt ended up not being "My Boy" to Michael anymore when Michael does find him and the betrayer is betrayed by his own flesh and blood. That would be a very poetic way to end Michaels stay on the island.
I can see this happening! Remember, TPTB have to explain Malcolm David Kelly's growth spurt. I can see them writing this into the season finale.

I can see it now....
Michael running, in the forest crazed out of his mind, Screaming "WALT"..."WALT", then sees a familiar looking man running toward him...

"Where is my boy!"
"I am your boy, I'm Walt"
"No you're not!" Micheal shoot him.
"Oww! that hurts! Mom said you were crazy!"
Zap!
Walt then turns Michael into a comic book.....End of season Two. :D






The Others wanted AnaLucia dead because she killed Goodwin, one of them. I think that was part of the Other's plan all along --to have Michael rescue Fenry, get rid of AL and lure the Losties to the Other's camp.


I'm curious CC! Who told the "Others" it was Ana-Lucia who killed Goodwin?


I'm quite sure that at least some of them saw Ana and Goodwin go up that hillside together, probably even watched the whole fight....Who knows, they may even be using hidden cameras everywhere or remote sensing psychic powers or whatnot.....






For those without children, it may seem supremely illogical that anyone would seriously entertain the 'destroy the world or else...' To most parents, logic doesn't even make an appearance in a situation like that.I couldn't have said it better, Az. :)

To sacrifice Billions of other children for just your one....Now that is highly illogical, Captain..... :(

[azteclady]

To sacrifice Billions of other children for just your one....Now that is highly illogical, Captain..... :(Dear, please read again what I say here (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=573480&postcount=7), this tidbit in particular:To most parents, logic doesn't even make an appearance in a situation like that.I am not saying it is logical, nor ethical, nor that it would get the desired result. All I am saying is that I can see most any parent reacting just like that.

[LostHorizon]

Dear, please read again what I say here (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=573480&postcount=7), this tidbit in particular:I am not saying it is logical, nor ethical, nor that it would get the desired result. All I am saying is that I can see most any parent reacting just like that.

Yes, I read it ma'am.
And I am quite sure that you can understand why a parent would do go through any lenghts do do what they would do in situations like that.
I also agree that Logic would not play a role in that tough choice for most folks.
But what I am trying to say is in the grand scheme of things, understanding that reaction and the probable following action emotionally is one thing, but actually having to performing it is another. Yes, the biological imperitive to protect your children is very strong among most animals , but one of the things that separates us from all the other animals is the concept of conscious sacrifice for the greater good. Yes, some, if not most parents would most likely only think of just their childen at that moment, and save them any way they can, even if it ultimately dooms them all. But the fact that some people do have the strenght and will and capacity to see beyond present emotions and turmoil to make the tough decisions for the good of the whole, no matter how awful or bad, is what will make humanity be able to survive any type of great and horrible catastrophe in the long run.

:)

[azteclady]

(...) But the fact that some people do have the strenght and will and capacity to see beyond present emotions and turmoil to make the tough decisions for the good of the whole, no matter how awful or bad, is what will make humanity be able to survive any type of great and horrible catastrophe in the long run.Looking at the current state of the world's affairs, I'm not sure I can concur with you on this...

As far as LOST goes, what I was trying to say (poorly, obviously), is that I don't think mind control or drugs or anything else would be necessary to get Michael to kill Ana Lucía and Fenry. A threat to Walt's life would be more than enough. In that sense, and until something else is revealed, Michael's behaviour is within character, in my opinion.

[LostHorizon]

(...) But the fact that some people do have the strength and will and capacity to see beyond present emotions and turmoil to make the tough decisions for the good of the whole, no matter how awful or bad, is what will make humanity be able to survive any type of great and horrible catastrophe in the long run.
Looking at the current state of the world's affairs, I'm not sure I can concur with you on this...

Come now, AZ! Please don't be such a Pessimist! :)
As long as there are people in the world , there will probably always be problems, but it is those who look at those problems and try to find solutions to make a difference I believe that will make this world a better place, even it fit is just a little bit....
:Hippy:


As far as LOST goes, what I was trying to say (poorly, obviously), is that I don't think mind control or drugs or anything else would be necessary to get Michael to kill Ana Lucía and Fenry. A threat to Walt's life would be more than enough. In that sense, and until something else is revealed, Michael's behavior is within character, in my opinion.

I don't argue that Micheal's behavior is not within character in a possible similar real life situation. If you remember, his behavior toward Walt just previous to the crash was light years away from his present state. Now I can understand if Micheal had actually raised Walt from a baby, spent years with him, and they both were as close as a father and son could be, but the fact of the matter is, they were both pretty much strangers before the crash. So why Michaels sudden obsession with Walt? Perhaps chalk it up to sudden parental responsibility on the Island plus Guilt, plus possible post traumatic stress disorder from the crash. The fact is, there could be other influences on the island that we know of , or have been hinted at, that may have also affected his present state of mind.

(BTW, who is "Fenry"? :p )

[azteclady]

Fenry: Fake Henry (Gale)--I don't know who to give credit for it, though.I don't argue that Micheal's behavior is not within character in a possible similar real life situation. If you remember, his behavior toward Walt just previous to the crash was light years away from his present state. Now I can understand if Micheal had actually raised Walt from a baby, spent years with him, and they both were as close as a father and son could be, but the fact of the matter is, they were both pretty much strangers before the crash. So why Michaels sudden obsession with Walt? Perhaps chalk it up to sudden parental responsibility on the Island plus Guilt, plus possible post traumatic stress disorder from the crash. The fact is, there could be other influences on the island that we know of , or have been hinted at, that may have also affected his present state of mind.This is, I'm sure, going to sound both convoluted and melodramatic, so please feel free to disregard it as nonsensical rambling.

Caveat: It is definitely not my intention, but I am aware that a lot of what follows may seem condescending, but parental/maternal love cannot be explained rationally; you either feel it or you don't. It's akin to explaining color to a blind person, if you will.

I don't see anything sudden in Michael's feelings from Walt, nor do I consider them obssesion in any way, form, nor shape. From where I sit, Michael has loved Walt very deeply--from birth all the way up to Walt's kidnapping. The intensity of love from a parent to his/her child doesn't diminish either with distance nor time. Michael worked hard to maintain at least some connection with his son. He kept trying and was thwarted by Susan at every turn--that box full of letters and cards? to a child you haven't seen since before his second birthday? That is not obligation, in my book, but love.

But Michael also had to live his own life after making the decision of letting Susan take Walt and Brian adopt him (a decision made out of love, mistaken or not). Can you imagine the shock of having the son you haven't seen in 9 years, the son who doesn't even know you are his father, shoved at you the way Walt was shoved at Michael? After 9 years apart, after 9 years alone with memories of Walt as a toddler, Michael is now forced to develop a relationship with a preteen who has just lost his mother and everything familiar in his life. Is it any wonder he fumbles and screws up? All the love he has felt through the years doesn't prepare him for the reality of a sullen, spoiled, grieving child.

I am of the opinion that, had Micheal and Walt made it 'home' to NY, a routine would have been established that would have fostered communication. They would have gotten to know each other as parent and son in a 'normal' environment. Sooner or later Michael would have accepted that Walt the preteen has different needs and expectations than Walt the toddler; Walt would have grown to accept the reality of his new circumstances, gotten to know his father and grown to love him or, at the very least, adapted to life with him.

The crash interrupted that process and exacerbated all those rough edges, if you will. It made excruciatingly obvious to both Michael and Walt (and the audience, of course), just how much work it would have been needed to reach a workable relationship between them.

[Hodgepodge]

...the act itself was dramatic. but a true rescue, without all the other characters loitering in purpose, would have been better...BA, this got me to thinking. You may still get your all out rescue attempt. An "attempt", being the operative word!

I was captivated by Michael's reconnaissance speech. "There's not that many." "Rag-tag and dirty." "Only two weapons." With this dialog alone, Jack was willing to shoot Sawyer for the cache of guns. Even Locke was in on retrieving the weapons. What do you imagine is going to happen when they return to the hatch, and find one man wounded, possibly two dead women, and Fenry has flown the coop? They're going to arm every man, woman, and Aaron for a reprisal.

My question is this! Has Michael set in motion the complete annihilation or capture of the Losties? Was that part of the overall plan by "Him"? This rescue attempt will fail completely, bacause the "Others" know they're coming.

Michael! You've done a really bad thing now!

[gmbuffalo]

i think micheal is the first one to get the "sickness" that rousseau always talks about happened to her crew. rousseau does not have the sickness herself, as someone earlier said. my guess would be that the other castaways will not go and storm the others, although jack and some may make a strong push for that. i think this is more of a character study, and one part of the story is that dharma is somehow observing what happens to people in different situations they are put into. the rest of the season michael will by trying to kill the other castaways. they will find out it is him, and then agonize over what to do. but when all is said and done, they will kill michael by the end of the season.

[Hodgepodge]

Gmbuffalo, let me welcome you to Lost-TV. I'm sure you're going to enjoy the community. Make sure to read the Welcome (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2)forum, it's easy to get lost. Now to your post.


i think micheal is the first one to get the "sickness" that rousseau always talks about happened to her crew. rousseau does not have the sickness herself, as someone earlier said. my guess would be that the other castaways will not go and storm the others, although jack and some may make a strong push for that. i think this is more of a character study, and one part of the story is that dharma is somehow observing what happens to people in different situations they are put into. the rest of the season michael will by trying to kill the other castaways. they will find out it is him, and then agonize over what to do. but when all is said and done, they will kill michael by the end of the season.What is this sickness you think Michael has? How did he catch it? Why don't the rest of the Losties have it? You maybe proven right with time, but I don't think it's the sickness.

There's been a lot of speculation, this whole little ordeal is an experienment. Put on by some diabolical entity (Dharma). The "whisper voices" add credence to this theory. I wouldn't put it past TPTB to play this out.

If and when the Losties find out it was Michael who perpetrated these acts, it will be to late. He'll be killed in the melee, and they'll never have to make the choice of what to do with him.

And again, :welcome:

[LostHorizon]

This is, I'm sure, going to sound both convoluted and melodramatic, so please feel free to disregard it as nonsensical rambling.

Don't worry, AZ If I though what you wrote was nonsensical rambling, I would have told you a long time ago!
:p




Caveat: It is definitely not my intention, but I am aware that a lot of what follows may seem condescending, but parental/maternal love cannot be explained rationally; you either feel it or you don't. It's akin to explaining color to a blind person, if you will......
......I don't see anything sudden in Michael's feelings from Walt, nor do I consider them obssesion in any way, form, nor shape. From where I sit, Michael has loved Walt very deeply--from birth all the way up to Walt's kidnapping.

I understand what you are saying, but there is something definitely going on with Michael's behavior post crash.....Something that I believe is quite out of the ordinary, even usual for someone in that situation.
I guess we probably won't really know for sure until we see Michael's flashback episode, and / or the season finale.....




My question is this! Has Michael set in motion the complete annihilation or capture of the Losties? Was that part of the overall plan by "Him"? This rescue attempt will fail completely, bacause the "Others" know they're coming.!

i think micheal is the first one to get the "sickness" that rousseau always talks about happened to her crew. rousseau does not have the sickness herself, as someone earlier said. my guess would be that the other castaways will not go and storm the others, although jack and some may make a strong push for that.


It does look like it's leading to these scenarios....:scratchch





Michael! You've done a really bad thing now!


Bad is not the word I would use, Hodge..... ;)





What is this sickness you think Michael has? How did he catch it? Why don't the rest of the Losties have it? You maybe proven right with time, but I don't think it's the sickness.

Don't you remember, Hodge, What Danielle told Sayid? She also said something like "Watch your people closely". And those "Havids" that term that you first told me about, regarding the hallucinations and the voices that the Losties are experiencing ( "dave", the Black Horse, Jack's Dad, Charlie's visions, Lockes vison of the Beechcraft, Shannon's vison of Walt, Sawyers Warthog, Sayid's wishpers, etc.. ) are probably manifestations of this sickness which I do believe they have, in one form or another. I guess that Micheal is probably a little more susceptible than the rest, being the father of Walt, maybe he is special in his own little way?
As for how did they catch it? Well, if it's biological agent, very easily ( remember the sign on the blasted Swan hatch?, and if it is somehow related to electromagnetism and it's effects on the brain, well.......





If and when the Losties find out it was Michael who perpetrated these acts, it will be to late. He'll be killed in the melee, and they'll never have to make the choice of what to do with him.



Agreed!
:thumbs_up

It's probably might end up being like what happend to Ethan....

[Dezdemona]

azteclady - I completely agree with you that reason would have no place if there seemed even the most minute possibility of saving your child. However, I happen to really like Michael and therefore view the current story line with trepidation. How can the group possibly accept him again once they discover he's responsible for what might turn out to be two very deliberate murders?

I'd really hate for the show to lose him so I'll have my fingers crossed through these next episodes. Sigh....

[Hodgepodge]

...Don't you remember, Hodge, What Danielle told Sayid? She also said something like "Watch your people closely". And those "Havids" that term that you first told me about, regarding the hallucinations and the voices that the Losties are experiencing ( "dave", the Black Horse, Jack's Dad, Charlie's visions, Lockes vison of the Beechcraft, Shannon's vison of Walt, Sawyers Warthog, Sayid's wishpers, etc.. ) are probably manifestations of this sickness which I do believe they have, in one form or another...I remember exactly LostHorizon! I was curious whether Gmbuffalo had those manifestations in mind.

We use this term "sickness" to cover a lot of we've seen on Lost. I'm not sure all of them can be attributed to the term.


I guess that Micheal is probably a little more susceptible than the rest, being the father of Walt, maybe he is special in his own little way?
As for how did they catch it? Well, if it's biological agent, very easily ( remember the sign on the blasted Swan hatch?, and if it is somehow related to electromagnetism and it's effects on the brain, well.......Michael hasn't spent half the amount of time as some of the others in the hatch. Locke for instance. If anyone should be going postal, it should be him. I guess it could affect each person differently, but I still think Michael is dealing with other issues. His need to recover his son. "I've got to get my boy back!"

[azteclady]

Actually, given that the 'quarantine' sign was inside the hatch door, you'd think that it's the outside (the island itself) that would be infected. Danielle's crew, from what we've been told and pieced together, was never anywhere near any of the (known) hatches, yet she claims they got sick.

LostHorizon, Dezdemona thanks ;)

[LostHorizon]

You're very welcome, Azteclady!

Well, after last night's episode, it sure looks like Michaels role in the Hatch Massacre will soon be fully revealed, as per Libby's last word she managed to say before joining Ana Lucia....

[Hodgepodge]

...Well, after last night's episode, it sure looks like Michaels role in the Hatch Massacre will soon be fully revealed, as per Libby's last word she managed to say before joining Ana Lucia....Jack, rightfully took the comment the wrong way. He thought she was worried about him, instead of divulging the real culprit.

[Dezdemona]

Jack, rightfully took the comment the wrong way. He thought she was worried about him, instead of divulging the real culprit.
And yet, when Boone managed to utter only "Locke" with HIS last dying breath, Jack immediately took it as an accusation of responsibility and confronted Locke as though he'd murdered Boone. Jack's an odd duck, to phrase it generously. Sigh...

[Hodgepodge]

And yet, when Boone managed to utter only "Locke" with HIS last dying breath, Jack immediately took it as an accusation of responsibility and confronted Locke as though he'd murdered Boone. Jack's an odd duck, to phrase it generously. Sigh...Dez, you're going to have to read the transcripts of The Greater Good again. Boone does more than just mention Locke's name. He says his accident was caused by a plane falling on him. Not how Locke says it happened by him falling off a cliff. He tells Jack, Locke said not to tell anybody about the hatch. I still don't think having that information would've saved Boone's life, but Jack did.

[boonian androphile]

I believe that Boone said something to the effect: We found a hatch...John said not to tell...etc.

There was a vague story in Boone's injury-inspired disclosures. Although the parallel between his and Libby's death-bed utterances, and the spitting up of blood, is interesting, Michael's actions carry a more factual component (now that the concept of brainwashing has sadly been dispatched:mad: ), which, in my opinion, ranks Michael's action/motivations somewhat less interesting than Locke's from season 1. I fear that Ana's death was meant to be a public execution. In terms of the narrative, I would have been happier with a little more mystery: just the discovery of the fatality, the near-fatality, and the seemingly plausible arm injury.

[cautiousguyonlost]

I totally think that Michael could be turned to get his son back. He hasnt seen him for awhile and maybe this time he will do anything to get him back. Why did he had to shoot two women in the first place. Michael is getting into more trouble.