Boobophiles - Locke's Real Fan Club [Archive]

Homer Noodleman

06-10-08, 11:13 AM

RangerMel.

Locke has always had a curious obsession with what Jack thinks. I suppose it reaches all the way back to Season One when he discovered Jack chasing Christian around the jungle. When you think about it, Locke has badgered Jack an awful lot about joining his side -- he even whined to Kate about it on the trek back from the hatch blowing.

Considering the abuse he has suffered from authority figures because he is such a monumental sucker, it is interesting that this all circulates around the one person he pushed into the role of an authority figure. His attempt to entangle Jack into his view of the island reminds me of Ben telling Jack he wanted him to want to do the operation and be part of the Others.

I do think that Rose, while having a small part, has an important one. Her reaction to the island's weirdness is illuminating. There are a whole lot of people elevating it into a place to be worshiped, but Rose, who because of her cure on the island can lay as much claim to its blessing of her as the Chosen One as anybody else, ignores, and even mistrusts, its seduction.

I've said elsewhere that I think the island's chosen one is nothing more than the person stupid enough to enter the cabin. Locke has been set up since Season One as the person stupid enough to enter that cabin without a thought in his head but those of his glorious destiny. Well, now he is in a coffin, but he apparently pleaded with Jack until the end to join the cult and drink the koolaide.

Kenji III

06-10-08, 01:09 PM

I love how in "What Kate Did", Locke still hadn't memorized the numbers.

Homer Noodleman

06-10-08, 01:58 PM

Hehehe... yea, anything that requires the slightest bit of effort seems to be of little interest to Locke. He expects everything to be given to him on a platter.

"Oh please, sob-sob, tells me what to do next oh Magic Coconut Tree."

silversurfer

06-10-08, 02:09 PM

:popcorn:

I would also say he seems like a likeable person, but lately he's had too many moments where he gives in to his demons and acts like a ... jerk. Like on the trek to Otherton when he declared their group wasn't a democracy,

That was some B.S. on the writers' part because last season he was this all inclusive guy that told everyone he was doing things differently than Jack and encouraged others to go into the jungle to find out where JKS were. Now, he's claiming that Jack was the one that led this democracy and that he himself was running things differently again.

Kenji III

06-10-08, 04:49 PM

John Charles

06-10-08, 04:57 PM

I wonder how you'd feel if your plane crashed on a mysterious island where your paralyzed legs were miraculously healed and then you came face to face with smokey. Plus all the other weird crap he's been through.

I bet you'd be listening for voices too, if you aren't already.

Dew

06-10-08, 05:59 PM

Now, now... we don't pester you in your fan club.

Drew,

Yes, Locke often in child-like in his naivety. For example, I think TPTB use Rose largely as a counterpoint to him. She's actually had a greater miracle then him -- after all, she gained her life and not just the use of her legs -- but she hasn't been so simple minded about the miracle the island provided as he has.

While she accepts it, he insists in making it a gift given to him, and not even considering what price tag he might be asked to pay. That is, like a child he centers the universe squarely about himself. Rose on the other hand is much more mature and nuanced in how she treats her cure. While she appreciates it, she by no means feels she has to self her soul because she received it.

Yes. IMO Locke is like a child in the sense of curiosity. This is all new and he is learning, albeit sometimes the hard way, as a child would. Trial and error. Yes the scope can be quite narrow yet I see him maturing as the series goes along. Rose is the more spiritual of the 2. She is the most spiritual of the entire cast.

Life experience speaks volumes on how people react to various stimuli. As we age we look at life so differently. Almost everyone in their 20's thinks they know a great deal until they hit 40, 50 etc and then the epiphany. It is all good tho, all good. One can chose look at me see what I did or can do while one can chose to learn from the experience and help others to avoid or get thru difficult times. Once again Rose showed this with Charlie while Claire was take by Ethan. :)

casual-viewer

06-10-08, 06:01 PM

Here's my theory on Locke's devolution into boobishness. Finally a thread where maybe I won't start a fight about it.

We know that the island is a place of healing for some people, including Locke. But I believe that he was not only healed physically, but he was temporarily healed from being a boob in the first season. All the preparation he did for his walkabout sure helped. So he got to temporarily be the hunter and show off his knifing skills, but just as there have been points when his legs stopped working, there are many instances when his idiocy has returned.

He reminds me of one of those guys who just tries so dang hard to be cooler and smarter than they are, to the point of taking lessons from the Fonz or studying up on specific topics, but they can only keep it up for so long.

I'm hard pressed to think of instances where he has done anything truly heroic or even smart in the later seasons, and if he has, then I chalk that up to the island's healing power as I mentioned before- the healing of the boobishness.

I think his role has gone from protagonist to foil. What used to be Jack vs. Locke became Jack vs. Ben and we (I) just didn't notice right away.

Cmdr Spock

06-10-08, 11:04 PM

While I'll be the first to admit that Locke's behavior is pathetically boobish when not outright dangerous to the people around him, I have to wonder how much of that is due to his upbringing and life experiences. He was a foster kid, not a lot of indication that he had any positive real world role models or very healthy relationships growing up. Escaping into books to find a sense of self identity. Constant humiliation and disappointment growing up, not much evidence of any healthy relationships with other people as an adult, is it really much of a suprise that he can't seem to put much value in other people? There seems to be a huge amount of dysfunctionality as well, like the stereotypical abused child he seems to be in constant search for a new abusive father figure. I find it extremely odd that he pursues a relationship with Cooper, who never had anything to do with him until he needed a kidney, and ignores the possibility of establishing a relationship with his biological mother. Doesn't he at least want to know the circumstances of his birth, why she chose that name? As tenuous as it was, at least they did have a connection.

Locke's behavior on the island towards others seems to be pretty much seeing them as the means to an end, whether as stepping stones in pursuit of his vision of self realization or as someone new to tell him what to do. He pays lips service to the idea that they are all special people brought there for a reason, but in his actions is consistently willing to toss others aside as they no longer serve his needs, abandoning Boone at the caves without any word of explanation, leaving Eko and Charlie to their fates after the dynamite goes off, shoving Mikhail into the sonic fence just to see what happens, taking Hurley hostage at gunpoint, denying him the chance of escape from the island, and then tossing him aside when Ben says he's no longer needed.

It should be interesting to see if John can actually make a true leap of faith and start seeing other people as people before he buys the farm, or if he will die as he has lived, as an ignorant, arrogant, dangerous boob who continues to make his decisions based on what he sees on DharmaTV.

RangerMel

06-11-08, 03:20 AM

That was some B.S. on the writers' part because last season he was this all inclusive guy that told everyone he was doing things differently than Jack and encouraged others to go into the jungle to find out where JKS were. Now, he's claiming that Jack was the one that led this democracy and that he himself was running things differently again.

Yeah, you know ... Locke seems to have the most notably screwed up writing for his character. It's like about mid-season 2 different people began to write his stuff and just changed direction with him.

gertie

06-11-08, 04:04 AM

Yeah, you know ... Locke seems to have the most notably screwed up writing for his character. It's like about mid-season 2 different people began to write his stuff and just changed direction with him.

I agree.

I hated the last few episodes where Locke is looking at Ben like some lost puppy-dog. (I didn't hate the episodes, just the Locke part.)

Homer Noodleman

06-11-08, 04:16 AM

http://www.engineguy.org/pix/locke_toys.jpg

I think it is consistent with Season One Locke. Walkabout, in its flashback sequences and especially from the vantage point of four seasons under the belt, pegs Locke pretty clearly.

Throughout his entire flashback he is shown to retreat into fantasy. They start with GL12 talking to Colonel Locke, only to have the camera pull back and show he is a cubicle drone making an idiot of himself around his coworkers. At lunch we see him gas-bagging on about what a master strategist he is while he is sitting in front of a game board with toy soldiers on it. Then we get the jaw dropping revelation that he has bought an airline ticket to Australia for some phonesex operator he is crazy mad in love with. It is all capped off by his 'spiritual walkabout' obviously being some tourist farce as the walkabouters depart from the parking lot in an air conditioned tour bus.

The whole flashback establishes him as being delusional, and when he gets to the island and can walk, his delusions of grandeur kick in big time. From day one he has believed his own baloney about being Chosen for some great destiny. Again, contrast that with Rose who has had an even more significant cure on the island -- since she is far saner she doesn't go off the rails like the boob.

As for when it becomes obvious is he is a buffoon, I would say that after Walkabout, Deus Ex Machina was the major give away. Up until then, because we didn't know the source of his seeming wisdom, it seemed like he might know what he was talking about. However, then we saw his vision and we saw how befuddled he was by it. He fumbles around and gets Boone killed for no good reason. The island sacrifice he always wind bags on about never got the hatch open like he thought it would. In fact, later on when Eko reads his visions correctly, we discover Locke's dream was never about the Swan, rather it was always about the Pearl.

The flashback in Deus Ex Machina is the 6 ton character development anvil dropping on our head.

He gets conned out of his kidney in such a transparent manner it ends up being a more embarrassing bit of sheer stupidity than thinking a phonesex operator was your sweetie. Key-rist, it wasn't even a clever scam. Any eight year old watching the show would have been yelling "don't trust him ya lunkhead."

And so by the end of the episode he ends up whimpering outside of his father's barred gate, just like he is whimpering over the locked hatch on the island. I think the message was pretty clear by that point. Locke was a completely delusional sucker who would get taken as a mark by anybody who called him son. His dad got his kidney, the island got his soul.

Kenji III

06-11-08, 04:06 PM

Poor John Locke. I was just rewatched "One of Them" and the guy was such a boob in that episode too. Jack told him to shut up and he just took it. And seeing him struggle to get out of Jack's grasp so he could enter in the numbers was just hilarious. He also forgot the numbers again which is just sad at that point. How the hell did he do well in science?

Bobb

06-11-08, 04:54 PM

iWonder

06-11-08, 05:01 PM

Hey, Homie, you know I'm in. :D

For me, Locke is less a "boob" and more of a "pawn". I have a lot of sympathy for his sad life, and the fact that he is so desperate to be liked/loved. I think the most poignant thing about his line to Jack about lying to himself was that Locke is doing the EXACT same thing. How else to rationalize his continued subservience to Ben??

I'd be interested in people's take on the significance of his on again/off again paralysis... I'm beginning to think it's the island's way of manipulating him back into line, kind of like a rolled up newspaper on the nose. It seems that anytime Locke is on the verge of questioning his "instructions", the island smacks him with the idea that if he doesn't do what it wants, it will punish him. Kind of the opposite of have faith and be rewarded: doubt and I will take away what was given. It works. He snaps back and tows the "blind faith" line again instead of taking a step back and using his reason.

Kenji III

06-11-08, 05:03 PM

casual-viewer

06-11-08, 06:34 PM

Cmdr Spock

06-11-08, 06:44 PM

Let's try to think of instances where Locke is not a boob, and discuss whether or not there's hope for Locke B.C. (Beyond Coffin).

What other Non-Boob Locke moments can we add?

I thought the improvised flamethrower from a can of hairspray and a lighter wasn't totally boobish (though I imagine Locke picked that up from watching movies...) Going after a polar bear with one takes stones at least.

Hey, Homie, you know I'm in. :D

I'd be interested in people's take on the significance of his on again/off again paralysis... I'm beginning to think it's the island's way of manipulating him back into line, kind of like a rolled up newspaper on the nose. It seems that anytime Locke is on the verge of questioning his "instructions", the island smacks him with the idea that if he doesn't do what it wants, it will punish him. Kind of the opposite of have faith and be rewarded: doubt and I will take away what was given. It works. He snaps back and tows the "blind faith" line again instead of taking a step back and using his reason.

I think that's a pretty accurate analysis of the paralysis and the island's use of it to manipulate him. Probably the best way to control John too, I don't see him being motivated as much by rewards as he is by being given instructions and punishment if he fails to follow them. Given the reward of the ability to walk didn't seem to do much other than make him think his Walter Mitty fantasies had come true.

Locke&Load

06-11-08, 09:15 PM

Well, blow me down with a feather!!!!!:D Homer the moderator started a club where all the Locke antagonists can complain about Lockes portrayal as a bumbling boob, and not pester the weblo's in our own club as well.
I won't be joining, as I don't share your view on the character or weblonians for that matter. But I won't however ignore the thread. I always get a little laugh at all the recycled "Locke is a boob" propaganda, views, and opinions.
And no, I won't pester anyone, let alone post here. I appreciate, respect and dare I say admire your gesture in setting up this club. There has been to much bickering, flaming, and trolling in reguard to Locke and his fans. Good Luck:Cheers:

iWonder

06-11-08, 10:55 PM

Somebody, maybe iWonder? pointed out before that it was about making up for his foster home childhood. ITA that he has a sensitivity in that regard.

Hi, CV! My goodness, you have a great memory!! I'm jealous. (I had to search to find it. :))

Yes, in another thread we were trying to reconcile how "warrior" Locke could have parental instincts. I mentioned that his kindheartedness might stem from having such awful, awful parental figures and the subsequent "I'll never be like that when I'm a parent" thoughts that might ensue.

I was just watching "White Rabbit". (Egad I miss the old Jack and Locke!) Locke was both boobish and not boobish in that one. He was very good at reading people and analyzing behavior, but like all the others, he wasn't about to step into the leadership role. He pretty much thrust Jack into it. Probably his smartest move!! ;)

This line leapt out at me-- Jack is telling him that he thinks he's going crazy because of his hallucination, and Locke says:
"Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner." Sound like anyone else we know?

casual-viewer

06-12-08, 02:01 AM

This line leapt out at me-- Jack is telling him that he thinks he's going crazy because of his hallucination, and Locke says:
"Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner."
Sound like anyone else we know?

totally!

Homer Noodleman

06-12-08, 02:34 AM

Let's try to think of instances where Locke is not a boob, and discuss whether or not there's hope for Locke B.C. (Beyond Coffin).

#1 - Tricks Claire into making a crib for Aaron under the pretense that he needs help with a project of his own. Not only does he do a wonderful thing for Claire, but it also suggests a bit of philosophy, that we don't always see our own contributions to society for what they are. Claire thinks John is handing her a bit of make-work because he pities her, but instead he's trying to show her that she makes worthwhile contributions to the world, that's there more to her than she suspects.

Bobb,

Most of his non-boobish moments seem to be clustered in Season One, and he has been disintegrating ever since.

There is an interesting plot thread that binds Claire and Kate to him and reveals his slow descent. When Claire is kidnapped Locke immediately springs into looking for her, even reasonably suggesting that it might be best if Jack stop crashing about making so much noise and stay in the camp instead. Then comes the split in the trail and Locke literally, as well as figuratively, follows the wrong branch.

This leads him to discovering the hatch, and he really starts sliding downhill from there. For example, would Locke have continued to search for Claire had he not been detoured into hatch obsession? I think he would have.

However, he did find the hatch and just like he couldn't resist sitting outside of his father's locked gate, he couldn't resist the hatch. Claire's rescue is forgotten (although, to be fair to him, her rescue is forgotten by all the other castaways as well) and instead he stops hunting boar for the camp and just sits around the hatch frustrated that it won't pop open.

The next intersection between him, Claire and Kate is when Charlie goes crazy and starts kidnapping Aaron in his sleep. Locke gives Charlie a well deserved sucker punch and then tells Claire he'll move his shelter closer to her to watch out for her. Only he doesn't. The hatch is open by this point, and the lure of the button is far too great for him to resist. Thus, it becomes Kate of all people, who ends up intervening and helping Claire when Crazy Danielle shows up.

By the end of Season Four Locke has lost all interest in Claire and Aaron. When the Othersville is attacked he leaves her to her fate and barricades himself into a house. He even refuses to open the door when Sawyer arrives with Aaron. It is left to Hurley to save Sawyer and Aaron. Of course in the future it is Kate protecting Aaron.

So you have a progression of Locke being solicitous and avuncular towards Claire in Season One, to Locke being completely indifferent towards her in Season Four. As he's been drawn deeper into his fascination with the island, he has matched that with a an ever increasing distance from Claire and Aaron. The result -- dream Locke's warning comes true.

Homer Noodleman

06-12-08, 04:08 AM

All non-boob moments for Locke are when he is being himself, a farmer. When he is trying to be a hunter, he is a boob.

I love Locke the Farmer.

ETA: Don't get me wrong though. I may poke fun at him, but he is one of Lost's best characters. His centrics almost always make me tear up.

Kenji,

I've read you say elsewhere that the hunter/farmer dichotomy is very important to Locke. Good call IMHO. I agree completely -- his problem is he's a farmer and not a hunter.

Yea, he is a very entertaining character.

Somebody wondered about his redemption... I think that depends on why he returned to get the Oceanic Six. If it is because he is still following orders and chasing his destiny, then his redemption, if he ever gets it, will have to happen during his Ghost Boob state. If he came back because he finally realized what a sap he's been and to repair the damage he's caused, then it started before he died.

gertie

06-12-08, 04:47 AM

Hi, CV! My goodness, you have a great memory!! I'm jealous. (I had to search to find it. :))

Yes, in another thread we were trying to reconcile how "warrior" Locke could have parental instincts. I mentioned that his kindheartedness might stem from having such awful, awful parental figures and the subsequent "I'll never be like that when I'm a parent" thoughts that might ensue.

I was just watching "White Rabbit". (Egad I miss the old Jack and Locke!) Locke was both boobish and not boobish in that one. He was very good at reading people and analyzing behavior, but like all the others, he wasn't about to step into the leadership role. He pretty much thrust Jack into it. Probably his smartest move!! ;)

This line leapt out at me-- Jack is telling him that he thinks he's going crazy because of his hallucination, and Locke says:
"Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner." Sound like anyone else we know?

Yeah.

Well, blow me down with a feather!!!!!:D Homer the moderator started a club where all the Locke antagonists can complain about Lockes portrayal as a bumbling boob, and not pester the weblo's in our own club as well.

I won't be joining, as I don't share your view on the character or weblonians for that matter. But I won't however ignore the thread. I always get a little laugh at all the recycled "Locke is a boob" propaganda, views, and opinions.

And no, I won't pester anyone, let alone post here. I appreciate, respect and dare I say admire your gesture in setting up this club. There has been to much bickering, flaming, and trolling in reguard to Locke and his fans. Good Luck:Cheers:

HEE HAW! Come on. It's to discuss Locke in a different manner.

Wait, there's a Jack bashing thread somewhere ( how many? ) , that tries to compare Locke to Jack. Come on, be fair. Is there only one side? Your side?

iWonder

06-12-08, 12:40 PM

I’m very glad to have the chance to discuss Locke objectively. I’m familiar with all the posters here, and I think I can say based on their posts elsewhere that we don’t hate Locke by any stretch of the imagination. Yet, if you try to talk about the character in anything less than favorable fashion, you get hassled, and any meaningful discussion gets sidetracked. The same thing was happening to me trying to talk about Jack. (which is the main reason I started THREADJack.)

It’s just about character study; its nice to be able to talk about these characters, and acknowledge both the good AND the bad.

And frankly, I think some of the early talk against this thread was some of the funniest hypocritical remarks I’ve seen in a while. “Sure its fun when I post my hate against Jack, but its disgraceful to have a tongue in cheek negative Locke thread” ?!?! Um, okay... :rolleyez:

John Charles

06-12-08, 12:56 PM

That's fine, except when you consider the thread title here. It's clearly provocative.

iWonder

06-12-08, 01:08 PM

Which part is considered provocative? The "boob" or the "real"? Sorry, I honestly don't know... I just assumed everyone would know it was Homer being Homer, you know? :)

ETA: I do see that "boobophile" would be considered negative, but then, it would let people know its a "hate" club... ? Though, after reading a while, they might see its pretty tame on the hate part... Either way, people would know going into it knowing what to expect.

John Charles

06-12-08, 01:14 PM

Either way, it's provocative.

He's calling Locke a boob in the thread title and then calling it a fan club. The OP, Homer, who we all know likes to argue that Locke is a boob, is being an ass by doing this IMO.

casual-viewer

06-12-08, 01:43 PM

I just don't get it. I love watching LOST, it's a story and characters created by writers. In some cases I feel like characters are written to be a certain way on purpose, in other cases, like we've been discussing with Locke, it seems like the writing has maybe degenerated or at least changed direction. I remember seeing a quote from an S1 writer who was disappointed that they turned Locke into having daddy issues when they had already planned to go that route with Jack.

But the vehemence of character love/hate that goes on... and turns into personal insults or attacks to posters... like I said, I don't get it. You don't have to like one character and hate the other, or always defend/always attack a character because you are in their fan club/hate club. I guess I don't have the history in this forum to know who is on what "team" and the feuds behind the feuds, but it just seems silly to me.

That just kills an interesting discussion. I was enjoying the part about finding the "non-boob" moments, because in my series rewatch, I'm coming away with a totally different impression of Locke, Jack, Sawyer and Kate that I thought I had. And I have to say that I need some help remembering why we ever thought Locke had his act together, but I know I used to.

ETA: the provocative thread title is what brought me in here, and I think that's the point of a thread title.

iWonder

06-12-08, 01:50 PM

:yeah:
LOL, I didn't see anyone complaining about his other provocative thread title, "Desmond & Penny are despicable"... Not one of the Des/Penny fans said boo about it. ETA: just read further, one person mentioned it was provocative, but wasn't particularly angry, and certainly didn't attack the poster personally.

And correct me if I'm wrong, Opaque Palace, but didn't you used to post here under a different name? Why so angry? :Hippy:

John Charles

06-12-08, 02:22 PM

Like I said, Homer has been advocating Locke as a boob for a long time. I don't bother arguing whether he's right or wrong as I don't care about engaging in such a discussion. But the thread title says "Locke's real fan club" and it's placed in the Terry O'Quinn section - not general discussion.

So I ask you, knowing that Homer thinks Locke is a joke, what business does he have starting a Locke fan club, especially when he is calling Locke fans Boobophiles right in the thread title? It's belittling. He knows this and he did it to provoke Locke fans.

Kenji III

06-12-08, 03:07 PM

Opaque, you must remember that all this is for a television show that is not real. It shouldn't belittle anybody.

John Charles

06-12-08, 03:42 PM

I don't see how that matters here. Fans of anything are fans right? Does it matter if it is a tv character or a comic book or a historical figure?

iWonder

06-12-08, 03:49 PM

So I ask you, knowing that Homer thinks Locke is a joke, what business does he have starting a Locke fan club, especially when he is calling Locke fans Boobophiles right in the thread title? It's belittling. He knows this and he did it to provoke Locke fans.

Okay, now I get where you're coming from... thank you for humoring me and talking about it. I do see your point. It’s actually very ironic in the end because I had almost the same feeling when Crandyman started the “unconscionable” MF appreciation thread; but I never resorted to nastiness against Crandy.

Had you called Homer a wiseass, I would have agreed 100%. ;)

Anyway, I think because I have a 4 and 7 year old, I’m on autopilot when it comes to being a mediator. I also think its very important to hold the ground on any threads that will let us talk about the characters without all the love/hate static. I’m not sure how the title will be received by everyone else and whether it will encourage that. But, its not my thread and not my call.

I do see both sides on this and now I’m going to step back and take my nosiness with me.

All I have to say is, boys, boys, let’s not fight, okay?! Can't we discuss this over a cool, frosty mug?? :cheers2:

John Charles

06-12-08, 04:00 PM

Okay, now I get where you're coming from... thank you for humoring me and talking about it. I do see your point. It’s actually very ironic in the end because I had almost the same feeling when Crandyman started the “unconscionable” MF appreciation thread; but I never resorted to nastiness against Crandy.

Where did Crandy put that thread? If it was in the GD area or somewhere similar, then who cares. If this thread had been started there then I probably would make a comment or two and move on. But starting a mock Locke Fan Club thread in the Terry O'Quinn section is clearly meant to provoke.

Now, I never said that it's against forum rules or anything. I just think it's shallow.

Cmdr Spock

06-12-08, 04:00 PM

knowing that Homer thinks Locke is a joke, what business does he have starting a Locke fan club, especially when he is calling Locke fans Boobophiles right in the thread title? It's belittling. He knows this and he did it to provoke Locke fans.

That's kinda assuming that people who think Locke is a boob can't still be fans of the character, an attitude I find more than a little annoying. I haven't thought much of Locke as a fictional person since Boone's death and John's bailing out on the whole situation, later trying to justify the death as a "sacrifice the island demanded," showing up at the funeral in a shirt drenched with the guy's blood, etc. A guy who destroys the Swan station computer, an action that has the possible consequence of destroying the world, as far as he knows, on the basis of intelligence gathered from a 20-odd year old videotape is a serious idiot as far as I'm concerned. Yet I still find Terry O'Q to be a fine actor and Locke's conflicts with the other characters to be central to the storyline of the show, it wouldn't be the same without him. Yet whenever you try to seriously discuss the character's flaws or mistakes, the rabid pro-Locke fans jump all over you, not even willing to admit the character has flaws or makes mistakes. I mean, what kind of serious discussion can you have with someone who still refuses to admit Locke killed Naomi, or even after seeing John's dead body in a coffin won't admit the character is dead?

Just because some of us do think Locke is a boob doesn't mean we don't like the character and what he brings to the show. At least now we have a thread to discuss the aspects of the character that the vocal majority of his fans refuse to even acknowledge exist.

Boobophiles IMO is not a descriptor of all Locke fans, just those of us who are willing to take the good with the bad. I'm a Boobophile and proud of it.

John Charles

06-12-08, 04:05 PM

I'm a Boobophile.
Well said.

By the way, I wasn't objecting to the content of the thread. You go on and on like that's what I've said. I could really care less about it.

I simply don't like this thread title and I know from seeing Homer's previous posts in other threads that he is NOT a Locke fan. He is a Locke basher and I believe that this thread title was meant more to provoke Locke fans than to initiate conversation about his flaws. There's plenty of other threads around for that in which you don't see me posting, right? My nearly 10,000 posts here mostly stay away from that debate.

So, thanks for sharing your fervor, even if it is directed at an issue we're not actually discussing.

casual-viewer

06-12-08, 04:14 PM

That's kinda assuming that people who think Locke is a boob can't still be fans of the character, an attitude I find more than a little annoying. I haven't thought much of Locke as a fictional person since Boone's death and John's bailing out on the whole situation, later trying to justify the death as a "sacrifice the island demanded," showing up a the funeral in a shirt drenched with the guy's blood, etc. A guy who destroys the Swan station computer, an action that has the possible consequence of destroying the world, as far as he knows, on the basis of intelligence gathered from a 20-odd year old vidoetape is a serious idiot as far as I'm concerned. Yet I still find Terry O'Q to be a fine actor and Locke's conflicts with the other characters to be central to the storyline of the show, it wouldn't be the same without him. Yet whenever you try to seriously discuss the character's flaws or mistakes, the rabid pro-Locke fans jump all over you, not even willing to admit the character has flaws or makes mistakes. I mean, what kind of serious discussion can you have with someone who still refuses to admit Locke killed Naomi, or even after seeing John's dead body in a coffin won't admit the character is dead?

Just because some of us do think Locke is a boob doesn't mean we don't like the character and what he brings to the show. At least now we have a thread to discuss the aspects of the character that the vocal majority of his fans refuse to even acknowledge exist.

Boobophiles IMO is not a descriptor of all Locke fans, just those of us who are willing to take the good with the bad. I'm a Boobophile and proud of it.

Well put.
All (well, most) of John's boobish actions and decisions have been necessary to either drive the plot to a greater reveal or continue/create a conflict. If everybody ran around being perfect all the time, it wouldn't be a very exciting show. Just like in a thriller when you shout, "don't go into the basement!" you know that they have to, even though it's the dumbest possible action they could take. And it's not like he's the only one. Kate, Jack, even Sayid have missed opportunities to kill Others, make sure somebody was dead, etc.

iWonder

06-12-08, 04:34 PM

Where did Crandy put that thread? If it was in the GD area or somewhere similar, then who cares. If this thread had been started there then I probably would make a comment or two and move on. But starting a mock Locke Fan Club thread in the Terry O'Quinn section is clearly meant to provoke.

Now, I never said that it's against forum rules or anything. I just think it's shallow.

Crandy's thread was in the Matthew Fox character forum. And, as far as I can see, the character forums are places to put love threads, hate threads, discussion threads, and tongue-in-cheek threads. Anything goes, as long as its about that particular character. That part of your argument does not hold water.

You might want to take a step back and consider that most of your ire is due to the fact that someone is dissing a character you like. It happens to all of us. (Actually, some of us more than others! ;))

iWonder

06-12-08, 04:40 PM

Now, I would suggest that we are doing the very thing that we did not want to do, and that is get derailed into discussing fan matters.

Fellow Boobophiles, has anyone else gone back to earlier seasons recently, and if so, how is your perspective different viewing it through season 4 eyes?

Dew

06-12-08, 05:25 PM

I think I will go back to the JF forum and re-examine the pictures :p

Homer Noodleman

06-12-08, 08:35 PM

You're confusing philes with phobes. Here is the definition of phile (http://www.yourdictionary.com/phile-suffix). The name isn't meant to be insulting, rather it is intended to clearly label the thread as a club for people who quite enjoy the character Locke, but who consider him to be a boob.

As for the "Locke's Real Fan Club"-- oh, grow some skin. It was a tongue in cheek swipe at Locke fans who insist on trying to label us boobophiles as Locke haters. You don't hear us whining about that, do you?

ETA: Yes, we should get this thread's discussion back on track.

casual-viewer

06-12-08, 10:03 PM

Fellow Boobophiles, has anyone else gone back to earlier seasons recently, and if so, how is your perspective different viewing it through season 4 eyes?

That's a big question...I don't have a real cogent answer.

One thing I've been thinking about is the episode with his flashback to the commune. I realize it was to establish him as a Mark, I don't know if that really sunk in with me the first time, as to how much of Ben's pawn he would become. But aside from making that point that he was gullible and wasn't a killer, that backstory was just plain weird.

More weird is the turnaround from him being unable to kill to then killing Naomi. He couldn't kill the cop even though he desperately wanted to save his place with the commune family. He couldn't even kill Cooper who had tried to kill him, and would have sealed his position as the island's chosen one. But he doesn't hesitate to throw his knife at Naomi. Can this be reconciled with an actual character development or was it just what the plot needed to happen?

Cmdr Spock

06-12-08, 10:57 PM

More weird is the turnaround from him being unable to kill to then killing Naomi. He couldn't kill the cop even though he desperately wanted to save his place with the commune family. He couldn't even kill Cooper who had tried to kill him, and would have sealed his position as the island's chosen one. But he doesn't hesitate to throw his knife at Naomi. Can this be reconciled with an actual character development or was it just what the plot needed to happen?

That's something that's always bothered me too, despite all his self-professed identity as a hunter, he couldn't kill his own father, a guy who clearly had it coming (sorry, I rewatched The Brig last night), yet a few episodes later he's chucking a knife through the spine of an unarmed woman he's never met. As much as it has been (by some people) attempted to be explained away as bad writing, I do think it's actual character development. Both Ben and Richard say that Locke can't be a part of what the Others got going on until his father is dead, I read that as Locke being too haunted by whatever demons of his past possess him re his non relationship with his father, he can't move on as long as he's still focused on that. Cooper's death frees Locke from all that, and allows him to become more true to his visions, whatever it is that the island wants him to be. Unfortunately that seems to be the kind of guy who can commit a murder that serves no purpose whatsoever.

Homer Noodleman

06-13-08, 12:51 AM

Joyce: Officer, sir. A British officer. We're here to blow up the bridge, sir!
Nicholson: Blow up the bridge?
Joyce: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. British commando orders, sir.
Nicholson (in disbelief): Blow up the bridge!?

Because I think they were drawing parallels between Cooper's locked gate and the locked hatch, I think Cooper is symbolic of the island power that grips Locke's imagination.

I think that Locke's whole backstory, from the kidney scam, to losing Helen because he sits outside of Cooper's house every night, to getting tossed out the window, to still not being able to confront Cooper is foreshadowing of the path he is going to take with the island strangeness.

As such, Cooper is far different to Locke than Naomi, Claire, Aaron and the redshirts who got killed. To him they're just more Boones to be sacrificed. Cooper on the other hand offered him validation, like he now thinks the island offers destiny. I think his inability to see the writing on the wall with regards to Cooper is going to be played out again when his island destiny turns out to be just another tawdry kidney scam.

The quote above is from The Bridge On The River Kwai. Nicholson is a British officer in a prison camp who, in a struggle of wills with the Japanese commander of the camp, goes so far off the rails that he builds a bridge for the enemy. It never crosses his mind what an abject collaborator he actually is until it is nearly too late.

I've always figured that would be Locke's fate, "Blow up the bridge!?" The question is, will his realization of his own boobosity come in time for him to fall on the plunger and ignite the dynamite, or will he just end up face down and dead in the mud of the river bed while somebody else has to step forward?

silversurfer

06-13-08, 12:55 AM

Because I think they were drawing parallels between Cooper's locked gate and the locked hatch, I think Cooper is symbolic of the island power that grips Locke's imagination.

I think that Locke's whole backstory, from the kidney scam, to losing Helen because he sits outside of Cooper's house every night, to getting tossed out the window, to still not being able to confront Cooper is foreshadowing of the path he is going to take with the island strangeness.

As such, Cooper is far different to Locke than Naomi, Claire, Aaron and the redshirts who got killed. To him they're just more Boones to be sacrificed. Cooper on the other hand offered him validation, like he now thinks the island offers destiny. I think his inability to see the writing on the wall with regards to Cooper is going to be played out again when his island destiny turns out to be just another tawdry kidney scam.

The quote above is from The Bridge On The River Kwai. Nicholson is a British officer in a prison camp who, in a struggle of wills with the Japanese commander of the camp, goes so far off the rails that he builds a bridge for the enemy. It never crosses his mind what an abject collaborator he actually is until it is nearly too late.

I've always figured that would be Locke's fate, "Blow up the bridge!?" The question is, will his realization of his own boobosity come in time for him to fall on the plunger and ignite the dynamite, or will he just end up face down and dead in the mud of the river bed while somebody else has to step forward?

Why not? We've already had Desmond and Hurley and Jin and Charlie, whistling Colonel Bogey's March.

iWonder

06-13-08, 01:16 PM

The question is, will his realization of his own boobosity come in time for him to fall on the plunger and ignite the dynamite, or will he just end up face down and dead in the mud of the river bed while somebody else has to step forward?

I tend to think him being in the coffin is an indication that his realization has happened. You said yourself, why did he leave the island he swore never to leave... I'm hoping his journey to the mainland to get the others is part of an attempt to wipe up the mess. (I think he offed himself.) Although, a strategy involving putting yourself dead in a coffin is a bit out there... Gotta have faith, though, right?

Why not? We've already had Desmond and Hurley and Jin and Charlie, whistling Colonel Bogey's March.*jaw drops* Wow, wouldn't this be something. Homer, did you think of Bridge On the River Kwai back when they did the whistle, or is this just serendipity?

Homer Noodleman

06-13-08, 01:34 PM

iWonder,

I first mentioned (http://losttv-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=88763&postcount=24) the Bridge On the River Kwai Nicholson scene before the whistling occurred on Lost.

It is hard to figure out how they're going to bail Locke out. In a conventional narrative, rescue from the island would have been the climax, and during that is when the light bulb would have gone off for Locke. However, in Lost the initial rescue is not that climax.

Further, by putting him in the coffin the really just use the same story telling device they used for Jack and Kate in the Season III finale -- how did they come to be where they were? Why was Kate seemingly together, but Jack a pill-popping, suicidal drunk?

This latest finale raises the question as to what landed Locke in the coffin. You would think Season V will answer that, but that leaves how would they give Locke screen time in Season VI a total mystery (I think paralyzing spider bites is a shark jump too far, even for the Lost writers).

They've really set up a nice mystery.

casual-viewer

06-13-08, 01:46 PM

Great discussion! And in that context, I can even see the relevance of that dumb commune backstory. It was a preview- his first failed opportunity to kill in order to remain a part of the utopia (although it's a stretch to call the island a utopia) he loves. C.Spock, I could almost go with you, except that he still got Sawyer to take care of Cooper, and I don't know if the psychological progression spoils should go to Locke for that. I guess in a sense he does have one less thing to worry about.

But that brings me to the idea of Locke's episodic future. We've still got plenty to see of him, because there are three years worth of island stuff that we haven't seen. Even leaving room for time weirdness, that's enough to fill 1 or 2 seasons, without having to reanimate any more corpses.

I get the parallels between Christian's coffin on the Oceanic plane and now having to take Locke's back to the island. But outside of Christian, there is always an excuse for a "dead" person to come back to life: Mikhail's fence was set to stun and not kill, John's bullet went through the spot where there should have been a kidney. Hokey stuff in my opinion, but I think it was for the greater purpose of establishing that the island doesn't just resurrect the dead. They could go the route of both Christian and John getting killed off the island, but belonging to the island so that they do have life on the island again. I'm just not going to be a huge fan of that happening, because it's already been so telegraphed. But that would be the way that John could finally be reconciled to his true fate, post-real-world death, as opposed to ending as a loser and a failure. It depends on if they want the final word on him to be boob or hero.

I can see Ben expecting the resurrection of John, and thus including him in the party that needs to return, only to see nothing happen and end up saying, "wow, you really weren't the chosen one after all, were you?"

ETA: Homer, I was composing while you were posting.

Cmdr Spock

06-13-08, 02:06 PM

casual-viewer

06-13-08, 05:45 PM

Hey c-v, the point I was trying to make about Cooper's death, and I don't think I did so very well, was that while his father was still alive Locke truly was incapable of murder. Criminal negligence, sure, hence getting Boone killed, but John wasn't really the kind of guy who could actually kill someone. After he conned Sawyer into offing his dad though, Locke was free of that particular piece of baggage and was finally free to become the guy he always thought he could be. Unfortunately, that guy is capable of murder.

OK, got that. Like as long as Cooper was alive, it was something hanging over John's head, and now that he's out of the picture John is free. It just seemed to me like since John didn't do the killing (although he did set up the "hit") that he didn't do any of the psychological freeing, if anything it would make him feel like more a loser that he didn't do it himself. But even that could work. The shame that he couldn't even kill Cooper and had to get Sawyer to do it could have been funneled into the (what?) rage/fear/frustration (?) that allowed him to attack the very next thing that threatened his island experience.

Also, I think him not being able to kill Cooper was more than just not being a killer. And the after effects of Cooper being gone could have changed him in a different way. Like Inigo Montoya shaped his whole life around vengeance toward the six fingered man and didn't know what to do next, John's whole purpose was wrapped up in getting his father's repentance and acceptance. He just couldn't believe that Daddy was 100% rotten and continued to try to understand why Cooper would do that to him. And he sure didn't get any apologies from Cooper before he was killed, so now what kind of hole does that leave? He wants something that he will never get. Maybe it frees him the way it did Sawyer, but maybe it puts him further away from reality and sanity.

Cmdr Spock

06-13-08, 06:12 PM

Also, I think him not being able to kill Cooper was more than just not being a killer. And the after effects of Cooper being gone could have changed him in a different way. Like Inigo Montoya shaped his whole life around vengeance toward the six fingered man and didn't know what to do next, John's whole purpose was wrapped up in getting his father's repentance and acceptance. He just couldn't believe that Daddy was 100% rotten and continued to try to understand why Cooper would do that to him. And he sure didn't get any apologies from Cooper before he was killed, so now what kind of hole does that leave? He wants something that he will never get. Maybe it frees him the way it did Sawyer, but maybe it puts him further away from reality and sanity.

I think this is spot on. As much as I would like (for the sake of the "Locke is a good guy!" crowd) for John to somehow redeem himself before his death, I honestly don't see that happening.* He still wants the approval of an authority figure, and now that the island is his new omnipotent abusive parent, things can only go downhill from here for Locke. "What do you want me to do?" he screams at the hatch that won't open, and I think that will be his mantra in dealing with the island. John's not so great at thinking for himself or making decisions that respect the well being of others, and now that the authority that he's trying to win approval from isn't even a human being, I think a lot more people around him are going to be hurt before he kicks the bucket.

Still, given that John's dead in 2007 but still alive in 2004, I can easily see the character being in the show til the S6 finale. Whodunit and what he did on and off the island to deserve it are easily storylines that can go on for two more short seasons of the show.

*ETA Or, at least I think it highly unlikely. Locke's track record for learning from his mistakes isn't so great, but I'm not going to dismiss entirely the possibility that he can rise above what he was and what he's become to surprise me before he dies.

casual-viewer

06-14-08, 12:09 AM

He still wants the approval of an authority figure, and now that the island is his new omnipotent abusive parent, things can only go downhill from here for Locke. "What do you want me to do?" he screams at the hatch that won't open, and I think that will be his mantra in dealing with the island. John's not so great at thinking for himself or making decisions that respect the well being of others, and now that the authority that he's trying to win approval from isn't even a human being, I think a lot more people around him are going to be hurt before he kicks the bucket.

Yep, and it makes me realize that LOST is actually full of anti-heroes. I mean in any show or story, the hero (usually) has flaws to make him human or a fatal flaw to make him vulnerable. But in LOST, all the main characters are seriously flawed with a few redeeming qualities, not the other way around. I do continue to see Sawyer emerge as a true hero, evolving from his pre-island life, and he started out as the obvious bad guy. I like that development. But I know, this is the Locke thread.

Cmdr Spock

06-14-08, 04:44 PM

Yep, and it makes me realize that LOST is actually full of anti-heroes. I mean in any show or story, the hero (usually) has flaws to make him human or a fatal flaw to make him vulnerable. But in LOST, all the main characters are seriously flawed with a few redeeming qualities, not the other way around. I do continue to see Sawyer emerge as a true hero, evolving from his pre-island life, and he started out as the obvious bad guy. I like that development. But I know, this is the Locke thread.

Yeah, out of the guys on the show, Sawyer stands out as the one who constantly defies his own nature and does the heroic thing. "You don't get to die alone." Awesome. But I think Bernard qualifies as a (non anti-) hero. He's a micromanager, true, but when the chips are down and stuff needs to be done, he's willing to put his ass on the line and use his skills to defend a bunch of people who don't respect him much. Bernard rocks, IMHO.

I know I've been waffling about whether or not Locke's going to redeem himself before he dies. Sorry about that, intellectually, I don't think he can, he's been consistently such a boob and a miserable failure in almost everything he does it's very hard for me to see him break the pattern before he dies. In the Whodunit poll, when someone offered the possibility of a phone sex Helen mishap as COD, it struck a chord in me, that would be a profoundly boobish way for Locke to die. Laughs and giggles aside, if Locke dies by boobery I'd like to think it would be something more related to his new role as Island protector though.

Emotionally, however, I gotta feel for Locke. This is a guy who's never gotten a break in his life (well, except for Peggy Bundy thinking he's hot. Is that really a break? Sorry, I digress). It would be more emotionally satisfying for me if John, for once in his life, put aside his own delusions and sees things for what they really are, throws the island monkey off his back, mans up and gets his ass killed trying to do the right thing. That wouldn't be very boobish of him, true, but I'm a sucker for happy endings, and Locke most definitely has an ending.

Sorry for not being able to take a definite stand on this one, Boobophiles, but I'm seriously torn on the issue of how Locke is going to die.

iWonder

06-16-08, 12:54 PM

But see, Cmdr, you've got your answer already. If we all agree that the usual character development on this show is to set aside your typical nature and rise above it/deny it--like Sawyer and like Bernard--then that is the most likely progression that the rest will take. Sun stops being the dutiful, subservient wife, Kate stops running... It would follow that Locke will stop being a dupe. That is how we see most characters "mature", isn't it? Rising above the very thing in their nature that holds them down?

silversurfer

06-16-08, 02:09 PM

Locke really is a "take three steps forward, take four or five back" kind of guy.

In the odd seasons, he seems to be taking the steps forward (for the most part), but in the even seasons he's taking his backwards steps. In Season 3 for example, he wasn't much of a dupe. People speculated that he accidentally blew up The Flame by bumbling through a game of chess, but the next episode revealed him with some C4 in his bag--indicating that he knew exactly what he was doing. Ben tried reverse psychology on him in "The Man from Tallahassee" to get him to blow up the sub, but Locke told him that he already knew this. And he really threw the smack down on Ben in that episode. Flash forward to Season 4 and the cards are reversed for those two because John is walking back again.

Season 5 may follow that we will see John walking forward on the island again, learning secrets and leading the Others, and Season 6 may be his death. I hope not as that would mean that Locke doesn't get to travel to the end of the journey that is LOST.

Can anyone fathom a Season 6 without Locke? Too dismal of a future for me.

casual-viewer

06-16-08, 02:29 PM

Can anyone fathom a Season 6 without Locke? Too dismal of a future for me.

I think this is a distinct possibility. We see a 'la S4 style, the action that leads up to the FF of Locke in the coffin. By then, new heroes have emerged for S6 (can you tell I'm rooting for Sawyer?) It's not a new precedent, they killed off Charlie in S3 and gave him a cameo or two after that. Not to say that Charlie was as important as John, but quite a major character.

silversurfer

06-16-08, 07:52 PM

I think this is a distinct possibility. We see a 'la S4 style, the action that leads up to the FF of Locke in the coffin. By then, new heroes have emerged for S6 (can you tell I'm rooting for Sawyer?) It's not a new precedent, they killed off Charlie in S3 and gave him a cameo or two after that. Not to say that Charlie was as important as John, but quite a major character.

But maybe by then, the will arrive to the island with his body in the coffin and something strange will happen and we will have more John Locke.

iWonder

06-16-08, 08:08 PM

Cmdr Spock

06-18-08, 04:48 PM

I've been rewatching some S1 eps, and frankly Locke isn't looking so heroic right out of the gate. I know the "Locke's not a boob!" fans like to trot out Walkabout as the quintessential Locke episode, as if he were established as the great jungle hunter hero, but I honestly have to say it actually defines him as a boob as well as a liar to his fellow castaways. His cube rat role playing phone sex operator infatuation delusions have already been covered, the points that struck me on this latest rewatch were his initial incompetence in the boar hunt, he gets knocked on his ass and out of his wits, starts thinking Kate is Helen, taking no responsibility for getting Michael injured and just wandering off to do his own thing. Later, alone, he encounters some manifestation of the island, by the sound effects and falling trees, smokey, but when asked about it later he doesn't tell anyone else what he's seen. Sure, he shows up with a dead boar, but given that now John's already lying for the sake of the island, I have to wonder if smokey didn't kill it for him as part of Locke's cover story.

Far more disturbing to me, though, are Locke's actions in The Moth and Confidence Man. Under the pretence of helping Charlie kick his habit, Locke's actually using him as live bait in another boar hunt. It's only S1E7 and Locke's already risking the life of another survivor to follow his own agenda. I wonder if Charlie had tripped and been gutted by the boar if he'd have been a sacrifice the island demanded...then of course there's John's clubbing Sayid over the head so he won't be able to locate the radio tower, Locke's already going against the plans of all the other survivors. What, actually let someone else do something that might lead to getting off the island? Hell no! Worst of all, in the next episode he convinces Sayid that it was Sawyer who probably knocked him out, and then gives him a knife. Ironic that the guy Locke eventually manipulates into killing his father is the first person John sets up to take a fall at someone else's hands.

Of course, the whole set up of Sawyer to take the fall arguably leads to the whole Sawyer being tortured for inhalers he doesn't have, thence to Sawyer and Kate's first kiss, on to her reading his letter for what it really is and starting to see him in a more objective view. Before all that, Sawyer was just a jerk she wasn't really too concerned about, afterwards he was a guy she'd kissed and had unique insight into. And thus was born The Triangle From Hell.

So even though Locke's been a lying boob since S1, one not overly concerned with the safety of the others and even actively conspiring to do them harm, you have to give him brownie points for indirectly creating the TFH. :D

iWonder

06-18-08, 05:48 PM

So even though Locke's been a lying boob since S1, one not overly concerned with the safety of the others and even actively conspiring to do them harm, you have to give him brownie points for indirectly creating the TFH. :D

Oy.

That is all. ;)

casual-viewer

06-19-08, 01:59 AM

Good Spock, very good notes on the beginning of the series.
Amazing how it took us (me) so long to realize that John was a boob and not a hero.
I remember in the very beginning, we wondered if Kate would go with Jack or Sayid! So that's when things changed.

Cmdr Spock

06-21-08, 03:17 PM

After a rewatch of the S1 finale, there's a line in Locke's dialogue with Jack that struck me as being portentous. "Survival is all relative, Jack." Much as I hate to admit it, I think this gives fodder for the John Locke Kenobi crowd...

Jack T Kirk

08-18-08, 01:40 PM

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/4686/jackandnaomi1bn8.jpg

Locke is a hero. Get over it.

sgtdraino

08-19-08, 07:53 AM

What I'd like to know, is why Jack is feeling Naomi's ass in that picture. Is that some sort of medical technique I'm unfamiliar with? Hmmm. He's a spinal surgeon, maybe he's checking the base of her spine??? Or maybe he's taking the thermometer out...

Brian

08-20-08, 01:19 AM

:rotfl:

Nice.

Cmdr Spock

01-21-09, 06:07 AM

Mere hours until the return of boobishness...sigh...I wonder what Locke's first boobish act of S5 will be...besides getting killed and stuck in a coffin I mean...:)

Cmdr Spock

01-23-09, 03:27 AM

First Locke Boobish moment of the new season! (Well, except for cowering in fear like a little girl when Ethan was going to blow him away after claiming Ben as a job reference):

John: What's this?

Richard: A compass.

John: What's it do?*

Richard: It...points North, John.

*Locke is back in the saddle again!

Homer Noodleman

01-23-09, 03:28 AM

All though it wasn't strictly speaking boobishness on his part, I was amused by the miniscule amount of time he was leader of the Others.

Alpert: Welcome to your new family John.

[B]Locke: Uh guys? Hello? Anybody here? Helloooo... ???
Crickets: chirp, chirp.

tellthemmrekoletyoulive

01-23-09, 03:35 AM

I know, pretty short-lived.

I'm in. I rewatched S1 and 2 and I was strucked by all of the dopiness I had overlooked. I cringed when he flung those dishes around after being baited by Ben.

Susan B Anthony

01-23-09, 01:32 PM

(Well, except for cowering in fear like a little girl when Ethan was going to blow him away

So how did you behave the last time somebody had a bullet aimed for your head after putting one in your leg?

iWonder

01-23-09, 01:59 PM

My, my. It seems rather early in the season for a Webelo to come in here with their dander up... Did one of you naughty boys go over to their club and cause trouble??:no-no:

ETA
So, how do you guys think this is all going to play out? If Jack is on his way back to be the newly crowned island patsy, does that mean Locke--the other side of his coin, the yin to his yang--will finally have a revelation that causes him to see they're being played, and become the skeptic?

Sort of a cautionary tale about falling too far towards any one extreme...

sgtdraino

01-23-09, 02:16 PM

All though it wasn't strictly speaking boobishness on his part, I was amused by the miniscule amount of time he was leader of the Others.

Heh. Except that when Richard meets Locke again at the Beechcraft, Richard is apparently operating based on orders from John Locke in Locke's relative future. So we really have no idea how long Locke will lead the Others.

Cmdr Spock

01-23-09, 03:54 PM

My, my. It seems rather early in the season for a Webelo to come in here with their dander up... Did one of you naughty boys go over to their club and cause trouble??:no-no:

T'warn't me ma'am, I stay out of there to avoid the Locke-strokefest (note I don't go there to speculate about who killed Locke, either). Wish they'd stay out of my poll and stop hijacking it for said festing as well.

So, how do you guys think this is all going to play out? If Jack is on his way back to be the newly crowned island patsy, does that mean Locke--the other side of his coin, the yin to his yang--will finally have a revelation that causes him to see they're being played, and become the skeptic?

Sort of a cautionary tale about falling too far towards any one extreme...

Haven't seen any new evidence that Locke is showing any great ability to think for himself, or not blindly do whatever his authority figure of the moment tells him to.

Richard: You're going to have to die.

...and where does John end up?

iWonder

01-23-09, 04:36 PM

Haven't seen any new evidence that Locke is showing any great ability to think for himself, or not blindly do whatever his authority figure of the moment tells him to.

Well, yeah, but it is just the first epi. I thought both Locke and Jack had very little screen time, actually.

My hunch is that one of the whoppers of this season's finale will be the revelation to Locke that the island is nasty. His death, while prescribed by the island, will be step one in the turning of the tables.

I'm also thinking that Ben is indeed one of the good guys. (Maybe he's fooled me too?) Perhaps he and Locke had a means to communicate and join forces in this little death scenario?

sgtdraino

01-23-09, 05:05 PM

My hunch is that one of the whoppers of this season's finale will be the revelation to Locke that the island is nasty. His death, while prescribed by the island, will be step one in the turning of the tables.

If Locke discovers The Island is nasty, then why does he still leave it to try and convince the O6 to return? Knowing it will kill him?

I'm also thinking that Ben is indeed one of the good guys. (Maybe he's fooled me too?)

;)

Perhaps he and Locke had a means to communicate and join forces in this little death scenario?

I don't think so. I think Locke was probably shot just like Sayid was shot, with darts containing a substance that puts him near death until he is revived. Remember, Hurley's mother thought that Sayid was dead.

iWonder

01-23-09, 05:39 PM

If Locke discovers The Island is nasty, then why does he still leave it to try and convince the O6 to return? Knowing it will kill him?
To die a tragic death for a noble cause? Maybe he has to go back to destroy something (with the help of the O6) even though he knows it will kill him. And sometimes, to pull off a long con, you have to play along with your mark to keep them from knowing you're on to them.

I don't think so. I think Locke was probably shot just like Sayid was shot, with darts containing a substance that puts him near death until he is revived. Remember, Hurley's mother thought that Sayid was dead.
Yes, they did emphasize that a bit didn't they? Still, what the heck is the deal with that dang spider and Nikki et al?!?

Susan B Anthony

01-23-09, 06:30 PM

My, my. It seems rather early in the season for a Webelo to come in here with their dander up... Did one of you naughty boys go over to their club and cause trouble??:no-no:

I find it is best to keep my dander up at all times. It saves time raising and lowering one's dander in emergency situations. :Peace5:

iWonder

01-23-09, 06:37 PM

:rotfl:

How delightfully efficient!!
:Hippy:

Homer Noodleman

01-23-09, 09:59 PM

Cmdr Spock,

"It points north John." The compass bit was classic Locke. He's such an oblivious idiot as he puppy dogs after somebody, all the while pestering them to tell him what his destiny is.

iWonder,

"You're not supposed to leave Jack." The problem is Locke will end up swinging from the end of the rope doing the island's bidding. If his attitude was, "screw the island, I need you to come back and help me rescue the other people from the island" I would buy he was doing something noble. Instead, he is just following orders.

Cmdr Spock

01-24-09, 05:50 AM

Cmdr Spock,

"It points north John." The compass bit was classic Locke.

Indeed, Homer. My jaw dropped during that scene, I thought for sure someone on the writing staff had been reading the posts of Locke's real fans. So reminiscent of all those earlier classic Locke moments, getting knocked on his ass and Michael wounded during his first boar hunt attempt, showing up at Boone's funeral drenched in the guy's blood, getting dumped by phone sex Helen, Eko with the whole "I found a book" thing, "Henry Gale" telling him he never pushed the button, getting clocked by Michael and locked up in the armory, Sawyer stealing the guns, getting tossed out of the Swan by Eko, getting caught by Charlie crying, getting head butted by Eko, the look on his face when the Swan timer runs down and the station starts to implode, totally ignoring Mikhail to play lame videogames and getting taken hostage, getting gutshot by Ben and then going on to totally trusting him and getting all his redshirts killed, the list just goes on and on and on...

"Don't tell me what I can't do!" Ok that doesn't work, but telling him what to do seems to work just fine...:rolleyez:

sweetsunray

01-24-09, 01:38 PM

If Locke discovers The Island is nasty, then why does he still leave it to try and convince the O6 to return? Knowing it will kill him?

Agreed... seems to me that Locke's still doing what he's told to do. So, he's gonna remain a boob :D

sgtdraino

01-24-09, 02:16 PM

"It points north John." The compass bit was classic Locke. He's such an oblivious idiot

The thing is, Locke's question was actually sensible. Richard just gave a stupid answer, for some reason. Everyone knows that compasses point north. Locke had one, and used one. It was obvious that Richard gave it to him for a purpose other than pointing north. So Locke asked what it was for, and for some reason got a snide and useless answer.

It was a cheap shot.

Susan B Anthony

01-24-09, 06:31 PM

It was obvious that Richard gave it to him for a purpose other than pointing north. So Locke asked what it was for, and for some reason got a snide and useless answer.

It was a cheap shot.

But apparently one that delighted the Boobophiles, who think that Richard gave Locke a compass so that he could find his way north.

iWonder

01-24-09, 07:58 PM

No, no, no, Richard didn't want him to go north, I'll explain:

See, Richard was being a smartas*... instead of being deferential to the all powerful "special connection to the island" leader... and it kind of underscored his boobishness...

That's what delights.

Let me know if you need any other clarifications!
:p

Considering the fact that many characters have made snide and useless comments to the delight or chagrin of the viewers, getting your nose bent out of shape about this just underscores that you both are taking this all WAY too personally.

Smartas* comments give each faction of fans something to chuckle about and enjoy.

Sometimes you're the hammer, sometimes you're the nail. Roll with it.

Cmdr Spock

01-24-09, 08:32 PM

I saw the whole "It...points North John." comment to be more indicative of Richard's frustration that Locke had been chosen by Jacob. Richard had already told Locke what the compass was for, it was a token he would show to him when they next met, for Richard would not know Locke when they next met. That Locke would see it as another thing to tell him what to do is another major indicator that he can't make a decision without RTFM. Don't tell him what he can't do, just tell him what to do.

P.S. iW, awesome Big Bang Theory reference in your sig! :)

Homer Noodleman

01-24-09, 08:58 PM

Yea, what was funny about it is how Locke is always so oblivious. A line similar to when Locke saw the chamber, and since it was vaguely box shaped, asked Ben if it was The Magic Box and Ben just rolled his eyes and explained the meaning of metaphors to the bald-headed dunce. Also, Alpert had already spread items, including the compass, on the table in front of Young Locke and Locke failed the test. I'm guessing Alpert's sarcastically literal answer was a measure of just how little he thinks of Locke.

The whole business of Locke's ten second stint as leader of the Others is another entertaining demonstration of the depth the Boob's lack of a clue.

He poodled around after Ben for the entirety of Season IV, after Ben shot him and left him for dead no less, following Ben's orders believing Ben was giving him the leadership position of the others. Ten seconds after assuming his throne and -- poof -- Locke is in the jungle with Alpert telling him, "Oh, did we forget to mention, your real destiny is to go back to the outside world and then drop dead."

Of course, Locke will never ask the right question, "Errr, why would I do that?" Instead he'll ask, "OK boss, how do I best do that? Poison, pistol or rope?"

Will it ever occur to the Jeremy Bentham version of the Boob that his destiny looks more and more like a gambit so Ben can return to the island to take over again. Well, he had his chance to let Sawyer throttle the little weasel, and he ended up taking orders from him instead, so I'm guessing it won't.

Spock's "don't tell him what he can't do, just tell him what to do" hits the nail on the head.

Susan B Anthony

01-25-09, 03:00 AM

The whole business of Locke's ten second stint as leader of the Others is another entertaining demonstration of the depth the Boob's lack of a clue.

Oh come on, how is that a reflection on Locke at all? It struck me as ironic and sort of tragic that Locke finally seemed to have what he has been looking for the last four seasons, and it is snatched away immediately. How would having a clue have changed anything? It was sort of like the irony of Hurley finally getting what he wanted, to go home, and ending up saying, "we never should have left that island." The irony of Jack finally doing what Locke wants him to after Locke is dead.

The compass line was a joke by the writers at Locke's expense, reminiscent of the "is this the magic box" bit. I don't think it showed anything other than Locke's disorientation at suddenly shifting around in time, and Richard's impatience to convey necessary information in the small window of opportunity. Unlike Sawyer and company, Locke caught on to the time travel without having it explained to him.

You all know I am a great defender of Locke, but I also recognize that, like many people of faith, he is seen as a fool by people who don't believe what he believes. From what I can see, the main argument of the Locke detractors is that he is stupid for believing X or Y or Z. It's called faith.

sgtdraino

01-25-09, 01:33 PM

The compass line was a joke by the writers at Locke's expense, reminiscent of the "is this the magic box" bit. I don't think it showed anything other than Locke's disorientation at suddenly shifting around in time, and Richard's impatience to convey necessary information in the small window of opportunity. Unlike Sawyer and company, Locke caught on to the time travel without having it explained to him.

:yeah:

It was clearly just a writers' gag to give the audience a chuckle, no different than Frogurt catching a flaming arrow right after he demands fire. We're not really supposed to derive any serious judgements about the characters from lines like this, they're just throw-away lines. Sometimes TPTB seem to think they're writing a dark comedy instead of a serious story. I think Homer believes they are doing this all the time, though.

sweetsunray

01-25-09, 01:42 PM

Pfff, Homer, totally agreed... nothing to add

Yes, Susan, it's ironic as with all other characters. Every ironic phrase and event is meant to remind us of each character's flaws, stress it, and with Locke it's his boobishness.

iWonder

01-25-09, 03:06 PM

P.S. iW, awesome Big Bang Theory reference in your sig! :)

I chuckle every single time they play that in their promo...

I'm just a pushover for "men of science", I guess! ;)

Susan B Anthony

01-25-09, 03:31 PM

Yes, Susan, it's ironic as with all other characters. Every ironic phrase and event is meant to remind us of each character's flaws, stress it, and with Locke it's his boobishness.

Haughtily rising above your "boobishness" comment, I will agree with your basic premise. While LOST tends to give its audience credit for more intelligence than most shows, they do seem to think we need constant reminding that Jack has control issues, Charlie was a drug addict, Sawyer is just acting out because he is a man in pain, etc. Is it because their basic message is that nothing changes, people can't change, you can't change what happens??

Locke is certainly someone who has tried to change. His success seems to be somewhat in the eye of the beholder. Locke himself believes he is merely becoming the person he was always meant to be. It might be said (by persons here, in fact) that he constantly fails because he is trying to be something he is not. Either way, I think this is a theme of the show, so if we're talking about it, they must be succeeding.

BTW, I think Sun & Jin are the only characters who have really evolved through the first 4 seasons. The rest of them are basically the same people they were on the day of the crash, just with a little more experience under their belt.

Homer Noodleman

01-27-09, 02:29 AM

Oh come on, how is that a reflection on Locke at all? ... It's called faith.

Or, some might call it blind faith. Others, like me, might call it zealotry. If it is zealotry, then it is a poor reflection on Locke.

The flashback in Walkabout establishes that Locke has a simplistic and naive view of what spiritual enlightenment really involves. Does a man preparing for a spiritual journey really prepare for it by spending all his money on an imaginary relationship with a phone sex operator? Do real walkabouts generally involve slick marketing brochures and air conditioned tour buses?

While enlightenment, or at least whatever he imagines enlightenment to be, clearly obsesses Locke, just as clearly he is extremely unserious about it. You said, "the main argument of the Locke detractors is that he is stupid for believing X or Y or Z." I say the fact that you can only articulate what he believes with letters, as if they were unknowns in a math formula, shows just how vapid Locke's beliefs actually are.

BTW, I can tell you what his belief is -- his belief is that the world is a stage for him to act out his magnificent and all-important destiny, whatever that destiny might be. Hence he meets Jacob, who pleads for help, and not once does it cross Locke's mind to wonder what that plea might suggest. Instead, staggering up from his grave, he goes back to kissing Ben's feet as soon as Ben bamboozles him once again with how important he is (and let us remember, Locke was never on Ben's list until he needed an idiot to do his bidding).

And so Locke goes from clunking Sayid over the head to preserve his imagined destiny, to smashing the computer in a fit, to blowing up the Flame and the submarine, to dragging Sawyer into committing a murder, to the attempted murder of Mikail, to the successful murder of Naomi via a knife in her back. After that, he locks the door against Sawyer and Aaron so he can protect his precious Ben with his promise of greatness.

Now he's apparently on a suicide mission for Alpert that will get Ben back to the island. Zealotry. Empty headed zealotry.

casual-viewer

01-27-09, 04:15 AM

BTW, I can tell you what his belief is -- his belief is that the world is a stage for him to act out his magnificent and all-important destiny, whatever that destiny might be. Hence he meets Jacob, who pleads for help, and not once does it cross Locke's mind to wonder what that plea might suggest. Instead, staggering up from his grave, he goes back to kissing Ben's feet as soon as Ben bamboozles him once again with how important he is (and let us remember, Locke was never on Ben's list until he needed an idiot to do his bidding).

Homer, I don't disagree, but do you believe that he had a turning point in regards to this grandiosity? Was it being healed on the island? It seems to me that he didn't believe in himself prior to the crash. He was depressed and angry and full of self-pity. We know that low self-esteem can manifest as arrogance and stubborness, but in this case it seems like his delusions are brought on by the island. He gets healed, he gets visions, he's told that he's chosen and special. Seems that he is a victim of the longest con. If Jack or anyone else had that much "evidence" of the power of the island, they might be at it's bidding as well. John through his pitiful history and emotional baggage does make a good mark. I can find sympathy for him.

ETA: I think John is what keeps the element of tradgedy in the show. Beyond which character dies when, the stories move past that. But John is a continuous tragic reminder. I wouldn't even mind calling him the tragic hero, because those guys are defined by their death. And usually an unneccessary one.

Susan B Anthony

01-28-09, 02:00 AM

The flashback in Walkabout establishes that Locke has a simplistic and naive view of what spiritual enlightenment really involves.

No argument on that point. The whole purpose of that flashback was to show the cesspool of a life that Locke had left behind. Up to the time he crashed on the island, Locke had been flailing around in life with nothing but a sense that there had to be something more. The biggest failure in his life was drop-kicking a positive and healthy relationship with the real Helen in favor of an imagined ideal relationship with his p.o.s. bio-father.

You said, "the main argument of the Locke detractors is that he is stupid for believing X or Y or Z." I say the fact that you can only articulate what he believes with letters, as if they were unknowns in a math formula, shows just how vapid Locke's beliefs actually are.

Sorry I was unclear on that point. I should have gone on: where X = that the island is a special place where miracles happen; Y = that all of the 815 survivors were brought to the island for a reason and the only way any of them can be at peace is to discover that reason and embrace it; and Z = that Locke himself has been chosen by destiny to fulfill a particular purpose. It isn't that I couldn't articulate his beliefs, just that I wanted to discuss the fact of Locke's faith, not the things he has faith in.

Hence he meets Jacob, who pleads for help, and not once does it cross Locke's mind to wonder what that plea might suggest.

Unless Locke believed, led by taller ghost Walt, that killing Naomi and preventing Jack from contacting the freighter was helping Jacob. Jacob/the island/or whoever seems to communicate in a fairly roundabout way, through dreams, visions, magic carvings on a stick. I don't fault Locke for sometimes getting the messages garbled.

After that, he locks the door against Sawyer and Aaron so he can protect his precious Ben with his promise of greatness.

Okay, that was rather dickish.

Now he's apparently on a suicide mission for Alpert that will get Ben back to the island. Zealotry. Empty headed zealotry.

My biggest problem with your whole argument, and your general distaste for Locke, is that you proceed from a basic premise that Locke is wrong. That he is not destined for anything and the only way he can be a decent human being is to accept that he is nothing special.

If Locke is wrong, then you are right and he should accept that he was given a miraculous cure and think no more of it. If Locke is right, then your argument is akin to saying, "Come on Moses, what makes you so special? Stop thinking you are going to lead us to the promised land, and just accept that you are an ordinary guy."

Whew! I think I'm channeling Draino with my point-by-point response! :Cheers:

iWonder

01-28-09, 02:45 PM

SBA, what I find really refreshing about your posts is that you have no problem acknowledging if another person has made a good point. I appreciate that kind of attitude, and think it goes a long way toward keeping things from getting contentious.

I think you are expressing the crux of the difference between our two factions: you believe Locke’s flashbacks show that his life has turned around on the island, and we (at least I) believe that the flashbacks are foreshadowing that the pattern continues: he is being conned again... That point of view makes for a very different viewing experience.

My biggest problem with your whole argument, and your general distaste for Locke, is that you proceed from a basic premise that Locke is wrong. That he is not destined for anything and the only way he can be a decent human being is to accept that he is nothing special.
Obviously, I cannot speak for others who post here, but I don’t have a "distaste" for Locke as a person nor do I think he isn't a "decent human being". I think he has a good heart, but he is being jerked around. And, in name of this quest, he’s doing some questionable things at the expense of others. I do think it will be a good thing when he finally accepts that he is nothing special, at least not “special” in the way these people have been filling his head with.

While this thread is perceived to be a “hate” thread, for me, it is simply a safe place to be able to discuss Locke within our p.o.v. without having to tread down the same tired paths with others who don’t agree. We’ve been mostly negative to this point, because, well, he hasn’t done anything particularly good (in our opinion) of late. We’ll just have to wait and see if we’re right in our perception of the story.

I understand completely why it bothers you so much that others don't "see" what you're seeing. I had very much the same reaction to the Jack bashing when I first arrived here. It’s the reason I don’t go into smackjack to discuss the current week’s happenings with Jack’s character; they don’t have the same p.o.v. as I do (and never will), so why bother? I’m no masochist. :D

Vive la difference!

Susan B Anthony

01-28-09, 03:16 PM

Thanks for the post iWonder. I hope I'm not violating any traditions by posting pro-Locke in this thread. I can't keep up with the hundreds of posts on this board so I usually hang out in the character threads where you can get a discussion going without having to be on the board 24/7.

As for acknowledging other people's points -- well I have no interest in a conversation that goes something like:

Shut up.

No you shut up.

No you shut up.

No YOU shut up, poo-poo head!

etc.

Yawn.

Susan B Anthony

01-28-09, 03:20 PM

I do think it will be a good thing when he finally accepts that he is nothing special, at least not “special” in the way these people have been filling his head with.

How have you come to the conclusion that Locke is not special? That he is not destined to be the protector of the island? The island, or somebody has been interested in John since he was born. (Well, the time-travel thing may force us to reframe what seems to have happened in the past, but I'm assuming for the moment that Richard's visits to Locke actually happened.)

iWonder

01-28-09, 04:17 PM

I hope I'm not violating any traditions by posting pro-Locke in this thread.

Nope, just making sure you're sure you want to be here! :p

How have you come to the conclusion that Locke is not special?
Hmmm... well, the biggest factor I think, is that I don't believe the island is "mystical" or "spiritual"; I think it has scientific properties that make it a powerful tool that may or may not be in the wrong hands. Or, put another way, I believe there are two factions fighting for control of the island, speaking via the island, but the island itself is not sentient. The magic is man-made. So its not that the "island" wants John, its that some group want John. And, if a group wants John to do their bidding, that brings with it a whole lot of potential for puppetry or manipulation. I smell a conspiracy. Its just a feeling. Guess I'm a pessimist!! ;)

Susan B Anthony

01-28-09, 05:32 PM

Hmmm... well, the biggest factor I think, is that I don't believe the island is "mystical" or "spiritual"; I think it has scientific properties that make it a powerful tool that may or may not be in the wrong hands.

Ah. And here is where we part ways. I think there are definitely scientific anomalies, resources, whatever, some people are trying to exploit. But I don't think you can explain half of what we have seen through a scientific explanation. Spontaneous healing? Maybe. There are those who wear magnetic bracelets in the belief that they have healing powers.

But what about the visions? What about Hurley being visited by ghosts? What about Jacob? Now, I posited a theory way back in S1 that Locke was suffering from schizophrenia. We know his mom had it, and it is hereditary. Symptoms are hearing voices, delusions of grandeur, paranoia, --- is this sounding familiar yet? This would go with Hurley's theory that he and Locke can see the cabin because they are the craziest.

What about smokey? What about the apparent time travel? What about moving the flipping island????? I just think there are some things going on that are beyond science.

Or, put another way, I believe there are two factions fighting for control of the island, speaking via the island, but the island itself is not sentient. The magic is man-made.

Is the island sentient? Depends on how you define it. I think I believe that there is a consciousness connected to the island, although I think it may be the consciousness of previous inhabitants. In other words, it is human. But I am also open to the idea that the island just amplifies the abilities or consciousness of the people there.

So its not that the "island" wants John, its that some group want John.

Do they want John Locke specifically? Or is he just there and amendable to coercion? Did they manipulate his whole life to give him just the right kind of complex to be their stooge? I have always thought it was odd that a healthy infant would not have been adopted, but grown up in foster care. Still, I would find it hard to swallow that they picked this kid out of all of the population and manipulated him into a wheelchair and onto an airplane which they then crashed on the island, knowing Locke would be an empty vessel which they could then fill up with religious zeal so that he would do their bidding. They could have just found somebody and paid them a lot of money.

I think this is the paradox that tptb have intentionally set out -- and in case the viewers didn't get it they named an episode "Man of Science - Man of Faith."

As Locke said to Jack at the Orchid, "We'll just have to see whose right." I for one can't wait!

Homer Noodleman

01-28-09, 10:31 PM

I hope I'm not violating any traditions by posting pro-Locke in this thread.

I don't have a problem with anybody posting in here.

How have you come to the conclusion that Locke is not special?

I think there are two broad groups of people among the main characters, those that are special can influence those around them. Walt is obvious with the 'flying birds in to windows' stuff, and Jack is likely another because of his cure of what's-her-name, his ex wife. I think a careful watching of Season One probably puts Kate in the same circumstance.

The second group, Locke and Rose, have things done to them. That's a point I used to make a lot in Season One -- the island, and not Locke, gave him the use of his legs back. How does that make him so special?

iWonder

01-28-09, 11:17 PM

Now, I posited a theory way back in S1 that Locke was suffering from schizophrenia. We know his mom had it, and it is hereditary. Symptoms are hearing voices, delusions of grandeur, paranoia, --- is this sounding familiar yet?

Oh yeah. Very familiar. One of my favorite lines from White Rabbit was when Jack is telling Locke that he thinks he's going crazy because of his hallucination, and Locke says: "Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner." Which always seemed quite telling to me! His "communion" with the island helps him see everything clearly, right?

What about smokey? What about the apparent time travel? What about moving the flipping island????? I just think there are some things going on that are beyond science.
lol, yeah, maybe I should clarify that the answers I expect will be explained by science fiction... Time travel is technically science, and we have yet to know what phenomena might be associated with it; my hubby had once suggested that the smoke monster is a "corrective" force that gobbles up any paradox created when the future is changed…Can't say i can separate the science from the fiction.

Still, I would find it hard to swallow that they picked this kid out of all of the population and manipulated him into a wheelchair and onto an airplane which they then crashed on the island, knowing Locke would be an empty vessel which they could then fill up with religious zeal so that he would do their bidding.
Well, I don’t think its manipulation down to such small details, more that one set of people has been trying to get rid of him, and the other tries to get him to come to the island. So, in the case of his legs, someone was trying to kill him. That he was just paralyzed and not killed was a lucky break (no pun intended). That did break his spirit though, so in a way they accomplished their aim. Until, of course, a familiar orderly at the rehab center planted the seed for a walkabout…

And they manipulated the others too. Just considering how everyone came to be on that plane makes a case that they’ve all been maneuvered somehow. Locke seems no more or less special than any of the rest of them. If he regained the use of his legs because of some time travel trick, and chose to believe he was singled out because of it, why shouldn’t they use him if the opportunity presented itself?

Then again…
Did they manipulate his whole life to give him just the right kind of complex to be their stooge?

Ben: Good-bye, John. I'm sorry I made your life so miserable.

Who knows….

sweetsunray

01-29-09, 12:14 AM

I think his flashbacks too show Locke having a liking to hear others tell him how special he is: although he thinks it a propensity, he also can't resits investigating who his dad might have been when his mom declares he was an immaculate conception, and special. It's one of the first glaring flashbacks where we see how referencing him as special sets him up to be conned.

I've generally come to see Lost now as a show where each character has a cycle of trying to redeem themselves, better themselves, but very pessimistic about the ending of it, since they continue to fall in their own traps. They almost all reset back to their former mode. It's like a soap opera, where the rule is that a character never really grows, in contrast to a character out of a novel.

sgtdraino

01-29-09, 01:02 AM

Or, some might call it blind faith.

"Blind faith" is faith with no rational basis for that faith. Locke actually has a great deal of rational basis for his faith, a lot more hands-on physical evidence than many traditionally religious people do for their own brands of faith.

The flashback in Walkabout establishes that Locke has a simplistic and naive view of what spiritual enlightenment really involves.

People are often simplistic and naive when they are just starting to learn about something new. That state does not define them for all time, it is simply a snapshot of them at one moment in their lives. When I first considered law enforcement as a career, I too was simplistic and naive. 12 years later, that is no longer the case. Being simplistic and naive are just the symptoms of a man in the process of expanding his horizons, of learning new things. If you percieve this to be a trait that persists in Locke, perhaps that is because he is always expanding his horizons. Always seeking to learn about the unknown, to explore greater mysteries.

BTW, I can tell you what his belief is -- his belief is that the world is a stage for him to act out his magnificent and all-important destiny, whatever that destiny might be. <snip>

And so Locke goes from clunking Sayid over the head to preserve his imagined destiny,

"All I did, all I have ever done, has been what is in the best interests of all of us." I firmly believe that is what Locke believes. He is not doing it for himself, he is doing it for all of them. That is why he is willing to leave the island to get them back, even though he knows beforehand that he will have to "die" to accomplish that.

Now he's apparently on a suicide mission for Alpert that will get Ben back to the island. Zealotry. Empty headed zealotry.

It's not empty-headed zealotry. Look at what is happening, look at what is going on around him. The island has gone mad, and the surviving 815s are in danger. Who knows what effect this skipping around might ultimately have on the rest of the world as well? "God help us all," Hawking says. This is not imaginary, this is not some delusion in the mind of John Locke. This is the real world of the Lost literary universe, these are the laws that physical world operates under. This is a world where a mysterious force really does communicate with people, and heal cripples and cancer. A world where the dead talk, where time travel is possible, where Tall Walt knew the truth about Naomi and her wet team. 4 Seasons later, one thing we can firmly establish is that Locke is not crazy. It's all real.

SBA, what I find really refreshing about your posts is that you have no problem acknowledging if another person has made a good point. I appreciate that kind of attitude, and think it goes a long way toward keeping things from getting contentious.

Bah. This post is completely without validity. It is so pointless, I refuse to even acknowledge it! ;)

Hmmm... well, the biggest factor I think, is that I don't believe the island is "mystical" or "spiritual";

I don't believe The Island is mystical or spiritual either. However, that doesn't make Locke any less "special."

casual-viewer

01-29-09, 03:46 AM

Grrrrrrrrrrrreat material for boobophiles tonight! I guess we'll eventually get enough to know whether to really root for Ben or Widmore. But that young Widmore sure seemed like he was going to be a, um, Jerk, and wreck things, and get on the wrong side. Meanwhile our tragic hero could have killed him and prevented it all. (or not, depending on your time travel/ course correction/ paradox theory.)

Regardless, I so called it. When John didn't shoot him and Sawyer asked why I said, "Because he is one of MY people and I am his leader."

Homer Noodleman

01-29-09, 06:01 AM

"Because he is one of MY people and I am his leader."

Yea, I can't wait to see the spinning coming over that line. It should be a hoot.

That line kicked off his idiocy, and Locke was delightfully boobish throughout the entire episode. In particular I was amused when Locke strode into camp and declared he was the leader of the Others. Alpert started to say there were strict guidelines to who became the leader, and Locke cut him off.

Of course, we know Young Locke actually failed his test when Alpert visited him, so it would seem those strict guidelines were not met.

We also know that Locke hasn't actually done a bit of leading of the Others, instead he's been told he has to leave the island and drop dead. Wee bit of a bait-and-switch if'n I've ever seen one.

I wonder where Rose was? Her and Bernard were shuffled out of sight in that episode.

Cmdr Spock

01-29-09, 06:53 AM

Oh, Jughead was an epiphany episode for Locke's real fans. I started a thread in "Guys..." trying to examine why Locke would kill someone in The Lie just to save Juliet and Sawyer, foolishly hoping to stir up some serious discussion, and of course got blasted by the Locke as GWH crowd, almost made a sockpuppet call but realized that would be out of line, and probably not true. Yet my faith in Locke has been justified! In Jughead, he without question declares for the Others, leaves the losties hanging, goes scampering off to get told what to do by Richard...finding out Locke's first action chronologically as leader of the Others (in the real world timeline) would be to clock two of them with rocks and kill the third with a knife through the gut was priceless. I mean, come on! I'm a Sun fan, and there was no Sun in this episode, yet I'd still call it as best S5 episode so far!

iWonder

01-29-09, 01:44 PM

Bah. This post is completely without validity. It is so pointless, I refuse to even acknowledge it! ;)
Nice one, lol! :)

OT/Welcome back from hiatus Casual-Viewer, good to see you again! /OT

So, I was wondering, if Locke the great "island protector" knew that Widmore was ultimately going to be the most dangerous threat to the safety of the island, WHY, WHY, WHY didn't he take the time to WARN Richard of Widmore's future betrayal?!?! Oh, wait, its because all Locke cares about is his OWN destiny and the heck with logic and everyone else. Gotta spend precious time figuring out his own stuff.

Sigh. I'd like to smack him upside the head.

sgtdraino

01-29-09, 04:00 PM

Yea, I can't wait to see the spinning coming over that line. It should be a hoot.

Heh heh. Oh you mean now! I thought you guys were talking about back when he first elected to stay with the Others. Yep, okay, so he now considers the Others to be his people. Guess what... he also considers the 815s to be his people! That's why he... wait for it... killed one of them to save 815s! Duh.

Of course, we know Young Locke actually failed his test when Alpert visited him, so it would seem those strict guidelines were not met.

You are not getting the time travel angle. Young Locke did not "fail" any test of leadership, Alpert is simply trying to find the point in time at which Locke recognizes the compass. Alpert is trying to connect the dots, he just doesn't yet realize that he's the one who makes the dots in the first place. That's why Alpert says of young Locke, "He's not ready yet."

So, I was wondering, if Locke the great "island protector" knew that Widmore was ultimately going to be the most dangerous threat to the safety of the island, WHY, WHY, WHY didn't he take the time to WARN Richard of Widmore's future betrayal?!?!

Because he can't. That would create a paradox, and that could destroy the time continuum. Break continuum = bad. Break continuum = "God help us all."

casual-viewer

01-29-09, 06:51 PM

Hi iWonder! Good to be back. After the premiere, I wondered if I would ever have anything to post about again. But thankfully there are a few things that still interest me. Good ole Locke. He just is what he is, isn't he.

iWonder

01-29-09, 09:23 PM

Because he can't. That would create a paradox, and that could destroy the time continuum. Break continuum = bad. Break continuum = "God help us all."

So, Locke, whilst studying knives, hunting, et al, also brushed up on the science and theory of time travel, did he? He's been at this for, what, one hour...never heard what Daniel has said about the physics of time travel...and he's figured out the implications of paradoxes in the space time continuum.
:bs:

I might add, the idea of a paradox is something that people here on the boards have theorized, and there is no proof that the writers of Lost are going to follow any of these logical rules...

Don't forget, Daniel said Sawyer wouldn't get a response to his knocking because you can't change the future. And then he proceeded to do that himself by changing future Desmond's memory.

sgtdraino

01-30-09, 01:04 AM

So, Locke, whilst studying knives, hunting, et al, also brushed up on the science and theory of time travel, did he? He's been at this for, what, one hour...never heard what Daniel has said about the physics of time travel...and he's figured out the implications of paradoxes in the space time continuum.

No, nothing so complicated. He just simply can't. The universe will not let him. As someone else said in another thread, if they'd shot at Widmore, they would have missed. Because Widmore is destined to live. Besides which, it is not Locke's style to kill a man retreating. He's never done it before, I dunno why he'd start now.

I might add, the idea of a paradox is something that people here on the boards have theorized, and there is no proof that the writers of Lost are going to follow any of these logical rules...

The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. Daniel Faraday is telling us the rules TPTB are using.

Don't forget, Daniel said Sawyer wouldn't get a response to his knocking because you can't change the future. And then he proceeded to do that himself by changing future Desmond's memory.

He didn't change Desmond's memory. Daniel has always traveled back in time and met Desmond in the hatch. Desmond simply forgot that they had met. He was unable to remember the meeting until he reached the "actual present," after which point in time the future is in flux, not set in stone. Only then would the universe allow him to remember. This is explained in other threads.

Brian

01-30-09, 01:13 AM

God knows I enjoy my share of character-bashing, especially the ones who really deserve it and because TPTB write these characters in a way that makes just about any episode a very target rich environment. I'm also not above being a bit over the top in the hopes of getting a reaction (read: discussion) out of people. That said,

Yea, I can't wait to see the spinning coming over that line.

Interesting choice of words there: spinning

Considering you began your post with
"Because he is one of MY people and I am his leader."

I know it's nit picking and I should really be above it, but if we're going to have these discussions and push each other's buttons, let's make a small attempt at getting the dialogue right (:p):

h9gNg55Megc

Now, nit picking aside, I actually do have a comment about Locke from last night which may very well go against some of the thoughts of other Locke fans. So be it. When the character is right, or I believe him to be right, I will defend him. I'll also err in his favor when operating in the gray area. But, when he's wrong, I'll also call him on it.

How pathetic was it that Locke decided to leave Sawyer and Juliet to go rescue Daniel while he went to find Richard? I'm sorry, but that is indefensible in my not-so-humble opinion. It makes absolutely no sense at all. There were three of them, they could easily over-power the girl marching Daniel off into the woods. Sawyer had a rifle and, oh that's right, that's what he used to take her gun isn't it? So then they would have had two guns, four of them, and a prisoner. I'd much rather go into the camp to find Richard in that type of situation rather than stupidly walking into the camp alone to talk to someone who already told you they wouldn't recognize you when they saw you. What guarantee did he possibly have that one of the Others wouldn't blow his fool head off before even had a chance to speak Richard's name? How incredibly stupid, selfish, and short-sighted.

/rant

Homer Noodleman

01-30-09, 01:22 AM

Yea, it was nitpicking, but we'll forgive you since you posted such a Booberific clip. ;)

Homer Noodleman

01-30-09, 01:23 AM

Draino,

He can try. He simply didn't.

sgtdraino

01-30-09, 01:45 AM

How pathetic was it that Locke decided to leave Sawyer and Juliet to go rescue Daniel while he went to find Richard? I'm sorry, but that is indefensible in my not-so-humble opinion. It makes absolutely no sense at all.

Don't forget, our intrepid heroes are operating under a ticking clock, and they never know when the timer will run out. They don't know when the next flash will occur, and they will shift to a different time period. Locke believes it is imperative that he make contact with Richard asap. I think he's right.

I'm sure you're all shocked. :)

Susan B Anthony

01-30-09, 01:51 AM

How pathetic was it that Locke decided to leave Sawyer and Juliet to go rescue Daniel while he went to find Richard? I'm sorry, but that is indefensible in my not-so-humble opinion. ... How incredibly stupid, selfish, and short-sighted.

It did seem a little cavalier, but I think that Locke was focused on what Richard had told him when he fixed up his wound -- that the only way to stop the time-shifting and save the island and everybody on it was for Locke to get off the island and bring the O6 back. When Locke saw that he had a chance to talk to Richard, he knew he better take it before they shifted again. It doesn't do much good to save Faraday from gun-toting-blond if they are all going to be destroyed in a greater disaster. Sawyer and Juliet had Faraday covered. Locke did what he needed to do in the little time available.

Brian

01-30-09, 01:54 AM

casual-viewer

01-30-09, 02:01 AM

"Because he is one of MY people and I am his leader."

I know it's nit picking and I should really be above it, but if we're going to have these discussions and push each other's buttons, let's make a small attempt at getting the dialogue right (:p):

Well, Homer was quoting me, and I was quoting myself, because seconds before John spoke, that was what I guessed out loud that he would say. So I guess I'm "in tune" with John. Although, he was not quite so boastful as I had imagined.

How pathetic was it that Locke decided to leave Sawyer and Juliet to go rescue Daniel while he went to find Richard? I'm sorry, but that is indefensible in my not-so-humble opinion. It makes absolutely no sense at all. There were three of them, they could easily over-power the girl marching Daniel off into the woods. Sawyer had a rifle and, oh that's right, that's what he used to take her gun isn't it? So then they would have had two guns, four of them, and a prisoner. I'd much rather go into the camp to find Richard in that type of situation rather than stupidly walking into the camp alone to talk to someone who already told you they wouldn't recognize you when they saw you. What guarantee did he possibly have that one of the Others wouldn't blow his fool head off before even had a chance to speak Richard's name? How incredibly stupid, selfish, and short-sighted.

/rant

He has FAITH that they would recognize (if only in their hearts) that he was their leader and no harm would come to him until he could fulfill his destiny. If anything were to happen to the rest of the losties, they would be the sacrifice that the island required.

Brian

01-30-09, 02:03 AM

Well, Homer was quoting me, and I was quoting myself, because seconds before John spoke, that was what I guessed out loud that he would say. So I guess I'm "in tune" with John. Although, he was not quite so boastful as I had imagined.

Ah. My apologies then. I thought I saw it elsewhere on the forum as well but decided to use that one as a discussion launch point, so to speak. :)

casual-viewer

01-30-09, 02:23 AM

No need to apologize. And also, if you don't know my boobophile credentials, the defense of John I just posted was typed in my snarkiest voice.

Rhosyn

01-30-09, 02:35 AM

I understand the time constraints and not knowing when/if the Island was going to shift again. I just, I don't know, it didn't feel right and for the first time, for me anyway, watching Locke through all these seasons I sat there in disbelief at what he was doing.

Really? Interesting. I've had much more of a problem with some of Locke's past actions/inactions (failing to be proactive in getting Sawyer and Claire to safety during the Barracks shoot-out springs immediately to mind).

All his decisions in Jughead seemed sound to me. Why was it his moral duty to accompany Sawyer and Juliet? They only had the one gun between the three of them. I'm no tactician, but I don't see how an extra unarmed person would have been any more effective, especially as both Sawyer and Juliet have proven themselves to be competent in similar situations. IIRC, Juliet didn't even DO anything, anyway.

Secondly, I don't think marching into Richard's camp with two guns and a hostage would have necessarily been any better. I think it could have easily made things worse; it would have created a blatantly hostile situation where Locke's side was two guns against many. And it would have put Sawyer and Juliet at risk, instead of just himself. Those two were far safer taking on one person with one gun, rather than a whole campful.

Besides, I think Locke suspected that Richard is not the sort of person to run a community that makes a practice of shooting unarmed, unthreatening visitors. And despite how awkward and blundering it looked, by getting deep into the camp as quickly and as noisily as possible, he also managed to make direct contact with Richard immediately, instead of having to go through the obligatory preliminaries of being bound by some underling and stashed away somewhere and questioned for however long. And uh, it's apparently a good thing he did, because as it turns out, he didn't have much time.

Since this is the Boobophile thread, I feel obligated to say I can see your side much of the time. I honestly think TPTB could ultimately go either way. But I hope that the WEBELO's are right, because I think that would be the better story.

Brian

01-30-09, 02:52 AM

Really? Interesting. I've had much more of a problem with some of Locke's past actions/inactions (failing to be proactive in getting Sawyer and Claire to safety during the Barracks shoot-out springs immediately to mind).

You could just as easily fault Hurley there as well. I mean, we all know Ben wasn't going out there to rescue anyone so that left Locke and Hurley. I don't have a problem with what he did there.

All his decisions in Jughead seemed sound to me. Why was it his moral duty to accompany Sawyer and Juliet? They only had the one gun between the three of them. I'm no tactician, but I don't see how an extra unarmed person would have been any more effective, especially as both Sawyer and Juliet have proven themselves to be competent in similar situations. IIRC, Juliet didn't even DO anything, anyway.

I feel they should have stayed as a group. There's safety in numbers especially when confronting an unknown enemy (for lack of a better word) of an unknown disposition. Like I said, it turned out OK, but it could just as easily gone the other way.

Besides, I think Locke suspected that Richard is not the sort of person to run a community that makes a practice of shooting unarmed, unthreatening visitors.

Uhm....you did see Frogurt get shot in the chest with a flaming arrow, right? :)

Since this is the Boobophile thread, I feel obligated to say I can see your side of many common Locke-arguments. I honestly think TPTB could ultimately go either way. But I hope that the WEBELO's are right, because I think that would be the better story.

Oh, absolutely. I hope everything works out for the best as well, especially for Locke. I've been a Locke fan since "Walkabout", which is also the episode that got me hooked on the show. I'm on his side through the end and for the most part I can defend just about anything anyone wants to throw at him (though sgtdraino usually beats me there ;)). I just didn't think that scenario felt right. I do understand his motivation, I know why he did it, I know why he had a sense of urgency, I just don't agree with it. To put it another way, it's not what I would have done in that scenario. Then again, I'm not a fictional character on a television show either. :) I know, I'm doing exactly what I've chided others in the past for doing and that is trying to put myself into a fictional situation to justify an action one way or the other.

Lately he's in a lot of no-win situations, at least from the fan's perspective. That clip I posted above is a perfect example. When he killed (oh wait, he didn't kill her did he? ;)) Naomi, everyone gave him hell for stabbing her in the back, literally (though I think he absolutely did the right thing there). Then they did the same when he killed that Other the same way (notice, that guy was "one of his people" too). Now he has a gun on a guy running away and doesn't shoot, and he catches hell for that. He can't win. He's in a situation where he would have caught hell if he shot the guy or if he didn't.

Homer Noodleman

01-30-09, 03:12 AM

Well, the guy who was running away had been involved in trying to hack Juliet's arm off with a machette. That's a wee bit different than tossing a knife into a stranger's back.

Rhosyn

01-30-09, 03:19 AM

I feel they should have stayed as a group. There's safety in numbers especially when confronting an unknown enemy (for lack of a better word) of an unknown disposition. Like I said, it turned out OK, but it could just as easily gone the other way.

There's no way to know, of course. I still think Locke's way was the safest way, at least for Sawyer and Juliet. His was definitely the riskier mission.

Uhm....you did see Frogurt get shot in the chest with a flaming arrow, right?

Wait... are we led to believe that was done by Richard's people? Because if so, I totally missed it.

I hope everything works out for the best as well, especially for Locke. I've been a Locke fan since "Walkabout", which is also the episode that got me hooked on the show. I'm on his side through the end and for the most part I can defend just about anything anyone wants to throw at him (though sgtdraino usually beats me there ;)). I just didn't think that scenario felt right. I do understand his motivation, I know why he did it, I know why he had a sense of urgency, I just don't agree with it. To put it another way, it's not what I would have done in that scenario.

Fair enough. :) And I knew you were a Locke fan; that's why I posted the Boobophile bit. Felt a bit awkward having a mainly pro-Locke dialogue in their thread...

He can't win. He's in a situation where he would have caught hell if he shot the guy or if he didn't.

So true.

Brian

01-30-09, 03:23 AM

Wait... are we led to believe that was done by Richard's people? Because if so, I totally missed it.

Yeah. A lot of the guys who captured Charlotte, Miles, and Daniel had bow and arrows. That's where I drew that conclusion from. Also, the two who Locke, Juliet, and Sawyer captured mentioned something about Sawyer yelling "Meet at the river" during the attack the night before, that's how they found them, or at least knew where to look.

Homer Noodleman

01-30-09, 03:24 AM

Rhosyn

01-30-09, 03:42 AM

Well, the guy who was running away had been involved in trying to hack Juliet's arm off with a machette. That's a wee bit different than tossing a knife into a stranger's back.

So... it's okay to kill someone in the interest of revenge, but not in the interest of preventing the act precipitating said revenge? Or were you talking about Naomi? That's a complicated issue that's been beaten into the ground already...

For the record, I agree that both those killings were sort of loose cannon moments, but I also think TPTB are sloppy in that regard. Sun didn't have to mortally wound Colleen, Juliet didn't have to kill Danny, Sawyer didn't have to kill Tom or Cooper, Michael could have tried something (anything) before shooting Ana-Lucia and Libby, etc. Either TPTB want us to assume (with the exception of Sawyer) that the characters had no choice, even though the writing doesn't really establish that, or they are portraying many of the characters as being unusually cavalier about human life.

Rhosyn

01-30-09, 03:46 AM

Boobophiles are Locke fans. We're just fans of, and quite entertained by, a character we consider to be a bungler instead of a jungle guru. You don't need to feel bad arguing else, we're confident enough in our position to defend it.

The only thing we'll get really snaky over is attempts to claim only people sharing your view can be his fan.

:)

Sounds good. I was going to say WEBELO, but Brian didn't have a banner, so...

And I know you're confident in your arguments, but sometimes people like to have a "safe space" of sorts. Wasn't sure if this was one of 'em. :)

Homer Noodleman

01-30-09, 03:55 AM

I was talking about Naomi. Locke was fully justified in killing the other person.

Primarily Boobophiles, or at least this Boobophile, are amused by the "they're my people", or whatever it was he said. That's because there were more than a couple of Webelo-type Locke fans who didn't believe that when he told Kate that in Season III.

Things like that are what cause the major differences in Locke interpretation between us.

If you believe, like I do, that Locke has already betrayed the castaways and joined the Others a couple of seasons ago, then there is nothing odd about the scenario that bothers Brian. Of course he's going to go to the others and leave the castaways to their fates. The Others are his people. While he may not have malice towards the castaways (although I'm not so sure of that in the case of Sawyer and Juliet), they are of secondary interest to him.

ETA: it doesn't bother me. It's just a character in a TV show. In the end, he's going to be whatever the writers make him.

Rhosyn

01-30-09, 03:56 AM

Yeah. A lot of the guys who captured Charlotte, Miles, and Daniel had bow and arrows. That's where I drew that conclusion from. Also, the two who Locke, Juliet, and Sawyer captured mentioned something about Sawyer yelling "Meet at the river" during the attack the night before, that's how they found them, or at least knew where to look.

Ooooooh, okay. Weird that they would use fire arrows when they have rifles... :confused: Anyway, if Richard's camp were presumed dangerous, then all the more reason for Locke to try to talk to Richard alone, while Sawyer and Juliet were occupied with a much safer mission. There was no way he just wasn't going to try. If he'd taken other people with him, he'd be catching hell, as you put it, for risking their lives just to further his plans to leave the Island. Besides, IIRC, taking a hostage has NEVER WORKED in ANY of the 815s interactions with others on the Island. So I'm not surprised Locke didn't go with that option...

Cmdr Spock

01-30-09, 06:41 AM

I so hate being on dialup at home (and that I missed some of the great debating going on this evening). Multi quote replies are definitely a lost cause on dialup. Anyway...

My major gripe with some of the Locke fans who believe him to be the Great White Hunter/Island's Chosen One is the total inconsistency.

GWH/ICO crowd: Locke is only acting in the 815ers best interests! He's totally about saving all of them!

Locke sets up Sawyer for a Sayid knifing. Locke gets Boone killed. Locke blows up the Swan and potentially dooms all life on Earth. Locke leads the team Locke redshirts to their doom. Locke bars the door against Sawyer and Claire. Pulls a gun on Sawyer and takes Hurley hostage. Locke declares for the Others, abandons the losties to go stooging after Richard...etc etc

GWH/ICO crowd: It was their own fault! Locke was following his destiny!

Now if the GWH/ICO crowd would just admit that they like the guy because he's someone whose life has pretty much been crushed but yet has managed to pick himself up and keep going after having had the experience of a miraculous recovery from a paralyzing injury, and has starting taking what he wants from life no matter what the cost, I'd have a little more respect for them, because that is what I see Locke doing consistently in the show. Admirable in his determination to reach his goal no matter what the cost, and for the obstacles he's had to overcome. Yet still a boob and an idiot. Gutshot and left for dead by Ben? Gee Ben, what do you think I should do now? What do those flowers look like again? Gee Richard, I have to die to fulfill my destiny?

...and where does John end up? *cough* dead in a coffin *cough*

iWonder

01-30-09, 04:54 PM

No, nothing so complicated. He just simply can't. The universe will not let him. As someone else said in another thread, if they'd shot at Widmore, they would have missed. Because Widmore is destined to live.

I never said Locke should or could kill Widmore when he was running away. I was talking about his time with Richard. After going into Richard’s tent, while he had his ear for a few minutes, he didn’t even mention that Widmore would pose a threat in the future and Richard should be on guard around him. If the universe wanted to prevent that by flashing him out of there before he could say that, then that would have been honkey-dorey for me.

My point is that the thought never occurred to him because he’s so wrapped up in his own destiny. And I think that was very telling from a writing point of view.

The writer's could have made Locke try to do something about Widmore. I daresay if anyone of us went back in time and were faced with changing something bad in the past, we'd at least try. The writer's chose to have him completely dismiss Widmore in favor of ensuring his own "discovery" as the chosen one. I feel that was deliberate on the part of the writers.

Besides which, it is not Locke's style to kill a man retreating. He's never done it before, I dunno why he'd start now.
Naomi. Naomi. Naomi. Naomi.

Oh... my bad... you said "man".

:nanabobo:

He didn't change Desmond's memory. Daniel has always traveled back in time and met Desmond in the hatch. Desmond simply forgot that they had met.
We have not been shown that Daniel did that the first time around, so the option is still wide open that the past can change the future. And he didn’t forget. The conversation between Des and Penny expressly stated that the memory just appeared all of a sudden. (I even think they spoon fed us that twice, last week and this.)

If the universe won't let the past be changed, why are Hawking, the Butcher and Ben all in a dither? They should be sitting back and relaxing instead of trying to ensure that something happens in the past.

But I hope that the WEBELO's are right, because I think that would be the better story.

I personally think that story would be too predictable. I like my plots all twisty! ;)

Susan B Anthony

01-30-09, 06:32 PM

Now if the GWH/ICO crowd would just admit that they like the guy because he's someone whose life has pretty much been crushed but yet has managed to pick himself up and keep going after having had the experience of a miraculous recovery from a paralyzing injury, and has starting taking what he wants from life no matter what the cost, I'd have a little more respect for them, because that is what I see Locke doing consistently in the show.

I like the guy because he's someone whose life has pretty much been crushed but yet has managed to pick himself up and keep going after having had the experience of a miraculous recovery from a paralyzing injury...okay and that's where you lose me. I don't think Locke is taking what he wants from life without considering the cost (to other people, I assume you mean). I think he feels that his life FINALLY has purpose, after years of meaningless existence, no place to belong (something that has been relentlessly shown in flashbacks), and a sense that there should be something more.

The thing I like most about Locke is that a part of him is still that geek being shoved in lockers, tormented by a nasty boss, and imagining relationships with a phone sex chick. I like that you never know if Locke is going to get it right. It is that weakness and insecurity that make his determination so courageous. Locke knows he could be wrong about being chosen, and yet he stays the course.

I don't care about Sawyer's bravado because it is second nature to him. It doesn't cost him anything. On the other hand, Jack (and Boobophiles, by the way) tell Locke exactly what he has been told his whole life.

RANDY: That's what you think you've got, old man? Destiny?

Yet Locke perseveres in his faith. He knows that Ben has been playing him, but he also knows that Ben has information he needs. (I think he also feels a kinship with Ben because of their shared destiny, but that is for another thread.) Even down to his last moments with Jack at the Orchid station, Locke did not let pride get in the way of asking Jack to stay. Even after Jack tried to murder him, Locke did not react out of anger or revenge.

Yet still a boob and an idiot.

I freely admit Locke's weakness. I just don't think he can be written off as an idiot.

Gutshot and left for dead by Ben? Gee Ben, what do you think I should do now?

Should he have taken revenge on Ben? Shot him while he was tied to the tree? Should he have done the same to Jack? Would that make him less a fool in your eyes?

...and where does John end up? *cough* dead in a coffin *cough*

Until we know the circumstances of Locke's death, I don't think we can say whether it is a product of his idiocy (which I'm guessing some people are already predicting), or his honor (which I'm guessing some other people are already predicting).

p.s. Dial-up sucks!

iWonder

01-30-09, 06:43 PM

I freely admit Locke's weakness. I just don't think he can be written off as an idiot.

I'm curious, would you buy him as a pawn? Or, is it any easier to write him off as a pawn?

Susan B Anthony

01-30-09, 06:43 PM

After going into Richard’s tent, while he had his ear for a few minutes, he didn’t even mention that Widmore would pose a threat in the future and Richard should be on guard around him.

We know that Widmore is a threat to Ben. It was a huge shock to us to find out that Widmore was on the island in the '50s. Just as much of a shock to Locke. He knew that in the "present" Widmore was willing to kill all sorts of people to gain control of the island. But he doesn't know the history of the Linus/Widmore rivalry any more than we do. Boobophiles are trying to have it both ways.

If Ben is the good guy and Widmore the bad, then you shouldn't fault Locke for teaming up with Ben.

If Widmore is the good guy and Ben the bad, then Locke was right in not shooting or exposing him.

It seems inconsistent to say Locke was wrong to throw in with Ben and wrong to do nothing about Widmore even though Ben told him Widmore was the enemy. What am I missing?

And incidentally, who knows what he might have told Richard if he had more time.

iWonder

01-30-09, 06:57 PM

We know that Widmore is a threat to Ben. <snip> Boobophiles are trying to have it both ways.
Locke knew that Widmore sent a freighter full of mercenaries to torch the island. He knew Widmore was very, very bad for the island, so much so that it caused him to throw a knife into a woman's back. Now, Widmore means "nothing" to him? You're pulling my leg, right?

It seems inconsistent to say Locke was wrong to throw in with Ben and wrong to do nothing about Widmore even though Ben told him Widmore was the enemy.
I don't think I've ever had a problem with him throwing in with Ben, but there is a whole world of difference in working with someone under an uneasy truce and wholeheartedly saying "how high" when a guy who has shot and left you for dead comes back and says "jump." I have the same qualms about Jack being his new puppy too!

And incidentally, who knows what he might have told Richard if he had more time.
Right. He made sure he took care of what was most important with what little time he had. Himself. Some see that as a negative, some see it as a positive.

sgtdraino

01-30-09, 09:44 PM

Draino,

He can try. He simply didn't.

lol. That's what happens when I post before I've actually seen the epsiode. Duh! The objective isn't to kill this guy, the objective is to locate his camp and talk to Alpert. He's running, the only way to stop him is to shoot him. Then maybe he ends up dead, or maybe he ends up wounded and difficult to transport. OR instead you can do the smart thing, let the guy think he's getting away, and then track his butt all the way back home. Which is exactly what Locke did. :D

And again, Locke has never killed anyone out of revenge. He has only taken a life in order to save other lives. It would have been out of character for Locke to take out Widmore as he's running. And hey, did Locke even have a gun? I don't think so.

I just, I don't know, it didn't feel right and for the first time, for me anyway, watching Locke through all these seasons I sat there in disbelief at what he was doing.

Well, he did give them ten minutes head start, that was nice. :) But Daniel isn't really the priority, and so long as he keeps himself alive until the flash occurs, no rescuing is necessary.

Uhm....you did see Frogurt get shot in the chest with a flaming arrow, right? :)

Yes, that was the Others at work. While Alpert doesn't seem like a particularly bad guy himself, apparently their leader (Jacob?) is pretty proactive these days about keeping strangers off the island, by deadly force if necessary.

Then they did the same when he killed that Other the same way (notice, that guy was "one of his people" too). Now he has a gun on a guy running away and doesn't shoot, and he catches hell for that. He can't win. He's in a situation where he would have caught hell if he shot the guy or if he didn't.

Ah, Brian. You know as well as I do that this is because the people in question who are giving Locke hell, are doing so because this is the way they show how much they like the character. Some people show their love of somebody by making fun of them, calling them idiots, and purposefully misconstruing their actions. It's just another kind of "fan." ;)

If you believe, like I do, that Locke has already betrayed the castaways and joined the Others a couple of seasons ago

Of course this is patently false, since as you pointed out, Locke killed one of the Others to save his fellow castaways. It is obvious he has not betrayed them. To say otherwise, is on the same level as Jack insisting that the island had not moved, when it quite obviously did.

ETA: it doesn't bother me. It's just a character in a TV show. In the end, he's going to be whatever the writers make him.

When Locke turns out to be ultimately vindicated, turns out to be right about the things he has said and done throughout the series, which is just how the writers make him... I think that you will still insist that he is a boob, but that inside it will bother you. Just a little. :)

My major gripe with some of the Locke fans who believe him to be the Great White Hunter/Island's Chosen One is the total inconsistency.

Who believes that? WEBELOs simply believe in Locke's good intentions. And of course we don't think he's an idiot. Can you name a single person who believes Locke is "the Great White Hunter/Island's Chosen One?"

Locke sets up Sawyer for a Sayid knifing. Locke gets Boone killed. Locke blows up the Swan and potentially dooms all life on Earth. Locke leads the team Locke redshirts to their doom. Locke bars the door against Sawyer and Claire. Pulls a gun on Sawyer and takes Hurley hostage. Locke declares for the Others, abandons the losties to go stooging after Richard...etc etc

Bah. These actions have been explained so many times there's no point in doing it anymore. Short version: For everything listed above, either Locke had a good and valid reason, OR he didn't even do what you say he did, OR he was manipulated by The Island into doing what he did, again for good and valid reasons.

Hmmm. Perhaps in the future I will simply link to one of the many other threads where all these charges are disputed.

and has starting taking what he wants from life no matter what the cost, I'd have a little more respect for them,

What? We don't have your respect? :rolleyez:
On the contrary (as usual) what we see in the show is Locke sacrificing for other people no matter what the cost to himself, whether that be losing friends, being accused of insanity, or actually having "friends" try to murder you. As is the case now, with Locke doing his best to leave the island to get the O6 back and save everyone, even though he is told that he will have to die to accomplish the task.

What do those flowers look like again?

Heh. There is no "again." He was never told what the flowers look like. Hard to know what something looks like, when you've never seen or heard a description of it before.

...and where does John end up? *cough* dead in a coffin *cough*

So far, everything points to knockout darts, a la Sayid.

I never said Locke should or could kill Widmore when he was running away. I was talking about his time with Richard. After going into Richard’s tent, while he had his ear for a few minutes, he didn’t even mention that Widmore would pose a threat in the future and Richard should be on guard around him. If the universe wanted to prevent that by flashing him out of there before he could say that, then that would have been honkey-dorey for me.

It would be more likely that blood would suddenly gush out of his nose and he'd keel over dead. That is how the universe responds to people who are about to create a helluva paradox. We don't know if Locke considered doing what you suggest, but it would be very dangerous to do. You're talking about actively trying to alter the past. That is against the rules of this show.

I'm curious, would you buy him as a pawn? Or, is it any easier to write him off as a pawn?

Absolutely Locke is a Pawn. Or perhaps more like a Knight, because he can move in unexpected ways. He is a very powerful playing piece in the chess game being played by The Island. He is a servant. But that's not a bad thing. I'm a servant too. "To protect and to serve" is a high calling.

casual-viewer

01-30-09, 09:47 PM

I guess I'm half-WEBELO half-Boobophile, because I believe he's a well-intentioned idiot, who keeps getting his butt saved by course correction. But he is a good tracker.

Susan B Anthony

01-30-09, 09:54 PM

I'm curious, would you buy him as a pawn? Or, is it any easier to write him off as a pawn?

I might buy "pawn." But I think your definition of pawn is probably similar to Locke's definition of chosen one. "Chosen" indicates that someone else made the choice. Locke did not choose the island, the island chose him, and he is comfortable with that. The choice that Locke made was to accept his destiny and fulfil it to the best of his ability. The island also chose Jack, but Jack chose to reject that destiny ---- at least until he realizes his life is crap and decides to return to the island.

Ben did all he could to prevent Locke from replacing him, but in the end he was unsuccessful. Yes, he tried, with varying degrees of success, to use Locke. Ben also used Jack, Sawyer, Kate, Juliet, Michael, and a host of other people. If Locke is an idiot for being manipulated, then so are the rest of them.

Locke knew that Widmore sent a freighter full of mercenaries to torch the island. He knew Widmore was very, very bad for the island, so much so that it caused him to throw a knife into a woman's back. Now, Widmore means "nothing" to him? You're pulling my leg, right?

Who said Widmore means nothing? I just dont' think it is a failure to simply catalog the information that Widmore was on the island in the '50s rather than --- well, what did you think he should do? Try to kill him? When he had the rifle, he didn't know it was Widmore.

I don't think I've ever had a problem with him throwing in with Ben, but there is a whole world of difference in working with someone under an uneasy truce and wholeheartedly saying "how high" when a guy who has shot and left you for dead comes back and says "jump."

Give me an example of when Locke did this.

Right. He made sure he took care of what was most important with what little time he had. Himself. Some see that as a negative, some see it as a positive.

No, he tried to find out how to get off the island in order to bring back the O6 in order to save the lives of everyone left on the island. How is that just looking after himself? Locke believes he will die in this endeavor and yet he is still willing to do it. How is that looking after himself?

Cmdr Spock

01-30-09, 11:13 PM

Can you name a single person who believes Locke is "the Great White Hunter/Island's Chosen One?"

Sure. sgtdraino. :nanabobo:

A facade is a false front, something fake. The "Great White Hunter" is not a facade. Locke has proved through his actions on the island that he really is a capable hunter and tracker. He really can do that stuff.
We already know that he has been "chosen" by The Island,

sgtdraino

01-30-09, 11:47 PM

Sure. sgtdraino. :nanabobo:

See those quotation marks around that thar word? I use those when I'm quoting someone else's terminology. In that particular case, azteclady. Perhaps your name should be Cmdr Outofcontext? ;) The point of that conversation was one person suggesting that Locke was not really a hunter, with me responding that Locke has demonstrated many times that he has highly developed skills as a hunter and tracker.

You didn't even link the second quote properly, so I don't know where you got it, but if I had to guess, I was talking about how all of the 815s are "chosen," Locke included. Locke is not "The Island Chosen One," he is just one of many "chosen" for a purpose by The Island... as he himself has stated.

Homer Noodleman

01-31-09, 01:43 AM

See those quotation marks around that thar word? I use those when I'm quoting someone else's terminology. In that particular case, azteclady. Perhaps your name should be Cmdr Outofcontext? ;) The point of that conversation was one person suggesting that Locke was not really a hunter, with me responding that Locke has demonstrated many times that he has highly developed skills as a hunter and tracker.

Out of context? Er, what? :confused:

So somebody said Locke wasn't a "Great White Hunter" and you disagreed and argued otherwise. What are you trying to say, that you never really called him a Great White Hunter because you never typed the words "Great White" in front of Hunter?

Ermmm... well, good luck trying to float that semantic nitpick in the Boobophile thread. :p

sgtdraino

01-31-09, 03:14 AM

Out of context? Er, what? :confused:

So somebody said Locke wasn't a "Great White Hunter" and you disagreed and argued otherwise. What are you trying to say, that you never really called him a Great White Hunter because you never typed the words "Great White" in front of Hunter?

What the person meant was that Locke isn't really a hunter. In order to convey their point, they stated that the "GWH aspect" of Locke is a facade. They were using the term improperly, just as those here are. The only context I have ever used the term "great white hunter," is in reference to something somebody else said. A "great white hunter" is a colloqualism with specific meaning. It is not the same thing as the generic term "hunter."

The term Great White Hunter is a popular phrase that emphasizes the racial and colonial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonialism) aspects of the profession, as well as its colorful aspects. The term echoes the privileged status of the white men (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people) who pursued this profession. Depending on the author and intention, the term can be used straightforwardly, in parody, or as a critique.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_white_hunter

I have never used the term to refer to Locke, nor would I use the term to refer to Locke. As you should be able to see from the above description, it doesn't really apply to him. Locke is a hunter, he is not a "Great White Hunter."

Homer Noodleman

01-31-09, 04:23 AM

Draino,

Don't you feel just a little silly trying to split hairs over that?

Everybody with a sense of humor gets the Great White Hunter bit is just a humorous exaggeration. Nobody really thinks he wanders around the jungle in a pith helmet bagging elephants and yelling at his porters. We also know that you think, and have claimed on many occasions in various ways, that he is brimming with woodcraft and what-not.

Or are you trying to claim that's not your position? If so, I'm all ears. If not, then what's the point?

Cmdr Spock

01-31-09, 04:31 AM

See those quotation marks around that thar word? I use those when I'm quoting someone else's terminology.

Hey sgtdenial*, the bolded portion of the quote below are not your own words?

A facade is a false front, something fake. The "Great White Hunter" is not a facade. Locke has proved through his actions on the island that he really is a capable hunter and tracker. He really can do that stuff.

Not going to bother with tracking down how you defined facade, I know what it means, and you said "Great White Hunter" is not a facade.

Way too funny. BTW, the second posted link brought me to the correct quote of yours. On dialup. Click the ">" looking icon to take you there. Perhaps if you could be bothered to read your own post all the way through? The quote is in the first paragraph if that helps you narrow it down...:rolleyez:

ETA: Post #26 of Will Ben Linus ever return to Lost Island? if you still can't find it. :D

*and may we please refrain from the personal attacks going forward? Cmdr Outofcontext? My post was perfectly in context.

iWonder

01-31-09, 04:17 PM

. Can you name a single person who believes Locke is "the Great White Hunter/Island's Chosen One?"
Just as you seem to have a perception of me as a Boobophile that I don't think is accurate, that is the perception I have of most of the vehement Webelos, yourself included. Until you stated otherwise, I had thought that summed up your view of Locke rather accurately, actually.

Bah. These actions have been explained so many times there's no point in doing it anymore.
Oy, if only you’d stop. :nanabobo:
Thing is, these actions were mostly refuted by you, and you didn't convince us to change our minds. What you call "explanations" we call "spin". You would save yourself a lot of time and effort by accepting that other people just don't agree with you, and that that's perfectly okay.

There’s quite a difference between discussing and browbeating.

It would be more likely that blood would suddenly gush out of his nose and he'd keel over dead. That is how the universe responds to people who are about to create a helluva paradox.
That’s not the only theory concerning the bloody noses. The other involves exposure to electromagnetism and the lack of a constant. What great paradox was Charlotte perpetrating while she walked across a field last week?

Absolutely Locke is a Pawn. Or perhaps more like a Knight, because he can move in unexpected ways. He is a very powerful playing piece in the chess game being played by The Island. He is a servant. But that's not a bad thing.
Excellent point. I hadn’t thought of the more positive aspects of a pawn. Whether the pawn/Locke is good or bad depends whether the forces manipulating him are good or bad.

iWonder

01-31-09, 04:18 PM

I guess I'm half-WEBELO half-Boobophile, because I believe he's a well-intentioned idiot, who keeps getting his butt saved by course correction. But he is a good tracker.
Actually, I would consider that sentiment to be 100% Boobophile. I won’t allow Webelos (or anyone else, for that matter) to tell me what my viewpoint is.

iWonder

01-31-09, 04:22 PM

(I apologize for my triple post, I wanted to separate each person I’m responding to for clarity. :))

Ben also used Jack, Sawyer, Kate, Juliet, Michael, and a host of other people. If Locke is an idiot for being manipulated, then so are the rest of them.
YES, I absolutely agree, they’re all fools. So, perhaps you can understand why people who will not apply the same standards to Locke as they do to the others drive me up a wall!! Because the “island chose” him… To which I say, yeah, but who’s driving the island?!

Who said Widmore means nothing?
LOCKE: (To Jones) Your name is Widmore? Charles Widmore?
WIDMORE: What's it to you?
LOCKE: Nothing. Nice to meet you.

well, what did you think he should do? Try to kill him?
Sigh.

…. WHY, WHY, WHY didn't he take the time to WARN Richard of Widmore's future betrayal?!?!

I never said Locke should or could kill Widmore when he was running away. I was talking about his time with Richard. After going into Richard’s tent, while he had his ear for a few minutes, he didn’t even mention that Widmore would pose a threat in the future and Richard should be on guard around him. If the universe wanted to prevent that by flashing him out of there before he could say that, then that would have been honkey-dorey for me.

Give me an example of when Locke did this.
If you can’t see that Locke followed Ben every step of the way and followed his directions without question then there’s really no point, is there?

Look, I don’t argue that Locke doesn’t think he's saving others. His intentions are undeniably good.

That is not my beef with him. My problem is that he is subverting his own free will and accepting morally questionable (and some outright bad) actions without question. He’s letting himself be used. You say faith, I say fool.

And, by the way, I will never accept excusing questionable behavior by saying its due to his "faith". Tell that to the 9/11 victims.

The killing of Cooper is an excellent example. Did Cooper deserve to die? Unquestionably, twice over. Was it morally right for Sawyer to do so or for Locke to manipulate Sawyer into doing so? No. I’m sorry. It wasn’t. I understand/empathize etc. the emotions behind it, yes. But in the grand scheme of things, it was wrong.

To cap it off, Cooper was not a threat to the island in any way, shape or form! If Locke's only transgressions are in service to the island, how do you spin that one?

Cooper's killing was a test by the Others all right. To see if Locke would give in to his darker side if needed and do anything in service to the island. And he fits the profile. Highly amenable to coersion. I find the motivations of the island and those controlling it to be highly suspect.

Really, it all comes down to whether the island is good or bad.

Rhosyn

01-31-09, 06:56 PM

Thing is, these actions were mostly refuted by you, and you didn't convince us to change our minds. What you call "explanations" we call "spin". You would save yourself a lot of time and effort by accepting that other people just don't agree with you, and that that's perfectly okay.

Well, what I took <b>sgtdraino</b> to mean is that Naomi's intentions have already been discussed to death, and ain't nobody gonna change their mind, unless and until we get more info.

Personally, I think there is enough evidence to support either side (not one side that is a true "explanation" and another side that is merely "spin"). I think TPTB deliberately left it ambiguous. We simply don't have all the puzzle pieces, and either interpretation could ultimately prove to be correct. Like most people, I go with the interpretation that best fits with my preferences, hopes, and with my understanding of the show itself and of storytelling in general.

After going into Richard’s tent, while he had his ear for a few minutes, he didn’t even mention that Widmore would pose a threat in the future and Richard should be on guard around him. If the universe wanted to prevent that by flashing him out of there before he could say that, then that would have been honkey-dorey for me.

Hmm. I think Locke is just proceeding with caution, what with being a time-traveller and all. For all we know, Widmore will prove to be instrumental in keeping the H-bomb inert. Locke's operating under the assumption that getting himself off the Island ASAP is his top priority, and that the less he meddles with any other issue, the better.

Besides, (and maybe I'm alone on this?) I don't have any particular loyalty to any group on the Island. I like the 815s more, because we know them better, the story is from their POV, etc. But that doesn't mean that any group or person which seems to be operating against their interests (whether it be Dharma, the Others, Ben, or Widmore) is necessarily evil. As we've seen throughout the show, the exploration of moral grey areas is a (if not the) theme of the show, and this is only being emphasized by the time-travel issue, as shown by the "You set the tripwires, not us" line in Jughead. This is one of the reasons I like Locke so much, because he seems to feel the same way. Richard's others are "his people," but so are the 815s. I respect and admire the fact that he can suffer all kinds of mistreatment at the hands of others, and still give them the benefit of the doubt. You criticize him for teaming up with Ben, but we don't know yet whether that was ultimately a bad thing. If he hadn't, presumably Keamy's team would have captured Ben and torched the Island. My gut tells me Ben is sort of a Gollum character; essentially he's bad news, but he's also very, very necessary.

Did Cooper deserve to die? Unquestionably, twice over. Was it morally right for Sawyer to do so or for Locke to manipulate Sawyer into doing so? No. I’m sorry. It wasn’t. I understand/empathize etc. the emotions behind it, yes. But in the grand scheme of things, it was wrong.

I so, so agree. None of the people in the story are innocent. They are all misguided to a degree, some more than others. It may turn out that the Island itself is good but that everyone is misinterpreting its wishes. Or the Island may turn out to be as flawed and as in need of redemption as any of the characters. Or it may turn out to be Ever So Evil! We'll just have to see...

iWonder

01-31-09, 10:12 PM

Well, what I took sgtdraino to mean is that Naomi's intentions have already been discussed to death, and ain't nobody gonna change their mind, unless and until we get more info.

I agree with that, many times over. :) However, the quote I pulled from Sgt. Draino was responding (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2566935&postcount=147) not just to Naomi's death, but a whole laundry list of Locke's questionable actions.

And what I was saying, is that in every single case, Locke's actions are explained in a positive light by him. Every single case. And we just don't buy it. Furthermore, rather than just understand that some of us disagree and let it go, he gets exasperated that he has to "explain" it to us again. Its kind of missing the point.

As we've seen throughout the show, the exploration of moral grey areas is a (if not the) theme of the show, <snip>I respect and admire the fact that he can suffer all kinds of mistreatment at the hands of others, and still give them the benefit of the doubt. You criticize him for teaming up with Ben, but we don't know yet whether that was ultimately a bad thing.
I’m also a fan of the gray areas; its what I found most interesting about the show and still do. (It might surprise you that I even think Ben is indeed one of the “good guys’!!)

I look at Locke’s horrible mistreatment and cringe that he doesn’t defend himself more adequately.

But I don’t criticize him for teaming up with Ben. (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2566669&postcount=146) Once again, I’m saying that his deference and unwavering trust that Ben isn’t going to just F him over makes Locke seem too naïve and vulnerable. Huge red flags. I know it seems contradictory that I like Ben but don't trust him, but I think that's the best way to handle him, doesn't it? ;)

Homer Noodleman

01-31-09, 10:47 PM

Boobophiles is the big tent Locke Fan Club. The unifying theme is that he's a bungler and not a wise old jungle guru. Beyond that, people have a variety of interpretations about Locke.

For example, I hold the view that he is drenched with hubris, and that his inflated sense of self-importance is going to result in disaster. The Croucher dialog snippet in Walkabout is of significant to me. It was not destiny that got Croucher to the top of the mountain, it was hard work and dedication. Locke just sees it as destiny, and he's never applied either the hard work of reflection needed on the island. Instead he just gets suckered by one faction after another who, sensing his credulousness, feed his inflated sense of self-worth and make him dance like a puppet.

LOCKE: So, what exactly did you see back there? I saw it once, you know.
EKO: And what did you see?
LOCKE: I saw a very bright light. It was beautiful.
EKO: That is not what I saw.

Other people hold other views. Many are no where near as hard on Locke as I am. What they don't feel the need to do is explain away and rationalize all of his foibles.

sgtdraino

01-31-09, 11:05 PM

Don't you feel just a little silly trying to split hairs over that?

You tell me. You're the ones splitting hairs.

Everybody with a sense of humor gets the Great White Hunter bit is just a humorous exaggeration. Nobody really thinks he wanders around the jungle in a pith helmet bagging elephants and yelling at his porters.

lol. That is a funny image. :D No, but I think some of you did think that I and others literally think of Locke as a "Great White Hunter," without really realizing what that colloqualism means. No, we think that Locke is a capable hunter and tracker (as I've said many times), not a "Great White Hunter." As you imply, that term is generally only used by your sort of "fans."

Just as you seem to have a perception of me as a Boobophile that I don't think is accurate, that is the perception I have of most of the vehement Webelos, yourself included. Until you stated otherwise, I had thought that summed up your view of Locke rather accurately, actually.

lol. That he goes around in a pith helmet bagging elephants??? :rolleyez:

Oy, if only you’d stop. :nanabobo:
Thing is, these actions were mostly refuted by you, and you didn't convince us to change our minds.

Of course not. You are the true believers, the unmoveable. You will never be convinced no matter how high the mountain of evidence rises. I don't argue to convince you, I argue to convince them. Those on the peanut gallery, those that lurk, perhaps some of those new members that WEBELOs recently picked up. And judging from most of the polls that reference these various issues (Boone, Naomi, etc.), apparently I have been quite convincing! :)

What you call "explanations" we call "spin".

You can call it what you want. But the truth is the truth.

You would save yourself a lot of time and effort by accepting that other people just don't agree with you, and that that's perfectly okay.

Hey, if Jack wants to insist that the island didn't move, if Jack wants to deny what happened right in front of his eyes, who are we to argue, eh? ;)

Whether the pawn/Locke is good or bad depends whether the forces manipulating him are good or bad.

Not quite. So long as Locke believes he is doing good, then he is good, whether or not the forces manipulating him are evil.

I won’t allow Webelos (or anyone else, for that matter) to tell me what my viewpoint is.

You mean, for example... oh, I dunno... insisting that you do think Locke is a "Great White Hunter?" And quoting you out of context to support their argument? Yes, I know just how you feel. ;)

(I apologize for my triple post, I wanted to separate each person I’m responding to for clarity. :))

Fisking is your friend!

YES, I absolutely agree, they’re all fools. So, perhaps you can understand why people who will not apply the same standards to Locke as they do to the others drive me up a wall!!

Funny, I somehow missed the "Friends Who Make Fun of Hurley Club," the "Stupid Sayid's Real Fan Club," and the "Desmond Is An Idiot Superfans" threads.

That is not my beef with him. My problem is that he is subverting his own free will and accepting morally questionable (and some outright bad) actions without question.

He questions all the time. Heck, he keeps having these lapses in faith even when you'd think he's seen enough to not lose faith anymore. Without question? How about, "Why did you do this to me!?" pounding on the hatch? Sounds like a question to me.

He’s letting himself be used. You say faith, I say fool.

We all let ourselves be used. That can be bad, or it can be the most noble thing you can do. It all depends upon why you are acting as a servant. Locke's motives are good, and therefore noble.

And, by the way, I will never accept excusing questionable behavior by saying its due to his "faith". Tell that to the 9/11 victims.

Completely different situation. In fact, you shouldn't even be drawing parallels to religious faiths, because Locke's faith is not religious in nature. Locke's faith is the same sort of faith you would have in a close friend, whom you have grown to trust because of the truthful things he has told you in the past, the helpful things he had done in the past. The times in the past that he has proven himself to be correct. That is The Island for Locke. It's not some illusory vision or imaginary friend, it's a real, concrete being that gives real verifiable information.

Was it morally right for Sawyer to do so or for Locke to manipulate Sawyer into doing so? No. I’m sorry. It wasn’t.

Locke did not manipulate Sawyer into killing Cooper. He only manipulated him into getting locked in a room with Cooper. Cooper did the rest of the work himself. Once Sawyer was locked in, Locke didn't say a word, so it really isn't possible that Locke manipulated Sawyer into killing Cooper.

If Locke locked you in a room with some guy, and then didn't say anything... would you proceed to murder the guy? Yeah, good luck with the jury on that one.

Well, what I took sgtdraino to mean is that Naomi's intentions have already been discussed to death, and ain't nobody gonna change their mind, unless and until we get more info.

Personally, I think there is enough evidence to support either side (not one side that is a true "explanation" and another side that is merely "spin").

I think there's at least a couple of polls on this issue that reveal pretty plainly that most people do believe that Naomi was bad, and that knifing her was necessary. Only the minority still find her to be ambiguous or innocent.

Locke's operating under the assumption that getting himself off the Island ASAP is his top priority, and that the less he meddles with any other issue, the better.

Right on.

If he hadn't, presumably Keamy's team would have captured Ben and torched the Island.

Yep.

My gut tells me Ben is sort of a Gollum character; essentially he's bad news, but he's also very, very necessary.

lol. A very apt comparison! :D

Boobophiles is the big tent Locke Fan Club.

"Big tent," lol. How many members you got under that "big tent?" Thirteen? <checks> Yup, thirteen:

Homer
Cmdr Spock
iWonder
casual-viewer
JackIsNoHero
sweetsunray
Dew
Kenji III
gertie
silversurfer
tellthemmrekoletyoulive
Boomfish
lostaway

There are 40 WEBELOs. It appears our tent is bigger.

Homer Noodleman

01-31-09, 11:33 PM

This is off-topic, but is anybody else having problems with the scroll wheels on the mouses wearing out quicker then they expect?

iWonder

02-01-09, 12:10 AM

This is off-topic, but is anybody else having problems with the scroll wheels on the mouses wearing out quicker then they expect?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

On my word of honor, I just bought a new mouse last week because the scroll wheel was broken....and as I read, I thought, "Wow! Yes, as a matter of fact...".and then the light bulb went on.

You rock.
:worshippy

iWonder

02-01-09, 12:58 AM

Okay, okay, one for the road, and then I’m quitting, honest. I have a new mouse scroll to protect!

(Yeah, that's right, I’m double posting! I’m baaaad. :p)

lol. That he goes around in a pith helmet bagging elephants??? :rolleyez:
Why, yes, I well and truly believe that you think Locke goes around wearing a pith helmet bagging elephants!!

Misdirection is one strategy, I suppose. You’re not fooling anyone.

I don't argue to convince you, I argue to convince them. Those on the peanut gallery, those that lurk, perhaps some of those new members that WEBELOs recently picked up. And judging from most of the polls that reference these various issues (Boone, Naomi, etc.), apparently I have been quite convincing!

I can see why you identify so strongly with Locke.

You can call it what you want. But the truth is the truth.

I say my version of the truth is the truth.

Hey, if Jack wants to insist that the island didn't move, if Jack wants to deny what happened right in front of his eyes, who are we to argue, eh?
Have I ever denied that that was a ridiculous statement? Stop changing the subject.

Not quite. So long as Locke believes he is doing good, then he is good, whether or not the forces manipulating him are evil.
Michael was a good man. He believed what he was doing was for the good of his son.

Funny, I somehow missed the "Friends Who Make Fun of Hurley Club," the "Stupid Sayid's Real Fan Club," and the "Desmond Is An Idiot Superfans" threads. The characters in question were Jack, Sawyer, Kate, Juliet, and Michael. Irrelevant hyperbole. Nice obfuscation.

He questions all the time. Heck, he keeps having these lapses in faith even when you'd think he's seen enough to not lose faith anymore. Without question? How about, "Why did you do this to me!?" pounding on the hatch? Sounds like a question to me.Yelling at an inanimate object is not the same as demanding answers from Ben, Richard or Jacob.

Completely different situation. In fact, you shouldn't even be drawing parallels to religious faiths, because Locke's faith is not religious in nature.
Who the heck said anything about religion? Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith), definition #1:
Faith: 1 a: allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1): fidelity to one's promises (2): sincerity of intentions

Whether it's faith in one’s friends, faith in one’s diety, faith in one’s political convictions; faith is faith. And faith is not an automatic carte blanche.

Locke did not manipulate Sawyer into killing Cooper. He only manipulated him into getting locked in a room with Cooper. Cooper did the rest of the work himself. Once Sawyer was locked in, Locke didn't say a word, so it really isn't possible that Locke manipulated Sawyer into killing Cooper. I'm setting this apart for all the lurkers out there. The Boobophiles in the peanut gallery who might be sitting on the fence, wondering what all the fuss is about. Wondering, what's with all the :rolleyez: in here? Surely, we're all just overreacting. But this. Read it again. Really read it. This is the stuff you just wouldn't believe if you didn't actually see it for yourself.

sgtdraino

02-01-09, 02:22 AM

Michael was a good man. He believed what he was doing was for the good of his son.

No, Michael knew what he was doing was very, very wrong. He just wanted his son so badly, he decided to do it anyway. It wasn't even to save his son's life, it was just to see him again.

The characters in question were Jack, Sawyer, Kate, Juliet, and Michael. Irrelevant hyperbole. Nice obfuscation.

You said, "They're all fools." Were you not speaking of all the 815s? That was my take. In any event, Jack is the only other character with a real hate club. Where's the "Josh Holloway Fans United to Poop on Sawyer" thread?

Yelling at an inanimate object is not the same as demanding answers from Ben, Richard or Jacob.

If you think his comments were directed at the hatch door, then you may need to rewatch that episode.

Who the heck said anything about religion?

You did. You compared Locke's faith to the religious Muslim faith of the 9/11 hijackers (which is pretty ludicrous to start with). Saying that all kinds of faith are the same, is like saying all kinds of love are the same. It's simply wrong.

This is the stuff you just wouldn't believe if you didn't actually see it for yourself.

lol. I say that every time I visit this thread. ;)

Then again, most people here do see this stuff for themselves, and they still don't believe it! Kinda like Jack insisting the island didn't move.

casual-viewer

02-01-09, 02:27 AM

This is off-topic, but is anybody else having problems with the scroll wheels on the mouses wearing out quicker then they expect?

the short length of your post caught my eye as I was scrolling through... & so stopped to say hi. ;)

casual-viewer

02-01-09, 02:45 AM

Our poor little fan club. Has it devolved into a poll?
Is John a:
~bumbler
~superhero
Let the (same) debate commence.

Now I am all about freedom on the forums and anybody following forum guidelines should be allowed to post anywhere. But I thought it was interesting to go back to the founding posts of this thread and see if I had misremembered it's purpose. Turns out I didn't and I found a little something else. (Bolding added)

Draino,

I realize that you think posters who believe Locke is a bumbler are trollish, biased, baiting and/or just plain idiots. I think otherwise. I think they merely have a different take on a fictional character.

This thread is for any people who quite enjoy what they perceive as Locke's idiocy. No doubt we'll be commenting on it, as well as making fun of it, as the thread grows. If your blood pressure rises reading a such heresy, I suggest you consider ignoring this thread.

Done. But I stand by Ace's assessment. There is legitimate debate, and then there is picking, prodding, rubbing things in peoples' faces. That is the last I will say on this subject in open forum.

I believe that the story could never have gotten this far, had it not been for Locke doing what someone less oblivious than him would not do, time and time again. For that, I am grateful for Locke. Any posts requesting for me to detail each action of his that I deem ridiculous, so that they can try to change my mind about how I FEEL about a character will be ignored.

You're right iWonder, I think most boobophiles feel the same way about our poor little guy, he tries so hard, bless his heart.

Homer Noodleman

02-01-09, 04:02 AM

casual-viewer,

You beat me to it. I was about to quote the same post.

Homer Noodleman

02-01-09, 04:55 AM

Lest there be any confusion -- stay on topic.

Cmdr Spock

02-01-09, 10:46 AM

This is off-topic, but is anybody else having problems with the scroll wheels on the mouses wearing out quicker then they expect?

Mouse wheel? Dude, I have a touch pad on my home PC. You want to talk about scrolling issues...

Ummm, back on topic. Anyone notice how Locke snagged the Garand M-1, even though it was Juliet's score?

I tried my best to figure out a Triangle From Hell reference from the fact that Juliet, Locke, and Sawyer all carried the gun, but the Garand made it four. Dammit!

Homer Noodleman

02-01-09, 07:27 PM

Spock,

Was that at the end of the show? They must want to give Locke a gun for the next Groundhog Day cycle.

A small detail I noticed was that when the castaways were re-castawayed on the beach, with Bernard making the fire and everybody bickering, it was Miles of all people who assumed Locke's mantle of the boar hunter. It was a hoot when he came striding back in with the boar slung across his shoulders.

I'm not sure what it was supposed to mean -- did he wander around trying to find a pig's ghost to locate the carcass? Or did he get the boar through other means?

iWonder

02-01-09, 07:54 PM

Rifle: I think he meant at the very top of the show... Their first scene in with their prisoners, Locke was demonstrating his knowledge of weaponry. But, hey, he gave it back... he just wanted to study it. Admire it. Maybe stroke it a little. But Sawyer was carrying it from their next scene up through final scene. (I just checked cause I didn't remember.)

Yeah, Miles was definitely pig ghost whisperer. The whole "only dead 3 hours" made me think he didn't do the killing (else what was he doing for 3 hours while the pig's corpse cooled?) plus his assurances that it didn't die of sickness or anything. I found the whole thing hilarious and a bit nauseating. I would've passed on the pork, myself. :vomit:

Another topic that I'd like to bring up is a very interesting analysis by GardenMom here (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2556244&postcount=26) that goes into more depth on the notion of “Locke the hunter”. Remember a few months back when we talked about the hunter vs. the farmer? Looks like we weren't the only ones picking up that subtext! You should go check it out...

Cmdr Spock

02-01-09, 08:11 PM

Spock,

Was that at the end of the show? They must want to give Locke a gun for the next Groundhog Day cycle.

Yeah, Juliet captured it, Locke had it over his shoulder when they were tromping through the jungle, Sawyer had it when the Ellie encounter occurred. Seriously weird that they all trust each other with a gun.

A small detail I noticed was that when the castaways were re-castawayed on the beach, with Bernard making the fire and everybody bickering, it was Miles of all people who assumed Locke's mantle of the boar hunter. It was a hoot when he came striding back in with the boar slung across his shoulders.

I'm not sure what it was supposed to mean -- did he wander around trying to find a pig's ghost to locate the carcass? Or did he get the boar through other means?

Sorry for parsing your post, Homer, but I was thinking Miles was communing with dead boar spirits to find the munchies.

ETA: iW beat me to it.

Homer Noodleman

02-02-09, 03:23 AM

Seriously weird that they all trust each other with a gun.

No kidding, especially Sawyer. I'm expecting him to beat the snot out of Locke before too long. Ever since he joined Locke's group during the split, his opinion of Locke seems to have been sinking lower and lower. i can't imagine he is going to put up with too much more of the Boob's backstabbing.

Then again, this is Lost and the castaways are a bizarrely forgiving lot.

sweetsunray

02-02-09, 10:31 AM

Euhm is it just me, or did Locke just boobishly created his own destiny full circle... He was "chosen" he believed, and he believed it still when he appeared to Richard 2 years before he was born. I don't know, all of a sudden 'the specialness" acquired from Alpert visiting him in the hospital the day he was born, coming to his foster house to pick out a tool, and trying to get him to go "not-in-Portland" when he's a teen seems totally nullified. Loved that twist of the story.

Tater

02-02-09, 12:32 PM

http://i39.tinypic.com/30ttoxd.jpg

Cmdr Spock

02-02-09, 02:13 PM

http://i39.tinypic.com/30ttoxd.jpg

Yep, Terry O'Quinn did a hitch in Starfleet. Bitchin'. :D

sgtdraino

02-02-09, 03:25 PM

Yep, Terry O'Quinn did a hitch in Starfleet. Bitchin'. :D

lol. Actually he really did! He played Admiral Eric Pressman, the ex-captain of a prototype ship, the USS Pegasus, on which Riker served:

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/3/36/RikerPressman.jpg/292px-RikerPressman.jpg

Cmdr Spock

02-02-09, 04:04 PM

lol. Actually he really did! He played Admiral Eric Pressman, the ex-captain of a prototype ship, the USS Pegasus, on which Riker served:

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/3/36/RikerPressman.jpg/292px-RikerPressman.jpg

I know this may come as a bit of a shock to you, but I am a Star Trek fan. I knew Terry had appeared in The Next Generation. :Cheers:

iWonder

02-03-09, 12:47 AM

I knew Terry had appeared in The Next Generation.

Gee, that must be nice. I'm never really sure what I know or think until SgtDraino tells me.

ba-da-bum.:drum:

sgtdraino

02-03-09, 11:19 AM

Jeez, touchy!

RoseArienh

02-03-09, 03:50 PM

I think..... no, I'm sure of it -- that this can be dropped and stopped now.

Remember, everyone, sniping is for PMs. Open forum is for discussing posts.

iWonder

02-03-09, 05:53 PM

Sorry. I'm like a cat in a roomful of rocking chairs lately.
:chillpill

Rhosyn

02-04-09, 12:52 AM

I agree with that, many times over. :) However, the quote I pulled from Sgt. Draino was responding (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2566935&postcount=147) not just to Naomi's death, but a whole laundry list of Locke's questionable actions.

Ah, gotcha. I was thinking of something else... My bad. :)

I’m also a fan of the gray areas; its what I found most interesting about the show and still do. (It might surprise you that I even think Ben is indeed one of the “good guys’!!)

I wouldn't be surprised if his ultimate goal is good. But I do think his methods (and possibly his motives) have become terribly, terribly twisted. Enough so that Widmore's placement relevant to Ben on the "good-bad" spectrum could still prove surprising...

But I don’t criticize him for teaming up with Ben. (http://www.losttv-forum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2566669&postcount=146) Once again, I’m saying that his deference and unwavering trust that Ben isn’t going to just F him over makes Locke seem too naïve and vulnerable. Huge red flags. I know it seems contradictory that I like Ben but don't trust him, but I think that's the best way to handle him, doesn't it? ;)

So... you agree that Locke did what he ought to have done, but you are bothered by the manner or attitude with which he did it? You feel that, if he still felt at all suspicious of Ben (which obviously he should), it would have been more apparent in his... mannerisms, expressions, etc.? I disagree. Locke's good at playing it close to the chest when he wants to. Where you see "unwavering trust," I see simple commitment to a chosen course. Locke decided to follow Ben's advice because Ben knows a lot and, more importantly, time was of the essence. When you're in a crisis, and in order to alleviate said crisis ASAP, you've decided to do what a certain person says (even though you don't trust them 100%), what's the point of acting suspicious, snarky, or hesitant? Again, they were running against the clock. Locke accepted the submissive role in the partnership because that was the best way to get things done fast. It doesn't bother me at all that he therefore acted submissive. It's honest.

P.S., I like Ben too, and you're right; he's definitely a "handle with caution" sorta guy.:D

grumpy

02-04-09, 03:37 AM

LOCKE: What is this?

RICHARD: It's a compass.

LOCKE: What does it do?

RICHARD: It points north John.

Okay, you can say this dialogue proves Locke is a boob, but his questions are not unreasonable, and Richard's answers are pretty snarky. Locke is obviously disoriented by the situation, Richard is pressed for time - why couldn't he answer "It's the object that will give you credibility the next time we meet"?

Okay, okay, the writers were having a joke, but if it were there for character/plot development, the character showing the most boobishness here seems to be Richard.

Cmdr Spock

02-04-09, 05:46 AM

Okay, you can say this dialogue proves Locke is a boob, but his questions are not unreasonable, and Richard's answers are pretty snarky. Locke is obviously disoriented by the situation, Richard is pressed for time - why couldn't he answer "It's the object that will give you credibility the next time we meet"?

Okay, okay, the writers were having a joke, but if it were there for character/plot development, the character showing the most boobishness here seems to be Richard.

Ok, ok, I'm a Boobophile, I think Locke's an idiot. I'm also on record for thinking highly of Terry O'Quinn as an actor, for thinking John Locke in the coffin is really dead, and that I hope John is able to man up and make his death be in purpose for something greater than himself when the moment comes. That said, I found the whole "It points North, John." scene to be especially hilarious because of the character's consistent and crucial flaw: Don't tell him what he can't do, but for the love of all that you hold dear, will you please tell him what to do. Then you tell him and he doesn't listen/doesn't understand/doesn't follow through, and gets a buttload of people killed...So, ok, he finds the hatch. Island telling him it's important. Beachcraft dream, Locke still needs hatch fulfillment, Boone dies. Hurley tells Locke the numbers are bad, don't do that, Locke blows the hatch anyway. Gets the scoop from Des and the Swan orientation film, button must be pushed or seriously bad things happen. John now has been told what to do. ...later, Pearl orientation video. Chat with Benry Gale, John's what he came for. Button pushing pointless, John has been told something different to do. He complies, Swan implodes, Des pushes failsafe, Island now vulnerable to outside world...skip through season 3, suffice to say, John destroys Flame, blows up submarine, falls for magic box scam, joins Others, is taking instruction from Ben, almost loses it when Ben's Jacob turns out to be real, etc. Oh, and gets gutshot by Ben and left for dead, and takes instruction from Tall Walt to off Naomi (who would never have found the Island if John hadn't imploded the Swan, btw). Then we have the S4 hilarity of John once again being told what to do by Ben (Block these doors so no one else can get in, including all those people you were leading to safety! Cross off Team Locke. Here, watch this informative video! Go join Richard, you're in charge of the Others now!) Is it little wonder that I find it more than a little amusing That John, as official leader of the Others, still has no clue as to who they are and what they're about, has to ask what the compass does when Richard has already told him it's a recognition token for when they next meet, and kills another Other the first time they meet? I'm still hoping for a noble end for John, but I have absolutely no doubt there will be more exquisite Boobishness before that happens.

My theory on Richard's snarky answer? Damage control. I think he figured if he didn't actually tell John anything it would reduce the body count.

iWonder

02-04-09, 01:37 PM

Again, they were running against the clock. Locke accepted the submissive role in the partnership because that was the best way to get things done fast. It doesn't bother me at all that he therefore acted submissive.
I think that's an interesting way to read his seemingly subservient manner... I guess it will all come down to just how much of his inner self has changed from the man he was pre-crash. Because we were shown so many times that he was too trusting, and the trouble that brought him. So, as a plot device, those back stories are there as either foreshadowing or to compare/contrast.

Its going to be interesting either way, isn't it?? :)
:Cheers:

sgtdraino

02-04-09, 03:44 PM

has to ask what the compass does when Richard has already told him it's a recognition token for when they next meet,

Richard didn't say that. And, in point of fact, it's not a recognition token for when they next meet. It can't be. When Locke gives Richard the compass, it will be the first time Richard has ever seen it. No, the compass is a recognition token for Richard to use on Locke, not the other way around.

So, in a way, Richard's answer kinda made sense, because there's really no logical inherent reason for Locke to give Richard the compass, except that he has to, because that's part of history. What goes around comes around.

Boomfish

02-04-09, 06:33 PM

Can I join? I definitley feel like a boobophile. I never post mind because I'm lame.

Locke's boobing is a marvel. I am constantly amused. I especially like it when he is confused or doesn't know what is going on (such as when he didn't know where to find the cabin or was feeling all heartbroken and betrayed after finding the pearl). He gets so angry...none of the rest of the losties know what's going on but they don't act like they've been betrayed by an intangible benevolent force. Only Jack gets more upset when out of the loop and that's because being wrong causes him physical pain.

I just don't understand why Locke feels that something (who knows what?) is his destiny but constantly tries to force the issue anyway. Just leave it dude...

In terms of the moral justification for his actions....I don't know. I sort of don't care. My problem is that Locke's (and some of his fan's) justification stems from him having several bizzare incidents occur (healing, smokey encounter, Jacon etc.) and interpreting these to indicate a supposed purpose which he has pieced together mostly by himself with advice from Ben...a known liar. He then assumes that as he has a 'purpose' this gives him the right to make decisions that affect others (knocking out Sayid, button pushing, non-button pushing, killing Naomi) without consulting anybody. I find this to be hilariously pompous behaviour. I don't care if he's right in each situation necessarily...I just don't know where he gets off making these calls in the first place.

The fact he thinks he is doing good is no justification at all. His opinion means no more than anybody's regarding his actions. To argue that by being convinced of their own righteousness an individual is righteous is ludicrous in the extreme! PLEASE NOTE: I am not saying that Locke's actions won't turn out to be the correct courses of action...just that he doesn't have enough info to be making calls right now.

In short I find earnest people with strong convictions amusing because at my centre there is nothing. I repeat my request to join?

Cmdr Spock

02-04-09, 07:04 PM

Welcome to Boobophiles, Boomfish! :Cheers:

casual-viewer

02-04-09, 09:04 PM

Welcome Boomfish!

Homer Noodleman

02-04-09, 10:02 PM

The fact he thinks he is doing good is no justification at all.

Welcome to Boobophiles and yup, and the fact that after Ben shot him and he came to in a pit full of dead people he still followed Ben's orders slavishly. In my book that makes Locke's notion of 'doing good' mighty dodgy.

The guy's a tool.

sgtdraino

02-04-09, 10:35 PM

Only Jack gets more upset when out of the loop and that's because being wrong causes him physical pain.

LOL! This reminded me of the scene at the end of Season 4 when Daniel finally admits to Jack that the freighties aren't going to rescue them, and Jack clutches at his stomach and collapses. lol. We joked that this was his bile and bitterness finally hitting overload levels. :D

Ah, here it is:

JACK: Why are you lying? Why did you say... that the helicopters are coming back?

[Jack grabs Dan by his collar and pulls him close.]

KATE: Jack!

JACK: Were you ever... gonna take us off this island?

DANIEL: (pause) No. (pause) No, no...

[Jack looks at Dan with pain in his face, then doubles over, holding his gut.]

KATE: Jack?

iWonder

02-04-09, 11:21 PM

He then assumes that as he has a 'purpose' this gives him the right to make decisions that affect others (knocking out Sayid, button pushing, non-button pushing, killing Naomi) without consulting anybody.

:wave2: Welcome Boomfish!!

Your observation above is probably my own biggest gripe with Locke.

Jack T Kirk

02-05-09, 06:26 AM

Tonight's Episode; the Little Prince:

Is Locke trying to imitate Ben, now? The way that he keeps appealing to people's emotions to get them to do what he wants is beginning to frustrate me.

Locke: "You want her back, don't you?"

Seriously, he did NOT have to go there. The writers are dumb about writing Locke.

iWonder

02-05-09, 02:13 PM

Yup, JLP, his pulling on Sawyer's chain bugged me too.

I think its becoming increasingly clear that Locke and Ben are more alike than most would care to admit. Last season, in Cabin Fever:

LOCKE: I forced you to come with us at gunpoint, and I'm sorry, Hugo, but I was led to believe that we needed you to find this place.
HURLEY: Oh, I get it. Now you got your magic map, you don't--you don't need me anymore.
LOCKE: I'm offering you a chance to leave. I don't want to put you in harm's way against your will.
HURLEY: And you think walking through the jungle at night by myself is gonna be any safer?
LOCKE: I'm not sure it is.
HURLEY: I think I'll stick with you guys. This way?
LOCKE: What?
BEN: He actually thinks staying was his idea. Not bad, John. Not bad at all.
LOCKE: I'm not you.
BEN: You're certainly not.

Then later, a key bit of dialog that was kind of glossed over due to the awesomeness of the destiny/fickle bitch line:

BEN: The cabin--what if it's moved again?
LOCKE: It hasn't moved because I was told that this is where it would be.
BEN: I was told a lot of things, too--that I was chosen, that I was special. Ended up with a tumor on my spine and my daughter's blood all over my hands.

Do good intentions really matter if they make you do bad things?? Jack is exhibiting the exact same behavior back on the mainland too. His corralling of Kate into Ben’s hands is the same m.o. as Ben and now Locke.

Service to the island sure does have its cost...

sgtdraino

02-05-09, 03:20 PM

Is Locke trying to imitate Ben, now? The way that he keeps appealing to people's emotions to get them to do what he wants is beginning to frustrate me.

I just thought they were having a conversation. Does Locke really need Sawyer to go with him to The Orchid? Or any of them? I don't see why he would. Looks to me like they're just sticking together due to safety in numbers.

Seriously, he did NOT have to go there. The writers are dumb about writing Locke.

Oh no, JLP is going to the dark side!!!

I would agree that the writers are sometimes dumb about writing Locke, though. That ridiculous "Jack ran a democracy" line probably the biggest example for me.

I think its becoming increasingly clear that Locke and Ben are more alike than most would care to admit. Last season, in Cabin Fever:

Ridiculous example. Locke was not manipulating Hurley, he gave him a straight up choice. Ben claiming Locke is manipulative does not make it so. In fact, whenever Ben claims anything, your first instinct should be to believe the opposite.

Do good intentions really matter if they make you do bad things??

Of course they matter. Of course, an argument can be made on whether or not it was reasonable for a particular person to believe they were doing the right thing. That goes to judgement and competence.

iWonder

02-05-09, 04:29 PM

sgtdraino

02-05-09, 05:14 PM

Homer Noodleman

02-05-09, 09:15 PM

I forgot to mention another moment I really enjoyed, when Locke tells Sawyer about the night the light went on in the hatch: he talks about being scared, confused, babbling like an idiot... how at the time he thought the light meant something, but it didn't.

I thought it was his finest scene. First, out of the mouth of Locke comes validation of what Boobophiles have been arguing for years -- that Locke is a clueless idiot. At least Locke realizes, even if some viewers don't, that Season I & II Locke was a Boob. Recognizing you have a problem is the first step towards recovery, so there's still hope for the hunter-wanna-be.

Even better, he tells Sawyer this as they are headed to the Orchid, to do what Ben did, even though he doesn't have a clue what Ben did. Hey, let's review this slice of dialog:

HURLEY: Well, if you could move the island whenever you wanted, why didn't you just move it before those psychos with guns got here?
BEN: Because doing it is both dangerous and unpredictable. It's a measure of last resort.

Sooo... after Ben did what he did, the folks on the island started jumping hither and yon through time and people's noses are bleeding profusely. Strikes me that might be the dangerous and unpredictable part of Ben's fears.

So what is Locke's measure of first resort? To find the Orchid and presumably start randomly pressing buttons and spinning dials, without a clue as to what any of it is about. Man, what can possibly go wrong with that plan?

What a Boob.

sgtdraino

02-05-09, 09:33 PM

So what is Locke's measure of first resort? To find the Orchid

Actually, Locke's measure of first resort was to find Richard and ask him how to get off the island. At this point, with no other leads, The Orchid is the best bet as to where to go to get these answers.

So, Homer, let's put you in Locke's shoes. Your objective is to get off the island, you didn't get enough information from Richard, Daniel is saying that he can't calculate a bearing without knowing the specific time period, and even if he did there's no guarantee you could make it outside the barrier before another flash hits. So, what do you do next? What is your best bet at this point? Seems to me that going to The Orchid is the best bet there is.

and presumably start randomly pressing buttons and spinning dials, without a clue as to what any of it is about.

You are presuming a lot. And you know what happens when you presume? You make a "pres" out of "u" and "me!"

Mark my words: Locke will not turn the wheel.

Cmdr Spock

02-05-09, 11:44 PM

So, If Daniel needs the exact time in order to calculate a bearing, seems like Locke telling him the exact time because he knew it when the light in the Swan was turned on mighta been the way to go...

...but I think the random pressing of buttons and spinning dials will be much more entertaining. Especially if they experience time skips while at the Orchid.

Homer Noodleman

02-06-09, 12:19 AM

We can only hope the knucklehead gets distracted by a computer chess game again.

casual-viewer

02-06-09, 01:10 AM

I forgot to mention another moment I really enjoyed, when Locke tells Sawyer about the night the light went on in the hatch: he talks about being scared, confused, babbling like an idiot... how at the time he thought the light meant something, but it didn't.

Its been a while since I've felt like I've watched John Locke the man, not John Locke the man on a mission. I liked seeing a glimpse of him again.

iWonder, I thought it was funny, because he was talking from the perspective of how he HAD been all those things. I just kept commenting to my husband, "right, and you are so much better off now.. not confused, or scared or deluded..." How exactly is he better off than before? He has less perceived control and less idea of what to do than ever before. And what was his turning point from being confused? Being told that he really was special, it wasn't just his imagination?

Although, I did like his line about how he had to get through the dark moments to get to where he is now. It's a good life philosophy, even though I posit he personally is not any better off right now.

iWonder

02-06-09, 02:41 AM

Oh, yeah, CV, me too. My fuzzy feeling passed as soon as the smug smile came back and he talked about getting to where he is now. But for those few moments, he just seemed, I dunno. Back down to earth?

Great epi all around. Seems like every fan/hater of every character has something to chew on for a week!

Homer, your siggy is freaking me out. But I bet you enjoy it every time someone posts that, don't you?

And, I can't imagine any other way that Locke would get off the island other than spinning that wheel. Consider your words marked, Sarge!

Homer Noodleman

02-07-09, 08:00 PM

You know, I'm wondering what this 'Great Disaster Befalling the Island' that Ben, Alpert and the like keep working Locke up over really is?

From what we've seen only the castaways are boinging all over time and in danger of nose-bleeding to death. Everybody else on the island seems to be doing just fine. As we know, the Others could give a crap if the castways all die, so why the sudden hysteria?

There's something else going on here IMHO.

Cmdr Spock

02-07-09, 09:15 PM

Not to go all Star Trek on you or anything, but I think sooner or later (ha!) the time skipping losties might encounter a situation where it is impossible for them to not interact with their former/future selves, which in the Lost version of time travel might perhaps result in a rip in the space/time continuum and the destruction of everything. Guess the multiverse concept of time travel (every instance of time travel intervention creates a new parallel universe starting from the point where something different happened) doesn't apply in Lost. Do something in the past that never happened (like offing 1954 Widmore) and poof! Everything's just gone. Everything. Thank whatever higher power you believe in that we have a guy who gets his intel from 20-year old videotapes, drunken Scots, self induced hallucinogenic vision quests, and advice from Ben to protect us from this.

Homer Noodleman

02-07-09, 09:19 PM

Cmdr Spock

02-07-09, 09:56 PM

Then why bring more castaways back? Add more time-boingers and you just increase your chances of them running into themselves. If that's the fear, just shoot the ones left on the island and be done with it.

Second question first. Certainly, offing everyone alive on the Island would seem to be the most effective solution to the threat of temporal intervention and the end of everything. But now that the losties are time skipping, and the Island as well seems to be displaced in time and space, how could one be sure of not offing someone in the wrong space/time? Torch the Island right before Des turns the failsafe, what happens then? Poof!

First question. Because I want to see the Jin/Sun/Ji Yeon hook up. No logical reason to support it, but it would make me very happy. :)

sgtdraino

02-07-09, 11:53 PM

Guess the multiverse concept of time travel (every instance of time travel intervention creates a new parallel universe starting from the point where something different happened) doesn't apply in Lost. Do something in the past that never happened (like offing 1954 Widmore) and poof! Everything's just gone. Everything.

Very good, Cmdr Spock. We agree completely! :)

Cmdr Spock

02-08-09, 12:09 AM

Very good, Cmdr Spock. We agree completely! :)

Er, does this mean you're a Boobophile now? (cringes in fear of a rip in the space/time continuum) Dogs and cats, living together, mass hysteria! :)

Homer Noodleman

02-08-09, 12:17 AM

Very good, Cmdr Spock. We agree completely! :)

Oh man, the Weblonians are going to be distraught over Brother Draino seeing the light and wisely abandoning them for Locke's real fan club.

sgtdraino

02-08-09, 12:47 AM

Er, does this mean you're a Boobophile now?

No, it means you're a WEBELO! :D

Either that, or it means I only agree with you completely about the time travel rules for the show.

Cmdr Spock

02-08-09, 01:09 AM

Thank whatever higher power you believe in that we have a guy who gets his intel from 20-year old videotapes, drunken Scots, self induced hallucinogenic vision quests, and advice from Ben to protect us from this.

Very good, Cmdr Spock. We agree completely! :)

No, it means you're a WEBELO! :D

Either that, or it means I only agree with you completely about the time travel rules for the show.

Um, ok. :rolleyez:

Thought we'd found a common ground, my bad.

iWonder

02-09-09, 12:17 PM

You know, I'm wondering what this 'Great Disaster Befalling the Island' that Ben, Alpert and the like keep working Locke up over really is?

From what we've seen only the castaways are boinging all over time and in danger of nose-bleeding to death.

I think it may hinge on Daniel. We've already seen him infiltrating Dharma. He's up to something besides gathering intel, IMO. I would guess he's trying to change time. Undo his mistake and fix coma girl.... It would be all the more plot twisty as he's the one blabbering on about not being able to change time (which I firmly believe is a huge fat lie). He just doesn't want anyone else to screw up his plan. Could be why he cries later on...

BTW, I was thinking more about Locke leaving, and duh, I totally forgot about Ben's secret closet, the one whose antechamber contains a desk with multiple passports. Maybe the donkey wheel will remain untouched after all.

casual-viewer

02-09-09, 06:38 PM

I think it may hinge on Daniel. We've already seen him infiltrating Dharma. He's up to something besides gathering intel, IMO. I would guess he's trying to change time. Undo his mistake and fix coma girl.... It would be all the more plot twisty as he's the one blabbering on about not being able to change time (which I firmly believe is a huge fat lie). He just doesn't want anyone else to screw up his plan. Could be why he cries later on...

iWonder, this is going to take us totally off topic... I just proposed last night that Widmore funding Daniel's research could mean that Widmore chose Theresa the Comatose as Daniel's subject because she had been on the island in her own past and he was hoping to use her consciousness time travel to gather more information about how the moving of the island might work. Just as Daniel told Des to find him in 1996 and tell him such & such, Daniel could have told Teresa to go eavesdrop on Richard and Jacob, or some other sort of info gathering from the island during that time. This would be the info that informs Widmore's search for the island.

You make me think that maybe Daniel can exploit the flashing to find Theresa during that time and tell her that he will be her constant, but not to tell him anything in the future when she starts to experience some weird stuff.

Since it's something we could see as early as this week, I don't want to bother fleshing it out much more than that.

/threadjack

Homer Noodleman

02-09-09, 10:54 PM

Good points. Also, it is easy to forget that Miles, Charlotte and Daniel are nominally working for Widmore, although they may all have their own agendas. regardless, I wonder what they make of Locke's boobery?

casual-viewer

02-09-09, 11:15 PM

It does make me wonder if the information travels in both directions. I'm assuming that Widmore keeps them on a need-to-know basis and aside from Daniel, the others may not know that they are working for him. But there is the possibility that since Widmore knows of Locke from the past (which lets not bring that whole convolution here) that he could have warned them about him...

It will be interesting to see how much Daniel goes along with Locke vs. asserting his own agenda. So far I think they both want to go to the Orchid anyway, but I have a feeling there is a moment coming when Daniel has to say, "uh, John, you really don't want to do that." Then John does it anyway and as the island implodes John gets to say, "I made a mistake.." and finds himself in Tunisia.

Homer Noodleman

02-09-09, 11:49 PM

I'm curious how they're going to handle Locke leaving the island, the goofy 70 hour deadline, and working dead Locke into Season VI. I could see Locke ending up in the chamber with the wheel, and -- like a monkey that can't resist a shiny object -- turning the wheel without a thought in his boobish cranium. Zoom, he's off on his suicide mission and the situation on the island gets even worse because the wheel got turned again.

Although, how that gets the Six back is a mystery. Plus, IMHO the show already has a lot of fans losing the plot as they construct ever more convoluted rube Goldberg like time travel scenarios (Locke tells Past Alpert, who warns Future Jack, who blubbers over Present Kate, who is mad at Future Hurley, who fears Past... well, you get the picture).

At some point they have to snap the story back into focus or it will just collapse with all the contradictions they're building with their time travel rules. For that reason I like the notion that Daniel is BSing them, as his knocking on the hatch door would seem to indicate, and the Season V finale is going to be similar to the scientists in the arctic, or the flash forward, in that it yanks the rug out from under us as it changes the complexion of the show.

However, where ever they take it, we can be sure Locke will continue to be a dunce.

casual-viewer

02-10-09, 12:39 AM

I'm hoping that happens sooner than the season finale. Much as I hate to hear what TPTB are saying since they can't be trusted. My overall impression from the press is that they are going to keep changing things up and keep the pace fast.

Cmdr Spock

02-10-09, 11:04 PM

I have a feeling there is a moment coming when Daniel has to say, "uh, John, you really don't want to do that." Then John does it anyway and as the island implodes John gets to say, "I made a mistake.." and finds himself in Tunisia.

This is pretty much how I see it happening. He'll start tinkering with something, there will be an ominous humming sound. Locke will have that look on his face he had after he destroyed the Swan computer, there'll be a huge fwzap! poof! and he'll be sprawled dazed on his ass in Tunisia without a clue...

Homer Noodleman

02-12-09, 02:22 AM

"That's why it's called a sacrifice."

Holy guacamole, did Locke come across bad in that episode or what? Even I felt sorry for the addle-headed boob.

First, when finally questioned about his insane scheme, all he can do is mutter that he "just knows", then Charlotte shrieks "don't bring them back, this place is death" as she keels over, then he gives an empty promise to Jin, and finally he ends up crawling in the dirt with yet another father figure mocking him as he orders the dunce about.

Crawling. Man, the island is a cold-hearted bastard, aint it?

Plus, since Smokie, er... I mean Christian... told him not to trust Ben, why the heck did he ever give him Jin's ring? Did he get sucked back into Ben's orbit when he returned, or did he just, metaphorically speaking, get conned out of another kidney by Ben?

casual-viewer

02-12-09, 04:13 AM

Christian's remark about John listening to Ben was classic. To give John credit (for a change) I think Ben is going to have to pry the ring out of his cold, dead hand.

I got mad at Jin at the well when he took John's word for it that he wouldn't bring Sun back. Does he know who he is talking to? The guy who will do anything he imagines the island is telling him to do. He's already said that he "just knows" that everyone has to come back. But really, what else could John have done in that situation but "give his word" anyway. He's gonna do what he's gonna do and Jin was going to stop him.

Homer Noodleman

02-12-09, 04:17 AM

Uh, this is Locke we're talking about. I figure it will take Ben all of 20 seconds to trick Locke into blabbing about the ring.

casual-viewer

02-12-09, 04:22 AM

Good point. I will be curious to see how Locke stands up to his internal conflict of believing he has to bring everyone back vs. trying to honor his promise to Jin and leave Sun alone. He may need to enlist Ben's help with that part so that he can feel like he technically kept his promise. But didn't Sun say that John did come to see her? Why would she even know to go find him like he implied? Why did Jin give him a story and a ring instead of saying, "How would she know you were there to be found if you didn't go looking for her?" C'mon Jin, don't give your wedding ring to a crazy man.

Cmdr Spock

02-12-09, 05:58 AM

Mark my words: Locke will not turn the wheel.

The coup de grâce belongs to iWonder. I just wanted to be here to see it. :)

Jack T Kirk

02-12-09, 09:57 AM

The problem with Locke's faith is that the object of his faith is undefinable.

For instance, Christians believe in a Creator God, in an absolute moral law, in the justice of that law, in a redeeming Savior, in salvation from sins, in resurrection, and in eternal life. That is a solidly defined object of faith. Even one who does not believe it can see why these things are valued by those who do.

Enviornmentalists believe in protecting the enviornment. Women's rights advocates believe in women's rights. A soldier believes in fighting for his country. The objectives of these beliefs are very clear, and their value to those who hold them is easy to understand.

Locke, however, has no clue why he believes what he does. He accepts that the island demands sacrifice, but he doesn't know what he's sacrificing for. He says that the island is a place where miracles happen, but he doesn't acknowledge the price tag that comes with the miracles - the things that gave him belief in the first place - his legs, a family, his dream of becoming a hunter - are now all gone. He tells the others that they NEED to stay on the island, even though none of them really need to be on an island where they spend almost all of their time running away from one mortal danger and into the next; to make them cooperate he spouts vague, simple mysticism and manipulates their emotions when the opportunity presents itself. Basically, his faith is impossible to define because it doesn't acknowledge REALITY as part of it. This makes him (as most of the people in this topic - who cannot deny what they've seen - realize already) a lunatic.

The writers of this show, Dumbstein and Dumberg, have blurred the concept of faith in the Plan with denying reality - which is really not faith at all, but insanity. In LOST, insanity is the standard of what makes the actions of the heroes good, right, and true. It isn't just Locke - It is a weakness of the entire theme of the show; The whole story is built on this flimsy foundation, and it pisses me off to no end. I expected something much better for the years I've sunk into watching this preposterous show.

sgtdraino

02-12-09, 10:48 AM

The coup de grâce belongs to iWonder. I just wanted to be here to see it. :)

Well, he didn't turn it. He jarred it back onto its axis, because Ben had apparently jammed it up somehow.

Wow, JLP, I take it you didn't like the episode! Perhaps your faith is being tested? ;)

Jack T Kirk

02-12-09, 11:07 AM

I guess I don't like the show. It doesn't hold any water. The suspension of disbelief is really stretching it thin - and I'm not even talking about the time travel stuff. I'm talking about the basic plot and why the characters do the things they do. There's no defined motives. Why do Ben and Widmore want the Island? There hasn't even been a hint of a suggestion - are we supposed to just accept that there is no purpose, and that they just want it? Why is the island special? - It just 'is', and healing and time traveling and stuff - and that's it. Why does Richard carry out orders like a mindless robot? Why are all the characters contradicting themselves to fufill the demand of a plot that makes no sense? (ex: Sawyer wanting Kate to come back to Hell, all of a sudden; Jin taking Locke on his word that he wouldn't try to bring Sun back - it goes against their strongest wishes, there's no incentive for why they should change their minds - it doesn't make any sense.)

The problem is is that the characters are just acting out of obedience to some arbitrary plot - and the plot has no clearly defined destination. I don't get the sense that it's adding up to any sum. Leave the island, come back to the island - what's the difference? It's just action for the sake of action, a tangled up mess of a story in which the characters exist to feed the island's twisted machinations. IMO, that doesn't make for a very engaging story.

There's some entertaining scenework, some fairly good acting, a few interesting interactions, that make it entertaining enough to tivo and watch every week, but other than that, it's a pretty weak, silly show.

sweetsunray

02-12-09, 01:27 PM

Gosh... I totally loved this episode... Christian reminding Locke he told John needed to move the island. Seriously, I hadn't even seen this one coming, yet it was so simple/so clear. But it was so typical Locke, remding me of Locke thinking he needed to open the hatch yet it was the swan he was directed to, reminding me of Locke preventing from anyone to ever again push the button, and now this one... :rofl: And time and time again he boobed around it cost someone else's life: Boone, Eko, and now Charlotte... The island giveth, the island taketh. So, what was this great destiny of his? Not to be the Other's leader, but to turn the wheel and move it... and die. Jacob doesn't want him, but only wants to be rid of the dunce asap :rofl: Poor Locke... he was wrong AGAIN!

I also cherised Christian making clear what sacrifice means. It isn't leading someone who trusts you as a sacrificial lamb, but to have the guts to sacrifice yourself.

:Cheers: best episode so far

sgtdraino

02-12-09, 01:57 PM

There's no defined motives. Why do Ben and Widmore want the Island? There hasn't even been a hint of a suggestion - are we supposed to just accept that there is no purpose, and that they just want it? Why is the island special? - It just 'is', and healing and time traveling and stuff - and that's it. Why does Richard carry out orders like a mindless robot?

Just because we don't know the answers to some of these questions, doesn't mean answers don't exist. I think in these two final seasons, we are going to learn a lot more about exactly why the island is special, and why Widmore and Ben are fighting over it.

Why are all the characters contradicting themselves to fufill the demand of a plot that makes no sense?

I think I mostly undestand their motivations, though I will agree that sometimes TPTB will twist a character a bit in order to further the plot in a needed direction. It is irritating, but no writer is perfect.

(ex: Sawyer wanting Kate to come back to Hell, all of a sudden;

Supposedly this whole mess is happening because Kate and the rest are not there, and "Hell" will return to normal once they return. Why would Sawyer not want that?

Jin taking Locke on his word that he wouldn't try to bring Sun back

Jin and Locke are both honorable men, and Locke proved to be a man of his word.

The problem is is that the characters are just acting out of obedience to some arbitrary plot - and the plot has no clearly defined destination. I don't get the sense that it's adding up to any sum.

Heh. I'm pretty sure we're going to end up somewhere at the end of all this! We just don't know where that is yet... and that is not surprising. It sounds to me like you are mostly frustrated that you don't have more answers yet. We just have to be patient for just a little longer. :)

Leave the island, come back to the island - what's the difference? It's just action for the sake of action, a tangled up mess of a story in which the characters exist to feed the island's twisted machinations.

Hopefully there will be more to it than that. I agree, if this is just the story of a bunch of people cruelly manipulated by a deranged Island, it's going to be quite a let-down. But I really don't think that will turn out to be the case. We'll see!

Gosh... I totally loved this episode... Christian reminding Locke he told John needed to move the island. Seriously, I hadn't even seen this one coming, yet it was so simple/so clear.

And yet if Locke really was supposed to be the one to do it, then why didn't Christian tell him how? He told him exactly what to do this time, couldn't be clearer. No, I think we are witnessing more manipulation by The Island.

remding me of Locke thinking he needed to open the hatch yet it was the swan he was directed to,

The Hatch is The Swan.

reminding me of Locke preventing from anyone to ever again push the button,

That is actually another example of The Island manipulating Locke into doing something. Pretty much the same thing that is happening now. The Island may be good, but it does not play fair.

And time and time again he boobed around it cost someone else's life:

Here we go again. :D

Boone,

Boone killed Boone. With help from The Island.

Eko,

Eko killed Eko, because of his own hubris.

and now Charlotte...

What does Locke have to do with Charlotte's death? In any event, she kinda had it coming. She called in the wet team.

The island giveth, the island taketh. So, what was this great destiny of his? Not to be the Other's leader, but to turn the wheel and move it... and die.

You are forgetting something: Richard was told by his leader, a future version of Locke, when and where to go in order to fix his leg. We have not seen that happen yet. That means we have not yet seen the end of Locke's leadership.

And Locke didn't turn the wheel, he repaired it.

Jacob doesn't want him, but only wants to be rid of the dunce asap :rofl: Poor Locke... he was wrong AGAIN!

I still think we will see Locke proven right. I think his actions will be shown to be instrumental in stabilizing the island, getting the O6 back where they're supposed to be, and saving many, many lives.

I also cherised Christian making clear what sacrifice means. It isn't leading someone who trusts you as a sacrificial lamb, but to have the guts to sacrifice yourself.

And that's exactly what Locke is willing to do. Yet again why he is the most selfless, most heroic character on the show.

Homer Noodleman

02-12-09, 02:32 PM

Jin and Locke are both honorable men, and Locke proved to be a man of his word.

No, Locke didn't keep his promise.

Jin asked that, if Locke ran across Sun, he tell her that they found Jin's body washed ashore and to give her his wedding ring as proof. We know that Locke saw Sun, and that Ben had the wedding ring. The ring Jin wanted as proof to keep Sun away from the island ben used to lure her back to it.

Locke, obsessed zealot that he is, broke his promise to Jin to keep his promise to the island.

iWonder

02-12-09, 02:44 PM

I will be curious to see how Locke stands up to his internal conflict of believing he has to bring everyone back vs. trying to honor his promise to Jin and leave Sun alone.
Wow. You give him a lot of credit. I just sat there dumbfounded that Jin would believe his lie. And Locke's sheepish look and sidewards glance after he said "I promise" made it so glaringly obvious he was lying.

Yet, the fact that he didn't show her the ring holds such promise for him honoring the promise, doesn't it? If he does, I'll gain back a lot more respect for him. Then again, maybe it just never occurred to him that it could be used to prove he's alive rather than prove he's dead. They're not building up a strong case for Locke's wits, are they?

ETA; didn't see Homer's post...yup, you're right, if he had kept his promise and said exactly what Jin told him to, then the ring wouldn't have been as strong an argument for Ben. Sun would have had more reason to think Locke was the one telling her the truth, not Ben. (Although at this point its getting harder to tell which is more trustworthy: Ben or Locke, haha. So which would Sun have believed if it had played out differently??)

The coup de grâce belongs to iWonder. I just wanted to be here to see it. :)
No, no, not me. He was responding to Homer. I merely acknowledged that this tenacious group was sure to hold him to his proclamation.

And really, who didn't expect a logical interpretation *cough*spin*cough* like this:

Well, he didn't turn it. He jarred it back onto its axis, because Ben had apparently jammed it up somehow.
:D
So, if Locke was the one who was supposed to turn the wheel, then he shares quite a bit of the fault for all the bad things that started happening on the island, doesn't he? 'Cause he would have spun it "straighter" somehow, so no flashing.

Anyone else connect the dots that if Locke had spun the wheel and left, he'd never have gone through the whole compass bit with Richard? What does that mean?

Locke, however, has no clue why he believes what he does. He accepts that the island demands sacrifice, but he doesn't know what he's sacrificing for. <snip> He tells the others that they NEED to stay on the island, even though none of them really need to be on an island where they spend almost all of their time running away from one mortal danger and into the next; to make them cooperate he spouts vague, simple mysticism and manipulates their emotions when the opportunity presents itself.<snip>The whole story is built on this flimsy foundation, and it pisses me off to no end. I expected something much better for the years I've sunk into watching this preposterous show.
JLP, you've just summed up everything that bothers me about Locke's story, and what drove me here to the loving arms of the Boobophiles. I had such high hopes for him, but then the sh*t sandwich just got harder and harder to swallow.

I agree, if this is just the story of a bunch of people cruelly manipulated by a deranged Island, it's going to be quite a let-down. <snip>The Island may be good, but it does not play fair.
All I can say is, prepare yourself for the worst. The Island may be bad, AND it does not play fair.

sweetsunray

02-12-09, 03:27 PM

Well, iWonder... he kinda made himself the leader by saying what he did to Alpert, believing what Alpert and Ben had told him, who based their knowledge on Locke's visit 2 years before he was born.

Christian speaking for Jacob reminded Locke he was the one supposed to move the island, and we know that zips you away from the island. If he had done what he was supposed to do in the first place, it is implied, then the island probably hadn't gone in limbo, the stay behinders wouldn't have been in danger, and he wouldn't have given Alpert his compass 2 years before Locke was born, the Others wouldn't have been waiting for him, adn Alpert would never have visited him, nor tried to lure him to the island as a teen via Mittelos. Locke's leadership is that of a snake swallowing its own tail.

No, we haven't seen Locke yet communicate to Alpert where to find him and treat his leg. I don't think that matters much... his leadership proclamation is based on a mistake, the snake eating its own tail. Also, anyone noticed how Christian didn't mention he needed to bring back the others? Christian only said Locke was the one who was supposed to move the island, and not Ben... It's Alpert who says to Locke he needs to bring back the others. I suspect that was a scene in the future (from Locke's pov when the limbo starts), and that Alpert met Locke off island (before Alpert goes back to the island and treats Locke's leg), where Locke tells Alpert about the bringing the other back to the island... another snake biting in its own tail.

What did Ben say again? "Destiny's a bitch" :cheers:

sgtdraino

02-12-09, 04:17 PM

No, Locke didn't keep his promise.

Jin asked that, if Locke ran across Sun, he tell her that they found Jin's body washed ashore and to give her his wedding ring as proof.

That is an interesting point. And yet, at the same time, Sun clearly does believe that Jin is dead... which was the main objective of Jin's request. So it would seem Locke did keep at least that part of the bargain, which (let's face it) was the part that was truly important to Jin.

We know that Locke saw Sun, and that Ben had the wedding ring. The ring Jin wanted as proof to keep Sun away from the island ben used to lure her back to it.

Do we know for a fact that Locke succeeded in visiting Sun? I'm not sure about that. Another possibility is that Ben somehow liberated the ring from Locke before he could see her.

But the bottom line is, Locke fulfilled the spirit of Jin's request, which was to reinforce Sun's belief that Jin is dead.

Locke, obsessed zealot that he is, broke his promise to Jin to keep his promise to the island.

Apparently not, or Sun would still believe that Jin was alive.

Locke's leadership is that of a snake swallowing its own tail.

Perhaps, but it doesn't really matter. It's a part of the past, and cannot be changed without causing a dangerous paradox.

No, we haven't seen Locke yet communicate to Alpert where to find him and treat his leg. I don't think that matters much... his leadership proclamation is based on a mistake, the snake eating its own tail.

<shrug> Snake eating its own tail? Perhaps, but so what? Mistake? It can't be a mistake, because it is part of history. To somehow change history, that would be a mistake.

Also, anyone noticed how Christian didn't mention he needed to bring back the others? Christian only said Locke was the one who was supposed to move the island, and not Ben...

I will need to watch that scene again, as I thought there was some mention of the O6, but I can't remember for sure. It will be interesting to analyze that dialogue.

I suspect that was a scene in the future (from Locke's pov when the limbo starts), and that Alpert met Locke off island (before Alpert goes back to the island and treats Locke's leg), where Locke tells Alpert about the bringing the other back to the island... another snake biting in its own tail.

Could be. But again, so what? You say that like it's a bad thing, when in fact it's a necessary thing.

casual-viewer

02-12-09, 05:53 PM

I guess I don't like the show. It doesn't hold any water. The suspension of disbelief is really stretching it thin - and I'm not even talking about the time travel stuff. I'm talking about the basic plot and why the characters do the things they do.

I guess this is the only safe place to admit I'm not enjoying this season much so far. I don't know how much of it is sour grapes over the time travel direction, but what struck me last night was that is was an hour of giving fans what they've been asking for, not a story arc that could hold it's own. It seemed very obvious that they gave us the Danielle backstory "we've" been asking for, and then made sure to script out areas of confusion, for example, "Yes, Jin has been time flashing along with the rest of us," and "Yes, Mrs. Hawking is Daniel's mother." Not that I'm disappointed by resolutions, but they just seemed so obviously crammed in there, it was hard to get into the action. Maybe I'm unpleasable at this point, but I still want the answers to have a reason to be in the story, not just to satisfy curiosities from past episodes.

I'm sorry, isn't this the episodes complaint thread?

Cmdr Spock

02-12-09, 06:56 PM

The coup de grâce belongs to iWonder. I just wanted to be here to see it. :)

No, no, not me. He was responding to Homer. I merely acknowledged that this tenacious group was sure to hold him to his proclamation.
The above was in reference to this:
Mark my words: Locke will not turn the wheel.
And, I can't imagine any other way that Locke would get off the island other than spinning that wheel. Consider your words marked, Sarge!

And really, who didn't expect a logical interpretation *cough*spin*cough* like this:
Well, he didn't turn it. He jarred it back onto its axis, because Ben had apparently jammed it up somehow.
:D

Classic! :D

I guess this is the only safe place to admit I'm not enjoying this season much so far. I don't know how much of it is sour grapes over the time travel direction, but what struck me last night was that is was an hour of giving fans what they've been asking for, not a story arc that could hold it's own. It seemed very obvious that they gave us the Danielle backstory "we've" been asking for, and then made sure to script out areas of confusion, for example, "Yes, Jin has been time flashing along with the rest of us," and "Yes, Mrs. Hawking is Daniel's mother." Not that I'm disappointed by resolutions, but they just seemed so obviously crammed in there, it was hard to get into the action. Maybe I'm unpleasable at this point, but I still want the answers to have a reason to be in the story, not just to satisfy curiosities from past episodes.

I'm sorry, isn't this the episodes complaint thread?

That would be my major complaint about this season, is that the pace is a little too rushed, they could have easily filled a season with everything that's happened so far. That and the excessive amount of fan service, a lot of what's happened has been pretty predictable just by going by what fans have said they wanted to see. Though I think showing Danielle's backstory from Jin's point of view was genius.

I find it very interesting that Ben is the one to give Sun Jin's ring. From Locke's weaselly expression when he takes the ring from Jin and says he'll tell Sun his dead body washed up on the beach makes me doubt John intends to do that. Yet if he does, how did Ben get the ring? Did Locke trust Ben yet again and ask him to give Sun the bad news? Or has Ben suddenly become the frontrunner in the Whodunit (http://losttv-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50469) race?