MovieChat Forums > AnagramYYZ
AnagramYYZ (621)
Posts
White Culture & Pride
Official canonical events of original, based on revelations in the sequels.
The pen is mightier than the machete
Sent the President a tweet this week! :-)
My tweet to President Biden
Patterns
Anybody celebrating this version is an idiot!
THIS SHIT IS NO JOKE... OUR COUNTRY IS IN DANGER
View all posts >
Replies
For Your Eyes Only (1981) and Goldeneye (1995) are both highly regarded by most, as well as a few of the Craig era. I also fully appreciate the two of Timothy Dalton. Not sure how you reached the conclusion of a post-Moonraker bottoming out.
Worst for me is A View To A Kill or Die Another Day. They both had potential to be fine, but were ultimately so flawed as to be insulting. Dalton, and the tone he brings, may have saved AVTAK if he had been cast as initially planned.
What wars were “started” by Democratic Presidents, Carter, Clinton, Obama or Biden?
Obviously global events in sovereign nations are not the responsibility of the Commander-in-Chief. To think this is the case is the akin to stating that the world would be at peace if it weren’t for the geopolitical schemes of the leaders of the United States.
I just want folks reading this thread in interest and possibly deciding to give it a go to have an accurate synopsis. It's not so much an argument with you personally. While there are moments for spirituality and an afterlife is something that certainly exists in the story in a far more concrete way than it how it's presented to us real humans who need faith, the heart of the show is really more like a The Village & Castaway meets The Terminator bitchslapping Marty McFly in an Indiana Jones setting where characters have lots of parental and relationship issues to broaden the audience and pad out the time. People don't watch those films and say, "The ark of the covenant is a metaphor for Jones choosing archaeology over settling down with barkeep, Marion Ravenwood, and he realizes this in a dream which is presented to the audience in the form of a motion picture." There's no reason to hold this view with Lost either because it robs it of all substance.
I'm here to tell readers that while you're free to some interpretation, you will not or should not feel compelled to the "bardo" or OP's "dead since first episode" viewpoint unless you actively chose so and ignore contrary facts. The characters are alive and vibrant, the action and mysteries do matter, and the non-chronological storytelling is not just some gimmick. So, stick with it, folks.
The Oceanic Six left the island, interacted with the world for three years, and then returned. What are you talking about?!
Sun had her baby. Kate had her trial. Hurley went back to the nuthouse and then surrendered to a triple murder charge that Sayid was responsible for. Jack saved more lives on the bridge and made the news again. Aaron & Walt grew up. Frank Lapidis got a job flying for Ajira Airways. Desmond knocked Penny up. Daniel Faraday went back-and-forth via submarine to Ann Arbor in the 1970s. Richard Alpert & Ethan Rom established Mittelos Labs in Portland and recruited Juliet Burke in Miami. Jacob & his brother occupied the Island since Egyptian times, yet we witnessed Jacob's very real and organic murder and transition to a ghostly realm in 2007. What the hell kind of "bardo" was he in?
Mr. Eko, upon death, attended his own "flash-sideways" with Yemi, where "moving on" was more prompt and his spiritual essence can return at will to lose a game of chess to Hurley.
The only purgatory on the island was for killers and traitors like Michael Dawson who arbitrarily executed Jacob's candidates. Upon his death on the freighter, he seemed stuck there like Man-in-Black, which would be logical and consistent. The whispers are in bardo perhaps.
It's frivolous to argue otherwise unless you simply watch the first season, and then the last—ignoring the bulk of the series. There's such a richness in the mythology and there's no reason to cheapen it with dreams or seven-levels-of-hell nonsense.
False information that spoiled nothing by the misguided OP. Committed viewers will awaken to the nature of the flash-sideways as intended, while still understanding that it is simply an epilogue to provide sentimental closure. This in no way eclipses the very real action, adventure and intrigue that our iconic characters experience in the course of their natural lives.
Mark Pellegrino rules as Jacob! Great character actor.
Your interpretation is nonsense. People like Tom Friendly leave the island regularly and stay at five-star penthouse suites in Manhattan and drink champagne with male gigolos. Charles Widmore left for twenty years, and returned.
No one is arguing that the scenarios the characters face on the island, and their relation to events of their past lives, do not intentionally read as purgatory-esque long before they get to the flash-sideways. To assume that it was literal just seems like a lightweight notion by someone not fully invested in the series. This is the case because they're close to the Source and because Jacob and The Island, which is essentially a living being, form a communion and choose people as island caretakers—candidates for Jacob's replacement "for a reason." If they were random folks with no purpose or tragic backstory worth telling, then not only would it be a boring show with no legs, but it would relegate the role of Protector to be inconsequential by the time we reach the endgame.
I concur with your position. But I also feel it's worth pointing out to readers that Stranger in a Strange Land ("Jack's tattoos" episode) is not only an amazing episode, but one of the best for Jack. The flashback may seem trivial or boring,so I understand the hate, but how Thailand acts in service to the Island events and provides context for Jack's behavior and characteristics which are further defined later was essential for the fullest storytelling appreciation. Much better than Sawyer making a deal with the warden in prison, or Jin buying a stuffed panda for the ambassador.
"He walks amongst us, but he is not one of us."
Jack: "That's what it says... that's not what it means."
Ben's most definitely talking about Charles Widmore. Widmore is Ben's primary rival along with Locke, I suppose. Jacob and Man-in-Black (who The Others, sans Richard, only know as the monster) do not lay their poker hands on the table, and Ben doesn't really know them for the bulk of the show. We see in subsequent seasons where he plots the death of Widmore's daughter, Penelope, as revenge. The difference in Ben's mind is that Widmore had a daughter with an outsider (non-Others) off-island, whereas Alex and Danielle Rousseau were brought <b>to</b> The Island. No babies are typically conceived or born on the island due to "the incident" where the radioactivity causes pregnant women to reject the fetus and die, so Alex is seen as somewhat a miracle baby and quintessential "Other" despite being kidnapped. Even despite that, to kill any of your people, is simply against the rules set forth by Jacob, and typically results in banishment or death. The Others even have a sheriff of sorts, who wasn't really expanded upon. When Juliet, even, is pardoned by Ben after she shot Danny, she still receives marking (branding burnt into her back) and disassociation.
What I don't understand is how Ben can hold Widmore as still somehow beholden to rules considering he was banished by this society, and didn't even pull the trigger regardless. Ben talking of "rules" is essentially just him making an excuse in his mind to evade responsibility for his failed bluff. He should have just surrendered. After all, if The Island has an ultimate destiny for him in store, which it does, then to surrender to Keamy should cause no fear in him at all. Ben was supposed to turn the donkey wheel. That was his path. Him being fearful of capture indicates a crisis of faith.
Martin Keamy is the villain of Season 4. We never see Charles ordering murder and carnage. He simply hired mercenary thugs who are overcome by their violent tendencies. But we also see that everyone else from the freighter was far more levelheaded. Miles Straume was even being paid $1.6 million just for providing a simple paranormal service. Widmore's mission is to target and extradite Benjamin Linus, retain his position of leadership, place known time-travelers in the vicinity to fulfill their historical purpose, and leave Jacob's candidates (mostly Oceanic castaways) to find their own destiny. He's not a moral man, but you'd be hard-pressed to convince anyone he was any worse than Linus.
JoWilli has got to be either one of the most uninformed or dishonest posters here, and that’s a tough position to reach.
Republicans don’t care about national debt, nor should they. But they recognize that it tends to help them during campaign season since it plays right in the mindset of voters who deem themselves “fiscally conservative” in their personal lives.
What matters is the Debt-to-GDP ratio of a nation, and for a wealthy country like USA, it is in relatively fine standing. In fact, if the government shut down for a single year (or two at most) they could probably pay the debt off in full. Bond holders know this which is why the Dollar $ is the world currency, and no one is stressing on default and collapse outside of political games.
For the US to pay it off in full would almost assuredly trigger a recession and economists seem to understand that holding a constant surplus is both dangerous and unpredictable.
Face it. The national debt is not, in any way, comparable to a family budget.
As a liberal, seeing the government bureaucracy being stacked by billionaires is the real threat. I hope to vote for Democrats who will, hopefully soon in my lifetime, be ready and willing to propose a Constitutional Amendment for a national “wealth tax” to abolish billionaires. As an individual, you should only be able to accumulate $999,999,999.99 before the federal government confiscates the rest for the privilege of residing in a country with the opportunity and infrastructure to make that ostentatious success possible. And obviously we need campaign finance reform, too, and the GOP care zilch about that.
For Elon Musk, that UnitedHealthCare CEO, Brian Thompson would be a literal peasant in comparison. Think about that. It’s absurd.
They want an oligarchy, and it’s not “socialism” to think that’s bad for God’s sake.
I'm a liberal, and I don't support an agenda for them of any kind beyond the elimination of any systemic bias which would infringe on their basic civil or legal rights as citizens. However, I don't believe such bias is actively in force any longer as it once was, so it's a non-issue. On an individual citizen basis, aside from actual hate crimes of violence or abuse, I advocate for Americans to have the right to feel however they need to about LGBTQ. If they own a wedding cake business, to use one famous example, and don't want to cater to same-sex couple marriage then that decision should be respected in a free country. Liberals should know this, as the motto of "we reserve the right to refuse service" is a cornerstone of any business practice. Also, military discipline has no room for avert displays of sexuality, therefore I support the reinstatement of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" which came about during a Democratic administration.
In my view, the only one's regularly talking about "wokeness," "trans" and "drag shows for children" are those on the MAGA Right trying to score cheap political points and instigate culture wars. They exhibit cult-like behavior with how they parrot these talking points, and naturally they project their own lemming psychology onto their political opponents. To strawman is in their simpleminded DNA.
Leftists, on the other hand, are far more concerned about how income disparity and the hoarding of wealth is decimating the American Dream of a, once great, middle-class. I would support any politician who could reasonably spearhead a coalition to pass a Constitutional Amendment calling for a "wealth tax" which would eliminate every billionaire from our nation. It should only be legal to hoard up to $999,999,999.99 in funds or assets before being forced to use subsequent earnings to reinvest in the nation that provided the means and infrastructure to attain such abundance and prosperity.
View all replies >