- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LOST "What They Died For" S6.E16 (Multi-centric)
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:25 pm to joshnorris14
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:25 pm to joshnorris14
quote:
Locke laughs at this.
yeah, that's the notable exception. And the one I have the hardest time explaining. I have thought about this for a long time.
1
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:27 pm to TDTGodfather
quote:
yeah but knowing what we know of the losties, not many of our main characters are cold blooded killers sans sayid.
I'm not a cold blooded killer. But if some douche on an island constantly lies and kidnaps people who are stuck with me, causing a few deaths in the process, tortures people, lies again, kidnaps a pregnant woman, etc. I don't think there would be much of a choice honestly.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:29 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
He has killed more LOSTies than any other character with this move:
LINK
LINK
and I guess you can throw in Alex as well.
The first link is to Keamy, and other than Claire, what other Losties died when he summoned smokey? I honestly can't remember.
The freightor was definitely his fault, but he indirectly killed them through his rage in the act of killing Keamy for shooting his "daughter" (although he said Widmore broke the rules for doing this, it doesn't excuse it and he has often been a bad leader for making mistakes in judgment).
This post was edited on 5/18/10 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:30 pm to STLSU
quote:
Yeah, they just called him on the fly to play the captured baloon guy, who at that point wasn't going to be the leader of the Others. They liked him so much though and decided after the first episode or two with Henry Gale that they would write him into the script and make him the leader.
Actually that was the plan is to make him leader of the Others, but if the actor wasn't exactly what they were looking for they would have replaced him and had Ben be a side Other, not a main character. The plan was just to have him for 4 episodes since they didn't think they could have him in the Hatch for double that and keep it interesting. He impressed them so much though they kept him in the Hatch as long as possible.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:34 pm to OMLandshark
Yeah, I think I saw the same interview you did or heard the same one. That's exactly what Cuse or Lindeloff said.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:34 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
And that's fine. But he served his purpose by Season 3, and had screwed over the Losties multiple times. Tortured people, captured people, killed people, lied about everything.
Normal people would have shot him or NEVER believed him again.
Ben was a good character who turned into an awful character of convenience and nothing more.
You're acting like LOST did to Ben as Heroes did to Sylar. Ben still had a lot to do over seasons 4 and 5 and had a purpose and they knew where to take the character.
And as far as trusting Ben in season 4, you have Faraday who can't lie to save his life to where they always knew something was up, you got Miles who was a complete arse and didn't deny anything, and you got Charlotte who did basically the same thing. Save Lapidus, these 3 alone would make it to where you may be more liable to keep Ben with you at all times since he'll make sure that he himself, and thus you, are safe.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:38 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
ou're acting like LOST did to Ben as Heroes did to Sylar.
Uhh they did. Good, Bad, Good Bad, Powerful, not powerful, captured, not captured, etc.
quote:
Ben still had a lot to do over seasons 4 and 5 and had a purpose and they knew where to take the character.
Only because they twisted the story enough to need him. He doesn't HAVE to exist. Now, like I said, the fact that he killed the two most important characters in the show, could have been a great storyline of fall and redemption, but they had made the character so unbelievable at that point that it couldn't work.
quote:
And as far as trusting Ben in season 4, you have Faraday who can't lie to save his life to where they always knew something was up, you got Miles who was a complete arse and didn't deny anything, and you got Charlotte who did basically the same thing. Save Lapidus, these 3 alone would make it to where you may be more liable to keep Ben with you at all times since he'll make sure that he himself, and thus you, are safe.
And he should have been dead long before that, and things could have happened differently.
Honestly, I like Emerson's performance, mostly. Sometimes it's too cartoony, but oh well. My problem is with the character of Ben and where he went. It was totally contrived.
This post was edited on 5/18/10 at 1:41 pm
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:39 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
How many times have there been standoffs? Heck, Jack could have let him die on the table, right? Sacrificed himself in the process. It would have saved us from the 3 crappy seasons of Jack (who has since somewhat redeemed himself).
Yeah, that wouldn't be particularly smart of Jack and the Others could have retaliated horribly against the other survivors as a result, killing dozens. It would be like in the beginning of Season 5 when Frogurt is shot in the face with a flaming arrow.
quote:
Bottom line: They had chances. Heck, they could have sent Sayid in to the Others camp at some point on a mission. I'm sure he could have gotten the job done.
As soon as they found the camp, they moved. Sayid didn't have that much of an opportunity to kill him since getting Jack was the primary focus.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:43 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
Yeah, that wouldn't be particularly smart of Jack and the Others could have retaliated horribly against the other survivors as a result, killing dozens. It would be like in the beginning of Season 5 when Frogurt is shot in the face with a flaming arrow.
We don't know that, since Ben wasn't as powerful as he seemed. I mean the implications now are that he wasn't at the top even at that time.
quote:
As soon as they found the camp, they moved. Sayid didn't have that much of an opportunity to kill him since getting Jack was the primary focus.
As with many times in our discussions, you end up focusing on the details (because you have a catalog memory of Lost) and not the point. Point being: They had plenty of chances, or they could have made more.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:45 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Uhh they did. Good, Bad, Good Bad, Powerful, not powerful, captured, not captured, etc.
i'm with ya on the captured not captured but when has ben been a sympathetic character other than
1) alex's murder (and they he went right back to his roots by killing keamy and destroying the freighter)
2) the Dr Linus episode where his character has turned/redeemed and has stayed since...
i wouldn't call ben "good" till the convo with illana imo.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:47 pm to TDTGodfather
quote:
i'm with ya on the captured not captured but when has ben been a sympathetic character other than
1) alex's murder (and they he went right back to his roots by killing keamy and destroying the freighter)
2) the Dr Linus episode where his character has turned/redeemed and has stayed since...
i wouldn't call ben "good" till the convo with illana imo.
Good being the neutral term , sort of "Not bad."
He was "good" before they knew he wasn't Gale. He wasn't a threat then from the eyes of the viewer.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:47 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
Uhh they did. Good, Bad, Good Bad, Powerful, not powerful, captured, not captured, etc.
Thats an extreme generalization. He didn't exactly change his alliances (he was very much forced to go with the survivors), and his personality and motives have remained the same (maybe until killing Jacob, which his motives would then understandably change). Sylar doesn't have a personality and is just a catalyst to the plot and is one of the dumbest characters in television history. Just because Ben isn't the main villain anymore doesn't mean they have to kill off the character and there is no where to take him.
quote:
Only because they twisted the story enough to need him. He doesn't HAVE to exist. Now, like I said, the fact that he killed the two most important characters in the show, could have been a great storyline of fall and redemption, but they had made the character so unbelievable at that point that it couldn't work.
Carlton Cuse has hinted at Ben's role being greatly expanded because of Adawale (Eko) leaving the show, and he has said that Eko was supposed to make it to near the end of the series. Something tells me that maybe killing Jacob was planned for him, since the Monster had such an interest in him. I couldn't imagine any other character besides him and Ben killing Jacob.
And I don't see how they've made Ben remotely unbelievable. How some people have reacted to him, yeah maybe, but his development as a character has been done very well and will go down as one of the best characters in television history.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:51 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
Carlton Cuse has hinted at Ben's role being greatly expanded because of Adawale (Eko) leaving the show, and he has said that Eko was supposed to make it to near the end of the series. Something tells me that maybe killing Jacob was planned for him, since the Monster had such an interest in him. I couldn't imagine any other character besides him and Ben killing Jacob.
I heard the exact same thing, and your point about him eventually killing Jacob made me think of Ben's cancer. I'm thinking it came from MIB and reason for him to build up rage against Jacob.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:52 pm to TDTGodfather
quote:
i wouldn't call ben "good" till the convo with illana imo.
Yeah, Ben was still a manipulative evil a-hole until the Dr. Linus episode. Ben was very much in forced alliances with the survivors. He needed them to keep him alive (and vice versa), and he needed them to get back to the Island. Ben never joined them by choice because he regretted his decisions until Dr. Linus.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 1:56 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
Thats an extreme generalization. He didn't exactly change his alliances (he was very much forced to go with the survivors), and his personality and motives have remained the same (maybe until killing Jacob, which his motives would then understandably change). Sylar doesn't have a personality and is just a catalyst to the plot and is one of the dumbest characters in television history. Just because Ben isn't the main villain anymore doesn't mean they have to kill off the character and there is no where to take him.
Right. Refer to above. Good not meaning his intentions were good but that he was "somewhat trusted" at points, and not at others.
quote:
Carlton Cuse has hinted at Ben's role being greatly expanded because of Adawale (Eko) leaving the show, and he has said that Eko was supposed to make it to near the end of the series. Something tells me that maybe killing Jacob was planned for him, since the Monster had such an interest in him. I couldn't imagine any other character besides him and Ben killing Jacob.
More excuses. The writers strike, Ecko leaving, etc. That's great. But that doesn't save it from being shoddily written. Excuse are just that, excuses.
quote:
And I don't see how they've made Ben remotely unbelievable.
He's not unbelievable as a singular entity, he's unbelievable because...
quote:
How some people have reacted to him, yeah maybe,
He shouldn't exist. Everyone's reaction TO HIM is completely unreal. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 18 times, I'm a complete retard.
quote:
has been done very well and will go down as one of the best characters in television history.
Avoid hyperbole. His character is conveniently written to serve the plot. He is shoehorned into places in the script, and people have irrational and unrealistic reactions to him. He is not a well crafted character IN TERMS OF THE NARRATIVE.
This post was edited on 5/18/10 at 2:01 pm
Posted on 5/18/10 at 2:00 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
More excuses. The writers strike, Ecko leaving, etc. That's great. But that doesn't save it from being shoddily written. Excuse are just that, excuses.
Thats not even an excuse. I'm glad his role was expanded over Eko's. It hasn't been any loss to the audience. Plus even if Eko was still in LOST, I'd be willing to bet Ben would still make it to the final season.
quote:
He shouldn't exist. Everyone's reaction TO HIM is completely unreal. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 18 times, I'm a complete retard.
He hasn't fooled people as much as you think. The only person he has fooled a ridiculous amount of times is Locke, but Locke is the most gullible person on the show. His flashbacks show this long before we knew Ben in the narrative of the show.
This post was edited on 5/18/10 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 5/18/10 at 2:02 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
OMLandshark
I will give you this: The pieces are there for Ben to be a great character. Ben is a good character who was misused by, what is becoming more apparent to me, awful writing.
I used to think the writing on the show was good, it was their forethought that was terrible. The more I think about and analyze the show, the more problems like this I see.
What might have held this show back was, straight up, the writing. You can write yourself about of a bad plan, out of bad characters, and bad situations. That's possible. There are some great things about Lost that are just completely sullied by obtuse and ineffective writing. Ben being one of them.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 2:08 pm to STLSU
quote:
yeah, that's the notable exception. And the one I have the hardest time explaining. I have thought about this for a long time
Can't recall, did they ever clarify why Ben killed Locke? Did Locke tell him that he had to die? And is it possible that Ben knew Locke couldn't commit suicide (nothing has proven he couldn't, but it is a theory)?
Posted on 5/18/10 at 2:09 pm to Freauxzen
I just don't see what your problem is with the character's arc. The only person he has really fooled multiple times is Locke, but Locke's gullible nature sort of excuses it and it certainly leads him to his demise over the series. Ben has remained true to his word in basically all other instances. He was dangerous and secretive to be sure, but he hasn't lied as much as we believe he has to characters not named John Locke.
Posted on 5/18/10 at 2:11 pm to The Boob
quote:
Can't recall, did they ever clarify why Ben killed Locke? Did Locke tell him that he had to die? And is it possible that Ben knew Locke couldn't commit suicide (nothing has proven he couldn't, but it is a theory)?
1) Locke's death would certainly send the right message to the Oceanic 6 to get back to the Island. Even Locke himself knew this.
2) Ben wanted to be leader of the Others again and couldn't do that with Locke alive, although I'm not sure if they would have let him, since he lied about talking to Jacob and being born on the Island for so long.
Page 7 of 43
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News