Lost 1:7 THE MOTH: Drawn to the Daylight

[Lola m]

SpringSummers said:

No - before that. I can't remember why Jack is a topic of conversation, but Sawyer and Kate are on the beach, and he says something about how he could be a doc too with some antiseptic and bandaids, or something like that. And she immediately gets her hackles up, saying he shouldn't compare himself to JACK. It just betrayed, to me, that she has put a halo on Jack.

Sawyer - a mass of insecurites underneath it all, natch.

And Jack would be soooo not happy at having a halo put on him. He has problems seeing the good in himself.

Lola

[Patti - S'cubie Cutie]

SpringSummers said:

Yes - also - butterfly vs moth comparison by Locke (butterfly gets the attention, but moth is actually stronger and swifter - something like that)

And Charlie's "brother" saying he was the pretty one out front who would get the attention, but Charlie was the one who had the song-writing/musical talent.

By the way: Did everyone think they were actually brothers? I had this feeling they were just calling themselves brothers, thought of themselves as brothers - but weren't actually brothers.

And how about Charlie being so religious? Nice touch and nice depth added to the character. That confession scene was great.

I think they were actual brothers. I got the siblings vibe from them.

[Lola m]

William said:

Scott/Steve is "inconclusive." They look very similar, and even their voices are not dissimilar...but witht he shaky camera work and th shortness of the scene, it's almost impossible to tell.

Vlad

Yeah, I was not totally happy with the return of the shaky cameral. I mean, yeah, rock slide and danger and oooh it's like you're in the thick of things. But also, a little dizzy making.

Of course, I went to the optometrist and had my eyes dialated this afternoon, so that probably wasn't helping.

;D

Lola

[SpringSummers]

Oh! I meant to ask you technopagan types . . . why are we still putting (VM ep 1.5) or (Lost ep 1.5) on the main Part xxx thread? This sort of confused me . . . because aren't we telling everyone to post here, instead? So . . . better not to put that in the Part xxx title, no? I think it could confuse a n'ubie type.

No biggie - just a thought I wanted to share before it went out of my head.

[Lola m]

Patti said:

PLUS, Sawyer had just lit that firework, bottle rocket or whatever and we saw it some distance away. I don't think he could have been close enough to Sayid.

Yep! I dunno. It's still really looking like either Locke or unknown island person.

Lola

[William the Bloody]

Lola said:

Yeah, I was not totally happy with the return of the shaky cameral. I mean, yeah, rock slide and danger and oooh it's like you're in the thick of things. But also, a little dizzy making.

Of course, I went to the optometrist and had my eyes dialated this afternoon, so that probably wasn't helping.

;D

Lola

OKay... we need to start a movement... spearhead it...let it be the S3 contribution to the show... a letter writing campaign begging, pleading the powers-that-be to stop using hte shaky cam. Maybe we could all send in boxes of Jello....

Vlad

[Lola m]

Patti said:

OTP?

**embarrassed toe shuffling and head hanging**

It means one true pairing and so it really needs another person to make it make sense but I had already typed it when I thought of that. It was such a dorky thing to have done that I posted it anyway. ;D

'Cuz I'm a loon like that.

Lola

[SpringSummers]

Patti said:

I think they were actual brothers. I got the siblings vibe from them.

You may be right . . . but there was something . . . something that was said or done that made me think otherwise . . . that made me think they weren't actual brothers, but bandmates who thought of themselves as brothers. But whether or not my impression was a solid one, or what it was based on, is forever Lost in the fact that I did not tape this ep and my brain can be a real sieve.

[Patti - S'cubie Cutie]

SpringSummers said:

Oh! I meant to ask you technopagan types . . . why are we still putting (VM ep 1.5) or (Lost ep 1.5) on the main Part xxx thread? This sort of confused me . . . because aren't we telling everyone to post here, instead? So . . . better not to put that in the Part xxx title, no? I think it could confuse a n'ubie type.

No biggie - just a thought I wanted to share before it went out of my head.

It's a reminder to watch the episode.


and then we put the big sign to watch the episode AND a big link to this thread and tell them to come here in the first post. N'ubies probably actually READ the first post. I don't think it's confusing.

[Patti - S'cubie Cutie]

Lola said:

**embarrassed toe shuffling and head hanging**

It means one true pairing and so it really needs another person to make it make sense but I had already typed it when I thought of that. It was such a dorky thing to have done that I posted it anyway. ;D

'Cuz I'm a loon like that.

Lola

Is it from some show or book?

[Patti - S'cubie Cutie]

William said:

OKay... we need to start a movement... spearhead it...let it be the S3 contribution to the show... a letter writing campaign begging, pleading the powers-that-be to stop using hte shaky cam. Maybe we could all send in boxes of Jello....

Vlad

You go first. *grin*

[Patti - S'cubie Cutie]

SpringSummers said:

You may be right . . . but there was something . . . something that was said or done that made me think otherwise . . . that made me think they weren't actual brothers, but bandmates who thought of themselves as brothers. But whether or not my impression was a solid one, or what it was based on, is forever Lost in the fact that I did not tape this ep and my brain can be a real sieve.

I DID tape it - when I rewatch it tomorrow I'll see if I can spot whatever it was.

[SpringSummers]

Patti said:

It's a reminder to watch the episode.


and then we put the big sign to watch the episode AND a big link to this thread and tell them to come here in the first post. N'ubies probably actually READ the first post. I don't think it's confusing.

My feeling is leave it off the Part title, but really - no biggie. Your reasoning is both sound and appreciated. Thanks for explaining. I kept wondering about it, but forgetting to ask.

[Lola m]

Sara said:

...this episode did not, in fact, begin with a shot of the featured character's eye as all the others have so far. But we panned over to a shot of Charley's red-rimmed eyes within moments.

I noticed the not starting with an eye thing.

But that's mostly because when I went to dinner with two friends and we were all talking about the show (OMG, everyone is watching this - we've gone mainstream!) I pointed out the eye thing. They were all impressed and I totally didn't tell them that I got the idea from a board I visit. ;D

Lola

[William the Bloody]

SpringSummers said:

Oh! I meant to ask you technopagan types . . . why are we still putting (VM ep 1.5) or (Lost ep 1.5) on the main Part xxx thread? This sort of confused me . . . because aren't we telling everyone to post here, instead? So . . . better not to put that in the Part xxx title, no? I think it could confuse a n'ubie type.

No biggie - just a thought I wanted to share before it went out of my head.

Adding to Patti's reason:

We also do it as a reminder to folks that haven't seen the show yet because they taped it and maybe are "late" by a day or two to catching up on the board, that there is a good chance of spoilers being in that particular thread for the latest episode. While we ask folk to come to this thread for the ontopic discussion after the airing, we also don't wanna stop them from talking in the Main thread about it.

Admittedly, it's sorta vestigial, but it does serve a purpose, much like our tonsils: Don't need 'em, can actually cause a problem, but they DO do something and we are better off leavin' them alone until they cause one..

Vlad