|
Post by Patti - S'cubie Cutie on Nov 14, 2004 15:58:52 GMT -5
I'd be happy to copy it if there were an article thread specifically for Lost, but as far as I can tell no such thing exists yet. Should I post it on the existing thread for articles about Buffy and such? I will immediately create an article thread for Lost! Now.
|
|
|
Post by Techno-bot on Nov 14, 2004 16:01:10 GMT -5
I will immediately create an article thread for Lost! Now. eta: no, I won't because Sue did it on the 11th. Go to the Interviews and Articles thread of the Resources board, and you'll see it there.
|
|
|
Post by Anne, Old S'cubie Cat on Nov 14, 2004 18:43:20 GMT -5
I definitely agree that the Sun-Jin relationship is a complex, two-way-street relationship between two adults. I don't see it as a victim-victimizer situation either. There's no sign of physical abuse of either party, so it's all head games stuff - codependency and all that stuff. Both people have to be playing the game for it to continue. They've both shown some signs of easing up on it. Jin tried his controlling stuff with the "cover up" message last week. Sun just said no. And he accepted it without any show of temper, and they moved on. I do think they loved each other a lot to begin with, and that maybe now, they can get that back - if Jin relaxes on trying to maintain the persona he thought he needed back in the "real world," and Sun starts being more honest with him. Of course, these two things are interrelated . .. the more Jin acts like an ass and maintains that sterness and hair-trigger temper, etc, the less likely Sun is to confide in him. The more Sun is dishonest with her husband, the more he is likely to feel confused and insecure (and act like an ass.) I would like to see them give each other a chance before branching off to be with others, as it did not seem "too late" to me. Sun is a grown woman, she made her own decision to stay with Jin. And that they are now away from her father and everything that meant. Yes, what Spring said. Sun may be hoping that she can reclaim her marriage, away from her father. I think that's what the airport scene meant, when Jin pulled out the flowers and she decided to stay with him.
|
|
|
Post by Sara on Nov 14, 2004 18:49:53 GMT -5
eta: no, I won't because Sue did it on the 11th. Go to the Interviews and Articles thread of the Resources board, and you'll see it there. Heading over there right now...
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Nov 14, 2004 19:45:54 GMT -5
"Sawyer" is one of the many surnames, like Chandler and Smith, that originally was related to a person's profession--calling someone John Sawyer indicated he sawed down trees for a living, like a lumberjack. Interesting that this character in particular is named for someone who cuts other things down, no? More interesting still, one of the meanings of "sawyer" is also "a tree fast in the bed of a stream with its branches projecting to the surface." Or, if you want to get all poetical, something caught between drowning and reaching for the sky. Ooooh, I like the poetical - I'll take poetical. Is he drowning or waving? Lola
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Nov 14, 2004 19:48:01 GMT -5
I was just thinking, beyond the physical appearance - Sawyer appears outwardly all crude bluster and caring for no one but himself, Sayid is confidence and quiet strength and caring for others. Deep inside Sawyer is still a decent guy (note how he backed out of that last con because of the little boy), and Sayid carries an inner darkness and violence. Layers within layers within layers. It seems like no one on the island is what they seem outwardly, and the island brings it all to the surface. I'm sure I could say more, but I'm not awake and this barely makes sense as it is. I loved Charlie and Claire; thinking about it, it seemed like she just needed an excuse to move inland, and he gave her one with the imaginary peanut-butter flirtation. I really also liked Hurley giving Charlie what-for. Charlie deserved it, and it was well-delivered. Anne, goes off thinking happy thoughts about that courtly hand-kiss, inner darkness be damned Very nice examples of the layers and layers within Sayid and Sawyer. And on the Charlie and Claire thoughts. I agree that Claire was just looking for the reason to move. Lola I will be reading Vlad's review and commenting tomorrow. I will!
|
|
|
Post by Patti - S'cubie Cutie on Nov 14, 2004 19:51:27 GMT -5
Ooooh, I like the poetical - I'll take poetical. Is he drowning or waving? Lola love that song...
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Nov 15, 2004 16:23:09 GMT -5
Vlad. What an interesting and thoughtful review! You grabbed me right from your opening paragraph (following the recap). Because you get right to the heart of Sawyer’s problem – the cause of his self hate and self-destructive behavior. He’s sold himself, become the man he hated, the man who ruined his childhood – all for money. Excellent job of pointing out all his traits that demonstrate how he keeps people at a distance, provides them with an image of himself (not necessarily true), the comparison with Tom Sawyer (clever, clever Vlad), the connection with the plot of Watership Down. Very nice way you wove all these threads together. Was very intriqued by your point regarding his change of heart during the con we see in flashback – about how it is due to a move from “empathy” to “sympathy”. Because it’s in actually interacting with, actually seeing other people and understanding / feeling how your actions affect them, that you really learn how to change your own behavior . And the whole island is one big crucible for quickly learning that very important lesson. Not a lot of time or leeway for mistakes when it’s this kind of survival on the line. You’ve got a finite number of people here, Sawyer, and you’re gonna have to all work together or you’re doomed. As Angel learned, it’s actually connecting with people that is the important thing. Your comparison of Sawyer and Kate was lovely – the wordplay with “con”, the similarities of their issues with trust. In particular, I was struck by how lonely and isolated each has been and how this is another reason for them to turn to each other. **Snicker** over how you used the phrase “Jedi moment” – nice. ;D More seriously, I liked how you noted that these moments can affect more than just the individuals taking direct part in them and how you contrasted Jack (encouraging others to count on each other and help each other) with Locke (taking a turn toward the not so good in this ep by encouraging distrust and doubt). Plus, I really appreciated your point about how Locke is “outside” the two camps – I hadn’t really noticed that before this, but it is very true. Locke is playing his own game, not anyone else’s. “Don’t tell me what I can’t do.” Finally, I found it very interesting how you identified Sayid’s problem to also be one of a lack of confidence. He seems on the surface to be one of the most confident members of the group. But he is confident when he is doing things, he’s not confident inside himself, in who he is. Got a nice laugh out of a lot of your “what worked” notes, but would also like to applaud and eetah your comment that this ep really built on previous eps – really came together as a whole. Yep, yep, yep, yep on your remaining questions!! (Plus a little giggle over your Charlie and Claire quips and a . . . “huh, you’re right” regarding your label of “thief” for Boone. I’m gonna have to think about that one.) Lola
|
|
LilRed
Junior S'cubie
Posts: 18
|
Post by LilRed on Nov 17, 2004 17:50:50 GMT -5
Another great review Vlad! I certainly never would have considered comparing Sawyer to Tom Sawyer. It's an interesting parallel to make, and although I haven't read the book in years, it works for me. And thanks for the synopsis of Watership Down. It's a book I've heard of, sure, but I've never read it. Good point about Kate and Sawyer both having trust issues. It'll be interesting to see how their relationship develops. I'm not sure if I agree with you about Sayid lacking confidence in himself. He was certainly disappointed with himself for torturing Sawyer, and it revealed to him that he was still capable of this, but I wouldn't call it a lack of confidence. Perhaps it's just semantics, but to me it seems that he is confident in that he feels he can go off by himself to come to terms with what he has done. I don't have any answers to your questions this time, particularly about him not burning the letter. I'll be keeping this in mind as I watch future eps to try to determine why. I can't seem to come up with a definitive reason that works for me right now. And I really liked the new pics of the characters! Unfortunately, I'm not going to be able to be a part of the discussion tonight after the new ep as I've got to head of to a planning board meeting. (In all honesty, I'd rather be in front of the computer interacting with all of you!) I'm taping the ep though, so I can join in on the discussion later!
|
|
|
Post by leftylady on Nov 19, 2004 17:51:58 GMT -5
Huh? I keep seeing this. I'm pretty good at deciphering on-line acronyms, but this one I can't figure out.
I've been tied up at work the last couple of weeks, so I'm WAY behind reading the postings. Nothing I have to say is exactly timely, but I wanted to add this: "Watership Down" - I was surprised to read recently in Billie Doux's reviews at tvtome that Sawyer was already reading about the book about rabbits in the episode entitled "White Rabbit". No prop is coincidental, and we missed it! I'll have to check my tape of the episode if I get the chance.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Nov 19, 2004 18:51:39 GMT -5
Huh? I keep seeing this. I'm pretty good at deciphering on-line acronyms, but this one I can't figure out. I've been tied up at work the last couple of weeks, so I'm WAY behind reading the postings. Nothing I have to say is exactly timely, but I wanted to add this: "Watership Down" - I was surprised to read recently in Billie Doux's reviews at tvtome that Sawyer was already reading about the book about rabbits in the episode entitled "White Rabbit". No prop is coincidental, and we missed it! I'll have to check my tape of the episode if I get the chance. EETAH is the phonetic spelling of the ITA acronym for I totally agree. Coined by our own Matthew.
|
|
|
Post by leftylady on Nov 22, 2004 11:37:52 GMT -5
EETAH is the phonetic spelling of the ITA acronym for I totally agree. Coined by our own Matthew. Thanks, Karen. I knew ITA, but you learn something all the time. I'll have to use it some time since I EETAH what's said here a lot!
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Mar 16, 2006 12:29:07 GMT -5
Sawyer's nekkid!
The old money in the suitcase trick.
I will do what I need to do. Shudder.
Sawyer beat him up? Jeez.
Charlie is a killjoy.
Claire's holding up hope of rescue.
Question of personal property.
Sawyer's being partway honest in his scams. Interesting.
We're not savages... yet.
Love Kate's outfit.
Locke trying to lead Sayid to suspect Sawyer. Did he do it?
Anyone who watches television knows how to improvise a slow fuse. Actually I didn't know that, but you can learn an awful lot from TV.
Hey It's That Guy!, as the husband.
Only australian who loves peanut butter. Hee. Love peanut butter.
Sayid's just been itching to torture.
Ooh, Charlie pulled the fat guy card. Bad form.
Kate/Sawyer kiss. Ugh. Sawyer was willing to go through a lot for it.
Fight, fight, fight! Men behaving badly. Sawyer/Sayid. Jin/Michael.
Eucalyptus?
Jin heard Sun speak English!
Sawyer, situational ethics.
Don't you feel sorry for me.
Imaginary peanut butter. Cute.
Sayid's scared by how much he enjoyed the torture.
Nice song.
Burning the letter or not. Not yet.
Sayid only trusts himself.
|
|