|
Post by Nickim on Feb 18, 2005 12:46:10 GMT -5
About Killer Kate, I've been wondering - what if she didn't actually kill someone, she just feels responsible for their death? Maybe her wicked ways broke her dad's heart, and he died of sorrow.Or maybe she was wishing the plane would crash so she wouldn't get dragged back to L.A. in handcuffs and disgrace. Anne, or she could've just shot a bank guard... I've said this all along. I could be completely wrong, but I don't think Kate killed someone in cold blood. Drunk driving? Shot a family member thinking they were an intruder? Hey, it happens. We've seen that Jack felt responsible for his father's death, but he didn't actually kill him. Sawyer, as a child, felt responsible for his parents' deaths, but he didn't actually kill them. So, I'd say that Kate will follow the same pattern.
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Feb 18, 2005 13:11:34 GMT -5
Precisely, and so far a lot of these people have been shown to be cons or conned--the "pyschic" did a number on Claire. Who's conning them all? Locke? Hurley? I would like some answers soon, but I don't really think we're going to get too many. Questions keep people watching. Yep. Questions, even when slightly maddening, keep up the interest - give folks a reason to tune in. They have a fine line to walk here - giving us enough answers to keep us from going looney while leaving (or raising) enough questions and mystery to keep it fresh and surprising.
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Feb 18, 2005 13:14:07 GMT -5
Great point. I'm sure we'll see why Sawyer isn't in an Austrailian prison for murder. I remember him saying something about "did you ever think you got the wrong guy." Somehow, he was able to get away. I'm also thinking he may have been arrested for something else entirely - perhaps even "thrown out" of Australia for some completely other event and they never caught him for the murder at all.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Feb 18, 2005 13:47:13 GMT -5
Not that hard for me to buy, since the event altered his whole life. He even became what he hated most. I could see him very easily jumping at the chance to get his revenge. I do hope we see him burn that letter very soon. Oh - I agree. What was hard for me to buy was the "both ways" thing. I CAN buy that Sawyer is so blind with rage he jumps at the idea of vengeance - despite the fact that as a con man, he should be hard to con, and without so much as a tiny hestation about the fact that Hibbs is a con-man. I can buy that. But then, he is so not-blind-with-rage, that he can't pull the trigger. Hibbs isn't worried about vengeance from Sawyer, should he be found out, because he knows Sawyer isn't a killer. BUT Hibbs is also absolutely counting on Sawyer being a killer. My head did spin. Perhaps my head is on too losely, perhaps one of the screws needs tightening, who knows? But nevertheless, my noggin twirled.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Feb 18, 2005 13:48:44 GMT -5
I've said this all along. I could be completely wrong, but I don't think Kate killed someone in cold blood. Drunk driving? Shot a family member thinking they were an intruder? Hey, it happens. We've seen that Jack felt responsible for his father's death, but he didn't actually kill him. Sawyer, as a child, felt responsible for his parents' deaths, but he didn't actually kill them. So, I'd say that Kate will follow the same pattern. She doesn't seem like a cold-blood type killer to me either. Though it is possible that someone was killed/hurt due to foolishness/negligence of some kind on her part, and she is, in fact responsible . . . in a manslaughter kind of way. I hope we get some of these answers before the season ends.
|
|
|
Post by William the Bloody on Feb 18, 2005 15:09:52 GMT -5
Oh - I agree. What was hard for me to buy was the "both ways" thing. I CAN buy that Sawyer is so blind with rage he jumps at the idea of vengeance - despite the fact that as a con man, he should be hard to con, and without so much as a tiny hestation about the fact that Hibbs is a con-man. I can buy that. But then, he is so not-blind-with-rage, that he can't pull the trigger. Hibbs isn't worried about vengeance from Sawyer, should he be found out, because he knows Sawyer isn't a killer. BUT Hibbs is also absolutely counting on Sawyer being a killer. My head did spin. Perhaps my head is on too losely, perhaps one of the screws needs tightening, who knows? But nevertheless, my noggin twirled. I would offer to give Spring a good screw, but then you know, it could get twisted... *ahem* ;D Anyway... I look at the whoel thing this way: Hibbs knows Sawyer so well that he knows that Sawyer's emotions will blind him in anything related to "finding hte real Sawyer." He knows that Sawyer is not a cold blooded killer, but the case of finding and dealing with teh real Sawyer is something far outside the scope of what Sawyer would normally be. Hibbs is not worried about Sawyer coming to kill him, because Sawyer isn't that kind of guy. Sawyer is the kind of guy that will go after the guy who destroyed his parents and his own life completely. He isn't the kind of guy that would go after someone that simply betrayed him. He knows this because Hibbs already HAS betrayed him once before and Sawyer didn't come after him then. And we also are assuming that Hibbs is a master here.. that he is perfect. Maybe his plan wasn't "perfect." Sawyer almost didn't go through with the murder... and he did discover what Hibbs was up to... so... yeah, maybe not the perfect con. But cons always involve risks. There are lots of little assumptions to make here, but that's what this show has been about from day one. We have all these little pieces shown to us...many of them out of order and sometimes out of context, but masterfully so. We then get to put the puzzle back together and hopefully manage to not get "LOST" in the process. Sometimes its 2 steps forward and and then a couple steps to the left and then one back... Vlad
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Feb 18, 2005 16:41:19 GMT -5
I would offer to give Spring a good screw, but then you know, it could get twisted... *ahem* ;D Anyway... I look at the whoel thing this way: Hibbs knows Sawyer so well that he knows that Sawyer's emotions will blind him in anything related to "finding hte real Sawyer." He knows that Sawyer is not a cold blooded killer, but the case of finding and dealing with teh real Sawyer is something far outside the scope of what Sawyer would normally be. Hibbs is not worried about Sawyer coming to kill him, because Sawyer isn't that kind of guy. Sawyer is the kind of guy that will go after the guy who destroyed his parents and his own life completely. He isn't the kind of guy that would go after someone that simply betrayed him. He knows this because Hibbs already HAS betrayed him once before and Sawyer didn't come after him then. And we also are assuming that Hibbs is a master here.. that he is perfect. Maybe his plan wasn't "perfect." Sawyer almost didn't go through with the murder... and he did discover what Hibbs was up to... so... yeah, maybe not the perfect con. But cons always involve risks. There are lots of little assumptions to make here, but that's what this show has been about from day one. We have all these little pieces shown to us...many of them out of order and sometimes out of context, but masterfully so. We then get to put the puzzle back together and hopefully manage to not get "LOST" in the process. Sometimes its 2 steps forward and and then a couple steps to the left and then one back... Vlad Are you sure it isn't just a jump to the left, and then a step to the right? There are so many questions and not many answers. I want at least one part of the puzzle to fit next week, because this is really maddening. Not at all like Buffy where you pretty much knew who was the bad guy and who was the good guy, and you could look forward to watching a good ass-kicking and feel good about it.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Feb 18, 2005 17:05:59 GMT -5
I'm also thinking he may have been arrested for something else entirely - perhaps even "thrown out" of Australia for some completely other event and they never caught him for the murder at all. I agree-- if I remember right, one of the things he was yelling in the police station was "But I gave it back" which I think would preclude it being a murder arrest.
|
|
|
Post by Nickim on Feb 19, 2005 9:16:29 GMT -5
I would offer to give Spring a good screw, but then you know, it could get twisted... *ahem* ;D Anyway... I look at the whoel thing this way: Hibbs knows Sawyer so well that he knows that Sawyer's emotions will blind him in anything related to "finding hte real Sawyer." He knows that Sawyer is not a cold blooded killer, but the case of finding and dealing with teh real Sawyer is something far outside the scope of what Sawyer would normally be. Hibbs is not worried about Sawyer coming to kill him, because Sawyer isn't that kind of guy. Sawyer is the kind of guy that will go after the guy who destroyed his parents and his own life completely. He isn't the kind of guy that would go after someone that simply betrayed him. He knows this because Hibbs already HAS betrayed him once before and Sawyer didn't come after him then. And we also are assuming that Hibbs is a master here.. that he is perfect. Maybe his plan wasn't "perfect." Sawyer almost didn't go through with the murder... and he did discover what Hibbs was up to... so... yeah, maybe not the perfect con. But cons always involve risks. There are lots of little assumptions to make here, but that's what this show has been about from day one. We have all these little pieces shown to us...many of them out of order and sometimes out of context, but masterfully so. We then get to put the puzzle back together and hopefully manage to not get "LOST" in the process. Sometimes its 2 steps forward and and then a couple steps to the left and then one back... Vlad It's a dance. Not everyone likes the same dances. So, the writers keep changing the music so that we keep watching, trying to figure out all the steps.
|
|
|
Post by Nickim on Feb 19, 2005 9:18:59 GMT -5
Are you sure it isn't just a jump to the left, and then a step to the right? There are so many questions and not many answers. I want at least one part of the puzzle to fit next week, because this is really maddening. Not at all like Buffy where you pretty much knew who was the bad guy and who was the good guy, and you could look forward to watching a good ass-kicking and feel good about it. I liked that aspect of Buffy also, but Lost is more like real life where people have to make the choice between good or bad. We don't know yet exactly how much influence the island has on that choice, but most of the stories we've seen have been of people who had made major mistakes in their lives. Has the island brought them there for redemption or to use their bad tendencies for it's own purpose? So far, it seems they're being redeemed. Jin is away from his father-in-law and seems to be treating Sun much better. Charlie's away from drugs and was trying to do good things until he killed Ethan. Was that the influence of the island or just Charlie's own need for vengeance? Sawyer seemed to turn his back on the need for revenge when he let the boar go. Did anyone else think Kate & Sawyer should have kept the piglet that was way too easy to catch and raise it to eat?
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Feb 19, 2005 10:18:07 GMT -5
I agree-- if I remember right, one of the things he was yelling in the police station was "But I gave it back" which I think would preclude it being a murder arrest. Yep! Like maybe a con he was running, or a disagreement in a bar, or something like that. I'm betting he hasn't really faced any consequences for the murder yet. Well, until now, that is.
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Feb 19, 2005 10:19:00 GMT -5
It's a dance. Not everyone likes the same dances. So, the writers keep changing the music so that we keep watching, trying to figure out all the steps. Very cleverly, and lyrically, put, Nicki!!
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on Feb 19, 2005 10:23:16 GMT -5
I liked that aspect of Buffy also, but Lost is more like real life where people have to make the choice between good or bad. We don't know yet exactly how much influence the island has on that choice, but most of the stories we've seen have been of people who had made major mistakes in their lives. Has the island brought them there for redemption or to use their bad tendencies for it's own purpose? So far, it seems they're being redeemed. Jin is away from his father-in-law and seems to be treating Sun much better. Charlie's away from drugs and was trying to do good things until he killed Ethan. Was that the influence of the island or just Charlie's own need for vengeance? Sawyer seemed to turn his back on the need for revenge when he let the boar go. Did anyone else think Kate & Sawyer should have kept the piglet that was way too easy to catch and raise it to eat? Totally agree on the piglet. Both on being too easy to catch and that they should have kept it (well, kept it and run like the dickens before mom or dad came to rip out their guts for messing with the kid) to raise. They're farming crops, they need to start raising their own meat too. **starts diagraming plans for a fish farm and wanders into the silly Gilligan's Island realm of bamboo pedal cars and coconut radios**
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Feb 19, 2005 11:36:31 GMT -5
I agree-- if I remember right, one of the things he was yelling in the police station was "But I gave it back" which I think would preclude it being a murder arrest. I figure that Sawyer was talking about the money he left at the house of his last con when the little boy interrupted his game and he realized that he wasn't *that* Sawyer, not really, in his heart. I could see where the woman confessed what was going on to her husband and him calling the cops later on. I think Sawyer was probably running from his partner, because wasn't it his partner's money that was being used to set up the con?
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Feb 19, 2005 11:44:24 GMT -5
I liked that aspect of Buffy also, but Lost is more like real life where people have to make the choice between good or bad. We don't know yet exactly how much influence the island has on that choice, but most of the stories we've seen have been of people who had made major mistakes in their lives. 'Lost' is more like 'Angel' in that regard. Choices we make being the main theme. I'm still not sure that the island had anything to do with bringing the plane down, but I do think that it is effecting the people who are stranded there and the one's with the most conflict in their lives are being effected more than the others. Like Vlad said, 2 steps forward, one back or sideways. I don't think the island is going to let them go until they all learn whatever it is they need to learn to be redeemed. Not me. But that's probably because I'm a small-town girl, and haven't had much experience with raising livestock to eat.
|
|