I Am DB

March 13, 2008

LOST S4E6: The Other Woman

Filed under: Lost,TV — DB @ 1:55 pm

This episode was not the strongest of the season, but that doesn’t mean it was weak. It offered a refreshing breather from the breakneck pace of the first five hours, and felt more like an old-school, character-centric installment. But there are still a few things worth talking about.

HARPER’S BIZARRE
When Jack, Juliet, Jin and Sun went into the woods to look for Faraday and Charlotte, Juliet heard whispering all around her. We haven’t heard much whispering in the jungle lately, and Juliet’s aural encounter preceded a surprising physical one: the appearance of Other therapist Harper Stanhope. We first meet Harper in the opening scene flashback, and she’s pretty bitchy right from the get-go. Back in the whispering woods, she delivers a message to Juliet from Ben: Faraday and Charlotte are headed to a Dharma electrical station known as The Tempest, and that Juliet must go and kill them before they release a gas supply that could kill everyone on the island.

Juliet asks how Ben could know this, considering he’s locked in Locke’s basement. Harper replies that Ben is “exactly where he wants to be.” Juliet’s question is worth considering. How does Ben know where Faraday and Charlotte are going? And how is he getting messages to Harper? And frankly…is Harper even real in that moment? Consider: she appears out of nowhere in the rain, and then disappears into thin air just as mysteriously. And the fact that Jack saw her too doesn’t convince me that she couldn’t be some sort of vision. After all, Sayid shared one of Shannon’s inexplicable Walt sightings, and when a horse from Kate’s past made a cameo on the island, Sawyer saw it too. Plus, why didn’t Jack recognize Harper? He spent a fair amount of time living amongst the Others. In all that time, he never met or saw her? When they moved from the cages back to the houses where Locke and Co. are now staying, Harper was nowhere in sight? There’s something fishy about her appearance, and about Ben’s role in initiating it.

THE REVOLUTION BEGINS
Claire approached Locke and told him she wanted to talk to Miles. John resisted, but Claire made some good points. Since John chucked a knife into Naomi’s back and Ben shot Charlotte, the freighter folks might be more amenable to talking with someone less openly hostile. She also reminded John that they still don’t know whose boat is parked off the island’s coast. All they know, thanks to Charlie, is whose boat it isn’t.

This scene didn’t accomplish much for Claire, since there was no follow-up of her talking to Miles. And in fact, the scene served to remind us – or at least, it reminded me – how atrociously the writers have failed Claire by denying her any sort of grief over Charlie’s death. This is the first time we’ve seen her even acknowledge him at all since learning of his death, and the writers still didn’t infuse the moment with the emotional response from her that it demands. What is wrong with these people?

I did wonder, though, if the scene was in some way setting up what’s next for Claire. We know she isn’t one of the Oceanic Six despite the fact that Aaron gets off the island, so she either gets left behind and has her baby stolen from her…or she’s not long for this world. I did have a moment where I wondered if her request to talk to Miles was planting a seed for something tragic that might come out of such an encounter. It doesn’t seem to fit that Miles would do anything to her…but something’s coming down the pike for Claire, and whatever it is doesn’t feel good.

The only thing the scene between her and Locke did appear to accomplish was setting up Ben’s latest effort to undermine the man of faith. It’s not long after Claire approaches about Miles that Ben is asking Locke if his people are starting to revolt yet (“It always starts out so innocently, doesn’t it?  A question here, a comment there…”). Their conversation leads to one of the few Big Reveals this episode offered, which brings us to…

CHARLES IN CHARGE
So it’s confirmed: Penny’s father, Charles Widmore, is involved in all of this island madness. Of course, we have to take Ben’s word about this – and Ben’s word is never quite what it seems.  But if we are to believe him, then we accept that Charles Widmore has been looking for the island for a long time, and wants to exploit its potential. Ben says that the boat offshore is Widmore’s. But what does Widmore know of the island, and how? What does he know about Ben specifically? Is Matthew Abbadon working for him? Was Elsa – Sayid’s post-island mark – working for him? And if so, was she communicating with him directly, or was there someone in-between…the so-called Economist?  Does Widmore know that Desmond is on the island?

Conversely, how does Ben know about Widmore? What is their connection? Who was Ben’s associate that Widmore was beating up on the video tape? (I was actually impressed that he was doing the dirty work himself. Usually these rich, powerful types let their thugs handle the physical assaults while they stand by, straightening their tie and watching with mild interest.) Who was videotaping the attack?

Although it was buried in the middle of a slower episode, this official revelation of Widmore’s involvement is, I think, a huge piece of the ultimate Lost puzzle we’re trying to piece together.

CRIMES OF THE HEART
Another revelation – this one more unexpected –  is that Ben has been pining for Juliet since she arrived on the island. This puts an interesting new spin on every interaction they had last season. Ben’s attraction had never been hinted at, and it struck me as a tad strange to introduce it now. I wonder if it was always part of the plan even as the writers worked their way through season 3, or if it is a new idea. In one of their sessions, Harper snarkily comments under her breath to Juliet that she looks just like someone from Ben’s past. Who does Juliet look like? A romantic interest? (We still don’t know what happened to Ben’s childhood gal pal Annie.) Or perhaps, in a more Oedipal twist, Juliet reminds Ben of his mother? She died during childbirth, but young Ben saw her wandering around on the island, just as Jack has seen his father. Ben’s mother and Juliet could never be mistaken for twins, but they bear a resemblance in hair color and skin tone. Something to think about…

We also learn that Ben’s seemingly impromptu decision to send Goodwin to the tail section of the plane had a more sinister motivation. If he sent Goodwin away as punishment, does that mean Ethan was being punished too? Later, when Ben brings Juliet out to see Goodwin’s body, she asks him why he sent Goodwin to his death. He yells at her incredulously, “After everything I did to get you here, after everything I’ve done to keep you here, how can you possibly not understand…that you’re mine?”

That’s one creepy line, but I call your attention to the middle part: After everything I’ve done to keep you here. Prior to that moment, we thought that he was simply refusing to let her go home until she had succeeded in solving the island’s pregnant-women problem. But that line suggests that Ben has actively manufactured her stay on the island. Is it possible that he has interfered with her research? Is it possible that he knows how to save the women’s lives, but is keeping his knowledge a secret so that he has an excuse to keep Juliet around? Is Ben evil enough to sacrifice pregnant women for his own romantic follies? Or am I over-analyzing? (While we’re at it, he also said, “After everything I did to get you here.” What did he do to get her there? Perhaps orchestrate her ex-husband’s death-by-rampaging-bus? Or is he simply referring to the persistent recruitment efforts of Richard Alpert and Mittelos Bioscience?)

FINAL THOUGHTS
Juliet had the best line of the night – a reaction to Jack’s surprise that Ben’s people had a therapist. Juliet’s retort? “It’s stressful being an Other, Jack.” Nice. The runner-up goes to Ben, less for the line itself than for his delivery of, “I always have a plan,” which he says to Locke with such comical casualness it made me laugh out loud. (I also liked his cheerful, “See you guys at dinner!” to the bewildered Hurley and Sawyer.)

I think this episode was meant as a minor calm before the storm, because from what last week’s preview showed us, I think tonight and next week are gonna be big.

Tonight’s Episode: Ji Yeon

March 6, 2008

LOST S4E5: The Constant

Filed under: Lost,TV — DB @ 3:47 pm

As if the creators of this show hadn’t realized by now that I’m a sure thing, they went and threw a whole lotta time travel into the mix. I’m a sucker for a good – even a not-so-good – time travel storyline, so I really couldn’t be diggin’ this any more. The show has been playing time games for a while, but this episode blew it all open like Locke blew open the door to the hatch. If you were confused by anything about Desmond’s trip through time, I recommend reading this week’s column at Entertainment Weekly, where Damon Lindelof helps explain what exactly Desmond experienced. There are some particularly cool theories the writer poses here as well. Whether they turn out to be true or not, the ideas are pretty great.  As for my far less enthralling take on last week’s events…

FUTURAMA
The initial question: what’s the deal with the way time exists around this island? More to the point, why did Desmond experience a time-warp when Frank veered slightly off Faraday’s bearing? We learn from Faraday’s questions that Desmond’s exposure to electromagnetism is to blame…but why?

While we puzzle over that one, let’s think about Desmond’s visit to Faraday at Oxford circa 1996. There’s some quality fat to chew on in these scenes. When Desmond says that Island-Faraday does not remember the 1996 meeting with Desmond, Oxford-Faraday seems momentarily surprised, but then quietly says something I couldn’t make out  – something about understanding why he will not recall the meeting, or perhaps not understanding why he won’t recall the meeting…I’m not sure, but there was something in that moment. And when Desmond questions why Faraday isn’t protecting his head from the radiation exposure, Faraday merely gives a knowing look as if to say, “That would have been a good idea…but it’s too late now.” We gather that as a result of his experiments with rat Eloise, Faraday has exposed himself to a high amount of radiation. Could this be the source of some of his…issues? Has he been leaping through time as well? Is that why he has a note saying, “If anything goes wrong, Desmond Hume will be my constant”?

WHEN DESMOND MET PENNY…
Lest we think this episode was just the stuff of sci-fi geekdom, it proved to also be one of the most emotionally powerful episodes in the series’ history, reaffirming the Desmond/Penny relationship as one of the central threads of the entire show.  I was reminded of Buttercup’s words to Prince Humperdinck: “Westley and I are joined by the bonds of true love. And you can not track that, not with a thousand bloodhounds. And you can not break it, not with a thousand swords.” But you can communicate across oceans and decades as long as there’s enough battery power in the phone. And there was indeed enough power for Island-Desmond to contact Penny, who has been looking for him for three years and knows about the island – or an island – thanks to her brief communication with Charlie. So she knows there’s an island, and she is determined to keep looking for Desmond. But what else does she know? Did she speak to Minkowski at some point (more on that below), and if she did, what did she learn? I still want to know what’s going on with the boat Penny actually hired – the one we saw at the very end of season 2.


And we still don’t know why Naomi had the picture of Penny and Desmond. Could Naomi have gotten it from her boss, Matthew Abbadon? Is Abbadon somehow in league with Penny’s father, Charles Widmore? (More on him further below.) That would be interesting, since both Abbadon and Widmore will likely factor into the Lost mythology at a pretty high level. I thought that maybe after Desmond’s Oxford meeting, he might have made copies of the photograph and given them to Faraday, telling him that someday when he goes on a mission to an island, to distribute the pictures to his team…thereby triggering all of this when Naomi parachutes onto the island. Does that make sense? Well, it doesn’t have to, since that’s not what happened. Man, I LOVE time travel!

FAREWELL GEORGE, WE HARDLY KNEW THEE
Let’s talk about the freighter. First of all, I don’t like that bastard in the wife-beater one friggin’ bit. What was his name? Keme, or something?  I hope Sayid eventually knocks that asshole overboard with a big piece of loose pipe. But I’ll put my emotions aside for a moment and cede to my curiosity:

  • Who is this guy?
  • In fact, who are all of these people on the freighter?
  • What is their connection to Faraday, Naomi, etc.?
  • Were they too hired by Abbadon, and if so, were they hired specifically to transport Naomi’s team, or do they have their own agenda?
  • Why are they so angry that Frank brought Sayid and Desmond back?
  • Why don’t they want Faraday talking to Desmond?
  • When Frank says he thought that Faraday could help the clearly disturbed Desmond, the ship’s “doctor” shouts that Faraday can’t even help himself. What can’t Faraday help himself from?

Wife-beater dude tells Frank that the captain (who is this captain?) wants to see him, and soon Sayid and Desmond are locked in the sick bay…but not alone. Also in the room, strapped down to a bed, is George Minkowski – the ship’s communications officer, who answered Jack’s call for rescue and has been mysteriously unresponsive to recent calls on the satellite phone. Now we know why. Although we don’t have a timeline for the following events, here’s what we learned: Minkowski and another crew member (Brand?) went out in a dinghy because they were bored and wanted to get a glimpse of the island. While out there, Brand started going crazy (they must have strayed off Faraday’s bearing?). Now Brand is dead and Minkowski is experiencing jumps in time just like Desmond (or as it turns out, NOT just like Desmond – read the EW article in the link at the top). Two days before Sayid and Desmond arrive, someone sabotaged all the equipment in the communications room and before Minkowski could fix any of it, he was strapped down by his fellow crew members because of his episodes. So what happened to him, and to this Brand person? Has Minkowski been exposed to radiation or electromagnetism, thus triggering the jumps? Why do his fellow crew members seem to react to his situation with hostility?

Georgie Boy also knows a little something about Desmond. He describes a flashing red light that would sometimes go off in the communications room, signaling an incoming call. He explains that he was under strict instructions never to answer it…but apparently he did one day, because he tells Desmond that the calls were from Penelope Widmore (The link I provided last week to an interview with Damon and Carlton includes a bit – if I recall correctly – where they talk about these calls from Penny, like the one Minkowski got, and the one Charlie got too). To what extent Penny and Minkowski have talked, we don’t know. But Minkowski offers to take Desmond and Sayid to the communications room, so they unstrap him…and conveniently find the locked door has been opened. “You guys must have a friend on this boat,” he tells them (more on that to below too).

Alas, poor George Minkowski…his increasingly frequent time-jumps seem to fry his synapses, and he dies in Desmond’s arms after leading him and Sayid to the communications room. I bow my head for Minkowski. I liked him and had hoped to see more of him, as played by the fine character actor Fisher Stevens. But Desmond may not have to face the same fate, because when Sayid fixes the ship’s phone, Desmond places a call. Faraday had told him in their Oxford meeting that in order to keep his brain from freaking out over the time-jumps, he needed to find a constant – something that existed for him in both his island life of 2004 and the year of his time-jumps, 1996. So Desmond calls his constant – Penny. In one of the most genuinely touching scenes in Lost history, Desmond and Penny speak for the first time in years – years that she has spent searching for him. And that brings us back to what I talked about a few paragraphs above, so we’ll move on.

PIRATED MERCHANDISE
In an unexpected but compelling flashback scene, we visit an auction, where the object on the block comes from the Black Rock – the dynamite-packed pirate ship (or as Rousseau calls it, the convenience store) that is washed up in the jungle on the island. We learn that seven years after the Black Rock disappeared on its journey from England to Siam, the first mate’s ledger was found in a pirate’s trove on Madagascar. The auctioneer reveals that the contents of the ledger have never been made public, and are known only to the owner and seller…Tovard Hanso.

Does that name ring a bell? Hanso. As in Alvar Hanso. As in The Hanso Foundation – a key funder of The Dharma Initiative. And who is the rich white man that wins the auction to buy this piece of Black Rock history? Penny’s father, Charles Widmore. I’m tellin’ ya…this guy’s dirty.

FINAL THOUGHTS
So the way I understood it, Desmond’s life is no longer in danger from his time-jumping because unlike Minkowski and Eloise, he was able to connect with a constant. I guess that’s why, after he hangs up the phone with Penny, he recognizes Sayid again. He now knows where he is.

On a side note, this episode reminded us that we still don’t know why Desmond landed in a military prison and why he was dishonorably discharged from service. Those details are sure to come up eventually.

As for all the funky time travel stuff, I can’t wait to see where it goes. I wonder – does the island’s nonconformity to the rules of time explain why Richard Alpert seems not to have aged since Ben was a kid?

Lastly, ever since Ben said he had a “man on their boat,” the widespread speculation online has been that Michael is that man. I wasn’t buying it at first, but I think that was just because I had my own theory about how Michael would be reintroduced…and I realize now that my way ain’t the way it’s gonna go. And Minkowski’s telling line about Desmond and Sayid having a friend on the boat, well…when I combine that with a few other things that are out there in the ether…it seems more and more probable that Michael is indeed somewhere on the freighter. But where, and why? Did he sabotage the communications room? And where the hell is Walt??

Tonight’s Episode: The Other Woman

February 28, 2008

LOST S4E4: Eggtown

Filed under: Lost,TV — DB @ 3:09 pm

After watching yet another terrific episode, at least I can say that they answered a few questions…while revealing a bunch more. Whether or not you actually read this recap, I do recommend reading these:

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20179125,00.html
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20179357,00.html

Interviews that Lost creators Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse recently gave to Entertainment Weekly. It includes their comments on how soon we can expect resolutions to certain mysteries, such as: who is in the coffin; who/what is Jacob; and why do some 815ers stay on the island. There’s some good stuff in these. Check ‘em out.

On a related subject, have any of you watched the Lost “Missing Pieces?” These are way cool. Damon and Carlton reference them in the interview, calling them “mobisodes.” They were originally created for Verizon Wireless, but now they all live on the official Lost page at ABC.com. They’re like deleted scenes from the first three seasons of the show…except they weren’t deleted. They are newly created – written and shot last fall while the cast and crew were making the current season. One scene, for example, takes place when the Others were holding Michael and Walt prisoner. Juliet goes into Michael’s “cell” and talks to him about his impending departure from the island. And there’s also a mysterious one that involves Jack’s father – on the island. Check out this Wikipedia article about the backstory on these scenes.

Now then…let’s go to Eggtown.

PERJURY!
According to Jack’s testimony at Kate’s trial, only eight people survived the crash of Flight 815; the plane crashed in the water; Kate saved their lives; two survivors didn’t make it; and Jack never spoke to the federal marshal. If the truth ever comes out, and if Jack’s still alive when it does, we might be back in the courtroom for his obstruction of justice trial. His testimony begets a few questions, but we’ll get to those in a minute.

BRIBERY!
Miles and Ben had quite the interesting exchange. Allusions to a mystery boss (Matthew Abbadon?) who is seeking Ben gave way to Miles offering to tell said boss that Ben was dead…if Ben will give him the oddly specific sum of $3.2 million, in cash. When Ben balks at his ability to deliver, Miles points toward Kate and says, “Do not treat me like I’m one of them! Like I don’t know who you are and what you can do.” When Ben asks what Miles plans to do about Charlotte, who has already seen him alive, Miles responds menacingly that he’ll take care of Charlotte. Does that mean he’ll kill her, or just make it worth her while to play along? From what little we’ve gleaned, Charlotte seems more interested in the island itself than she does in Ben…but who knows where her storyline is going. Anyway, Miles initially gives Ben two days to come up with the money, but extends to a week when Ben points out that being held prisoner in a basement might slow him down a tad. Miles leaves satisfied…but I couldn’t help thinking that Ben never explicitly says he’ll deliver. (For what it may be worth, this is the second time we’ve seen Miles show an interest in money above all. Remember his flashback to the slain teenager’s bedroom, where his whole modus operandi seemed to be locating a hidden cash stash? Miles always seems to be looking for the Benjamins).

Get it?!?

CONSPIRACY!
The week’s “Holy Shit!” revelation was that in a post-island world, Kate is claiming to be Aaron’s mother. This bombshell leaves us with a whole new set of questions. How did this come to be? Is Claire dead, or is she being kept from her child? Backstory-wise there doesn’t seem to be much left to do with her, and we know she’s not one of the Oceanic Six…so death seems possible. On the other hand, back in season 1, an anxious and agitated psychic impressed upon Claire the importance of her raising her baby personally rather than giving it up for adoption. Plus, Desmond had a flash of Claire and Aaron getting off the island in a helicopter (though as Desmond is about to find out, getting into a helicopter doesn’t appear to guarantee safety). Neither of these points means Claire can’t be killed off, but they are important nuggets to remember. And though Aaron was not conceived on the island, he is apparently the first baby born there in a long time. Maybe even ever. Also, though I’m afraid I can’t find the original source material, I recall that before Lost even hit the airwaves in 2004, J.J. Abrams said that Claire’s baby would be a key piece of the overall mythology.

Whether Claire is dead or alive, how could Kate be convinced to take the baby and pass it off as her own? It’s all part of the big Oceanic lie, man! Jack’s out there telling the world flat-out falsehoods about the circumstances of the crash and the fight for survival. Jack, who has always been so morally righteous; Jack, who turned in his father for drinking on the job; Jack, who went after Locke with a vengeance for lying about Boone’s injuries. And now Jack is selling the Oceanic fairy tale without blinking an eye. Of course, we know it’s going to catch up with him later and he’ll be quite distraught, but for now he seems content to spout the fiction. Based on his exchange with Kate outside the courthouse, he clearly isn’t comfortable with the Aaron situation, whatever that is. So once again, we’re left wondering about the entire Oceanic 815 fantasy. Who is orchestrating it? Who put the fake plane at the bottom of the ocean? Who coached the Oceanic Six about their story for when they returned to civilization? Why are they playing along? Why have these six people gotten off the island, and what has happened to those who didn’t? And what will transpire to make Hurley, and eventually Jack, so hell-bent on going back?

Another question I’m left with at the end of the Jack/Kate scene is that in the first flash-forward episode, when Jack and Kate met at the airport, they seemed estranged by something more than just his difficulty coming by to visit Aaron. She tells him in this episode that whenever he’s ready to see Aaron, he’s welcome to come over. But further out in the future, he has to implore her not to hang up the phone when he calls, and he practically begs to get her to come meet him. Though she agrees, she doesn’t seem particularly happy to be there or to see him. So what happens between the time they meet outside court and the time they meet at the airport?

MEMORY!
With all the baby mama drama, it might be easy to forget about one of the episode’s most curious moments. On the beach, Daniel and Charlotte have a deck of Dharma Initiative playing cards and seem to be testing Daniel’s memory. It appears that he looked at three cards, which Charlotte then turned face down. We don’t know how much time lapsed before Daniel tried to recall the three he’d seen, but however long it had been, he could only remember two. Charlotte tried to be encouraging, but Daniel was not pleased with his results. This scene surely signifies something larger yet to come.

ALBUQUERQUE!
If we can assume that Aaron is the fifth of the Oceanic Six, then who will round out the group? Though we know Ben is off the island and has the means to pass himself off as someone else, it’s doubtful that he is one of the Six, since he’s still got people like Sayid’s girl Elsa trying to find him. The six survivors are too high profile for Ben to be one of them.

Whatever happens to Desmond and Juliet, I’m guessing neither of them is posing as a crash survivor, since passenger lists would be able to disprove their presence easily enough (unless even the manifest has been manipulated). With only one person left to get off, where does that leave Sun and Jin? If Sun doesn’t leave the island soon, she faces death due to her pregnancy. It’s possible that only one of them gets off the island – maybe because the other one dies, or because external forces manage to separate them. And hey, Sun and Jin are not the only couple on the island. What about Rose and Bernard? When last we heard from them, they were firmly in the “Jack” camp, so it’s doubtful that they would remain on the island voluntarily. Could Michael be the sixth member? And if he is, where has he been since departing the island? And where would that leave Walt?

Of course, all of this speculation about couples torn asunder hinges on whether or not Aaron is considered one of the Six…

STUPIDITY!
This is a complaint – a big one – directed at the writers and producers. Do I need to remind you that in the timeline of your show, Charlie died two days ago? Two days. Three at the most, if I’m miscalculating. And here’s Claire, all smiles, living the comfy life in the barracks without so much as a single forlorn stare. Ditto for Hurley, whose brooding has given way to the joys of Gene Kelly and Olivia Newton-John in Xanadu.  What the hell, people? In the premiere episode, Hurley and Claire were shattered by the news of Charlie’s death, and now a couple of days later all is forgotten? This grates on me in a major way. How can these guys – the writers, that is – be so obtuse? I literally do not understand how it is possible to write a scene for Claire – who for the last two-and-a-half seasons has shared the majority of her screen time with Charlie – without it crossing anyone’s mind that maybe his absence would be having some affect on her. Seriously, it offends me.

LASTLY!
The plot thickens. Locke gets crazier. Kate treats Sawyer like crap…again. (Really. That morning after BS you pulled was uncool, Kate. Un. Cool.)  And a helicopter goes missing.

Despite it occasionally upsetting me, I love this show.

By the way, the post strike schedule has been set. Here’s how it will go:

Episode 5 – Tonight, 2/28
Episode 6 – 3/6
Episode 7 – 3/13
Episode 8 – 3/20
Episode 9 – 4/24
Episode 10 – 5/1
Episode 11 – 5/8
Episode 12 – 5/16
Episode 13 – 5/22

Tonight’s episode: The Constant

February 24, 2008

Better Late Than Never: My Annual Absurdly Long Oscar Predictions Opus

Filed under: Movies,Oscars — DB @ 1:54 pm

OK, well with hours to go before the show, this obviously arrives later than I would have liked. I’d have gotten it out sooner if I didn’t like to write about thos shit so much that I feel the need to go into all the detail instead of just sending a friggin’ list. You may not even see this until after the ceremony is done, but at least the message is time-stamped so you’ll know that for better or for worse, these were my picks. Hope you all enjoy the show…

When the kudos season was set to kick off way way way back in November, I was already crafting a little essay about how we’d be seeing a repeat of 1996, when the dark, quirky Coen Brothers masterpiece Fargo went up against the romantic sweep of The English Patient. Critics favored Fargo; the industry swooned for The English Patient (though Fargo did score some big wins on Oscar night). I saw a similar scenario unfolding this year, with No Country for Old Men ultimately losing ground to Atonement. And frankly, Atonement deserved to be a much bigger player these last few months than it was. It deserves every nomination that it got, and several that it didn’t. Anyway, I never got around to writing that piece, and now I’ve had to eat my unwritten words. Atonement, despite Best Picture wins at the Golden Globes and BAFTA’s, is the film least likely to score a surprise win against far-out-in-front contender No Country.

Every year seems like the toughest, most wide-open year to make predictions, but the truth is that it always feels that way. A few categories are locks, a few are toss-ups, a few are wide open, and even the locks aren’t really safe. What distinguishes this year for me is that it boasts the strongest slate of movies the field has seen in some time. Every year has its share of films and performances that leave us complaining and cursing about how unworthy they are and how much better X is than Y. Not so this year. With maybe one or two exceptions, the nominees are so stellar that no matter what happens, almost every category will see something or someone deserving going home with an Oscar.

But enough of my preambling. Let me get to the actual rambling. Without further ado, my predictions for Oscar’s 80th…supported by tiresome pages of explanation that no one cares about but me.

BEST PICTURE
As I said, No Country for Old Men is way out in front here. Armed with enough critics awards and guild prizes to fill an entire wing of Casa de Coen, the film has lodged itself firmly in viewer’s psyches. Even criticism of its final scenes hasn’t been overwhelming enough to derail it. Can anything beat it?

There Will Be Blood is too divisive – this year’s love it or hate it nominee. And anyone who was disappointed by the ending of No Country will find no solace here. Atonement would have needed more support throughout the season, not to mention a Best Director nomination. I don’t understand what happened with this movie. It has all the ingredients, yet the spark never caught.

Which leaves Juno and Michael Clayton, each of which fit the profile for an upset. Juno has the feel-good factor, as well as the box office numbers. But good a film as it is, it doesn’t really have that Best Picture vibe. It has captured the affection of audiences young and old, but 20 years from now it won’t stand up to the idea of what a Best Picture winner should be. Sure, we could each say the same about other past winners of the big award, but I think in most of those cases the argument relies on the idea that there was a better choice; a more deserving winner. In this case, I think it’s less about Juno‘s inferiority and more about the movie not having the meat on its bones to deserve the top prize. And I think the Academy knows it.

Michael Clayton, on the other hand, has the right stuff. A sturdy production that captures the tone of the great 1970’s films; a star turn by a beloved Hollywood fixture, backed by strong supporting performances; a story that is both plot and character driven, and is challenging enough to make the audience work a bit, yet rewarding enough to make it worth their while. It satisfies where No Country confuses and disappoints. Unfortunately, it doesn’t have awards momentum. If anything could beat No Country, this is probably the one. And if enough older voters are turned off by the violence or esoteric ending of the Coens’ film, this is where their vote will likely go. But I doubt it will be enough. The Oscar goes to No Country for Old Men

Personal Pick: No Country for Old Men


BEST DIRECTOR
Like their movie, Joel and Ethan Coen are a force to be reckoned with this season. They have been expressing their unique vision for years, and are such impressive filmmakers that they’ve been embraced by a mainstream despite never being part of it. The industry loves them, respects them and wants to reward them.

The only question is how much rewarding will be done. The Coens could potentially win four awards for No Country – as producers, directors, writers, and editors (though it’s unclear how the latter would be handled, since they edit under the pseudonym Roderick Jaynes. The Academy has said that if the film wins, there will be only one statuette and it will be engraved with Jaynes’ name). It is possible that the Academy members will choose not to heap so much gold into the brothers’ skinny arms.

Paul Thomas Anderson’s skill can simply not be denied, but again There Will Be Blood is too divisive to garner him the necessary support. If I might paraphrase from a recent Best Picture winner, “A day may come when Paul Thomas Anderson will win a well-deserved Best Director Oscar, but it is not this day.”

Which again leaves Juno and Michael Clayton grouped together, in the form of Jason Reitman and Tony Gilroy, respectively. But these guys are lucky to be here. Their surprise nominations took spots that were arguably more deserved by the likes of Sean Penn, Joe Wright, Sidney Lumet, and Tim Burton. I mean to take nothing away from Reitman and Gilroy’s accomplishments. Movies do not direct themselves, and these guys captained their ships most impressively. But their films are first and foremost achievements in screenwriting, and I think voters will agree.

No, if anyone can steal it from the Coen Brothers, Julian Schnabel seems like the best bet. From everything I’ve read, no one seems to think that The Diving Bell and the Butterfly will go home empty-handed. Schnabel has been a sport throughout the season – humbled by his continued inclusion in the club, gracious in the spotlight and graceful in his odd confrontation with Sean Young at the DGA awards. His film definitely expresses a strong visual point of view, and it is known that he had to fight to make the film the way he wanted to make it. Audiences are moved by the film and admire it, so Schnabel could be the usurper here. On the other hand, he’s very much a film industry outsider, and the town tends to favor its own. So the Oscar goes to Joel Coen and Ethan Coen.

Personal Pick: Paul Thomas Anderson (in a tiny, tiny, marginal choice over the Coens)

BEST ACTOR
Daniel Day-Lewis owns this category just like he owned There Will Be Blood. His competition is admirable, but even they know this isn’t their year. In fact, they probably voted for Day-Lewis too.

Personal Pick: Daniel Day-Lewis

BEST ACTRESS
A very tough call. Weeding out the also-rans rids us of Cate Blanchett, who despite being outstanding in everything all the time, didn’t have as much to work with in Elizabeth: The Golden Age as she did in the first film (for which she should have won, sorry Gwyneth). Moving on, the Academy loves them some Laura Linney, but this isn’t her year.

This is a three way race between Julie Christie, Marion Cotillard, and Ellen Page…with Christie out in front. Page is a bright new talent who anchors Juno with a strong, assured performance. In the absence of a Best Picture win, here’s a chance to give some big love to Juno. But fresh young actresses fare better in the supporting race than the lead, and a Best Actress win for Page is too much too soon.

So how to choose between Christie and Cotillard? Christie is the odds-on-favorite, having racked up the most pre-Oscar prizes, including a Golden Globe and a SAG award. And then there are all the elements that have nothing to do with her performance: she’s a screen legend who won this award in the 1960’s. She earns big points for sticking around and still showing the skills despite not working much anymore, and for still being beautiful and feisty.

Then there’s Cotillard, who out-transforms anything Michael Bay shat on screen in ’07. Her performance is a tour de force that sees her playing a gamut of emotions and ages. And she too has won a couple of key awards, namely the other Golden Globe and the BAFTA. If you judge on performance alone, how can it not be Cotillard? But there’s the problem: rarely are the nominees judged on performance alone. As an online pundit pointed out, Christie is helped by the fact that both Away From Her and La Vie En Rose are small movies that may not have been seen by many Academy members. This could prove an advantage to Christie because she is more likely to earn votes from people just because she’s Julie Christie, even if they haven’t seen the film. Cotillard doesn’t have that going for her. Still, I think people will have made a point to watch La Vie En Rose because of the acclaim the actress has garnered. And if enough people see her, I just don’t see how they can vote any other way. I know this is not the safe bet, but I’m going out on a limb and saying the Oscar goes to Marion Cotillard.

Personal Pick: Marion Cotillard

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
No need for a coin toss here. Casey Affleck is mesmerizing in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, one of the year’s finest films; Philip Seymour Hoffman is superb in Charlie Wilson’s War; and Tom Wilkinson is captivating in Michael Clayton. But none of them burn up the screen like Javier Bardem. Nor does Hal Holbrook, though he is of course the spoiler, being a respected veteran of stage and screen. He’s never been nominated, and this is a category that has often served as a way to honor career achievement. And in case there’s any doubt, Holbrook was beautifully touching in Into the Wild. But with so small a role in a movie that proved less popular with the Academy than expected, any chance he might have had to come from behind is slim. As No Country for Old Men takes its place in film history, Bardem is the one who will carry the flag. Every time there’s a picture of No Country in a magazine, or every time it shows up in some montage of Oscar-winning films, it is Javier Bardem’s face we’ll see. His performance is unique, chilling and strangely funny. Simply put, it’s a winner.

Personal Pick: Javier Bardem

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
When Amy Ryan started sweeping the critics prizes for her wrenching turn in Gone Baby Gone, I didn’t think her momentum would carry her to a win at the Kodak. This was mainly because she’s not enough of known quantity in Hollywood, which can work against a nominee unless the buzz around their performance is truly off the charts. But it turns out Ryan is still very much a front-runner in the most unpredictable category of the year.

The one performance that can be counted out is Saoirse Ronan’s in Atonement, though she was terrific in a tricky part. Tilda Swinton seemed like an also-ran through most of the season, but has picked up speed lately, and there are some who think she will win because, in a category with no overwhelming favorite, this will be voters’ best opportunity to honor Michael Clayton. But every time I’ve applied that logic when trying to predict a winner, it has failed. Besides, Swinton’s beautifully modulated performance is one of subtlety, which doesn’t necessarily catch voters’ eyes. Cate Blanchett once again proved how chameleonic she can be, doing a stunning, spot-on take of Don’t Look Back-era Bob Dylan in I’m Not There. No one can deny the effectiveness of the performance. The strikes against Blanchett are that some dismiss the role as merely stunt casting; the movie has apparently not been popular with Academy members (though the studio convinced director Todd Haynes to assemble a cut that focused solely on Blanchett’s Dylan, and then sent the DVD out with copies of Variety); and Blanchett won the award just a few years ago, for another take on a real-life celebrity. I think she she’s more deserving this year than she was then (I preferred Virginia Madsen in Sideways), but I’m not sure she can pull out the win.

A lot of people seem to be going with Ruby Dee, whose surprise SAG win is feeding the idea that this will be a career achievement award. Not just career, but life achievement. Dee is not only an admired veteran actress, but she was also a civil rights activist who accomplished many great things outside of show business. And after all this time, she has earned her first Oscar nomination, just a few years after the passing of her equally renowned husband Ossie Davis. Given all of that, I might be on her bandwagon too if it weren’t for one thing: her role in American Gangster is paper-thin. She has only a few scenes, and the most memorable thing she does is slap Denzel Washington in the face. Other actresses have won in this category with minimal screentime, but at least in those cases the roles had some meat to them – Beatrice Straight in Network and Judi Dench in Shakespeare in Love being the most prominent examples. But there is no such weight to Dee’s role, and I cannot allow myself to believe that the Academy members will give her the award just for career achievement; not when the role doesn’t have at least something substantial to it. If the Academy feels Dee deserves an honor for her career, they should give her an Honorary Oscar…which can join the many other lifetime achievement-type awards she has won from such organizations as the NAACP, the Screen Actors Guild and the Kennedy Center (all shared with Davis). But for this nothing little role, I can’t see it. I’m probably letting my own defiance stand in the way of my true belief that the Academy could very well give Dee this award, but I’m standing my ground.

Which brings me back to Amy Ryan. It’s been said that not enough people will see Gone Baby Gone to give Ryan a win, and she doesn’t have the history of a Julie Christie that would make people vote for her even if they haven’t seen it. But I’m guessing that all the acclaim she won will create curiosity amongst Academy members to see what all the fuss is about. And besides, plenty of actors have won the award even when they were their film’s only nomination – Kathy Bates, Forest Whitaker, Jessica Lange, Marisa Tomei, Jack Palance and Michael Douglas being among more recent examples

As I said, this is the toughest category of the year to call. It’s wide open, so I’m certainly not confident in my choice. But my guess is that the Oscar goes to Amy Ryan. And with all respect to Ruby Dee, I’ll be pissed if she wins.

Personal Pick: Tilda Swinton

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Nancy Oliver (Lars and the Real Girl) and Tamara Jenkins (The Savages) can sit back and enjoy the show without worrying about the stress of having to go up on stage. Ditto for two of Ratatouille’s nominees (the third, Brad Bird, well…we’ll get to him later). The only ones who need feel the pressure are Tony Gilroy and Diablo Cody. Both of their films are Best Picture nominees that are well liked across all Academy branches. Both films are, as discussed in the Best Director section, screenwriting achievements above all else. If voters really want to send Michael Clayton home with something, this is the place they should do it (actually, it’s the second place they should do, considering my own choice for Supporting Actress). Gilroy’s script is meticulous, taking ideas that we’ve seen in potboiler legal thrillers from the likes of John Grisham and stripping them down to their essence, to a place where they feel plausible and unsensationalized. The conundrum for voters is that this is also the best category in which to honor Juno. Cody’s script is packed with rich characters, sharp humor and a sweetness that isn’t cloying. And screenwriting is the safe category to honor comedies, which might be deemed not “important” enough for Best Picture. Just as Little Miss Sunshine took this prize last year, I’m sure this year the Oscar goes to Juno. Will Diablo Cody be the first ex-stripper to win an Oscar, or does Judi Dench have some skeletons in her closet?

Personal Pick: Michael Clayton

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Once again, Atonement’s lack of broader support will keep it from a victory in a major category like this one. Sarah Polley (Away From Her) can hang with fellow femme writing nominees Jenkins and Oliver in the no-pressure zone. It will be nice to see Polley at the Oscars however, since she arguably should have won Best Supporting Actress 10 years ago for The Sweet Hereafter (she wasn’t even nominated). Ronald Harwood has a shot here for Diving Bell, since he faced the challenge of a protagonist who could not move or interact and who would barely even appear on camera. If voters want to honor Diving Bell and/or not go Coen Crazy, Harwood could be the surprise winner (something at which he has practice, having upset The Hours and Adaptation in 2002 when he won for The Pianist).

Members also have another chance to honor Paul Thomas Anderson’s personal achievement, and There Will Be Blood is a notable adaptation because of Anderson’s ability to successfully combine elements from the source material with his own original ideas to create something cohesive and extraordinary. But alas, Anderson will likely lose out three times to Joel and Ethan, who have all the momentum, not to mention a legitimate claim to the prize. This race is not immune to a surprise, but I think the Oscar will go to Joel and Ethan Coen for No Country.

Personal Pick: No Country for Old Men


BEST ANIMATED FILM
Surf’s Up is fun and clever, with some genuinely great animation. And Persepolis is visually distinct and powerful, but also depressing – even more so than you’d think for a movie about a girl growing up first under the Shah, then the Taliban. There are more than enough dark themes in the various live-action nominees. When it comes to animation, the Academy will want something more pleasing – like a movie about a rat-infested kitchen. Pixar should just go ahead and change its name to OSCAR WINNERS, INC. Not that they’ve won every time they’ve been nominated, but there is something in the air over there that leads them to do consistently outstanding work. In fact, the Academy should just shave a few minutes off next year’s show by handing Pixar the 2008 award for Wall-E now. Either way,  Ratatouille sets Brad Bird up for his second Oscar.

Personal Pick: Ratatouille

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
Poor Roger Deakins. He will likely go home Oscarless again this year, with nothing to put on the mantle that also remains Oscarless but which should hold trophies for The Shawshank Redemption, Kundun and The Man Who Wasn’t There. His win this year should come for The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, but he’s unlikely to get it for a film that wasn’t more popular. Overall momentum for No Country could conceivably bring him a win for that film, but I don’t think anyone considers that the strongest work in the category, or even among the strongest of his career.

The critics and the cinematographer’s guild favored Robert Elswit’s camerawork in There Will Be Blood, but I feel like members often want to give this award to work that is more “beautiful” and visually rich than what TWBB requires. Atonement fits that bill, and lest you think that this nomination just represents the much-talked about tracking shot at the beach in Dunkirk, make no mistake: Seamus McGarvey’s work throughout the film is masterful, with particularly exquisite play between light and shadows. Just watch the scene in which Briony slowly enters the library and makes her fateful discovery. Wow.

In the end though, here is the place where Diving Bell may stand its best chance. I admit that I’m partly basing this on my online reading, where as I said earlier, various sources seem certain that voters will not send the film home empty-handed. But the odds are very good regardless of this theory. Janusz Kaminski’s photography is the key to the viewer’s identification with the main character, by placing us firmly with his perspective. It’s highly effective, enough so to give Kaminski his third Oscar after Schindler’s List and Saving Private Ryan.

Personal Pick: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford and Atonement


BEST FILM EDITING
First off, I have to mention the shocking omission of Atonement. The way that film is edited is essential to the story being told so effectively and creatively, and were it here, it would easily be my personal choice and possibly my prediction for the win. I’m not sure I’ll ever understand how it was left off the list. But it was, so what are our options? Into the Wild and Diving Bell don’t have much of a prayer here. Nor does There Will Be Blood, which hasn’t generated as much talk about its editing as it has for its cinematography and production design. A win for No Country potentially gives the Coens their fourth win of the night (that little Roderick Jaynes hiccup notwithstanding), and from what I can tell, the film’s editing was tight and effective. It’s competition comes from editor’s guild winner The Bourne Ultimatum, where the work is less subtle, more bravura. Both editing jobs help build immense tension.  The award tends to go to a film that is at least nominated for Best Picture, but there have been exceptions, such as The Matrix, Black Hawk Down and Who Framed Roger Rabbit. It’s easy to see this going either way. It may come down to whether voters want to share the wealth a bit, or shower the Coens with praise. Unlike the Supporting Actor race, here we could use an Anton Chigurh-style coin toss. I’m giving the edge to The Bourne Ultimatum, but I would love to see Roderick Jaynes take it home.

BEST ART DIRECTION
Sitting this one out will be American Gangster and The Golden Compass. This category is always a difficult call, because the voters sway between a preference for historical recreations and an appreciation of more stylized fantasy worlds. Given that, Atonement and There Will Be Blood each have a shot, and of the two I’d give the edge to the latter for the challenge and visual effectiveness of the oil derricks. But Sweeney Todd offers voters the best of both worlds – period London with a Tim Burton twist. That combo led Sleepy Hollow to a win in 1999, and as long as voters don’t feel they’re repeating themselves (which none of them likely will, with the exception of other art directors) the formula should prove successful again.

Personal Pick: Sweeney Todd

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
This category follows the same rules as Art Direction, and I think it will go the same way. Across the Universe and La Vie En Rose are filler, and while I don’t think Elizabeth: The Golden Age will win, the costumes are lavish and plentiful, so it has a shot. Atonement is a strong contender, largely for Kiera’s green dress, which has drawn a lot of attention and may be the single most striking piece of costuming in the category. But is it enough to carry the rest of the film’s work, which is excellent but less flashy? There’s definitely potential there, but once again I’m going with Sweeney Todd.

Personal Pick: Sweeney Todd


BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
It’s been a while since I’ve seen some of these nominees, so I can’t recall how effective all their scores were in the context of their films, but I doubt any of them were as strong as Dario Marianelli’s fantastic contribution to Atonement. It’s the only score that stayed with me afterwards, and the only one that seemed like part of the very fabric of the film. The Kite Runner score may have its admirers, but I have to think voters with go with Atonement.

Personal Pick: Atonement

BEST ORIGINAL SONG
I’m dismissing the song from August Rush outright. The movie looked excessively sentimental, and I’m sure the song only reinforces that. Enchanted dominates the category with three nominations, and though I haven’t seen the movie, I’m guessing the songs are all solid for what they are. The movie looked like a clever parody of the Disney formula, and the songwriters are the same ones who wrote for some of Disney’s 90’s cartoons, so the match makes sense. One of these could push through. But I think voters will go with the lovely “Falling Slowly” from Once. It’s a simple, sweet song that is used twice in the movie, each time to great effect, and the movie’s humble origins only add to people’s affection for it. The one silver lining of Eddie Vedder getting shafted for all of his excellent songs from Into the Wild is that his absence should clear the way for “Falling Slowly” to take home the gold.

Personal Pick: Falling Slowly, from Once


BEST MAKE-UP
It may have the most drastic, transformative make-up of the lot, but it’s hard to imagine anyone in the Academy wanting to hear, “And the Oscar goes to…Norbit.” As for Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, there’s certainly a lot of make-up – hordes of pirates with wigs and mustaches and grime. But the best make-up in the film isn’t make-up at all, as my friends at ILM can tall you. So I think the Academy will go with La Vie En Rose, which features some of the finest aging make-up I’ve ever seen, and which helped contribute to Marion Cotillard’s disappearing act.

Personal Pick: La Vie En Rose

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
The work in The Golden Compass looked nice, but there was no new ground broken, and nothing that made the jaw drop. Pirates of the Caribbean had some excellent work, but with the second film having just won last year, this may be looked at as more of the same. So if the voters are in their right mind, they’ll look past the fact that Transformers was the very definition of a bloated summer action film, and focus on the amazing work that made giant metal robots a reality.

Personal Pick: Transformers

BEST SOUND MIXING
As usual, what do I, or anybody in the Academy other than members of the Sound branch, know about either of the sound awards? I’m going with Transformers here because much has been made of the fact that one of the nominees, Kevin O’Connell, has been nominated 19 times and never won. I feel like I’ve been seeing that point come up quite a bit. I’m not sure if it’s been coming up around the industry, or if I’ve just seen it on Oscar-themed websites, but given that Transformers seemed to have good sound work and that the dude has never won, I’ll go ahead and say his losing streak ends here.

Personal Pick: What do I know?

BEST SOUND EDITING
Again, what do I know? No Country has a shot, because sometimes one of the sound awards does go to a movie that isn’t necessarily an action-oriented noisefest, plus the sound work in the film did contribute to the tension. But the same thinking applies to There Will Be Blood, and maybe honoring that for sound work allows voters to indirectly pay tribute to the film’s inventive but ineligible music score. So I really don’t know, but I guess I’ll go with There Will Be Blood.

Personal Pick: Again, what do I know?

And finally, the remaining categories, none of which I know much about. I’m just making guesses based on what I’ve heard and read:

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM – 4 Months, 3 Weeks….oh wait, I mean The Counterfeiters
BEST DOCUMENTARY – No End in Sight
BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT – Sari’s Mother
BEST LIVE ACTION SHORT – At Night
BEST ANIMATED SHORT – Madame Tutli-Putli


February 21, 2008

LOST S4E3: The Economist

Filed under: Lost,TV — DB @ 3:19 pm

If you don’t actually want to read this whole thing – and believe me, I understand – skip down to the last two paragraphs for an explanation of what is happening to the rest of this season’s episodes now that the strike is over…if you haven’t heard the plan already, that is.

Now then…

Shortly after 7:00pm last Thursday, the electricity in my neighborhood went out. It came back at about 9:05. DIRECTV rebooted and began recording Lost, having missed everything before the first commercial. In between the lights going out and coming back on, there was a lot of angry, incomprehensible swearing coming from my apartment. Neighbors reported making out phrases such as “goddamn motherfucker” and “any other night” amidst the loud banging of fists on the wall.

So I missed the opening, pre-credits sequence of the show. I’ve gathered the following online and from friends: Sayid closed Naomi’s eyes, and removed from her wrist a bracelet with the inscription, “N — I’ll always be with you — RG.” (How very J.K. Rowling of you, Lost…) Apparently there was some discussion with the freighter folks in which Frank said the helicopter wouldn’t leave without Charlotte, so Sayid volunteered to go convince Locke to release her. And somewhere in there, a flash-forward revealed Sayid as one of the Oceanic Six, on a golf course. He was approached by a guy who thought he looked familiar. Sayid said he was one of the Oceanic Six. The guy kinda freaked out. And then Sayid shot him. Did I leave out anything?

Friggin’ PG&E.

The writers and producers of Lost have kicked the “What the hell is going on?” factor up a notch or two this season. The questions are flying fast and furious, and the answers feel like they’re a long way off. So how did the mystery deepen this week? Let’s see what we’ve got.

MOBILE HOME
Jacob’s cabin remains on the move, as Locke discovered when he returned to the site and saw nothing there…except for that line of sand-like granules marking the spot. I knew last season when Locke crouched down and took note of that demarcation that we were meant to remember it. I also thought at the time that the substance might be gunpowder, though we have no reason to suspect that for now. The question remains – where is Jacob’s cabin? And who the hell is Jacob, anyway?

PICTURE THIS
Sayid wants to ascertain why Naomi was carrying a picture of Desmond and Penny, so Juliet leaves the helicopter site to fetch the time-leaping Irishman from the beach. When she returns with him, he begins questioning Frank, who insists that whatever Naomi’s reasons for having that picture were, they were unknown to him. Unsatisfied, Desmond demands that Frank look him in the eye and tell him that he and his crew have never heard of Penelope Widmore. Frank looks toward Daniel, who despite being engrossed in an experiment, manages to offer a shifty look in return…one that suggests the name Penelope Widmore is not at all unfamiliar to them. Frank remains mum, so Desmond announces that when the chopper leaves the island, he’ll be on it. Maybe on the freighter he can find somebody who has answers. Am I reading too much into Daniel’s look, or is there still a connection between this team and Penny?

WARNINGS
Daniel and Frank have two other brief but intriguing exchanges. The first comes when Daniel asks Frank to borrow the satellite phone so that he can call Regina on the freighter and get her help with his experiment. Frank hands Daniel the phone, but warns him to hang up immediately if Minkowski gets on the line. What does that warning mean? Minkowski is the still-unseen freighter member who took Jack’s call for rescue. Last week, Miles tried to contact him, but was told by Regina that he was unavailable. Miles wasn’t happy, and insisted that Minkowski call him back as soon as possible. So what’s the story with this Minkowski fellow? When will we meet him? Where was he when Miles called? And why does Frank not seem to trust him? Could Minkowski possibly be Ben’s spy? And while we’re at it, who’s Regina??

Intriguing Exchange #2 between Daniel and Frank comes later, when Frank is about to take off with the copter. Daniel pulls him aside and warns him that no matter what happens, he must follow the EXACT same bearing that they came in on. Frank gets the message; I wish we could say the same. Why is it necessary to be so precise and what might happen if Frank veers slightly off-course? In her recap (no longer available online) E! News columnist Kristin dos Santos theorizes that the bearing Daniel refers to is 325 – the bearing Ben instructed Michael to follow when he set him and Walt free. And I also caught a fan’s comment online suggesting that without using that bearing, one can not leave the island’s pull – hence Desmond’s inability to sail away after abandoning the hatch. Interesting idea…and probably accurate.

TIME LAPSE
The experiment about which Daniel contacts Regina has to do with her launching a device onto the island, which should be guided right to Daniel by a beacon that he sets up with some equipment he had on the chopper. Communicating with Regina via the satellite phone, Daniel watches the sky and listens as she counts down the moment to impact. But the sky stays clear, even after she reaches zero. Whatever she had launched, it didn’t land. Until it did, that is…31 minutes later. Daniel compares the clock on the beacon to the clock from the “payload,” and is definitely concerned about the difference in time. What larger implications does this have for the island?

MILES AWAY
Sayid, Kate and Miles arrive at the Others’ barracks, where Locke and Co. are awaiting them with a trap. Before the two groups meet however, Sayid makes an interesting discovery. In Ben’s home, he finds a secret room filled with suits, luggage and a drawer full of international currency as well as passports and identification. He opens one passport and finds Ben’s picture. I couldn’t make out the name on the page, but something tells me it’s not Benjamin Linus. (Entertainment Weekly‘s recapper says the name was Dean Moriarty – which has multiple literary origins. Here’s his full article. I don’t know whether to be annoyed by his constant references to literature or impressed that maybe his references really were intended by the writers of the show. Either way, his article is always an interesting read). Does this hidden room suggest that Ben leaves the island regularly on “business?”

Eventually, Locke and Sayid have a perfectly civil conversation in which Sayid insists that by returning with Charlotte, he can get a ride on the chopper to the freighter and look for answers. He offers Miles in exchange for Charlotte. I didn’t understand why it would be acceptable to Frank for Sayid to return with Charlotte and not Miles. I would think the idea was that Frank wouldn’t take off until all of his team was safe and accounted for. Maybe in the opening sequence that I missed, Sayid asked Frank for his word that he would transport him to the freighter if he returned with Charlotte. If this is the case, then Sayid could leave Miles behind thanks to the Law of Semantics. This would explain Frank saying, “You cheated” when Sayid brings Charlotte back. Whatever the case, Frank does pilot the chopper off the island, with Sayid, Desmond and Naomi’s body onboard. Charlotte chooses to remain on the island, saying that she has work to do. Daniel stays as well. So after Michael and Walt, Sayid becomes the third survivor of Flight 815 to leave the island. Will he be back again before returning home as one of the Oceanic Six?

By the way, with the absence from this episode of Matthew Abbadon, the creepiest (and coolest) moment of the night goes to Miles, who answers Hurley’s question about whether the freighter folk are here to kill them with an ass-kicking delivery of the line, “Not yet.”

“EVERYBODY HAS A BOSS”
So says Sayid to Elsa, the woman whose employer, a supposed “economist,” he has been tasked with killing. The episode’s big shocking reveal is that Sayid’s post-island boss, who has assigned him this execution, is Ben. (Or appears to be Ben…more on that in moment). When Sayid tries to tell Elsa, who he seems to have fallen for, that he is going to kill her boss because his name is on a list he was given (hmm, a list…why does this sound familiar?), she shoots him. Turns out she was just as interested in finding Sayid’s puppet master as he was in finding hers. Sayid seems caught in the middle of quite a fight – with Ben leading one side…and who on the other? Internet speculation is that Matthew Abbadon is the other key figure here. And if that’s true, maybe Ben really is one of “the good guys,” because this Abbadon dude seems evil to the core.

But how did Sayid get here? How could he be working for Ben? Back on the island, he told Locke, “The day I begin trusting him is the day I would have sold my soul.” It would appear that day has come for Sayid Jarrah. After being shot by Elsa (who he kills moments later), Sayid makes his way to what seems to be an animal hospital, where his bullet wound is tended to by Ben. Sayid is emotional over the night’s events, but Ben remains cold. What follows is the episode’s most fascinating exchange – even more so than anything spoken earlier between Daniel and Frank. Ben tells Sayid, “These people don’t deserve our sympathies. Need I remind you what happened the last time you thought with your heart instead of your gun?”

Sayid answers, “You used her to recruit me into killing for you.”

“Do you want to protect your friends or not, Sayid?” Ben asks him.

Whoa. So it seems that Sayid has been working for Ben for a while. How long is this list naming people that have been marked for termination? And what did happen the last time Sayid thought with his heart instead of his gun? Did he lose another love? Could it have been Nadia, the woman from his pre-island life who he still loves (despite the beach fling with Shannon)? How did Ben use Nadia, or whoever the woman in question is, to recruit Sayid? Hopefully his next flash-forward will fill in the gaps. And how are his actions protecting his friends? Which friends is he protecting? The other five members of the Oceanic Six? People still on the island?

One last thought on this scene. I couldn’t help but wonder when we saw Ben treating Sayid if it was, in fact, Ben. I’m sure it is…but there was just something about him that made the word “clone” pop into my head very briefly. I’m just sayin’…

FINAL THOUGHTS
Another mind-boggling episode that featured good material all around (including some great Hurley lines and a cool scene between Kate and Sawyer that led to a surprising turn of events) but deepened the mystery considerably. If I have one complaint about the season so far, it’s that new questions are coming at us like machine gun fire. I don’t mind waiting for the answers; it’s keeping track of all the questions that bothers me. Working on these write-ups helps me keep it all straight.

Tonight’s Episode: Eggtown.  If my power goes out again, mark my words: there will be blood.

POST-STRIKE NOTE:
Tonight’s episode is the fourth of eight that were shot before the strike. Originally, another eight episodes were supposed to be made, for a season total of 16. But the strike knocked that plan out of commission. Here’s the new plan: five more episodes, instead of eight, will be filmed for this season. The writers will figure out how to condense their original plan so that all the key story points that were left to play out this year will still be addressed. Supposedly, the missing three episodes will be worked into the next two seasons so that the show will wind up having the same total number of episodes as was planned. The remaining five episodes will begin airing on April 24th, at yet another new time: 10:00pm on Thursdays (a mistake, if you ask me, but they didn’t).

So that means there will be about a month between the end of this current slate of episodes and the beginning of the post-strike ones. I had also heard that ABC might possibly hold off airing episode eight for that month, and put it on instead the week before the five new shows start up. The reason for this is that apparently the end of episode seven is a more logical and less frustrating point to stop for four weeks than the end of episode eight, which is supposed to be something of a shocker. So says the rumor mill.

« Previous PageNext Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.