78 posts tagged “television”
Within a few months, I managed to become a big fan of the AMC series, ”MAD MEN”. I became a fan so fast this past summer that after watching two episodes of Season Two, I purchased a copy of the DVD set for Season One. And fell deeper in love. As for Season Two, I thought it was excellent. In fact, I consider it a slight improvement over Season One. But . . . I do have some quibbles about it:
"MAD MEN" Season Two Quibbles
1. Duck Phillips - I had once complained on the "Basket of Kisses" site that by the end of Season 2, Duck Phillips (portrayed by the superb Mark Moses) seemed to resemble a minor villain that Don Draper had to defeat. Someone responded that Matt Weiner never intended to portray Duck Phillips as some kind of villain. After reading two interviews that Weiner had given, I now see that I had been right to accuse him of such a thing in the first place. How disappointing.
2. Don's Approval For Pete - Why did Pete Campbell need Don Draper's approval? What on earth for? Pete is a grown man in his late 20s. His existence at Sterling Cooper should have meant more to him than acquiring the approval of someone as flawed as Don. He did not need Don's approval. He did not need anyone's approval to exist. And the fact that he gave up a promotion to snitch on Duck - all for Don's approval - makes me realize that Pete has not matured one bit.
3. Bobbie Barrett - Matt Weiner's comments about Bobbie Barrett made me realize a few things about the show's fans. Judging from the comments I have read about Bobbie over the past few months, I get this feeling that most fans viewed Bobbie's sexual desires and aggressive personality in the same manner that Joan's fiancé, Greg, had viewed Joan's sexual history. And since these fans certainly could not drag Bobbie to the floor and rape her, they resorted to calling her every bad name in the book and then some.
After 46 years, our society has barely changed. It seems as if even in the early 21st century, we have maintained a whore/Madonna complex about women. Even Weiner labeled Bobbie as ”that woman” in his interviews about Season Two. He also claimed that it had been wrong for Don to sleep with Bobbie. I do not understand this comment. What was Weiner trying to say? That it was it wrong for Don to have sex with Bobbie and not wrong for him to cuckold Betty with women like Rachel Menken, Midge Daniels and Joy?
4. Paul Kinsey and Sheila White - What on earth happened to the storyline featuring Paul Kinsey’s romance with Sheila White? The season’s second episode - (2.02) “Flight 1” - reveals that Paul is involved in a romance with an African-American woman named Sheila White. This revelation causes a rupture in Paul’s friendship with Joan Holloway, when the latter makes racist comments about the romance. Two episodes later, the romance is hinted again when a visiting Sally Draper finds a photo of Sheila on Paul’s desk. In the episode (2.10) “The Inheritance”, Sheila makes another appearance on the show. She and Paul have a fight over his reluctance to join her in Mississippi for a voter’s registration campaign. He eventually joined her after being pushed out of a trip to California by Don Draper. When Paul returned to New York in (2.13) “Mediations in an Emergency”, Paul informed his co-workers that Sheila had dumped him after three days.
All I can say is this - WHAT IN THE HELL HAPPENED? What led Sheila to finally dump Paul? Unfortunately, Weiner never revealed her reason. He simply ended the romance on a vague note. What makes this move even more annoying to me is the fact that many fans did not question the vague manner in which the romance ended. Instead, they crowed that Sheila had dumped Paul because of his pretentiousness.
One aspect of good cinematic storytelling is that one should ”show” what happened and not tell. Weiner ”told” the viewers what happened to Paul and Sheila . . . and he failed to tell the entire story. This makes me wonder if Weiner had decided not to continue exploring Paul’s relationship with Sheila in order to please the fans. If most of them had defended or made excuses over Joan’s racist comments about the pair’s romance, it really is not that hard for me to come up with this possibility.
5. Peggy Olson’s Meteoric Rise - Could someone please explain how a young woman between the ages of 20-22 or 23, managed to rise from a secretarial school graduate/secretary to the senior copywriter for Sterling Cooper in less than two years? I realize that Peggy was a natural talent in the advertising business. Both Freddie Rumsen and Don Draper recognized this. And I had no problem with Don promoting her to junior copywriter in the Season One finale - (1.13) ”TheWheel”. But what on earth made him promote her to senior copywriter around the end of Season Two’s (2.09) “Six Months Leave”?
One, Don was rather peeved that Peggy had failed to inform him about Freddie Rumsen’s drunken “accident”. And two, there were other copywriters at Sterling Cooper who were capable of assuming Freddie’s position as the senior copywriter. Who? Well, there was Paul Kinsey. I realize that Paul’s pretentiousness and romance with Sheila White made him unpopular with many fans. But Season Two also proved in the episode, (2.06) “Maidenform” that he was just as talented as Peggy. He also has more experience than her, which would have made him the perfect candidate to replace Freddie. Personally, I believe that Don had allowed his mentoring of Peggy to get the best of him and promoted her at a time when she did not really deserve it.
* * * *
Aside from the above quibbles, I thought that Season Two of ”MAD MEN” was excellent. I would go as far to say that it was actually an improvement over Season One. I would be very surprised if it ever failed to earn an Emmy nomination for Best Drama, next August.
Below is my review of the 1989 miniseries, "AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS":
”AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS” (1989) Review
I have seen at least three full versions of Jules Verne’s 1873 novel, ”AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS”. And if I must be frank, I have yet to see a version that I would consider to be flawless or near flawless. But if I had to choose which version would rank as my favorite, it would be the three-part miniseries that aired on NBC in 1989.
Directed by the late Buzz Kulik, this version of Jules Verne’s novel starred Pierce Brosnan as the globe-trotting Phineas Fogg. ”MONTY PYTHON” alumni Eric Idle co-starred as Fogg’s French manservant, Passepartout; Julia Nickson portrayed the India-born Princess Aouda; and the late Peter Ustinov was the English detective who was convinced that Fogg had robbed the Bank of England, Detective Fix. The story started with a conversation between Fogg (Brosnan) and three fellow members of the Reform Club (Christopher Lee, Patrick Macnee and Simon Ward) in 19th century London about the technological advances in transportation in the past thirty to forty years. This leads Fogg to make a wager for twenty-thousand pounds (£20,000) that he could travel around the world in eighty (80) days or less. During the same day, a thief robs the Bank of England and all suspicions point to Fogg, who is identified by a bank employee as the robber.
Wentworth (Robert Morely), an official from the Bank of England and his assistant McBaines (Roddy MacDowell) dispatch private detectives to various ports throughout Europe to find Fogg and have him extradicted back to England. One of the detectives include Fix (Ustinov), who is sent to Brindisi, Italy. Unfortunately, Fix spots Fogg and Passepartout boarding a steamer bound for Suez and Bombay a minute too late and is forced to follow them on their trek around the world. Upon Fogg's arrival in India, one last member joins his traveling party when he and Passepartout (actually, Passepartout) rescue a recently widowed Indian princess from a suttee funeral pyre.
Like its 1956 predecessor, this version of "AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS" turned out to be longer than necessary. The miniseries could have easily been a two-part miniseries or a 135-minute television movie. Unfortunately, John Gay filled his screenplay with unecessary scenes and dialogue that merely served as fillers to justify a three-part miniseries. In Part I, Fogg and Passepartout's adventures in France lasted longer than necessary - especially after they met a balloonist named Gravier and his mistress, Lucette. Even worse, viewers have to endure Fogg and Passepartout's balloon journey from France to Italy - which included a period that the heroes found themselves stranded in the Italian Alps. Part II included scenes that featured Fogg, Passepartout and Aouda's adventures with a Burmese prince and the bandits that kidnapped all of them; and Fogg, Aouda and Fix's encounter with the Empress of China and her son, the Emperor. I realize Gay also added these scenes to make Fogg's journey around the world more interesting. Unfortunately, they failed to interest or impress me.
Another problem I had with Gay's script turned out to be a major blooper that involved Fogg's encounters with the famous bandit, Jesse James (Stephen Nicols). Following Fogg's first encounter with James in San Francisco; he, Aouda, Passepartout and Fix boarded an eastbound train for Omaha. By some miracle, Jesse James and his brother Frank managed to catch up with this train somewhere on the Great Plains (probably in Nebraska), where Jesse boarded said train before the second encounter with Fogg. How was this possible? Fogg's train should have traveling eastbound for at least a day or two before James boarded it. There is NO WAY that the bandit could have caught up with that train. Gay should have allowed the James brothers or Jesse board the train in Oakland, along with Fogg and his party. Sloppy writing. And some of the dialogue featured in the miniseries seemed ladened with pedantic and half-finished sentences and unecessarily long pauses that seemed to serve no other function than to act as fillers to stretch the story.
One might wonder how I can view this version of "AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS" as my favorite, considering the above criticism. But despite the flaws, I must admit there were many aspects about the miniseries I found enjoyable. John Gay's screenplay did not turn out to be a total loss. In fact, the number of gems in the story seemed to outweigh the flaws. I especially enjoyed the following:
*Fogg and Passepartout's charming encounter with actress Sarah Bernhardt (portrayed by a still sexy 54 year-old Lee Remick) at Dover
*Fogg and Passepartout's hilarious adventure at a Parisian bar
*The steamship journey from Brindisi to Suez that featured Fogg's encounter with Egyptian stonecutters and Fix's hilarious encounter with a Turkish prisoner willing to offer himself to help the detective pass the time
*Princess Aouda's rescue
*Fogg, Aouda and Fix find themselves shipwrecked on the China coast
*Fogg's first encounter with Jesse James at a San Francisco ball
*Fogg and James' duel on the Omaha-bound train
One particular scene I truly found enjoyable was Fogg and Aouda's hilarious and unsuccessful attempt to stowaway aboard Cornelius Vanderbilt's (Rick Jason) Europe-bound yacht. It was never featured in the novel or the 1956 movie. Too bad. I thought it was one of the best written scenes in the miniseries.
And it was Pierce Brosnan's performance as Phileas Fogg that really made that last scene a comic gem for me. Which is not surprising, considering he has turned out to be my favorite Fogg. Sorry Mr. Niven and Mr. Coogan, but I feel that Brosnan's portrayal has the other two beat. He managed to combined the best of the other two actors' performances to create the most emotionally rounded Phileas Fogg. He managed to perfectly convey the angst of Fogg's tendencies to suppress his emotions with some great comic timing.
Speaking of comic timing, Eric Idle's timing was effectively on display in some of my favorite scenes. Granted, I found his French accent rather questionable. But Idle more than made up for it in some very hilarious scenes. One featured his reaction to being attacked by a French thug at the Parisian bar and another a drunken moment shared with Fix at a Hong Kong tavern. But my favorite Idle moment centered around his reaction to a questionable meat pie purchased by Fogg on the Omaha-bound train in probably the funniest line in the entire miniseries.
Julia Nickson was both charming and amusing as the very brave Princess Aouda. Her Indian princess provided the miniseries with some deliciously angst-filled moments that allowed Aouda to question Fogg about his habit of suppressing his feelings from others. Nickson's Aouda also provided the miniseries with some political correct moments that were not only amusing, but well handled without being overbearing. And I simply enjoyed Peter Ustinov's performance as Detective Fix. Like Brosnan's Fogg, his Fix came off as more rounded and complex as Robert Newton or Ewan Bremmer's Fix. Without a doubt, Ustinov had some hilarious moments - especially in scenes that featured Fix's encounter with the Turkish prisoner on the voyage to Suez; and his reaction to another game of whist with Fogg. Not only did Ustinov managed to be funny, but also give Fix's character with a great deal of depth not found in other versions of the story.
I do have to say something about the supporting characters. One, I really enjoyed Robert Morely and Roddy McDowall as the Bank of England official and his assistant. Morely was a lot more amusing and fun in this miniseries than he was as the more stoic bank official in the 1956 version. And McDowall supported him beautifully. I also enjoyed the performances of Christopher Lee, Patrick Macnee and Simon Ward as the three Reform Club members who made the bet with Fogg. I especially enjoyed Lee's performance as the one member who especially found Fogg's precision and rigid habits rather annoying.
This version of "AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS" lacked Victor Young's memorable score and Lionel Lindon's cinematography. But it does possess a pleasant and catchy score written by Billy Goldenberg. And I must admit that I found myself impressed by Emma Porteus' costume design, which captured the styles of the early 1870s more effectively than the 1956 movie.
In a nutshell, the three-part miniseries is simply too long. It has scenes and some clunky dialogue that could have easily been edited. But screenwriter John Gay also provided some wonderful and effective moments in the script. Frankly, I thought the cast was top-notch - especially the four main characters led by Pierce Brosnan. And although he is not well known, I thought that director Buzz Kulik did a solid job bringing it all together. The 1956 version may have won the awards, but in my book, this 1989 miniseries remains my favorite version of Jules Verne's novel.
Ever since Oceanic Flight 815 survivor Sayid Jarrah tried to murder young Ben Linus in (5.10) "He's Our You", and fellow survivor Jack Shephard refused to operate on the 14 year-old to save his life in (5.11) "Whatever Happened, Happened", I have heard comments that compared Ben to Adolf Hitler. I have also heard comments that compared Ben’s younger self to a "young Hitler". Many people have claimed that it was Ben who had ordered the deaths of the Dharma Initiative members on December 19, 1992. However, I have my doubts.
"WHO ORDERED THE PURGE OF THE DHARMA INITIATIVE?"
According to the series, Ben has offered contradicting facts on whether he had ordered the Purge of the Dharma Initiative or not. In (3.23) “Through the Looking Glass”, he had claimed to Jack that he was responsible for the Purge:
“Not so long ago, Jack. I made a decision that took the lives of over forty people in a single day"
Unfortunately, Ben contradicted this claim in the Season 4 episode (2.11) “Cabin Fever”, when he had the following conversation with another survivor of Oceanic Flight 815, Hugo “Hurley” Reyes:
HURLEY: So... This is where you shot Locke and left him for dead, huh?
BEN: Yes, Hugo, I was standing right where you are now when I pulled the trigger. Should have realized at the time that it was pointless, but... I really wasn't thinking clearly.
[Hurley steps back a little]
HURLEY: Is that why you killed all these people, too?
BEN: I didn't kill them.
HURLEY: Well, if the Others didn't wipe out the DHARMA Initiative--
BEN: They did wipe them out, Hugo, but it wasn't my decision.
HURLEY: Then whose was it?
BEN: Their leader's.
HURLEY: But I thought you were their leader.
BEN: Not always.
Interesting. He had admitted to trying to kill John Locke. But he denied being the one who had ordered the Purge. In the final flashback featured in another Season 3 episode called (3.21) “The Man Behind the Curtain”, viewers finally saw Ben’s experiences during the actual Purge. And most of his scenes featured his last moments with his abusive father, Roger Linus:
[Ben looks at his watch]
ROGER: Why do you keep looking at your watch? You got a date? [Pauses] Listen...if it makes you feel any better, I will do my best to remember your birthday next year.
BEN: I don't think that's going to happen, Dad. [starts to unzip bag]
ROGER: What do you mean?
BEN: You know, I've missed her too. Maybe as much as you have. But the difference is, for as long as I can remember, I've had to put up with you. And doing that required a tremendous amount of patience.
[Ben pulls out a gas mask]
BEN: Goodbye, Dad.
[Ben puts it on and then releases a gas canister]
ROGER: Ben?
[Roger struggles for breath, coughing and retching as blood spurts from his nose and mouth, clawing at Ben's mask]
[At the Barracks, Ben walks with gas mask on. He sees all the DHARMA employees lining the ground, all dead. He then notices Horace on a bench, and closes his eyes. Richard and the Hostiles arrive with masks on. Richard checks his watch, then removes his mask taking a deep breath. The rest of the team follow, as does Ben]
RICHARD: You want us to, um...go get his body?
BEN: No, leave him out there.
Does this mean that Ben had ordered the deaths of the DHARMA Initiative? I do not know. The only order Ben gave in the above mentioned scene was to leave Roger’s body in the van. Following the flashback, Ben said the following to Locke:
[In real-time, Locke stands over a mass open grave full of skeletons, some still wearing their DHARMA jumpsuits]
BEN: This is where I came from, John. These are my people. The DHARMA Initiative. They came here seeking harmony, but they couldn't even coexist with the Island's original inhabitants. And when it became clear that one side had to go, one side had to be purged, I did what I had to do. I was one of the people that was smart enough to make sure that I didn't end up in that ditch.
That last passage interested me. What exactly was Ben trying to say? That he had ordered the Purge against the DHARMA Initiative? Or that he made sure that he, as a member of the Initiative, would survive the Purge? Thanks to the most recent episode of ”LOST” - ”Dead Is Dead” - viewers know that Charles Widmore was the leader of the Others in 1988. And in another Season Four episode called (4.09) “The Shape of Things to Come”, viewers learned in a flash forward that Ben had taken the leadership of the Others away from Widmore:
WIDMORE: I know who you are, boy. What you are. I know that everything you have you took from me. So... Once again I ask you: Why are you here?
BEN: I'm here, Charles, to tell you that I'm going to kill your daughter. Penelope, is it? And once she's gone... once she's dead... then you'll understand how I feel. And you'll wish you hadn't changed the rules.
[Widmore shifts in his bed.]
WIDMORE: You'll never find her.
[Ben turns to leave.]
WIDMORE: That island's mine, Benjamin. It always was. It will be again.
So, when did Ben Linus replace Charles Widmore as leader of the Others? Before December 19, 1992? Or after? The photograph below from ”The Man Behind the Curtain” hints that Ben was still a worker for the DHARMA Initiative during that period, despite the fact that he had been one of the Others since the 1980s:
But had Ben assumed leadership of the Others by then? If not, does that mean Charles Widmore was still leading the Others in December 1992? Both the LOSTPEDIA and the WIKIPEDIA sites claimed that Richard Alpert had led the Others in the Purge against the DHARMA Initiative. But neither site made it clear who had ordered the Purge. And ”Dead Is Dead” never gave a clear date about when Widmore was exiled off the island.
In the end, viewers know that Charles Widmore had been the leader of the Others in 1988-89, when Danielle Rosseau’s companions were killed and she gave birth to a daughter, Alex, before the latter was kidnapped by Ben Linus. Viewers also know that Richard Alpert led a group of Others in the Purge against the DHARMA Initiative on December 19, 1992. On that same date, Ben killed his father, Roger Linus, in a similar manner – toxic gas. And viewers know that Widmore was eventually replaced by Ben as the Others’ leader and exiled off the island. If we only knew when Widmore had been exiled, perhaps the mystery of who had ordered the DHARMA Initiative Purge will finally be cleared.
Below is an article I had written on my opinion and observations of the latest episode of "LOST" - (5.08) "LaFleur":
”LOST” – (5.08) “LaFleur” Review
Many fans of ”LOST” have claimed that its Season Five has been the series’ best since the first season. I have to be honest. I do not think I can agree with that sentiment. At least not for Season Five’s first five episodes. I have mixed feelings for it, just as I had for Seasons Two to Four. But there are elements of the fifth season that I have enjoyed so far. And many of those elements had a lot to do with the story arcs surrounding the island castaways left behind when the Oceanic Six departed the island at the end of Season Four.
”LaFleur”, the eighth episode of Season Five, picked up where (5.05) “This Place Is Death” left off – when John Locke turned the Frozen Donkey Wheel from ”(4.13) “There’s No Place Like Home, Part II” and vanished from the island and into the future. Following Locke’s departure, Sawyer, Juliet, Jin, Miles and Daniel are relieved to discover that they no longer have to endure the constant time jumps that have threatened their existence and ended Charlotte Lewis’ in ”This Place Is Death”. However, they are surprised to discover that the time jumps have stopped in 1974, when the Dharma Initiative has been in existence for at least four years. The five survivors decide to return to the beach and make camp, when they comes across a pair of Dharma Initiative members who have been captured by some of the island's native inhabitants, known as the Others. Juliet and Sawyer kill the two Others and free Amy (Reiko Aylesworth), but her husband has been killed. The group returns to the Barracks, where Amy resides; however, she tricks them into walking through the sonic fence which surrounds the Barracks, knocking them unconscious. The rest of the episode focused upon how the five survivors ended up joining the Dharma Initiative in 1974 and the state of their lives, three years later in 1977.
Remember when I had stated that I had mixed feelings about the series’ Season Five? Well, some of those reasons had a lot to do with how Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindehof’s writers handled the story arcs surrounding the two groups of characters during this season. Of course, there are the members of the Oceanic Six who made it off the island – Jack Shephard, Kate Austen, Sayid Jarrah, Sun Kwon, Hugo “Hurley” Reyes and the infant Aaron Littleton. And there are the members of those left behind on the island, included James “Sawyer” Ford, Juliet Burke, John Locke, Jin Kwon, Miles Straume, Charlotte Lewis, Daniel Faraday, Bernard Nadler and his wife, Rose Henderson. Quite frankly, I did not care for the episodes that heavily featured the Oceanic Six. One, I never cared for their lie that left the infant Aaron in the hands of fugitive Kate Austen for nearly three years. Two, I simply did not care for their story arc in the first half of Season Five. I found it contrived, trite and a waste of my time. The story arc featuring those survivors left behind turned out to be a different kettle of fish.
On the other hand, I found myself enjoying the segments surrounding the ‘Left Behinders’ in episodes like (5.01) “Because You Left”, (5.02) “The Lie” and ”This Place Is Death”. So, it is no surprise that after eight episodes, my favorite Season Five episodes turned out to be both (5.03) “The Jughead” and ”LaFleur”, which heavily featured Sawyer, Juliet and the gang. But . . . I am not here to discuss both episodes. Only ”LaFleur”.
What can I say? I loved the episode. I love it so much that I now consider it to be one of my ten favorite episodes of the entire series. And I never thought I would be saying this about a Sawyer-centric episode. Five days after it first aired, I found myself still thinking about it. I am sitting in front of my computer, trying to think of something meaningful or witty to say about this episode. But the words continue to elude me. I have a deep suspicion that my high opinion of ”LaFleur” had more to do with how this episode had such an emotional impact upon me.
Like the Left Behinders, I felt the relief they must have felt over the end of the time jumps, following Locke’s departure. Or the confusion and they had felt upon stumbling across Amy, her dead husband Paul and the two Others. I felt Daniel’s continuing grief over Charlotte’s death . . . or Amy’s grief over Paul’s death. I felt Richard’s curiosity during his conversation with Sawyer (from now on . . . James) about Locke’s appearance twenty years earlier. I felt Horace’s despair over his suspicions that his new wife, Amy, had yet to get over her grief for her husband now dead for three years. I felt James’ desperation to find help for Amy, who was in labor with Horace’s child . . . and Juliet’s reluctance to deal with another childbirth. I certainly felt James’ relief and happiness over the successful birth of Amy’s child and Juliet’s tearful joy. I felt James’ relief and disbelief in discovering that some of the Oceanic Six – Jack, Kate and Hurley – had made it back to the island. And I especially felt the friendship and love both James and Juliet had for one another.
But the above paragraph strikes me as being too simple a way to describe my enjoyment of ”LaFleur”. Foremost, I have to commend writers Elizabeth Sarnoff and Kyle Pennington for penning a well-written episode that revealed the Left Behinders’ experiences with the Dharma Initiative in two time periods without disintegrating into a big mess. The fact that Sarnoff and Pennington also managed to inject some character development – mainly James and Juliet – into a complicated plot has raised my admiration toward their work. Another thing that I liked about ”LaFleur” is that for some reason, it strongly reminded me of one of my favorite ”LOST” episodes of all time - (2.07) “The Other 48 Days”.
This episode is not an exact replica of the Season Two episode that revealed the backstory of the Tail Section passengers' first 48 days on the island. But I feel that both "The Other 48 Days" and "LaFleur" allowed viewers to experience the interactions of a small group - in the case of the Season Five episode, the Left Behinders - developing a close relationship through shared experiences. Mind you, most of James, Juliet, Miles, Jin and Daniel's worst experiences occurred in previous Season Five episodes like "Jughead" and "This Place Is Death". Still, we got to see how they became part of the Dharma Initiative in 1974. And how they had managed to settle into their new lives in 1977.
Josh Holloway literally owned this episode with a performance that nearly knocked my socks off. His James Ford aka James LaFleur has come a long way that rough-hewed Southern con man who had irritated just about everyone back in Season One. This transformation did not happen overnight. In fact, I suspect that it had its origins during late Season Three, when Hugo Reyes forced him to take the mantle of leadership of the Losties during Jack, Sayid, Kate and Locke's absence during that period. The Southern accent has remained intact and so has the snarky sense of humor and talent for pulling a con job. Not only did he managed to convince one of the Dharma Initiative leaders - Horace Goodspeed - that he and his fellow castaways were survivors of a wrecked salvage vessel looking for the Black Rock. Within three years, James had become Head of Security for the Initiative and a new love, namely one Dr. Juliet Burke.
When I had earlier stated that Hollowy had owned this episode, perhaps I should have said almost. After all, Elizabeth Mitchell (who has become one of my favorite actors on this series) was just as good as Juliet Burke. After three years, she has forgo her profession as a fertility doctor by becoming an auto mechanic for the Dharma Initiative. At first, I was surprised that she would choose to become a mechanic, instead of continuing her role as a doctor. But considering her past heartaches in dealing with previously pregnant Others, I eventually understood. But the premature labor of one of the Dharma members, Amy Goodspeed (portrayed by Reiko Aylesworth of "24" fame), led James to convince Juliet to act as midwife for the new Goodspeed baby. The result of Amy's labor led to one of the most beautifully acted moments in the series' entire history, when Mitchell and Holloway expressed Juliet and James' relief and happiness over the baby's successful delivery. I could go on about the strong screen chemistry between the two actors. But I have been aware of that chemistry ever since the Season Three finale - (3.22) "Through the Looking Glass". The interesting thing about James and Juliet's relationship is that the series used their growing friendship in the previous six or seven episodes to show how they eventually became a couple. They seemed to have become the first romantic pairing, whose relationship started out as a mature friendship. Perhaps that is the reason why I find it so appealing.
The other cast members in this episode also did a fine job - especially Jeremy Davies, as the grieving Daniel Farady, Doug Hutchison as the Dharma Initiative mathematician who came off as less self-assured than he did in past episodes, Nestor Campbell as the Others' ageless second-in-command, Richard Alpert and Reiko Aylesworth's sly performance as Amy, another Dharma member, whose life James and Juliet save. Daniel Dae Kim had a nice moment when Jin witnessed Juliet's news about the successful birth of Amy and Horace's baby.
There were many moments in "LaFleur" that have remained stuck in my mind . . . even after five days. Here are a few that I consider truly memorable:
*James, Juliet, Miles and Jin spot a giant, Egyptian-style statue following Locke's disappearance.
*The brief look on James' face after Juliet saves him from being shot by one of the Others.
*Amy tricks the Left Behinders into walking past the sonic fence.
*James mentions Richard's encounter with Locke and the 'Jughead' bomb in 1954 to the very surprised Other.
*James convinces Juliet to remain on the island for a while.
*Juliet and James' happy reaction to the successful birth of Amy and Horace's child.
*James' conversation with Horace about dealing with past loves.
*The sight of James and Juliet in bed, with her body spooning his. She really 'had his back' in that scene.
*Jin delivers three of the Oceanic Six members - Jack, Kate and Hurley - to an awaiting James.
Even thought that last scene was memorable, I must admit that I found myself comparing it to the sight of a roach crawling across a white rug. It also made me wonder how the Oceanic Six's arrival will affect the Left Behinders - now members of the Dharma Initiative. Both Kate and Jack's presence might prove to be a trial for the James/Juliet romance. Right now, I am beginning to wonder if it will survive. And will the Oceanic Six's presence threaten the Left Behinders' standing with the Dharma Initiative? Or will another threat emerge - mainly in the form of the still grieving Daniel Faraday? I guess that in the remaining eight episodes, we will find out.
Here is a gallery featuring the characters, Don and Betty Draper, from the acclaimed AMC series, "MAD MEN":
"MAD MEN" - The DON AND BETTY DRAPER Gallery
"CHARMED" RETROSPECT: (1.16) “Which Prue Is It Anyway?”
Most fans of ”CHARMED” seemed to harbor the opinion that the series’ early seasons are much better than episodes that aired during the series’ last four years. After viewing Season One’s ”Which Prue Is It Anyway?”, I can easily see how they managed to form that opinion. Mind you, I believe that this particular episode was not exactly the best of Season One. But it certainly seemed like a masterpiece in compare to most of the episodes from Seasons Four to Eight.
Penned by Javier Grillo-Marxuach, the episode began with Phoebe experiencing a premonition of Prue being stabbed to death by a man with a large sword. The Halliwell sisters discovered that their new enemy is a mortal named Gabriel Statler, a Lord of War. The sword renders Gabriel invulnerable to all mortal weapons and steals power. Gabriel is after Prue because one of the family’s ancestors, a Warren witch named Brianna had bested him during the Crimean War back in the 1850s. To become fully empowered again, he needs the power of a first-born witch. Prue is specifically targeted, because he also wants revenge against the Warren family. To protect herself, Prue used a spell to multiply her strength by three. Instead, the spell created two clones of Prue. Hence . . . the title.As much as I enjoyed ”Which Prue Is It Anyway?”, I had problems with it. One, I found the humor behind Prue and Piper’s discovery of Phoebe’s martial arts lessons tacky and slightly racist toward those of Asian descent. The episode also featured a bad moment for Phoebe to showcase her new martial arts skills – which only featured kicking. During the sisters’ final encounter with Gabriel, Piper froze him so that Prue could kill him with his sword. Unfortunately, Phoebe chose that moment to kick Gabriel, causing Piper’s freeze upon Gabriel to end. Bad timing . . . eh? I am certain that Grillo-Marxuach had deliberately written the scene to unfold as it did. I just found it rather contrived.
Another problem I had turned out to be Gabriel’s motive for hunting Prue. As I had stated earlier, Gabriel wanted revenge against the Warren family line because one of the sisters’ ancestors – a great-great-something aunt named Briana – had managed to get the best of Gabriel during the Crimean War. The Warren family had been in America since the 17th century. What was Briana Warren doing on the peninsula of Crimea (which was under the Russian Empire in 1854-56) in the mid 19th century, in the first place? Also, Gabriel went after Prue, because the latter was the oldest sister . . . and the most powerful. Frankly, I found Gabriel’s reasoning rather limited. He could have acquired a lot more power if he had hunted all three sisters . . . one at a time.
But my main problem with ”Which Prue Is It Anyway?” centered around the main villain, Gabriel Statler. Mind you, Alex McArthur portrayed the character with great relish. The problem with Gabriel rested upon his characterization as a Lord of War and his motivation for going after Prue. According to the episode, Gabriel and his sister, Helena, are members of the Lords of War, a clan of supernatural warriors dedicated to war. The Lords of War are also mortals that have started most of Earth’s wars throughout history. Why? Who knows? But this description of the Lords of War illustrated a major irritation for me – humans’ tendency to use fantasy or science-fiction as an excuse to distance ourselves from our flaws or fuck-ups. In the case of ”Which Prue Is It Anyway?”, humanity’s responsibility for its penchant for aggression is blamed on supernatural beings. Even worse, Grillo-Marxuach had never explained why the Lords of War even bothered to start wars. Perhaps the audience was simply expected to believe that Gabriel and his kind want to start chaos because they are evil. If we were . . . I cannot buy it.
Despite its flaws, ”Which Prue Is It Anyway?” turned out to be a pretty damn good story. One of the consequences that resulted from Gabriel’s witch hunt resulted in the creation of the two Prue clones. This situation provided comedic gold for the episode. As stated earlier, Prue had cast a spell to triple her power and ended up inadvertently creating two clones of herself – a perky Prue (Pink Sweater) who possessed an overbearing manner masked by a cheerful demeanor; and a sensuous Prue (Blue Sweater) with an intense penchant for male attention. Both Prue clones provided some hilarious moments – especially with Pink Prue. But the two clones also provided moments of poignancy when the real Prue was forced to feel the pain that each clone experienced while being stabbed by Gabriel’s sword. The expression in Andy Trudeau’s eyes spoke a thousand words when the good police inspector discovered Pink Prue’s body in the city morgue.
I certainly found no fault in the performances featured in this episode. Holly Marie Combs and Alyssa Milano gave solid and humorous support as their characters (Piper and Phoebe Halliwell) dealt with Prue’s alter egos. T.W. King (a great favorite of mine) did an excellent job of conveying Andy’s grief over the death of Pink Prue and his suspicions that something was amiss with the Halliwells later in the episode. It was nice to see Bernie Kopell (”GET SMART” and ”THE LOVE BOAT”) as the city morgue’s sarcastic coroner. Both Alex McArthur and Shannon Sturges gave first-class performances as the evil Statler siblings – Gabriel and Helena. I also have to give them kudos for hinting an incestuous relationship between brother and sister without being too obvious. Apparently, they had failed to be a little more subtle for even Blue Prue managed to pick up on their incestuous vibe:
”And Gabriel has this weird binding passion for Helena. So, if we grab her we can use her as leverage. A sword for his sister.”
I also have to compliment McArthur for his exuberant portrayal of Gabriel. I may have found the character’s background as a Lord of War rather purile, but I cannot help but admire the energy that McArthur infused into the role.
One could not discuss ”Which Prue Is It Anyway?” without mentioning the woman of the hour – Shannen Doherty. Watching her in action reminded me of how much ”CHARMED” had benefitted from the actress’ presence during the series’ first three seasons. I would not call Doherty’s performance in this episode as her masterpiece, but I would certainly view it as one of her better performances during her three-year stay on ”CHARMED”. In ”Which Prue Is It Anyway?”, Doherty managed to portray three facets of Prue Halliwell. Not only did she portray Prue in all her complicated glory, she also had the opportunity to portray extreme aspects of Prue’s personality. In Doherty’s portrayal of Pink Prue, she revealed the domineering and perfectionist traits of the oldest Charmed One that must have been the bane Piper and Phoebe’s lives . . . and irritated Original Prue to no end. Doherty also got the chance to reveal Pink Prue’s traits with a humorous perkiness rarely shown in Original Prue. With Blue Prue, Doherty allowed her character’s sensuality to be unleashed with comic results at Quake – the restaurant where Piper worked during Season One. Considering how Doherty managed to nab these different nuances of Prue, it was not surprising to learn that she had earned two Saturn Awards for her portrayal of Prue.
I am almost inclined to rate ”Which Prue Is It Anyway?” as one of Season One’s best episodes. But due to the episode’s limited approach to Gabriel Statler’s villainous goals and the unsatisfying and one-dimensional description of his background as a Lord of War, I cannot give it that much credit. However, writer Javier Grillo-Marxuach did pen a well-paced episode filled with humor and pathos. The first-rate cast did his script justice with a solid cast that included an exuberant performance by guest star Alex McArthur and exceptional work by star Shannen Doherty.
Here are some wallpaper featuring characters from "BUFFY THE VAMPRIE SLAYER":
BUFFYVERSE Wallpaper
"LOST" - The Aaron Littleton Lie
On February 4, 2009, ”LOST” aired an episode called (5.04) ”The Little Prince”. In this episode, former fugitive Kate Austen discovered that that someone knows the secret of Aaron Littleton’s true parental lineage. When I first learned about this episode, I found myself wondering if the series would finally address the moral consequences of the Oceanic Six’s lie about Aaron. It did . . . on a very limited scale.
As everyone knows, Australian survivor, Claire Littleton had given birth to an infant son named Aaron on the castaways’ 41st day on the island. While on the run from the murderous Martin Keamy and his thugs; Claire, James “Sawyer” Ford and Miles Straume make camp for an overnight rest some fifty-seven days later. That night, a vision of her late father, Christian Shephard, led her to abandon Aaron and follow her father into the jungle. Sawyer and Miles spent nearly a day searching for her, before giving up and heading for the castaways’ beach camp. To make a long matter short, Aaron ended up with Kate Austen, a fugitive accused of murder, bank robbery and a few other crimes. Kate, Aaron, Desmond Hume, pilot Frank Lapidus and the other members of the Oceanic Six – Jack Shephard, Sun Kwon, Sayid Jarrah and Hugo Reyes – were rescued by Desmond’s lady love, Penelope Widmore, in her yacht. There, they made the decision to create a series of lies about their experiences on the island. One of those lies centered around Aaron’s parentage. In the Season Four episode, (4.12) ”There’s No Place Like Home, Part I”, Oceanic Airlines representative Karen Decker repeated the Oceanic Six’s lie to the press:”Based on the location of the wreckage, our best estimate of the crash site is... (click) here. From there, the survivors were carried by the ocean's current to... (click) here--an uninhabited island in the Lesser Sunda Islands known as Membata. As you've all read in your briefing books, on day 103... (click) a typhoon washed up the remnants of an Indonesian fishing boat, including basic supplies and a survival raft. On day 108, the remaining six survivors, including Ms. Austen's baby which she gave birth to on the island of Membata, used this raft to journey here-- (click) an island called Sumba. They then came ashore near a village called Manukangga. This photo was taken by the local fisherman who found them. Once it was discovered who they were, they were transported to Honolulu by the U.S. Coast Guard. As you can imagine, this has been an extraordinarily trying experience. They have, however, agreed to answer a few questions. So, ladies and gentlemen, the survivors of Oceanic 8-1-5.”
Now, according to the Oceanic Six, Kate was six months pregnant when she was arrested by U.S. Marshal Edward Mars in Australia and later boarded Oceanic Flight 815 on September 22, 2004. Sometime between the crash and their arrival at an island called Sumba, Kate gave birth to Aaron. Six months following their return, the Shephard family – Jack and his mother, Marge – held a funeral for Christian Shephard, who had died in Australia before the crash. Kate (with Aaron), Sayid and his wife Nadia, and Hurley attended the funeral. Following the service, a blond woman approached Jack and informed him that she was Carole Littleton, Claire’s mother. While Kate stood nearby, holding Aaron, Carole also revealed that she had an affair with Christian and that Claire was Jack’s half-sister. This meant that Aaron was Jack’s nephew. Naturally, Jack was upset over the news. Even more important, both he and Kate failed to inform Ms. Littleton that she was standing just a few feet away from her grandson. The episode, (4.04) “Eggtown” revealed that Kate eventually stood trial for her crimes. Because her mother Diane Jensen – the prosecution’s star witness for the murder charge – refused to testify against her, Kate got away with the cold blooded murder of her father, Wayne Jensen. For some reason that still defies me, the prosecution decided to offer probation to Kate for her other crimes – which included bank robbery, assault of a Federal officer, grand larceny and grand theft auto. Kate agreed to ten (10) years of probation. In other words, she was not allowed to leave the state of California for a decade. I doubt that this verdict actually bothered Kate. It kept her out of prison and she was able to go home and continue her charade as Aaron’s mother.
In a recent episode of ”LOST” called (5.01) “Because You Left”, Kate had received a visit from two attorneys who claimed to have a court order demanding paternity tests be conducted to conclude if Kate is Aaron's biological mother. Kate used their visit as another opportunity to do what she does best – namely flee. This time, she did so with Aaron. In the following episode, (5.02) “The Lie”, Kate met up with her fellow Oceanic Six survivor, Sun Kwon, somewhere in Los Angeles and told the latter about the attorneys’ visit. Sun advised her to meet the attorneys again and kill them. According to Sun, the Oceanic Six had to maintain their lies in order to protect the island and those who had been left behind.
In the end, this excuse that Sun gave Kate is the same excuse that Jack first stated on Penny’s yacht some few years ago – namely their lies were necessary to protect those who had been left behind and the island itself from the authorities and especially Charles Widmore. In fact, many of the show’s fans have expressed their acceptance of this excuse on many ”LOST” forums, message boards and blogs. I must admit that I never understood the need for these lies, except for one reason – the media and the authorities would have found the truth ludicrous and committed the Oceanic Six to various mental institutions. Even if the authorities had believed their story, I doubt that anyone would have been able to find the island, considering that Ben Linus managed to move it using some ‘Donkey Wheel’ in the Season Four finale, (4.13) ”There’s No Place Like Home, Part III”. But what really annoys me to no end was the lie about Aaron and Kate.
Kate Austen must be a very popular character with the fans of ”LOST”. Of all the characters, she is the only one who has received more excuses for her crimes and mistakes than any of the others. Sawyer is probably a close second, but that is another matter. Many fans have spent more time on her ludicrous love triangle with Jack and Sawyer than on the fact that she is an unrepentant murderess and now, kidnapper. With Aaron, Kate has now committed the act of kidnapping via a lie. Mind you, she is not solely guilty of this latest crime. Jack, Sayid, Sun and Hurley are also guilty. Before ”The Little Prince” aired, everyone – including myself – believed that Jack had been the creator behind the lie surrounding Aaron. The episode eventually revealed that Kate was the one who had suggested the lie to Jack. He eventually accepted it and used it as part of his repertoire of other lies surrounding the island. Sayid, Sun and Hurley remained silent on the matter, while Kate carried out the lie. Along with the excuse mentioned in a previous paragraph, I have come across many excuses surrounding the lie about Aaron’s parentage. I have yet to come across an excuse or justification that made any sense to me. And God knows I have come across a good number of them. Here are just a few:
*Kate is a good mother.
*No one had any knowledge of whether Claire had any relations in Australia.
*Claire had originally been on her way to Los Angeles to give Aaron up for adoption.
*Sun’s Korean heritage prevented her from claiming to be Aaron’s mother.
*Claire had allowed Kate to leave the island with Aaron (this one was hard to swallow).
*In Kate’s dream, Claire told her not to bring Aaron back to the island.
*Carole Littleton’s affair with a much married Christian Shephard made her morally unacceptable as Aaron’s guardian (I swear, I actually came across this one)
*The psychic Richard Malkin had lied to Claire, when he told her that only she should raise Aaron. A “nice couple from L.A.” – namely Jack and Kate – were destined to raise him.
*Due to ”LOST” being a fictional story, there was nothing wrong with Kate pretending to be Aaron’s mother.
*By lying, the Oceanic Six did the best thing they could to protect Aaron.
*Claire left Aaron in the jungle to follow her father in (4.09) “The Shape of Things to Come”.
And so on. One of the forums that really demonstrated the need for fans to see nothing wrong in Kate’s custody of Aaron is The Fuselage
. Other forums such as Lost-Forums, Souless Spike, Television Without Pity more or less skirted the issue. Although the Lost-TV Forum posted a thread in which someone had criticized Kate for creating the lie about Aaron, most of the members who have responded are defending Kate’s actions . . . and bashing Jack for agreeing to the lie. Amazing. This woman has gotten away with the kidnapping of a child and she is getting a free pass by certain fans. Fortunately, not all of the show’s fans on this forum are defending her. There are some of them on other threads who have criticized Kate for her actions in regard to Aaron.There are many aspects to the lie surrounding Aaron Littleton that I find questionable. First all, I have doubts about the Oceanic Six’s decision to lie about the island. In one of the flashbacks for “The Lie”, Jack claimed that the lies would protect those left behind on the island:
JACK: Hurley, what about you?
HURLEY: I don't think we should lie, dude.
JACK: We need to protect the people that we left behind, Hurley.
HURLEY: How does lying protect them?
JACK: It protects them from Charles Widmore. The guy hired a boatload of people to kill all of us. He faked a plane crash. I mean, you think telling him the truth, he's just gonna--he's gonna leave them alone?
Hurley was right. How would this lie protect those left behind from Charles Widmore? The Oceanic Six had witnessed the island’s disappearance. How could Widmore learn about the island’s whereabouts if the Oceanic Six had no idea where it had disappeared to? Should it not have been more important for them to tell the authorities that others had been left behind, so that they could be rescued? Of all of the survivors from Flight 815, only two people had formed any attachment to the island – John Locke and Rose Nadler. Rose’s husband, Bernard, was only willing to remain due to his wife’s belief that the island kept her healthy and alive. I suspect that the Oceanic Six’s real motivation behind their lies was due to their guilt over leaving the others behind. None of them ever bothered to stop at the beach camp to see if all of the Losties had made it to the freighter. Instead, they had Frank Lapidus fly them straight to the freighter in their bid to escape from the island. I suspect that guilt was the main motivator behind their lies.
But what was the main motivation behind the lie surrounding Aaron Littleton? In this scene from ”The Little Prince”, Kate Austen gave her reasons to Jack Shephard – one of two men she has managed to wrap around her finger during her three month stay on the island:
JACK: (Chuckles) At least one of us can sleep. It's gonna take more than two nights for me to get used to sleeping in a normal bed. What are we gonna do about him? About Aaron.
JACK: I don't know.
KATE: I've been thinking a lot about him. Did you know that Claire was flying to L.A. to give him up for adoption?
JACK: No. No, I didn't.
KATE: I think we should say he's mine.
JACK: What?
KATE: We could say that I was six months pregnant when I was arrested and that I gave birth to him on the Island. No one would ever know.
JACK: Kate, no. You don't have to... (sighs) There's other ways too this.
KATE: After everyone we've lost--Michael, Jin, Sawyer... I can't lose him, too.
JACK: Sawyer's not dead.
KATE: No. But he's gone. Good night, Jack.
JACK: Kate... If we're gonna be safe, if we're gonna protect the people that we left behind, tomorrow morning, I'm gonna have to convince everyone to lie. If it's just me, they're never gonna go for it. So I'm gonna turn to you first. Are you with me?
KATE: I have always been with you.
That was probably one of the most flimsy excuses I have ever came across for keeping a child, based upon a lie. It made Kate look like an over-emotional nanny who had resorted to kidnapping to keep a favored child by her side. She had grown attached to Aaron and could not deal with another loss after Sawyer’s departure from Frank’s helicopter? On one level, I can understand this. It is possible that she had grown emotionally attached to Aaron, considering what they had experienced before Penny’s rescue. On another level, I find this excuse questionable. There is something niggling in the back of my mind that Kate may have been using Aaron as an excuse to avoid time in prison. It is possible that she realized that she could not flee from the authorities following their return to the States . . . and decided to use Aaron as some kind of character reference without allowing him to show up at the trial. She did not need Aaron at the trial. She had Jack. Looking back on the trial featured in ”Eggtown”, Kate did not put up much of a fight against Jack testifying for her. But like I had said . . . it is merely a possibility. But surely she must have realized that Aaron would come into the picture some way or the other by claiming to be his mother. What did she expect?
There are those who claimed that Kate and the rest of the Oceanic Six had done nothing wrong by supporting the lie about Aaron’s parentage. Here, I beg to differ. Frankly, I found the lie to be appalling. Kate used Claire’s revelation that the latter was planning to give Aaron up for adoption as an excuse to claim the baby as her child. What she, Jack and the rest of the Oceanic Six failed to realize was that none of them knew the circumstances surrounding Claire’s original intent. They decided to accept the possibility that Claire lacked a family . . . and hand over an innocent child to a woman who was facing charges of murder and other crimes in the U.S. No one had known whether Kate would be able to avoid prison and decided to allow her to claim Aaron as her son. I found that despicable.
There is also the argument that Kate really had no choice but to raise Aaron. Sun could not claim the baby as her own, due to her Korean heritage. Many fans claimed that someone had to raise Aaron. Why? To protect him? What on earth made them think that Kate could protect Aaron? This is the same woman who ended up getting jumped by a mortally wounded Naomi Dorrit in the Season 4 premiere, (4.01) “The Beginning of the End”. How on earth was Kate supposed to protect Aaron? Very people did not even bother to consider that the Oceanic Six could have told the truth about Aaron’s parentage . . . and maintain their lies about the island. All they had to do was reveal at the press conference hosted by Oceanic Airlines in ”There’s No Place Like Home” that Claire had survived the plane crash, given birth to Aaron and died before the five adult survivors could be rescued. Chances are that Aaron would have ended up with his grandmother, Carole Littleton. The ironic thing is that when Carole made her second appearance in ”The Little Prince”, both Kate and Jack viewed the woman as some kind of villain or threat to their existence. Especially Kate:
KATE: Oh, my God.
JACK: (Exhales deeply) It's Claire's mother.
Act 5
JACK: Wait.
KATE: What am I waiting for, Jack?
JACK: Wait. I just... let's just think about this for a minute.
KATE: She knows.
JACK: Maybe she doesn't know.
KATE: No, but she knows about Aaron, and that's all that matters!
JACK: (Sighs) Let me go talk to her.
KATE: What?
JACK: If I can just explain to her why we did it--maybe if I can get her to understand why... she'll listen to me. I can fix this, Kate. I can fix it. Hey. Aaron is my family, too.
(Knock on door)
(sighs)
CAROLE: Dr. Shephard?
JACK: Hello, Ms. Littleton. Um... may I come in?
CAROLE: Of course.
(Door closes)
CAROLE: You look drenched.
JACK: No, no. No, I'm fine.
CAROLE: God, I haven't seen you since your father's funeral. How did you even know I was here?
JACK: Um... I knew you were here, Ms. Littleton, because I followed your lawyer.
CAROLE: Why would you do that?
JACK: I'm--I did it because, um... I understand that you feel the need to do this. But I need you to know that everything that Kate and I have done--it was for Aaron.
CAROLE: Who's... Aaron? I--I'm afraid I'm not following you.
JACK: Ms. Littleton, um... what are you doing here in Los Angeles?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Thunder rumbles)
JACK: Let's go. Drive. Then call Sun and tell her to bring Aaron to the Long Beach Marina. We'll meet her there.
KATE: What--wh-what are you talking about? What happened?
JACK: Kate, we have to go now.
KATE: I'm not going anywhere until you tell me what just happened!
JACK: She doesn't know anything.
KATE: What?
JACK: She doesn't know. She still thinks that Claire is dead. (Pants) She doesn't even know that Aaron exists.
KATE: But the lawyer--
JACK: She sued Oceanic, and she's in town to pick up her settlement.
KATE: What, and it's just a coincidence that her lawyer happens to be the same one that's trying to take my son?
JACK: I don't know. But whoever's trying to take Aaron... it's not her.
KATE: Then who is it?
Amazing. Kate, Jack and the rest of the Oceanic Six were the ones guilty of kidnapping and both Jack and Kate end up viewing Carole Littleton as some potential kidnapper. It was enough to make me sick to my stomach.
Many fans have condoned the Oceanic Six’s actions by claiming that Kate turned out to be a wonderful mother for Aaron. Frankly, who gives a shit? I really DO NOT CARE what type of mother Kate turned out to be. What she and the rest of the Oceanic Six had done about Aaron was despicable. They had dragged an innocent child into an unnecessary deception with hardly any qualms, for their own selfish reasons. They really have no excuse for the lie about Aaron. And since the Oceanic Six have less than three (3) days to return to the island, they have ensured that the grieving Carole Littleton will never learn about the only link to her missing daughter – her grandson, Aaron. Of all the crimes that have been featured on ”LOST”, I found the lie about Aaron to be the most appalling I have ever witnessed on that show. The Oceanic Six disgusted me. Especially one Kate Austen.
"THE DARKER SIDE OF SAYID JARRAH"
When it comes to Sayid's less pleasant side of his personality, many fans tend to focus upon his former position as a interrogator for the Iraqi Army. Yet, hardly anyone has ever pointed out some of Sayid's other unpleasant traits.
One, he is self-righteous and prone to make assumptions about others with knowing all of the facts or even bothering to investigate.Two, his anger has led him to not only make these assumptions, but react in a negative way. Sayid's anger led him to attack Ana-Lucia and Eko for Shannon's death . . . without bothering to find out what really happened in "Collision". His anger had also led him to attack Ben on two occasions in Season Two and turn Michael into the freighter's captain in Season Four's "Meet Kevin Johnson" without considering how Michael could help the Losties deal with Widmore's hired thugs.
He has committed some awful acts on Nadia's behalf. He murdered a fellow soldier in cold blood to allow Nadia to escape. He betrayed his own people for her . . . and he didn't exactly share her political beliefs. Later, he betrayed an old college friend to the CIA and the Australian Intelligence on Nadia's behalf. I don't think he really cared one way or the other about the terrorist cell in Sydney. He simply wanted information on Nadia. And in his grief and anger over Nadia's death, he allowed himself to become Ben's minion after his departure from the island . . . without any real knowledge of what was going on.
It is interesting in how some of his traits remind me of Jack and other traits remind me of Michael - two characters that are not very popular with "LOST" fans.
