Lost

[caliber66]

All I'm saying is that they should acknowledge that a 12 year old Ben is running around. They did that with Charlotte immediately. It's a pretty big deal to have them living at the DI at the same time as little Ben don't you think? Regardless if they can DO anything about it. Besides, do you really think that is in keeping with Swayer's personality? "Oh look, it's little Ben Linus! In the future he's responsible for killing everyone here. Oh but wait, Daniel said we can't change anything, so I guess I'll just pretend he isn't here."

Seems to me it would be pretty consistent with Sawyer's personality not to care one way or another what happens to the DI folks.

[jenbobblehead]

I cannot believe for one instant that the writers would allow this Ben/Sawyer+ 1970s deal to go unanswered. There is just simply no way they "missed" that and it is a continuity error.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

Not saying I disagree with you here, but Daniel might not be 100% accurate. I'm just thinking out loud, but Sawyer/Juliet killed 2 Others and saved that Dharma initiative lady. Maybe thats what was going to happen anyway, but it didn't seem like it.

 

As far as the benjamin timeline thing goes, if we don't have exact dates or anything, its possible he was born in 1965 and shows up in 1977, after the most recent episode takes place. Who knows? When I first brought it up I was just saying it occurred to me that he might have been there in those years.

 

The Lost characters fill roles that were occupied by others in the past. Their presence in the past where they had none in that context does not, in itself present a paradox. The actions will occur...the actors may change. (Kind of like what happened at the end of 12 Monkies). The Universe does take corrective actions. Past events cannot change...but possibly the actors can change.

[OOO]

The Lost characters fill roles that were occupied by others in the past. Their presence in the past where they had none in that context does not, in itself present a paradox. The actions will occur...the actors may change. (Kind of like what happened at the end of 12 MonkiesThe Universe does take corrective actions. Past events cannot change...but possibly the actors can change.

 

Yeah but at the end of 12 monkeys

that female scientist is on the plane with the bad dude, so you never know what might happen.

 

 

As far as Lost goes, as long as they are consistent with their view on time travel I'm fine with it. I am down with the past can't change, universe corrects itself idea. It just seemed to me in that particular instance they walked into a situation that was happening, and altered the outcome. Seems like those two guys would have been alive had the 815 people not been there, and that girl would probably have been dead. Maybe if they had just waited and watched, the black smoke monster was about to kill the two of them and free the girl, but who knows.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

Yeah but at the end of 12 monkeys

that female scientist is on the plane with the bad dude, so you never know what might happen.

 

 

As far as Lost goes, as long as they are consistent with their view on time travel I'm fine with it. I am down with the past can't change, universe corrects itself idea. It just seemed to me in that particular instance they walked into a situation that was happening, and altered the outcome. Seems like those two guys would have been alive had the 815 people not been there, and that girl would probably have been dead. Maybe if they had just waited and watched, the black smoke monster was about to kill the two of them and free the girl, but who knows.

 

 

Their intervention did not fill a void...it changed the game. And your reference to 12 Monkey's kind of reinforces my point. Bruce Willis fills the role that Brad Pitt had filled...and he watched it happen the first time. (Not putting spoiler space here cause the movie is 14 years old. The universe follows rules...the Losties ' actions follow the events that happened...unless they are a severe game changing event. There are a couple of interesting holes here. The birth of the baby may indicate a game change. And if one isn't supposed to be able to come back to the island if they turn the wheel has certainly been circumvented. Not necessarily by Locke...he was dead when he returned. But certainly by Ben. Cuse and Lindelof have set themselves an interesting course here.

 

I am really intested in the Temple and the statue of Anubis/Toth (whoever it is). This stuff has got to be important.

 

And as for Richard: why does he seem so...petty? He wiped out a US Army platoon/company, but he can't wipe out the DI? And for someone who is rather ageless, he seems a bit suprised by the whole time travel thing. Certainly he is aware of the unique properties of the island. Why is he so unkempt when he first meets Ben, but is his dapper self when he meets Goodspeed and Sawyer in the DI camp?

[Moe_Syzlak]

I cannot believe for one instant that the writers would allow this Ben/Sawyer+ 1970s deal to go unanswered. There is just simply no way they "missed" that and it is a continuity error.

Yeah this is what i think too. There is NO WAY they will ask us to swallow the idea that Sawyer et al just lived with young Ben and didn't do anything about it. If they asked us to swallow that it would be the single biggest unbelievable turn in a show that features a wide array of ridiculous plot devices.

[KevinG]

Yeah this is what i think too. There is NO WAY they will ask us to swallow the idea that Sawyer et al just lived with young Ben and didn't do anything about it. If they asked us to swallow that it would be the single biggest unbelievable turn in a show that features a wide array of ridiculous plot devices.

 

 

So what do they do? Kill young Ben? Watch 2009 Ben fade away ala Back to the Future?

 

I like the idea that Sawyer et al, don't notice Ben. Do we no for sure that Ben has ever told Juliet that he lived with the Dharma folks? Yes the name Linus would be a tip off, but it is entirely plausible that they have never met. Remember Ben's dad was a "workman" and tell me do you know the last name of the janitor in your office building or apartment complex? I would guess not. Let along do you know his kids name? Not likely.

 

It would be more plausible that young Ben noticed Sawyer, et al, and that is one of the reasons he is obessed with them in the future.

 

Also we don't know if Ben is on the island 1974-1977. Their paths could have not crossed.

 

This would be a cool scene, Sawyer et al get introduced to a young Ben, exchange looks like WTF? and then flash they are back in 2009. That'd be cool.

 

The writers of the show are too good. The will explain the Ben thing one way or another. Let's not freak out here.

 

Also on Charlotte, in one earlier episodes Ben says her birthday is in 1979. When Daniel sees the "little redhaired girl" it is 1974 (do the math). So 1) Ben is lying about her age 2) That is not Charlotte. My guess it isn't a real person, maybe another island apparition to f with Daniel.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

So what do they do? Kill young Ben? Watch 2009 Ben fade away ala Back to the Future?

 

I like the idea that Sawyer et al, don't notice Ben. Do we no for sure that Ben has ever told Juliet that he lived with the Dharma folks? Yes the name Linus would be a tip off, but it is entirely plausible that they have never met. Remember Ben's dad was a "workman" and tell me do you know the last name of the janitor in your office building or apartment complex? I would guess not. Let along do you know his kids name? Not likely.

 

It would be more plausible that young Ben noticed Sawyer, et al, and that is one of the reasons he is obessed with them in the future.

 

Also we don't know if Ben is on the island 1974-1977. Their paths could have not crossed.

 

This would be a cool scene, Sawyer et al get introduced to a young Ben, exchange looks like WTF? and then flash they are back in 2009. That'd be cool.

 

The writers of the show are too good. The will explain the Ben thing one way or another. Let's not freak out here.

 

Also on Charlotte, in one earlier episodes Ben says her birthday is in 1979. When Daniel sees the "little redhaired girl" it is 1974 (do the math). So 1) Ben is lying about her age 2) That is not Charlotte. My guess it isn't a real person, maybe another island apparition to f with Daniel.

 

The way the time travel scenario has played out in Lost has the individuals contacted in the past (mainly Desmond) having a found memory of the event in the future. So...if Sawyer meets Ben, they won't have a gestalt moment; Ben will suddenly remember the meeting in the 'future'.

[m_thomp]

Okay, I watched most of this episode last night. I say most of it, as I was doing the dishes during some ad breaks and missed a few minutes of it.

 

Can anyone explain to me why the 1970s Sawyer and co. and the more modern incarnation are at all related to each other? If it was explained, then sorry, I missed it. I was thinking all along that these were merely alternate versions of the same people. As Daniel said, in one of the bits I did catch, the record is spinning again and they're just on the wrong track. So what you're seeing is Sawyer and co. experiencing life in two identical enivironments but differently ... parallel universes, etc. The characters are merely vessels going on different paths. It seemed to me as though the 70s versions were completely unaware of their mental past (but actual physical future) exploits, which led me to think that although the characters were shown in different time zones, they were actually unconnected, but we, as the audience, were again filling in the missing gaps in the backstory and assuming they were connected.

 

I might be barking up the wrong tree and it was all explained in one the sections I missed.

[KevinG]

The way the time travel scenario has played out in Lost has the individuals contacted in the past (mainly Desmond) having a found memory of the event in the future. So...if Sawyer meets Ben, they won't have a gestalt moment; Ben will suddenly remember the meeting in the 'future'.

 

No I don't think it works like that. Remember before Daniel encountered Desmond in the past he said this would only work because Desmond is "special." Desmond had become unstuck in time in the past. The only way that Daniel was able to change the "past" is because Desmond is special.

 

So if Ben meet Sawyer et al back in 1977 he has always remembered them. He would not get a sudden memory of them. Ben obviously is not letting on if he knew Sawyer et al, earlier in his life. I wonder if this has anything to do with the list back in season 2, which was Jack, Kate, Sawyer, and Hurley. But who knows.

[Mystik Spiral]

The characters are merely vessels going on different paths. It seemed to me as though the 70s versions were completely unaware of their mental past (but actual physical future) exploits, which led me to think that although the characters were shown in different time zones, they were actually unconnected, but we, as the audience, were again filling in the missing gaps in the backstory and assuming they were connected.

 

If I understand what you're saying, no - they are completely aware of what they did, ummm or are going to do, in the future. I mean, Sawyer went to get Juliet to deliver the baby, saying that he was taking her out of retirement (or something similar). He is perfectly aware that she's a baby doctor in the future.

 

As for Ben, fwiw

I read on Lostpedia that the actor who played young Ben is returning this season.

 

[TCP]

Huh? Sawyer's timeline means he WOULD have memories of 2004 even as he is LaFleur in the '70s. He knew Ben lived in that compound -- as did Juliette -- and he knew Ben's last name was Linus. You don't think that over the course of three years that Sawyer is living as LaFleur (not to mention Juliette) that he would notice a kid running around named Ben Linus? So, IMO, if the timelines we are talking about are accurate (i.e. Ben WAS living on the island with his dad while LaFleur is there), the show either hasn't yet addressed the fact that they DO in fact know who Ben is or it is a real continuity error (again, IMO).

What? No! Sawyer from season 1-4 wouldn't have the memories of LaFleur-Sawyer.

[Mystik Spiral]

That's not what he said - he said Sawyer as LaFleur would remember the events of 2004, on the island after the crash. He's talking about whether LaFleur would recognize young Ben.

[Moe_Syzlak]

That's not what he said - he said Sawyer as LaFleur would remember the events of 2004, on the island after the crash. He's talking about whether LaFleur would recognize young Ben.

Right LaFleur-Sawyer would have the memories of 2004 Sawyer, but 2004 Sawyer would not have the memories of LaFleur Sawyer. Similarly, 1970s little Ben would not have the memories of of 2004 Ben. BUT is 2004 Ben on the other island in the 1970s about to get a memory of LaFleur in the same way Demond's memory of Farraday suddenly popped into Desmond's head? THAT would be weird. LaFleur meets young Ben and older Ben, now on the small time plane (for lack of a better word) as young Ben, suddenly now remembers meeting the Losties in the 1970s.

 

[stickman]

I wonder if this has anything to do with the list back in season 2, which was Jack, Kate, Sawyer, and Hurley. But who knows.

 

If I were a betting man....

[TCP]

That's not what he said - he said Sawyer as LaFleur would remember the events of 2004, on the island after the crash. He's talking about whether LaFleur would recognize young Ben.

Apologies I got that backwards!

 

I'm sure this will be addressed in the following episodes. The Lost writing team doesn't make mistakes!

Does Nels Cline ever hit a wrong note? No! Do the writers of Lost ever contradict themselves? Heck no!

[bleedorange]

Apologies I got that backwards!

 

I'm sure this will be addressed in the following episodes. The Lost writing team doesn't make mistakes!

Does Nels Cline ever hit a wrong note? No! Do the writers of Lost ever contradict themselves? Heck no!

 

Exactly. I'm not worried. Although, I try not to think of things in too much detail. I figure everything will reveal itself to me over the course of the final season and a half, and to just sit back and enjoy it.

[Mystik Spiral]

^that's how I feel. Sometimes I enjoy reading theories, but I don't spend too much of my own time & energy trying to figure things out. Whatever happens, happens.

[a.miller]

Right LaFleur-Sawyer would have the memories of 2004 Sawyer, but 2004 Sawyer would not have the memories of LaFleur Sawyer. Similarly, 1970s little Ben would not have the memories of of 2004 Ben. BUT is 2004 Ben on the other island in the 1970s about to get a memory of LaFleur in the same way Demond's memory of Farraday suddenly popped into Desmond's head? THAT would be weird. LaFleur meets young Ben and older Ben, now on the small time plane (for lack of a better word) as young Ben, suddenly now remembers meeting the Losties in the 1970s.

I can almost be sure that this, or something, similar will happen......

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

No I don't think it works like that. Remember before Daniel encountered Desmond in the past he said this would only work because Desmond is "special." Desmond had become unstuck in time in the past. The only way that Daniel was able to change the "past" is because Desmond is special.

 

So if Ben meet Sawyer et al back in 1977 he has always remembered them. He would not get a sudden memory of them. Ben obviously is not letting on if he knew Sawyer et al, earlier in his life. I wonder if this has anything to do with the list back in season 2, which was Jack, Kate, Sawyer, and Hurley. But who knows.

 

 

I was going to bring this up in an earlier post...but I couldn't come up with a good explanation for why Ben let Hurley go back to the Losties camp and kept the three.

[Moe_Syzlak]

Apologies I got that backwards!

 

I'm sure this will be addressed in the following episodes. The Lost writing team doesn't make mistakes!

Does Nels Cline ever hit a wrong note? No! Do the writers of Lost ever contradict themselves? Heck no!

I agree. As I said, I was not saying I don't think the writers have this worked out, I was merely responding when it was said that if they DIDN'T address that it would be still believable/plausible that they could all live in the compound with YOung Ben for three years and not realize it. I don't buy that, but it's far FAR from a big deal.

[insideoutoflove]

I was going to bring this up in an earlier post...but I couldn't come up with a good explanation for why Ben let Hurley go back to the Losties camp and kept the three.

Yeah same here...and what about Jin? Why wasn't he on the list? Wouldn't Ben remember him from the 70s as well? Also, they all have different names in the DI..I don't know I just confused myself when I started thinking about this too much so I stopped

[KevinG]

Yeah same here...and what about Jin? Why wasn't he on the list? Wouldn't Ben remember him from the 70s as well? Also, they all have different names in the DI..I don't know I just confused myself when I started thinking about this too much so I stopped

 

 

the theory has a lot of holes for sure. But I likes it.

 

Maybe it has something to do with Sun and the promise that Locke made to say that Jin was Dead. I dunno I am grasping at straws.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

the theory has a lot of holes for sure. But I likes it.

 

Maybe it has something to do with Sun and the promise that Locke made to say that Jin was Dead. I dunno I am grasping at straws.

 

 

Something just hit me.

 

Ben showed very evident surprise when he heard Jin was still alive. Maybe certain events in the past have changed which may have spurred Ben's actions re: John.

 

Things are getting too good to get a freakin' week off.

[TCP]

What? Why wasn't there a new episode tonight? I thought there wasn't suppose to be any weeks off!! Grr