Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by Rob Helmerichs, Apr 29, 2009.
"You guys were in 1954? Like.. Fonzie times?"
First she apparently believes that awful things will happen if the past is attempted to be altered. Remember seasons ago when she was adamant with Desmond that he not alter his mission lest there be terrible consequences? Remember tonite's conversation with Widmore regarding 'losing' an offspring? She believes she sacrificed her son to save the universe.
That leads to your last question. Some, Eloise Hawking is one, believe that what happens is not some simple co-existance. Maybe the universe flashes out of existance in a burst of tachyons causing a space time singularity and a Big Bang creation of a new universe.
She knows it ultimately doesn't matter. Judging by her previous conversations with Desmond about course correction, Daniel will die no matter what she does. In her mind she is making a sacrifice for the greater good of the universe by not trying to change anything.
I don't think they want to change their future. In this episode at least, their goal was only to get back to 2007/2008. I don't think they believed Daniel when he was talking about the variable.
Anyone else pick this up... Going to commercial break, before I could find my remote and hit fast forward, the screen goes black and a small picture of what looks like kids leaving school shows and goes away, then the text "what did you see?" was displayed with abc logo in the corner the whole time.
On iPhone, sorry for bad grammer and misspelling if any
In the scene where Eloise was telling Daniel to go with Widmore's expedition, the first time through I thought that maybe Daniel in 1970 had told her to tell him to go with Widmore, since he knew he'd probably do the opposite and not go, or something like that. Much better that she's in pain telling him to go. It'll be interesting to see who came up with the idea of doing that sacrifice, and why..
This explains it.
I'm a lot less stressed now that I get the time travel for the most part, but there is still one aspect that bothers me, and will probably always bother me since it will never make sense.
I totally understand the concept that the things that are occuring the in 70's HAVE to occur otherwise the cosmic order of events will be thrown into chaos. So Hawking sends Dan to the island, he time travels, then causes a chain of events that will likely lead to "the incident", and if this "incident" were to NOT happen, there would be MUCH graver catastrophe. Cool, I get it. What happened happened, and has to happen or things go boom.
What I don't get is the fact that every thing seems to be on a causal loop. Locke for instance. Locke crashes on the island, time travels to 1954, tells Richard about himself, then Richard facilitates his landing on the island. So Richard can't know who Locke is send him to the island, but Locke can't meet Richard without coming to the island. This in my mind is a catch-22, and basically collapses on itself. You can't have two events that CAUSE each other, it doesn't make sense.
I've seen people make the argument that it would only be a paradox if one of those events DIDN"T happen, and that makes no sense to me. Two events that cause each other simply "exist" in the ether--no starting point. That's illogical to me on all levels. Everything starts somewhere. This is the same thing that's annoyed me with Terminator forever. Connor sends Reese back to protect his mother, but he wouldn't exist without sending Reese back, so how does he exist in the future in the first place? It will never make sense
Whatever happened, happened!
I speculate that instead of immediately using the H-bomb to cap the energy source, it will instead be put in place with a failsafe key to activate it as a last resort. It will eventually be set off by Desmond, but only after the events we have already seen have unfolded.
That's a good idea, except for the idea of Desmond and Locke living through an H-Bomb explosion.. Then again, the island does heal, and we have seen a later version of Locke actually rise from the dead. Ok, scratch my exception.
I think it's still possible that there is an exception to "what happened, happened." And that Eloise knows that her son is the one person who can set into motion a course of events that does change things in some critically meaningful way. That would be a reason why she is not only willing to send her only son to be "sacrificed" (another Christian allusion, by the way), but that she is actively pushing for it. It would also be a reason that she tells him if he goes back, "I will be proud of you." The implication may be that he will be able to accomplish something to be proud of.
Even if Eloise sent Daniel back to the island simply because it was his destiny and that cannot be changed, I still loved it when Daniel said "We have free will. We can change our destiny." Even if the whole point of the show is that Daniel was wrong there, I sill liked hearing it.
All in all, this show is getting better by the week! I am more confident than ever that where the writers are taking us will be a really rewarding destination (as well as giving us the rewarding journey).
OK, I do believe that we've *probably* seen the last of Dr. Faraday, but he is with the Hostiles presently... and they do still have the Temple... so who knows exactly what will happen next week.
Darn, Ellie's a cold-hearted woman.
She wouldn't kill Daniel to prevent it though, not after what she's been through. Plus she's doubtful Daniel could succeed.
Yes. Yes it is.
No, even the first time that I watched that scene, I told myself "Her face is practically cringing as she's saying this.. she's not proud of him for going at all, and she doesn't want to tell him to go, but she's got some reason she thinks she has to".
I don't think he's done yet.
Right, DUH! So he really did leave the island when Sawyer said he did, and now he's back, with new theories.
As mentioned before, even with their current, crappy situation, some of them (like Kate), might not want to prevent the crash.
And, there can be no doubt any longer that Widmore staged the fake flight 815 crash.
I noticed the cringe too. But the fact that telling him to go was so painful for her (and that she thinks she has to) doesn't necessarily mean he wouldn't also make her proud by going.
During that scene itself, the cringe did seem to be a sign that Eloise was lying about being proud of Daniel if he would go. But given what happens at the end of the show, and her telling Widmore "Don't talk to me about sacrifice!" it could be that the cringe was simply signalling the pain of knowing that she was sacrificing her son. Perhaps Daniel would make her proud, but certainly not in the way he intends
I didn't want Farady to die. And I had no idea he would.
I thought that the way Eloise was going to convince Daniel to go to the Island was by telling him that he might be able to find a cure for Theresa.
This has always bothered me - if she knows what happened; and whatever happened, happened; why the urgency to convince Desmond?
Hawking's character never makes any sense - she spends a good part of her life making sure her life is tragic because she knows it will happen..? I would find it more 'believable' if she spent her entire life resisting fate and found it impossible.