The 'Lost' Hour: Season 6, 'Lighthouse'
Wednesday, February 24, 2010; 2:00 PM
Join "Lost" bloggers Liz Kelly and Jen Chaney each Wednesday at 2 p.m. ET to talk about "Lost's" sixth and final season.
Liz and Jen, both obsessive "Lost" fans, have been writing their weekly dueling analysis of the show since 2006. When not debating the merits of Sawyer's hotness, Liz Kelly writes the Celebritology blog and Jen Chaney acts as movies editrix and DVD columnist for washingtonpost.com. For episode analysis, discussion transcripts and more, visit washingtonpost.com's Lost Central.
Liz Kelly: Welcome to this afternoon's show. Lots to discuss. One of the early themes in the blog comments is re: whether or not Jacob meant to dis Hurley when he implied that Hurley was a more willing follower than Jack.
I just want to clarify that Jen and I were describing that line as a "dis" somewhat tongue in cheek. I don't think Jacob meant to slight Hurley, he was merely stating a fact: that Hurley is a much easier person to get to comply with his wishes than Jack. Whether that's a compliment or no is up for debate, but we meant no slight of our own against either Hurley or Jacob.
Jen Chaney: Definitely not.
In fact, it may be a compliment to Hurley, in a way, that he's more open and capable of believing in something greater than his own needs and issues.
As promised, I do hope we'll talk about Mr. and Mrs. Skeletor, aka Adam and Eve. They popped up again last night but we didn't really get any closure there ... yet.
Rockville, MD: Sidebar: Liz, are you pregnant? Mazel Tov if you are!
Just a comment: It seems like the sideways stories are much more interesting and illuminating than the island stories. I was quite moved when Jack listened to the messages on his son's answering machine, and I felt his conversations w/David were heartfelt and genuine. Matthew Fox did a great job this week.
Liz Kelly: Thank you! I am indeed pregnant. Mr. Liz and I are expecting a baby boy sometime in June.
I'm with you about the off-island stories having a certain compelling qualities that we're not seeing on-island yet. There is so much work being done on-island to push the mythology of the plot forward -- to, as Jen said, get us where the writers want us -- that there hasn't been much time left over for actual full-bodied storytelling. Much of that nuanced unspinning of a yarn and character development we've come to expect from the show has been taking place off-island and that is where we are getting subtlety: little details like Jack's appendix scar, his rising to the occasion as a dad, Locke's acceptance of his disability.
So I guess I'm with you. Right now I'm much more interested in the Sideways characters than our old island friends. Well, except maybe for Dirtbag Claire, who wafted into the story like a breath of fresh sewer air last night.
Jen Chaney: I agree completely. I have found the off-island stuff more compelling so far than the island stuff. But as I've said before, I think the stories will intersect more clearly at some point.
Right now, I see the two narratives as two parallel lines, but each week those lines inch closer to each other.
Wallace 108: Have we ruled out Kate as David's mother? That might explain the look of recognition on her face when she saw Jack outside the airport in LA X.
Then again, I didn't notice any freckles ...
Liz Kelly: Hmmm, something tells me that fugitive from the law Kate Austin is not the woman living in what looked like a stable suburban household, raising a young son.
Jen Chaney: For a fleeting second, I had that thought. (David has dark, curly-ish hair, not unlike Kate.)
But it definitely appears that Kate and Jack do not know each other in this version of L.A. And say what you will about Ms. Austen, but I would think she'd remember fathering a child with Jack, enough to maybe say, "Hey, 'sup?" when she bumped into him coming out of the airplane bathroom.
Locke's bag o' tricks: So I assume Locke/MIB doesn't really need water or food or other supplies on the island. So what do you suppose he's been carrying in that pack?
Liz Kelly: Hmmm, good question.
Dupont Circle, D.C.: Maybe in our own flash-sideways timeline they're airing Lost episodes that are actually good.
Liz Kelly: Ouch. Okay, let's stop right here and take a pulse. There was was a lot of grumbling after the premiere aired on Feb. 2 because some of us (and I include myself here) felt the opening eps didn't live up to the hype. But since last week's Locke-centric episode, I feel like we're getting back on track. How does everyone else feel?
Fairfax, VA: We paused a ridiculous number of times during the lighthouse sequence to see if we could see anymore new names on the dial (thank you DVR!) Interestingly enough...we saw a new one "Austen" #51 - here is the screenshot.
washingtonpost.com: So Jane Austen is a candidate? You would think they could cross her off...
Liz Kelly: Thanks for bringing that up because last week we were all scratching our heads wondering why Kate's name hadn't been included on the cave wall along with the other Losties who had been "touched" by Jacob.
Interestingly, her number accompaniment on the wheel is "51" -- as far as I know, not a number we've encountered before and definitely not one of THE numbers.
Jen Chaney: Thanks so much for this. I didn't see that screenshot yet.
Why 51? Hmmm ... Area 51? Kate's an alien? (Liz, make your jokes now...)
Liz Kelly: Who, me? Make a joke at Kate's expense? Nay!
Liz Kelly: A little breaking Lost-related scandal courtesy our editor: According to Radar online, which itself quotes the National Enquirer, Matthew Fox is allegedly involved in a dalliance with a stripper:
Lost star Matthew Fox is caught up in a sex scandal with a stripper who is young enough to be his daughter.
Fox, 43, who has been married for 18 years and has two children, is accused of cheating with 26-year-old stripper Stefani Talbott. Talbott worked as a dancer at Stars Cabaret club in Bend, Oregon.
Maybe this is sideways world Matthew Fox and not the real deal?
Jen Chaney: This makes me very sad. I always liked the fact that Fox stayed happily married and, seemingly, grounded.
Let's hope that it's not true. I'm tired of the cheating celebrity stories. It's getting old.
Liz Kelly: Here's a link to the full story which ain't much more than what we've excerpted here.
home sweet hovel: What are the chances that "The Claire" will be the hot new hairstyle a la 1994's "The Rachel"? Is there an Emmy for hair and makeup?
Jen Chaney: I can just see myself asking for that at the salon.
"Yeah, I'd like The Claire. So could you frizz my hair to the point of absurdity, put it in a ponytail, spit on it, rub some dirt in there, then charge me $65?"
Alexandria, Va.: Liz, in the dueling chat, you noted that the writers could have shown Jack as an emotionally absent dad.
Well, he was the last dad to pick up his kid from school - on the one time a month that he has to watch his kid. Doesn't that qualify as a little absent emotionally?
Liz Kelly: I think that's kind of a leap. We don't know he was the last parent to pick up his kid. David could have stayed late to practice his piano or complete detention or practice his brooding.
Jen Chaney: Well, at the least, he was running late. And almost forgot to go. Which isn't good.
But I think, to Liz's point, it was hard to process that he was an absent dad based on the scant info we had. I think most of us were just trying to process the fact that he had a kid, and couldn't yet asses what kind of a father he was. And there simply wasn't enough time in the episode to show us, so they had to tell us.
Who is candidate 108?: So "someone" needs to get to the island. Hurley had to turn the wheel to 108. So that number should correspond to a person, just as all the numbers to. However (to be captain obvious) 4+8+15+16+23+42 = ... 108. So, is it a person? Who? Is there some significance that this person is the "sum" of all our candidate losties?
Jen Chaney: I think there may be significance about 108 being the sum, yes. The point being that all of them had to be there, together. As much as Jack may be more crucial in all this, and as much as MiB may talk about Jacob needing a substitute, I think all of our Losties had to come to the island for some reason.
Hurley never cranked it to 108, though. I'd be curious to know what we'd see in the mirror if he did.
New York, NY: So the numbers correspond to the numbers on the big wheel. Aren't those called degrees? Since this show always references the interconnectedness of the characters' lives, I wonder if the numbers have something to do with, or are a reference to, the degrees of separation between them.
Liz Kelly: Well, if that's so, Kevin Bacon had better be on that wheel somewhere.
Jen Chaney: I like the degrees analogy, not sure that the numbers represent the distances between them, though. But it's an interesting idea.
I have this sneaking feeling that perhaps the numbers weren't always intended to correspond to particular characters, but at some point the writers decided to do that because fans kept complaining that they never explained the numbers. I could be wrong. I hope I'm wrong.
Sterling, VA: I heart taking the time out of my boring work day to chat LOST, so thanks for that!
But I bring a question, do we think Jack had David in the "first" timeline or only in this new post-bomb timeline?
Jen Chaney: I think that's definitely post-bomb. In the timeline as we knew it before, he and Sarah married, divorced and did not have children. And he even said last night on the island -- where Jack and everyone else remains blissfully unaware of the LA X timeline -- that he would make a terrible dad. Which implies that he wasn't one before.
Columbus, OH: I'm beginning to get the feeling that we'll never know why they found a glass eye in the Arrow Station.
Liz Kelly: I always assumed it was McPatchy's. He's the only guy on the island missing an eye, as far as I know.
The Island Visitor: I agree that it will most likely be Desmond who needs to get back to the island, but I think it would be much more interesting if Jacob needed Widmore to come back.
Liz Kelly: Many folks have speculated in the comments section that it is Widmore and not Desmond who Jacob is expecting to arrive on island.
I think there's every reason to believe that could be so, but remember, Desmond was told that the island isn't done with him yet -- so I wouldn't discount his arrival, too.
Jen Chaney: I also thought about it being Widmore, and I think that's just as likely, and an argument that's just as easy to support.
Part of the reason I leaned toward Desmond was because someone -- Hurley, I think, or maybe Jacob -- made a point of saying that the lighthouse was used to guide ships. Which is pretty obvious since that's what lighthouses do. I felt like that had to be said to intentionally remind us of someone who got to the island on a boat -- Mr. Desmond.
Juliet's the mommy: Hi Liz and Jen, great job with the write up this morning. I strongly believe David's mom is Juliet. Those blue eyes are a dead giveaway. Furthermore, when Juliet says in the end of episode 1 this year "maybe we can meet for coffee sometime" I think was actually her telling that to Jack, as Jack is trying to put the marriage back together. Which is why she told Sawyer that it didn't work: because she saw her future and it was with Jack and David. And, why did you not bring up the elephant in the room with Jack? He has no chest hair in the sideways timeline. WEIRD.
Liz Kelly: Okay, I have to admit to being a bad observer. Was Jack ever revealed to be hirsute? If so, I totally missed it. Unlike Sawyer and Desmond, Jack has been comparatively modest. He keeps his shirt on. But I'm willing to trust you on it.
Maybe sideways Jack, unlike the Jack Shephard of yesteryear, is a fan of manscaping.
And I'm really cottoning to the idea of Juliet being David's mom. It would make a lot of sense and it isn't out of the question that Jack and Juliet -- both doctors -- would have met and fallen in love at some point. But I do still think that coffee date was meant for Sawyer. Especially since sideways Jack and David's mom are no longer together.
Jen Chaney: I don't know, I think it's just as possible that Juliet's coffee moment could have been her flashing to what's happening in L.A., which could very well be concurrent with the island.
Either way, I very much like the idea of Kate being with both Jack and Sawyer. It's the only way that the Skater/Jater issue that has ripped apart out nation can ever be resolved.
Liz Kelly: Poll update: So far, 44 percent of you claim to be satisfied with season six thus far. Though 30 percent of you -- also a big group -- say you're still waiting and willing to give the show time to find its groove.
Washington, DC: So, I guess last night's episode proves that the island is all about smoke and mirrors, eh?
Liz Kelly: Give the man (or woman) a cigar.
Seven Corners, VA: I couldn't make out whose name was at 108 degrees, could you? And after Jacob's explanation, does it even matter?
Liz Kelly: The name accompanying 108 was "Wallace" and it was already crossed out. I don't know that we've ever encountered a Wallace in our story line before now. Have we?
Here's a screengrab.
old town: Am I really the only one who was completely frustrated by last night's episode?
I'm beyond caring about getting answers, I know they will be held off for a while (though it would be nice if the promos stopped shoving slogans like "the time for questions is over" in our faces).
I'm talking about things like consistency, meaningful plot progression, etc.
So we get this magic Lighthouse that appeared out of nowhere (I wont even bother with how ludicrous that was), with a magic mirror inside that could potentially provide answers for a lot of things and of course five minutes later Jack smashes it to bits. So here we have another convoluted series of events and introduction of new things to the show that were only used to teach Jack a vague lesson. What's the point of all this?
Liz Kelly: Well that's the million dollar question, isn't it?
The lighthouse didn't bother me. Maybe after the effrontery of the temple, the sudden addition of the lighthouse just doesn't seem like a big deal.
But I am in complete agreement with you about the annoying promos saying that the time for answers has come because we ain't getting many.
Jen Chaney: As I said in the analysis, I found the Hurley/Jack scenes awkward. And yes, the appearance of the lighthouse was a little random.
I am enjoying the L.A. stuff more, so that's compensating for my issues with how the island narrative is progressing. But I do hope there will be a moratorium on introducing new structures/statues/temples into the story at this point.
Baltimore: No mention as to the minimalist "next week on Lost" overly mysterious edit at the end of the episode. At first glance it suggested that "we haven't finished editing it yet". Or was it a cheap ploy?
Jen Chaney: Oh, yes. We didn't get around to discussing that.
Promos tend to be cheap ploys in general. It's possible they're still editing. Or it's possible that seriously significant stuff is going to happen and they can't bear to let us see a single second.
I say it's an just effective attempt to tease us.
Silver Spring, MD: Do you ever want to just punch the characters? I mean, they go and find this heretofore unknown lighthouse, with a magical viewing mirror, and Jack immediately smashes it. He couldn't just wait two minutes to see what was at number 108?
Liz Kelly: But that's Jack all over -- a hothead. Actually, I amend that statment: that's season one Jack all over. He is again the guy who acts first and asks questions later, if at all. He's forgotten his brief dalliance with blind faith and his father's advice to count to 10 (or was it five?), center himself and proceed calmly.
Jen Chaney: Well, yes and no. He's impulsive at times, and he tends to think he's right when he isn't. But in season one, Sawyer was really the hothead. Jack was the one who tried to maintain a sense of calm, even when he himself was losing it.
But in subsequent seasons, yes, he totally lets his emotions rule at certain moments.
I thought that emotional outburst seemed pretty sudden. Jack got really angry at Hurley all of a sudden, with not enough provocation, I thought.
However, the smashing of the mirrors was an interesting echo of the "Through the Looking Glass" reference from off-island and earlier in the episodes.
Lighthouse out of thin air: Re: the newly appearing lighthouse, didn't Jacob's cabin move or at least people couldn't find it again? Maybe Jacob can hide or move buildings he doesn't want to be found.
Jen Chaney: Ah, the whole hiding-the-building routine.
You make a good point. I guess I'm just saying that, as the other chatter pointed out, the arrival of the lighthouse didn't feel as organic narratively as, say, the cabin did.
Both are equally weird, mind you. But the cabin seemed to arise naturally out of the story-telling and this felt jammed in, for lack of a better way to explain it.
Jones, Indiana: I did enjoy the writers nod to our complaints of the temple being cheesy with Hurleys reference to Indiana Jones. I do however, think this line should have been one on your poll for "Best line of the show"!
Jen Chaney: Oh, good call. Forgot that one, and I had written it in my notes and everything!
Dueling Analysis: Where is the link to the dueling analysis? I kept trying to find it this morning, but only saw links for last week's "The Substitute."
washingtonpost.com: 'Lost' Dueling Analysis: 'Lighthouse'
Jen Chaney: It's on "Lost" Central, too. Just didn't go up until later in the morning.
3 years?: How does Jin know it's been 3 years?
Liz Kelly: Because Jin is able to read a calendar and knows he spent three years with the Dharmas before the explosion.
Wallace 108: "Bacon" was crossed out next to # 92 ... as in A Few Good Men (1992), in which Kevin Bacon costarred with Demi Moore, who was in Half Light (2006) with -- wait for it -- Henry Ian Cusick!
Liz Kelly: Whoa.
Jen Chaney: Maybe that referred to Sir Francis Bacon. Who, weirdly, made a cameo appearance in "The River Wild."
Isla, ND: That isn't 108 at Wallace, it's simply 08.
Jen Chaney: Look again, man. That's 108. There are numbers in the 90s before it, and more clearly readable numbers in the 120s that come later.
Liz Kelly: Yep, definitely 108.
Metro Center, DC: So since that little kid spooked unLocke last week, I've been thinking that maybe all kids on the island have special powers, can see certain things, can kill Smokey, or maybe the presence of the kids protects the Others (i.e. Jacob's peoples) from Smokey?
That's why they took Baby Alex from Rousseau, the kids from the Tailies, tried to take pregnant Claire, and took Walt. And that's why they're so interested in fertility - because they need perpetual protection. Who's with me?
Jen Chaney: Well, that's as good an explanation as any. But why would kids serve as protection? Stronger life force?
Re: Island Visitor (Detroit, MI): What if the person Jacob is trying to bring back is Aaron? MIB could have been using Claire's form in Season #4 when she told Kate not to bring him back to the island. Likewise, MIB has now convinced Claire that The Others have her baby - when he should know the kid's not even on the island. Aaron also has connections to at least a couple of the Losties (Jack, off-island Kate) so maybe there is something to that whole "sum of all the Losties/numbers" thing.
Liz Kelly: But we don't really know that Aaron isn't on the island. As Jen pointed out this morning, we don't know where in the timeline the island landed after the detonation at the hatch site.
And since that's the case, it opens up room for possibilities, like Aaron being old enough to be back on island and be old enough to tell MIB "the rules."
Jen Chaney: Exactly. Speaking of Aaron, I wanted to note something. We all debated about Claire's ultrasound and the Oct. 22, 2004 date that was on it.
Well, according to the most recent LindeCuse podcast, that was a production error. Which I still find hard to believe, but they sounded serious.
That strikes me as an incredibly random error, and one that someone should have caught. But I guess it's proof that sometimes we infuse great, deep meaning in things on the show that are, in fact, meaningless.
Liz Kelly: If we do over-analyze, though, it's nobody's fault but LindeCuse's. They have trained us to look for meaning where it normally would not be found. In baked hams and Xanadu, dammit.
Baltimore MD: Is Jack the only character we've seen that seems to have some recognition that things are off in the alt universe (when he got his scar, seeing Kate at the airport, the deja vu moment on the plane right before it didnt' crash)?
Liz Kelly: Hmmm, well, we did have that moment when Kate jumped in Claire's cab at the airport and seemed transfixed by the sight of Jack on the sidewalk.
Jen Chaney: Yes. And I would argue that Claire's outburst of Aaron's name may have been a flash to the other world, too.
But Jack seems more aware of it than anyone else.
arlington, va: last week you mentioned that if we follow the episodes from season one you can predict who the next episode will focus on in this season, who will be next weeks character?
Jen Chaney: Sayid.
Liz Kelly: Well, except that this week we had a break in the order. The fourth episode of season one focused on Locke, not Jack, and the episode immediately following "White Rabbit" (which did concentrate on Jack) was "House of the Rising Sun" -- all about, yes, Sun.
Jen Chaney: Liz, you're confusing me! So far we have been in synch with season one.
Ep three of this season and of season one was a Kate episode, ep. four was a Locke and ep. five was a Jack one.
Next week is a Sayid one, which breaks with that tradition.
Liz Kelly: Okay sister -- here's my problem. I was counting the season premiere as one episode, not two -- as apparently you and Lostpedia are.
Not fair, I say!
Jen Chaney: Oh, it's fair.
MORE SKELTER ANALASIS SIL VOUS PLAIT!!! You promised!!: Watchu think watchu think!? They TOTES just threw that in there ON PURPOSE. To bring out 1) Papa Shephard wasn't in his casket 2) Jack seriously needs to throw some money at a therapist to nip his daddy issues in the bud 3) HUGO BOSS addressing the possibility that due to time travel Adam & Eve could be a couple (male & female) Lostie
If we're going on all the biblical/theological references - although this is WAY out there - any anything/everything to do with Lost is anyways - any chances the bony couple could be the parents of MIB and Jacob? Like a Cain and Abel kinda deal... ?
I think we'll get the reveal when Jacob/MIB visit Adam & Eve in some episode off in the distance. I could tell you exactly which episode in the season if Jack hadn't smashed my magic stalking mirror...
Jen Chaney: I'm with you on this.
I think Hurley mentioned the possibility of the skeletons being Losties purely because there has been so much speculation about that among fans. And the fact that he did mention it, to me, rules it out as an option.
The Jacob/MiB parents option is interesting.
Re: Wallace: Wallace is a Scottish name. Perhaps Desmond Hume has a different birth name--or something.
One thing I think we'll see in another episode--Sawyer making plans to see his now-elderly but very much alive parents for Thanksgiving. If Locke's dad isn't the big meany in the new LA timeline, then it stands to reason that he did not con Mrs. Ford, so Mr. Ford didn't kill her and himself. Sawyer was a much more chipper dude in LA X than he was initially.
Liz Kelly: Wallace is indeed a Scottish surname, so that may not be as far-fetched as it sounds at first blush.
Who am I kidding? This show thrives on far-fetched. So in that case, you're probably right.
We never have gotten Desmond's full back story and seen what his true origins are -- so it is entirely possible that "Hume" is a name he adopted later in life.
Metro Center, DC: Jen Chaney: Well, that's as good an explanation as any. But why would kids serve as protection?
Answer: I believe it's because children are the future.
Jen Chaney: And we should teach them well, and let them lead the way?
Can we call this the Whitney Houston Theory of Lost?
Kidding aside, I see what you're getting at. You could be right.
Mike: What about those of us who are MORE THAN satisfied by the season so far? There is only 1 positive choice in your poll. Personally, I think the season has exceeded my expectations so far and I've been on the edge of my seat for all 5 episodes.
Liz Kelly: Good point -- I should have included that as an option. Consider yourself heard!
No Provocation?: "The Island" has been jerking Jack around for years, and has been seriously messing with his mind (seeing his dead father? Hello?).
Seemed to me that Jack just had enough in the lighthouse. He, like the viewers, want answers and they're not forthcoming.
Plus he's probably a bit ticked over the whole "I was broken and I thought the island would fix me" thing.
Liz Kelly: I'm glad you brought that up because we forgot to touch on the whole "I was broken and thought the island could fix me" thing in the analysis.
But that's a pretty simple one to analyze: It is, again, Jack looking for easy answers and showing a big-time lack of patience. Whose to say the island isn't yet going to fix him? And, anyway, what does "fixed" look like?
Jen Chaney: It's also an oversimplistic way of explaining what was going on with Jack. He had lost Kate, he was starting to have an addiction just like his father's that was interfering with work. And he also felt an incredible sense of guilt about leaving those people behind on the island.
So, Jack being Jack, he felt compelled to try to go back and do something about it. And, yes, as always he figured he could fix the situation, and himself in the process.
Kids: Kids are special because they are innocent.
So, MIB is the cause of the infertility? He made the Other women infertile to protect himself?
Jen Chaney: Okay, true. But innocence can't fight off evil.
But I had not considered the possibility that MiB caused the infertility. Intriguing! There's yet another mystery we need resolved, stat.
Milwaukee , WI: The seven ancient wonders of the world include 2 statues (Collossus of Rhodes and Zeus at Olympia), a temple (Artemis at Ephesus) and a lighthouse! (Lighthouse of Alexandria)
The others remaining: Hanging Gardens of Babylon
Mausoleum of Maussollos at Halicarnassus
Great Pyramid of Giza
If a pyramid shows up on the island then I think we'll all stop watching, right?
Liz Kelly: Well, considering all the hieroglyphs, I don't think a pyramid would be a complete surprise.
It's 2007 on the island: Ajira people are there too, there's been no time jump for them, Richard told Smokey Locke it had been three years. Case closed.
Some things are being way over-thought.
Liz Kelly: I think 2007 is a safe assumption, but... we don't know that the island didn't again move (including taking the Ajira folk along for the ride) when the explosion happened.
Jen Chaney: I was totally sure it was 2007. The problem I have is that I can't shake the sense that bloody-hands boy is Aaron. And he's clearly not 3.
Although maybe that was just a production error and someone accidentally cast an 8-year-old instead of a toddler.
Deskin WA: I'm surprised you two didn't mention the fact that Kate's number, 51, is the mirror number of Sawyer's 15. That seemed pretty significant to me, in an episode with so much mirror imagery. If they weren't going to give her one of -the- numbers, they could have picked anything. But that one in particular seems to link her with Sawyer. I wonder why?
Jen Chaney: Great observation. It would imply that they are soulmates of some sort, wouldn't it?
Liz Kelly: Yeesh.
Next Week's Episode...: is entitled "Sundown", are you sure it is about Sayid??
Jen Chaney: That would be a natural assumption. But this is what the press release says about next week's episode:
"'Sundown' - Sayid is faced with a difficult decision, and Claire sends a warning to the temple inhabitants, on 'Lost,' TUESDAY, MARCH 2 (9:00-10:00 p.m., ET) on the ABC Television Network."
Blinky eyed Jack: I think it's a little improbable that Juliet is David's mom, being that she lived in Miami. It's already a little far-fetched the amount of people crossing paths in "L.A.".
Liz Kelly: Can't agree with you. Pre-explosion Juliet lived in Miami. There's no guarantee that once things reset, so to speak, that she would have the same history and be at that identical point in her life.
I mean, if Jack can suddenly have a tween kid, it isn't that big of a leap to believe that Dr. Juliet (insert maiden name here) lives in Los Angeles and never even met Edmund Burke.
Hurley's Forehead: Was I the only one that noticed Hurley's forehead with the shifting ink patterns on it? When they kept cutting back and forth from Jacob to Hurley it seemed that his ink splotch kept changing. It just seemed like such a small continuity thing that they would have caught. Maybe I was wrong... Maybe I'm going to start seeing strange children popping out the woods, too.
Liz Kelly: I didn't notice it changing, but I am doubting that was a detail of importance. We have to presume the ink got on his forehead as a result of him using his arm to wipe sweat out of his eyes (though who uses the inside of hte forearm for that kind of swiping?). So we can assume he swiped multiple times -- which would change the appearance of the ink splotch, right?
Springfield, VA: My only complaint about last night's episode was when Hurley and Jack ran into Kate near Adam & Eve. It was way to contrived - especially her comments about looking for Claire.
Liz Kelly: Agreed -- the Kate encounter was very contrived -- especially the knowing "I hope you find what you're looking for."
It was all of a piece with the exchanges between Jack and Hurley, that were equally forced and out of character. As Jen suggested in the analysis, it seemed a bit of a quick fix to get us where the writers want us to be on the continuum of Jack Shephard's story arc.
Liz Kelly: Jen, maybe this is a good point to talk a bit more about Adam and Eve?
Jen Chaney: I responded to something about that earlier in the chat, although now I am not sure if the response went live. It gets so crazy up in here sometimes.
Basically, to (maybe) repeat myself, I think Hurley made his Adam and Eve comment to let us know that no, they are not some past versions of the Losties. If they were, I think they would have saved that for a big reveal.
Liz Kelly: Okay, that's all the time we have today. We'll be back next week -- same time, same place. In the meantime, please continue the discussion in the blog.
Jen Chaney: Yet again, you have overwhelmed us with your questions -- in a good way! Sorry we couldn't get to all of them.
Thankfully, I feel confident that we'll all still be just as confused at this time next week. So see you then!
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.