'Lost': Happy we'll be, across the sea

 When I was a kid, I lived in a very small town, population 800-some. The very edge of town was the local recreational complex, where I spent most summers at the local baseball field, being very bad at playing baseball. Inevitably, after one practice was over, another would start up, and the rest of us kids would hang around for that practice, waiting for our rides home, out into the country. This, naturally, was as good a time as any to go exploring, to go looking for hidden treasure and adventure and all of the things kids go looking for. Now, this was small town South Dakota, so we didn't find any of that. Nor did we find pirates or ghosts or, I don't know, ninjas. We just found lots of weeds and the occasional wild animal.

Oh, and we also found a cave.

To be more precise, we found a tunnel. Peering into its darkness, into the earthy walls that made up its bulk, we could see the glimmer of daylight on the other side. Now, there's very little to get a bunch of young boys excited than sticking a tunnel in front of them, a tunnel where they don't know where it ends up, a tunnel where they have to go racing home to get flashlights to go exploring. And that was just what we did. We ran to a friend's house. We got flashlights. We turned them on. We ventured inside. We went seeking the other end. What was there was sure to be better than what we had in our tiny town. Adventure and talking animals and knights and mystical kingdoms. That's what you get at the end of a mysterious tunnel.

The promise of what's at the other end of a mystery is almost always more interesting than what's actually there. You can get all of the solutions or explanations or answers you want, but you are almost always going to want to go back to the moment before you entered the tunnel. This is just the nature of being human, really. Too many shows like "Lost" spend all of their time focusing on what's at the other end of the tunnel, when they should really be focusing on what it's like to stand outside of it and hold your breath in anticipation of the wonder of what might be at the other end. "Lost" has always been all about getting your flashlight and getting ready for the first steps into the unknown. It has put off answers as long as humanly possible, raising them up to the level where almost no one was going to be satisfied with whatever it came up with. We're getting answers, sure, but they're not always the answers we want. And if that's the case, is the problem with the writers, for not satisfying our needs, or is it with us, for not being open-minded enough to jump on board?

I ask these questions because I'm of two minds about "Across the Sea." One part of me, the TV critic part, the part that dissects these things and picks them apart and looks for things to dislike about them, mostly really liked the episode, aside from a few niggling points. It was a bold move, I think, giving over the whole of an hour of TV, so close to the end of the series, to two characters we barely know, and the episode did a good job of turning their pseudo-Greek theatrical drama into something real and psychologically relatable. One of the chief criticisms of the sixth season of "Lost" has come from the idea that Jacob and the Man in Black -- as both characters and concepts -- are too vague, their motivations too unclear. Because I've thought the season has been good about foregrounding the characters we already know and love and keeping Jacob and the MIB's machinations in the background, I mostly haven't minded that this is where the season has been playing out. But I can see where the people who feel that Jacob and the MIB aren't wholly understandable as characters are coming from, at least, even if I simultaneously disagree after tonight's episode and don't think it really matters as we head into the series' end game.

But the other part of me is a "Lost" fan, and the "Lost" fan in me is starting to wonder if Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse have ever written any really bad science fiction and/or fantasy. Take it from someone who's written some of this: There is nothing worse than having a friend (or, worse, one of your kids) foist a lengthy, complicated, novel-length epic about some other world you've never heard of, filled with half-explanations and funny names and weird characters that come up out of nowhere and expecting you to not only love it but follow all of it. Exposition is both the enemy of an effective science fiction or fantasy tale and a grim necessity. Sometimes, you just need to have a scene where Giles sits Buffy down in the library and explains the true nature of the latest threat. By and large, "Lost" has avoided having scenes like this. By and large, the show has chosen to show, not tell. 

Honestly, this is completely admirable. It's one thing to have a character sit down and tell us bluntly how the final five Cylons came from the Earth that was to live among the Twelve Colonies on "Battlestar Galactica." Sure, it answers everything, but the longer it goes on, the more the air goes out of the room. You need your exposition to be quick and snappy, and on a show like "Galactica" or "Lost," there's very little room for quick or snappy, since everything has season after season of backstory behind it. So I understand the impulse to err on the side of caution, to have us learn about the sickness by seeing Sayid go through it or learn about the heart of the Island, tonight, by showing it as a mystical, glowing pool that no one can quite comprehend.

 But at the same time, as mentioned, I've written a lot of pretty terrible science fiction and fantasy in my time, and what inevitably happens when you give it to someone to read is that they pepper you with questions about things that don't quite make sense. The thing is, you've probably placed the answers to those questions within the story somewhere, but because they're lost in a morass of other information, the reader doesn't know what they're supposed to signify. And that leads to the reader having so many questions that they don't know how to find the answers they don't know they know (if that makes sense). The job of the writer in a situation like this is to make sure the right things get the right amount of attention, to make sure that the readers are always cognizant of just what's important for them to know.

For the most part, "Lost" has done a fantastic job of playing up what we need to know and making sure we know it at just the right time. Even without Jack yelling "WE HAVE TO GO BACK!" you know you're watching a flash forward at the end of "Through the Looking Glass" simply because Kate shows up. The series doesn't need to explain that the world Desmond inhabits in "Happily Ever After" is the "wrong" one because it has the flash-cut to Charlie's hand reading "Not Penny's Boat" to do all the heavy lifting for us. "Lost" has always been exceptionally good at directing our attention one way when it needs to distract us or making sure we pick up just the right pieces of information. Without that guiding hand, the story could become a big mess, just a bunch of information banging up against other pieces of information without any real coherence.

And yet I fear that the final season of "Lost" is courting this sort of problem. I'm not saying that Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse needed to sit down with an extra-critical creative writing teacher who would explain to them just what didn't make sense in their story or anything, but I do wonder if the producers think they've answered some questions without providing us with enough context to realize they've been answered. This is why I fear that the producers think they've solved the question of just what the sickness does to people by showing us how it affects Sayid, when, really, what we want is for someone to sit down and just explain the process to us. Hopefully succinctly, granted, but  we want that explanation.

To that end, as a "Lost" fan, the success of "Across the Sea" is almost wholly dependent on what happens in the three-and-a-half hours that will close out the season. The cave of softly glowing light? I suspect we'll get an explanation for that. What happened to the proto-Man in Black when he went down in there? I hope we'll get an explanation, but I fear the producers think "He became the Smoke Monster! Or something!" will suffice. Who was the Woman who raised the twins? How long has the Island been around? Where did any of these people come from to begin with? I fear that the producers think these questions have been adequately answered. I'm not going to say I need all of them answered to be satisfied with the ending -- I daresay the show could get away with answering none of them -- but by raising all of them at once this close to the end, "Lost" risks disorienting its audience even more than usual, particularly as we still don't have a terribly good idea of just what happens if the Man in Black gets off the Island beyond vague rumblings of doom.

And yet ... there's so much about "Across the Sea" that works, that is, indeed, almost harrowingly beautiful. This is a story of two boys, raised by another. This is a story of two twins, and depending on how you choose to interpret the story, either one could be the Bad Twin. "Across the Sea" takes a very modern story -- the giant, pop culture mash-up that is "Lost" -- and makes it feel like a myth, by boiling all of the elements of its story -- of every story, really -- and making them feel somehow both elemental and new. It's a story that takes a conflict that seemed almost depressingly black and white last week and introduces shades of grey into it all over the place. The Man in Black killed Sun and Jin and Sayid, sure, but he was also once a sad little boy who just wanted to go home, to get away from a mother who would never tell him what he needed to know (and that's a nice little bit of meta-fiction on the part of the writers). And Jacob may seem benevolent and wise now, but he's also someone who seemingly helped his mother kill and burn a whole village, just as he would later cause shipwrecks and even more death. There were answers buried in this story, sure, but even more importantly, there was a sense of origin, of things taking shape that could not be undone, of people who could have possibly stopped the events that are now destroying so many lives in the present, just by being good to each other, by being forthcoming. Maybe these aren't the answers we want, but they're beautifully wrought nonetheless.

Around the episode's mid-point, the Man in Black's real mother -- the one who was killed by the Woman who raised him -- tells the young boy that "there are many things across the sea." The boy has always believed this not to be true, believed that all he saw was all he would ever know. You can sense that ache in the way his mother says it, in the way the grown man later tries to build an improbable machine to move himself off the Island (the machine that would become the frozen donkey wheel). There is always a hope for something else, for another world just across the sea or at the other end of the tunnel. By making the Man in Black a boy who just wanted to find his true home, the series has made him at once recognizably human and a mythical archetype. By making Jacob a boy who yearned for his mother to love him like the prodigal son who spurned her, the series has done the same. The stories this episode takes its basis from -- both Biblical and mythological -- seem so cut-and-dry to us now because we've heard them for millennia. What this episode does is restore them to a place where they were about people with conflicting motivations, a time when these stories still had ambiguity.

When my friends and I entered the tunnel, we found a local farmer's field on the other side, and after a few rainy days, the tunnel mostly closed up. But we had our moment of possibility, of wonder. "Lost," at its best, evokes that possibility and wonder. But the Man in Black, one of that show's major characters, still stands on the shore of his prison, adrift from possibility, and he still looks for a way off, his anger calcifying into bitterness and maybe even evil as the years go on. We are all hoping for something Else, something better, even if you have all of the secrets of humanity buried at the heart of the place where you live. What makes "Across the Sea" work is how it taps into that very human desire, how it remembers that before he was the Man in Black, he was just a man.

Some other thoughts:

• *Here's the one thing I KNOW I didn't like: When it was established that the body of the Man in Black and the Woman were Adam and Eve, I REALLY didn't need the crazy flashback to Season One, and the discovery of the bodies. I got it, show. Thanks. I don't need the answer to every mystery to be accompanied by Lindelof and Cuse marching across the screen with a banner that reads, "ANOTHER MYSTERY SOLVED!"
• *The episode, to a degree, is only going to work insofar as you're willing to buy the performances of Mark Pellegrino and Titus Welliver, and I thought both of these guys hit it out of the park. The kids, though, I wasn't as sold on. Though I never would have guessed the mini-MIB would look so much like Justin Bieber.
• *Great shot: Jacob tumbles backward as the Smoke Monster emerges from the cave, soaring into the sky above him. 
• *Also worth praising: Michael Giacchino's score is always good, but it was on some other level this week. I particularly love the music when we first see the cave and when Jacob realizes that the body that housed his brother, at least, is dead. (I'm a sucker for mournful piano.)
• *So what do we think happened to the MIB when he disappeared into the cave? Was some part of the Man in Black absorbed into the Monster, leaving the body behind? Or did his soul somehow co-mingle with the Life Force of the Island, meaning that, in a very real sense, he IS the Island, and if he were to leave, it really would mean the end of all things? The latter is my wife's interpretation, and I sorta think she's right. (Added evidence: The light in the cave goes out.)
• *More food for thought: Would a lesser-known actress than Allison Janney have helped make the Woman easier to handle as a late-breaking very important character? And should this episode have aired earlier in the season to give Jacob and the Man in Black more context?
• *Finally, why are so many important things in this show nameless? The Island. The Monster. The Man in Black. The Woman. Discuss.
• *And if you're tired of hearing me jabber but still have ideas and thoughts, comment on this post or e-mail or Tweet me before tomorrow's "Lost" Wednesday.

--Todd VanDerWerff (follow me on Twitter at @tvoti)

Photos: Above: Jacob (Mark Pellegrino) just wants to get his mom, the Woman (Allison Janney), to love him best. Talk about dependency! Below: The Man in Black (Titus Welliver) just wants a name. Thanks a lot, mom! (Credit: ABC)

Related articles: 

'Lost' 10s: The 10 mysteries we most want solved

'Lost': Daniel Dae Kim says how fans view the ending will depend on how much they care

Complete Show Tracker 'Lost' coverage

Comments

[Leonel A Umana]

the man in black is a kidnap stranded victim of the island that wants to go home and jacob is the dupe that wants to protect it. Sound familiar. Replace the man in black with Jack and Jacob with Locke and you have the story of the two protagonist. I do not know what the writer intended but obviously the women is the real enemy here and all those who say they are trying to "protect it". If the series have any justice then the island gets blown up and all these "protectors" are sent into their own flashsideways version of hell. Having said that I hope Jack wake up and reliaze that whether the island is evil or not, all these "guardians" are on the wrong side. Kate decide to get a life. Sawyer too with Juliet. Ben decide he had enough of the island and start warning them off with help of Richard, Hugo, and Miles. And the Ghost of Jacob is sent to purgatory admitted being such a dupe, while the Ghost of their "mother" sent to hell for her deeds, and the man in black is reincarnated in another life for the crime done against him and atone what he done to. The Man in Black is both victim and victimizer.

[OldDarth]

Major, major fumble tonight.

Very, very disappointed. For the first time ever with the show. And so late in the game too.

The bottom line is this episode failed to answer to some of the BIG questions that have been six years in the making and brought up new ones about new characters that will never been seen again for which there is no investment in at all.

Major miscalculation.

[Johannes]

Nice writeup. I totally agree with you on the point you make about the flashbacks in today's episode. They were not only unneccessary, but also pulled me out of the story, because I was simply annoyed. Last week Kristin over at E-Online announced a scene in this episode would show us, that the writers had been planning this episode, and most of LOST, all along and not just making it up "along the way".

Well, I personally never understood that accusation ( which probably developed in the first seasons, when all the internet started going crazy about LOST and people who went to the troubles of putting their theories in forums etc. started to feel there were no answers and none of their theories seemed to hit the jackpot) and couldn't care less, as long as the product that comes out in the end is good, which LOST was and is, to me, most of the time.

But the thing is, I think, most people who care about such "accusations" are probably enough into LOST to remember the scene when Jack and Kate find the bones. And they would have understood without the flashbacks. Even I remembered it. And I only watched season one once, maybe twice. The stones I didn't remember, but the skeletons and the scene in general.

Great episode, but those flashbacks were totally unneccessary. I hope there will be enough uproar about them for the producers to cut them from the DVD's, Bluray or whatnot. Yeah. Probably...

[Matt]

Without getting into the specifics of whether or not I liked the episode (there were good parts and bad), I think this episode laid the foundation for Desmond's role. When Other Mother asked MIB how he knew that the donkey wheel would work with the light and water to free him from the island, he didn't know how he knew, he was just "special". I don't think this particular wording was an accident. We've been beaten over the head of late with the information that Desmond is special. We all assumed that it was mostly just because he could withstand electromagnetism. At the same time, though, we've been told that he's going to have to make a great sacrifice. What if MIB (or at least his soul) was turned into Smokey because he was special and could withstand EM as well? I think the sacrifice that Desmond may need to make is becoming the new Smokey, holding all the world's evil within himself and never leaving the island (with Jack keeping him there).

If not this, then I think the only other plausible explanation for Desmond's existence is that he's going to have to make some sort of sacrifice and reignite the light that was lost in the cave (with Jack taking over the island protector role and keeping the light safe in the future). I think either of these two paths is pretty plausible and given the path the show has followed, I don't honestly see how it will be anything other than one of those two directions.

[Bucky]

Ugh. This show has an utterly appalling moral agenda. The producers recently came out and said, to my understanding, in an interview that "MiB is completely evil, mystery solved."

So, evil, according to LOST, is asking questions, being frustrated with laughably cryptic, faux-deep clap-trap, trying to take control of your life and develop agency regarding the things you understand. Individuality and self-determination are evil, apparently.

Meanwhile, if you're a good little robot like Jacob who always tells Mommy the truth (no matter who it betrays) and follows every order, you're a good guy. Even when you beat your brother to death and throw him in a "worse than death" pit.

This is the same nonsense that's been happening all season, where characters that used to be defined by their drive and determination to carve their own destinies now sit around like cabbages waiting for another spooky new character to "tell them what to do." That's the problem of LOST: bad guys do naughty stuff like try to discover the almost certainly disappointing secrets of the Island and effect real lasting change on the story, good guys sit tight and wait to follow orders, no matter how stupid or delivered by whatever pointless character (i.e. the Temple crew).

[Luke]

I know that producing a timeline of the Lost saga has proven notoriously difficult, but when did this episode take place? They were speaking Latin at the beginning, which made me think it was an ancient setting. But then they switched inexplicably to English. Was this for the viewer's sake, so that we didn't have to read subtitles for an hour? Or are we to assume that this story took place in a more recent context? Or does time travel make anything possible?

[lis]

What about the scene earlier episodes where the MIB and Jacob are sitting on the beach? How did the MIB get back into his body for that scene if he was decomposed in the cave?

[Neil]

I think it's both dangerous and pointless to get wrapped up in wanting to know the origin of origins. Did we really expect them to trace this thing back to the origins of the universe? The only way to have done this is to have blatantly invoked the work of some deity, which I think we all can agree would have drawn even more outrage. The simple fact is any religion, mythology, or scientific belief structure has question marks when it comes to the "Beginning of Things." The Judeo religions say that in the beginning, there was God. But where did God come from? Science says there was the Big Bang, but where did that accumulation of mass come from?

The bottom line is, that no matter what you're working with, you can't and never will be able to explain The Beginning Of Things. We all must accept that existence, the world, and life 'Simply Is." Then you pick a point to begin telling a particular part of the story.

The writers of Lost forewent explaining the existing of the Light of Life, and the history of its protectors (the Woman and prior). Instead, they told us the story of Jacob and his brother, which, really, is all that is relevant to the story of the castaways. Those are the two characters influencing the fate of the main characters. We know their backstory, we know their motivations, and I, for one, and more than satisfied.

Expecting this show to somehow incorporate its own mythological version of the history of existence is not only unrealistic, it's guaranteeing yourself disappointment.

[TD]

It looks like Ben will become the new Men in Black. The similarities between the two characters are striking, but the way that MIB left his "mother" to join the Others was reminiscent of when Ben left his father to join the others. It looks like it will be Jack and Ben left playing the game.

[joel]

@Luke: Pretty sure the context of the episode is ancient, as in a long, long time ago on an island far, far away. They switch to English to placate the audience, in much the same way that they switch from Russian to English in The Hunt for Red October (and Sean Connery switches to Scottish).

[Scott]

Completely agree with Neil's point above.

I don't think the MIB completely absorbed the Light, because Ben was still enveloped in it when he turned the wheel and got dumped in the Middle East.

Also not sure how anyone can be the new Guardian since what made it feasible was that you didn't age because you drank that potion. However didn't the MIB smash it to the ground when Jacob gave it to him? And why did Jacob do that in the first place?

[Terry]

I thought the episode overall was a piece of brave storytelling, but the flashback to Season One at the end almost completely ruined it for me. Without any explanation Cuse and Lindelof gave us a flashback into The Island's history and respected the viewers to keep up. And then at the end they forgot their whole strategy, or had a minute they needed to fill, and brought out the sledgehammer to make sure any imbeciles or casual fans who happened to stumble upon this episode had some kind of vague understanding of what was going on.

My other problem was having The Mother explain the light to Jacob and The Man in Black. The explanation just fell flat like Michael and Hurley discussing why the voices whisper on the island. You don't need to give some explanation for everything, just let there be a little mystery. Let the viewer get caught up in Giachinno's music and the imagery and implications of the light in the tunnel. Viewers should have been able to ascertain that this is the "force" that the Dharma people are there to harness and the village of men were an early prototype of the Dharma scientists. I would have been more satisfied without hearing how The Island has a light that men will try to take and if the light leaves all of the light in the world will go out. I know they are trying to give the viewer an understanding of how why it will be so bad of the Smoke Monster leaves, but once again, just leave a little mystery or show us how it is bad. Don't give me a couple of cheesy lines of dialogue that explain things without really explaining them.

But besides all of that it was great seeing Man in Black and Jacob's history and having multiple scenes where they interact with each other. Also the Cain and Abel/Prodigal Son references were fun. And I also particularly liked Man in Black's line to Jacob about how everything is easy for Jacob and he doesn't understand men because he just "watches from above."

[Maura]

My immediate reaction when it was over, was that I HATED that episode. Maybe at this point, I'm so invested in the Lostie characters that 1 whole hour w/o them, so close to the end, sort of bothered me.

I knew Allison Janney was going to be on - and I thought she'd be awesome. But I sort of hated that it was her playing the crazy mother. CJ on West Wing? Awesome. Liberty Bell's mom? Perfection. Lost? Not a good fit. And after all this mysticism and hype about Jacob, wasn't it played like he's a just a bit dim? I think the whole thing seemed incredibly cheesey.

I think the light/source killed MIB and took his energy, creating the smoke monster. His body was dead - he previously accused Jacob "you took my body."

My favorite part is that they still haven't named MIB. I now imagine hearing Desmond call him "Brotha."

Did ANYONE predict Adam and Eve would be MIB & Mommy Dearest??!!

[KarenJ]

Well, I'm enjoying the ride with these last episodes. I've read a good bit of sci-fi and fantasy and have no problem at all 'falling for' a story line or the worlds or creatures/persons within that world. I don't have a problem not knowing 'when' they were on the island in this episode. It was a long time ago - that's good enough for me.
But, I'm also not understanding the 'no name' stuff. Really, my only disapointment - MIB has no name? What? Gee wiz.... OK - he popped out second so his 'real' mother had no name for him. But 'other mother' didn't name him either? He's called 'brother' or 'son'? Well - OK then. But, in Greek and Roman myths everyone has a name. The places have a name - always. I find Greek and Roman mythology down right confusing - BECAUSE of all the names and places. So - is this story more closely related to a fairy tale, where the places and people are more ambiguous and even sometimes nameless? I'm sure there's a point here - that it can be anywhere anytime or any man/woman - or something wacky like that. I'm hoping it'll be more clear in the next couple of weeks.
Todd - I'm with your wife on the MIB/smokey bit. His 'blackened heart' mingled with the 'energy' (or whatever it is) of the island. Perhaps he's not 'the island' - but somehow part of it. And if mortal man desires the light in the tunnel, but can never be fulfilled by it - and now MIB/smokey IS that - not a good thing indeed.
And the wine in the bottle? That's quite a revelation huh? And Adam and Eve NOT being Jack and Kate? Frankley - I'm relieved. That theory always resonated as odd to me. (wouldn't that be yet another story line that would have to be told at the end?)
Very well written and thoughtful write-up Todd. I'm finding that very few TV critics take the time or care enough to be REALLY thoughtful about the show they're writing about. They just blast out a few points and some knee jerk reactions - usually.

[Neil]

Old Darth, you're exactly who my post below was aimed at. The show was NEVER going to explain everything, simply because it's impossible. There was no "Life, the Universe, and Everything" answer that they could have provided that wasn't either (a) laughable, (b) a cop-out or (c) overly burdensome to the rest of the story. Major world religions have struggled for millennia to explain the nature of existence, and the true nature of good, evil, and everything in between. Yet so many people think the writers of Lost were going to come up with an explanation that tied it all together in a neat little package?

Yeah... um, no. We simply must accept that some things merely "are."

So basically, if you burdened yourself with unrealistic expectations, you have no one to blame but yourself for their not being answered.

[Craig]

I give up. Come on LOST...I no longer care wether we gets a bunch of answers or not...but seriously, we need SOME answers. I could do without Adam and Eve if I was given who came before Jacob's fake mother. I could care less what the whispers are if we were given an hour on the ancient Egyptian inhabitants. Only 2 (i guess 3) episodes left and we're given another richard-esque episode. This is the final FINAL hours...i can't imagine showing us the fight/outcome between Charles and MiB is more important than why it's such a big deal in the first place.

Apparently this is the island Scientology was talking about and the glowing light is the rest of the alien souls that didn't escape into a body like they're friends...help us out Lost....did Jacob learn everything he needed from fake mom in a scene not shown between them? did he just become "apart" of her and therefore know the answers? and since he's dead and was the only one remotely aware of what was going on back then...how is the rest of the cast going to know? MiB def. doesn't know since he couldn't even find it alone...

I'm just gearing up for mild to moderate disappointment come the 2.5 hour Sunday showing...for a show that really heavily, if not entirely, of what came before or happened before...why is it ok to fore go such monumental backstory for the island.

[MoreBSG Please]

Todd, I do agree that introducing such a 'big' character at the end of the show was a misstep. Since Season 5 closed with Jacob & MIB on the beach, it would have been very cool to start with last night's episode as the first episode of Season 6. So much more would have been answered and we would have concentrated on who the 'candidate' was to protect the MIB from leaving.

I love your analogy of 'shades of gray' and that was well established for MIB & Jacob. Jacob is no saint and we've kind of seen his manipulative ways and MIB is no longer the bad guy who is out to kill and corrupt. His motives were extremely clear because of last night's episode. MIB was humanized almost completely and how can you not empathize with wanting to go 'across the sea,' or try and get out. I have always liked Cuse/Lindelof storytelling - but a lot of the storytelling this season, has been filler. I'm ok with taking some of the bad with sparks of greatness. One last nitpik - the light @ the end of the tunnel was cheesy - but its ok. They had a point and they made it.

[Sparkly Cave Light is the New Black]

You mention the fact that Lost has put off the answers as long as humanly possible and the idea that maybe this episode would have worked better earlier in the season. I think both of these issues point to a continued problem throughout the series.

I read a book on writing (it may actually have been "On Writing" but I can't remember) that advised something like, "if you have an amazing twist or a grand reveal, don't save it. Use it now. Doing so will create opportunities for more amazing things later."

Unfortunately, the show runners at Lost have done nothing but put off the really big reveals, substituting them with fuzzy non answers and newly created questions that add to a false sense of suspense. Doing this has closed off innumerable pathways for exciting story telling. I've really enjoyed Lost, but I think this 'withholding' strategy has backfired and made me care less about the final outcome, which is a shame.

[Andrew Hanson]

As we watched the scene when the mother explained the light in the cave, my friend threw up her arms and proclaimed she's never watching "Lost" again (like she does every week).

I realized it was a lie.

The mother explaining the cave and later that Jacob had to take over for her reminded me of Desmond and Kelvin looking for their replacement in the hatch.

No one truly understands the purpose or power of the island, but there are always people who feel that the island has a purpose and power. They make up stories about why the island is the way it is, but in reality, no one knows. They just know that it needs to be protected.

And I'm cool with that. As long as Lost keeps interesting, well-developed characters struggling to do what they think is right, I'll keep watching.

[lazarus]

Bucky, I don't think the producers are passing judgement on MIB at all, or siding with Jacob's actions. When they referred to Smokey as "evil", isn't it possible they're talking about what he has become, not who he used to be? I think this episode is perfect coming right after that pronouncement, because now we can see that evil doesn't necessarily begin that way.

There's no way we're expected to endorse everything we've seen Jacob do over the course of the last season, and one of the goals of last night's story was certainly to paint a portrait of him that was far from squeaky-clean.