Austin Improv

They could just say time travel is scientific not supernatural.

slappywhite wrote:They could just say time travel is scientific not supernatural.

Maybe it's because of those strange moments like when Ben materializes at the Sahara desert dressed in a Dharma Parka, or when Ben moves through a series of doors that seem increasingly ancient in age, but I think the brand of time travel Lost presents is more supernatural than scientific. Also, Desmond became, like Billy Pilgrim before him, unstuck in time as a result of moving through some kind of unstable spacetime field between the boat and the island. That seems like supernatural time travel. I mean, that's funky ju-ju Christopher Reeve using a penny in Somewhere in Time kind of freaky time travel. It seems like scientific time travel would involve a machine with a bunch of spinning things and lasers and nanofusion accelerators and... what the hell am I talking about? I suppose one can argue that, since time travel is a subject pursued by physicists, then time travel earns the category of science rather than supernature. It's also easy to argue that the genre of science fiction, which has featured a great deal of time travel over the years, rarely approaches the subject of time travel in terms of wizards and ghosts and demons, but rather as a scientific possibility. So, I agree that the writers can be excused for saying there are no supernatural phenomena behind the mysteries of the island because time travel is arguably more scientific than supernatural.
And now 3 Buts:
1. But... I don't remember the writers saying there was nothing supernatural going on.
2. But... no matter who said what, Lost is seriously kicking ass, and I want them to bring out whatever they've got, even if what they've got goes against what they said they have.
3. But... Jacob's cabin moves, and Jacob is invisible, and only a select few can hear or see Jacob, and Walt can appear just about anywhere in some spiritual holographic form, and so can other dead people, and Walt also summoned a bird to its window-crashing death, and over 40 people survived a brutal airplane crash, and Locke's disabled legs worked from just crashing on the island.
I dunno, kinda supernatural.

I've got your back, Jeff.

Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse wrote: How important is it for you to get the science right?
CC: The science needs to be right enough that we kind of create a sense of believability to the story telling.
DL: We function on Jurassic Park rules, which are, if you can convince me that a mosquito can bite a dinosaur and then get preserved in amber, and that the DNA will not degrade over all that period of time, then you can show me a cloned dinosaur and I won't call it a science-fiction movie. And, you know, we try to do the same thing on the show. If something highly unlikely occurs, we try to offer up some grounding in the actual physical world that we understand in an effort to explain it—except in the case of things that don't potentially have a scientific explanation, which is where the show begins to go into its own territory.
CC: But we're always trying to skirt that line between the two possible explanations, the scientific one or a mythical and magical one, and we are purposefully ambiguous about which one might be correct. Obviously, certain things fall into the science category and certain things fall more into the mystical category, and that just sort of depends on what story we're telling that week.

There's a lot of fan talk that any non-rational or fictional or magical explanation of the island's happenings is a completely unacceptable cop-out. So far, there are plausible scientific explanations for everything that's happening, so people have accepted what's going on. Does being called out by viewers (or the press) worry you?
DL: Well, first off, I would challenge that assertion, and say, how does Yemi walking out of the jungle, the deceased brother of Eko, have a scientific explanation? I guess you would argue that he doesn't walk out of the jungle, that this is all sort of happening in Eko's head, that it's a hallucination. Would that be the case, is that...

No, what I was thinking was the stuff that has been explained so far has a scientific explanation, whereas the other stuff, we're waiting, we don't really know.
DL: Right.
CC: I think the question kind of strikes right at the core of the central theme of the show, which is the notion of faith versus empiricism. Jack represents the empiricist camp, and Locke represents the faith camp, and, you know, who is right? Well, the show hasn't fully answered that question yet.
DL: Hopefully it won't feel like it's a cop out when the show does answer that question, because we never promised a show that was based entirely and grounded in science. It's nice that it's able to do that, but we reserve the right to go in the direction that the uber-plan directs us.

source: http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/s ... 60693.html

Another good PM article here: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science ... l?series=6

Brad is great. Gives us the chocolate cake.

I think there's a strong possibility that by the end the Lost writers will make Ben's character very very likable. I hope this isn't the case. Some twist at the very end will make you realize all the while he's actually defending the safety of the world.

His brutality in the desert... Holy crap.

HerrHerr wrote:

Kathy Rose Center wrote:SPOILER ALERT ...

HerrHerr wrote: 2) Ben is the worst father ever (or worst fake father ever).

Is not!! It was the first time I ever remember seeing Ben cry, so his affection for her was genuine. He just made an arrogantly bad "call." And that was also genuine disbelief on his face when the commando called his bluff. A thoroughly evil guy would not have been so affected by that turn of events. And even the best parent has been known to make a tragic mistake. That's what makes it such a tragedy.

I don't see Ben as evil. I see him as an emotionally damaged guy trying his best to survive in a capriciously dangerous environment. I'm glad to see his character being given such complexity and depth. One-dimensional villains are so boring! And he might actually turn out to BE a "good guy" ... in some obscurely twisted way, heh heh heh.

Yeah, I was just being sarcastic. I agree, the cool thing about Ben's character is that we don't know whether he is "good or evil." The layering of his character is complex and last night's episode "peeled" another new layer for us. He was playing by "the rules" (whatever those are) and got hosed. But we still don't know what his full agenda is.

I'm still hoping to see some more to Locke. He used to be my favorite character. Desmond almost took over that title. Now it's Ben.

Well, the way to make the time travel scientific is that purple radiation stuff.

It was above the island when the hatch exploded
It was used by Farraday on his mouse to jump into the future

So, theeeeeoretically, the island is rife with this kind of radiation and someone who knows how to manipulate it properly (presumably Ben, who knows his shit) can time travel.

I definitely remember the articles where they said things happening on the island were definitely explainable in real world terms.

They have since changed their mind about that, but I don't have a problem with it at all. Obviously.

I just moved out of my old place on Wednesday and was not able to watch the show last night.

Did anyone dvr it in hopes of watching it this weekend? I am not sure if I have the computer technology to watch the show on-line.

God, I feel so...

...ummm...you know....

Boo... I'm not big on the lovefest between characters. There was very little of this episode I enjoyed.

Hey!


Are they still doing the pop-up version of the previous week's episode each week. Like right beofre the current week's episode or the day before?

HerrHerr wrote:Hey!


Are they still doing the pop-up version of the previous week's episode each week. Like right beofre the current week's episode or the day before?

nope. they've been showing grey's anatomy instead.

by the way, i'm going to withhold on talking about the newest episode until the newest episode is good.

I went ahead and read the synopsis of last week's show. Sounds like a yawner compared to the previous Smokie episode.

They seem to be under the impression that anyone gives a crap about Jack and Kate's happiness.

acrouch wrote:They seem to be under the impression that anyone gives a crap about Jack and Kate's happiness.

Peeeeeeeeny! (Think Stella).

That's where the real love is.

HerrHerr wrote:
Peeeeeeeeny! (Think Stella).

That's where the real love is.

"But he's my SON!" (Think annoying)

I'm just glad we haven't heard that in a while.