Comments on: Wild Speculation – “Dead is Dead”

By: DezziesOtherLifeBrotha

DezziesOtherLifeBrotha — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:47:47 +0000

Of course he may not be dead…. THIS IS LOST! He just got shot… c’mon.. This is driving me nuts. How long has everyone on this board watched this show? four years? Five years? Let’s see a show of hands?

Would it really shock anyone if he was alive? How many frickin people have been shot and lived on this damn show… like a hundred!??!

Young Ben… Locke…Mikhail… Keamy (that guy got killed at least 3 times)… the list goes on and on.

Is it just me or is it a little too abrupt (even more abrupt than masterfully killing off the awful paulo and nikki) killing this guy. Why introduce him at all…

By: DezziesOtherLifeBrotha

DezziesOtherLifeBrotha — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:28:59 +0000

Exactly! All this Locke isn’t the REAL Locke blah blah blah… He’s too Confident hooo haa hoo… it’s all mularkey. Seriously.

He has been this confident. Man From Tallahassee is a great example. Most of Season 2 is a better one.

And he has had his confidence shattered. We have seen it happen a few times now, but his character is growing, changing.

BTW, another episode this season was titled “Whatever Happened, Happened” Is that a set in stone RULE because it was an episode TITLE?? I think we all know that that rule will be broken…. (faraday already broke it himself in his interaction with Desmond)

By: Iwantmykidneyback

Iwantmykidneyback — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:45:28 +0000

and Christian also appeared when Locke fell down the well. If he was a real body he would be trapped down there.

By: Iwantmykidneyback

Iwantmykidneyback — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:40:50 +0000

I think the title and Ben’s comments just make Locke look more epic than ever. It’s like Ben’s saying, “you can’t do this.” and Locke saying in typical Locke fashion, “Don’t tell me what I can’t do!”

By: cap10tripps

cap10tripps — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:30:34 +0000

To me this is interesting. There is something going on with resurrection obviously. You could certainly be right about manifestations of imagination, but what is the purpose? I would suppose it’s the island using imaginations to put forth its agenda.

Remember we have seen Christian do things like taking the picture off the wall that a simple imaginary figure could not do, so I would propose that there is much more to it then just imagination. Whatever Smokey is, I believe it can take physical forms of the deceased. Perhaps it uses the imagination of the people on the island and connects them to the bodies that have rested somewhere on the island. Everyone we have seen that is physically dead (Christian, Yemi, Alex, Libby, Ana Lucia, Locke) or most probably dead (Claire) that has manifested one way or another have died or has had their dead body on the island.

Your theory would actually work with mine (Smokey=Locke) or Zombie’s (Smokey=Richard). That is, perhaps all other manifestations were just manifestations that seem as real as you are me. There are theories to why this is as well, but let’s not venture that for now. Perhaps Richard and Locke are different. Perhaps they are actually resurrections (you would think at least Locke is). If this is the case, then perhaps he is resurrected with the soul of Smokey or perhaps he was resurrected by Smokey or the island (which Smokey could very well be a manifestation or agent of). Any way you slice it, all interesting stuff…

By: cap10tripps

cap10tripps — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:52:29 +0000

Okay, so I need a bit of evidence to back my hypothesis. How bout the fact that when capturing Sayid Ilana says she is working for the family of one of Widmore’s cohorts. Now we see her leading a group on the beach with guns and a metal box which may or may not be an armory. These facts would provide enough evidence to hypothesize that she is working for one side of the war. If you accept this possibility, then a double cross would certainly make for an interesting twist. Either way I’m betting she is working for one of them with the specific purpose of controlling the island…

By: cap10tripps

cap10tripps — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:44:54 +0000

Woh, woooooh. Seriously though, I’ll concede to respect your opinion. Just understand that that just about every LOST fan that I’m friends with or have had discussions with or even gone back and forth with on Doc’s sites love the theoretical speculation that is the heart of a site like this. If you don’t, no problem here. Understand that thousands of us do, so relaxabate. Let the speculation fly, and come up with your own “more intellectual” theories that will probably end up being just as wrong as the rest of them. In fact, I’d like to hear one. Not to pulverize it, but to honestly disect it and ponder like I would with any other that sparks my interest…

By: Michel

Michel — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 03:30:01 +0000

Some evidence, at least, my friend. Some evidence is needed. At least when other stuff seems to be contradicting it. It’s easy to just make stuff up. The real treat is to hit, and not miss. Things don’t come out of the blue that much in LOST. They clues are just real subtle. The endgame is getting near, so just wildly speculating, with no regard for what’s going on in the show, it’s just missed bullets.

By: Handsome Smitty

Handsome Smitty — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:58:15 +0000

Dead is Dead refers to Alex – she was dead the day Ben snatched her – and he was on trial for ignoring that fact

By: RandomZombie

RandomZombie — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 23:30:20 +0000

I bother to theorize, evidence or no, because I like to, I want to, and it typically makes for good conversation.
With Lost you don’t know what’s going to happen, and events often occur out of nowhere, with no previous hints or evidence given.

I write the thoughts and ideas that I get while watching the show. Sometimes there is evidence, sometimes there isn’t. If we stick to talking about only the things that are supported by firm evidence, discussion will get very stale very quickly.

By: Michel

Michel — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 23:16:41 +0000

???? We bother to theorize to get ahead of show’s events, to figure out things as much as we can and follow the clues the wirters are leaving us. To put the pieces together. And that’s fun. Putting a puzzle together it’s fun, because it has a long-term goal and challenges your intellect, attention to details and logic-skills.

What you do not do is do a completely different thing with it. You don’t place the puzzle pieces forming a giant flower just because it looks nice on your mantlepiece because, eventually, you’re going to have to put it apart and keep on with the puzzle in the correct order.

When you say “pondering about them” you must mean “pondring if they’re accurate. If the theories were wrong, it was a missed shot. But if they were right, great. That’s what we should aim for.

BTW, where is that evidence of Smokey taking the form of dead people? Smokey. Forget what the writers have said before, they have been deliberately misleading from time to time. The only thing that is canon is what can be seen in the show. Only that.

Don’t feel bad about. I’m just stating my opinion. Theorizing without limits (not narrow limits, but limits anyway) makes up for some esterile theories. And esterile theories are definetely not that fun. In fact, they’re a downer.

By: cap10tripps

cap10tripps — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 23:07:06 +0000

Why even bother to theorize? I feel like there should be a Debbie Downer sound effect after your posts. We theorize because it’s fun. I’ve had and read a bunch of theories that turned out completely wrong. That does not take away from the fun of reading, writing, and pondering them. Hell, what a rush when they turn out to be right. Try it out sometime man. You’re missin out on a big part of what LOST is.

Btw, there is 100% factual evidence that Smokey has taken the form of the deceased. We’re just taking the ball and running with it. What evidence do you have that these theories are wrong? You’re contradicting yourself again. It IS speculation and not fanfiction until proven to be. When that happens we will move on to some more speculation that will crack your monocle and clog your wooden pipe yet again…

By: Michel

Michel — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 23:04:01 +0000

Except that we saw a person apparently be resurrected… Locke. And Ben said he had no knowledge of that being possible… and seemed genuine. He said that Locke was walking among the living. And, certainly, we don’t have any precedent for it, because those who have been seen walking after their deaths act radically different from Locke… OR from their past living selves, and are capable of non-physically-possible feats.

We don’t know why Richard told Locke he had to die. Mayb a Locke from the future, knowing how thing would turn out, told him that. No one know if Richard is aware of resurrection. He wasn’t aware of time travel, after all. See what I mean?

By: Michel

Michel — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:57:52 +0000

You can be completely sure I never said absense of speculation, but purification of speculation… narrowing down the theories so we can depurate what doesn’t make sense and end up having a more precise one. If you want to have fun imagining things up, that’s completely fine… but you’re not interested in what’s actually happening in the show… just content to let your imagination run wild, like if you were writing up a fanfic. Not sure if that’s what you wanna be doing.

I haven’t contradicted anything. If we take what has been provided to us… Locke resurrected, doesn’t remember the inmediate moments after he got out of the casket, and has been acting exactly like ever before after that… something that sets him apart from all the other supposedly resurrected people in the island: Christian, Yemi, Alex. Hell, we don’t know if those people are resurrected… just that their bodies were gone. But are they alive again? Alex is not.

We saw Claire acting weird… probably after her death… along with her dead father… and she was suddenly and probably all-knowing. But that is not what has happened to Locke.

The theory I posit is: Christian, Claire, Yemi and Alex ar all semi-material manifestations that are made from the memories of the castaways. That’s why Jack keeps seeing his father in one outfit, but the other guys see him in another (except Hurley). And Christian is the one with more prominence because he was the one that had met most of the castaways before dying… Jack, Ana Lucía and Sawyer. That’s all.

Nothing of that has anything to do with Locke. He isn’t changing outfits, communicating directly with Jacob, suddely dissappearing or teleporting to places far from the island. He can’t do any of those things… because, like Ben says, he’s walking again among the living. Period.

And Nothing of that has anything to do with Richard. When you say Richard could be “possibly dead” you may mean “possibly resurrected”, but then Ben wouldn’t be so surprised with Locke, since Ben must be familiar with the reason of why Richard doesn’t age anymore.

By: ryan sims

ryan sims — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 22:47:41 +0000

but, they’re both in the second part. as is a mysterious new character named tommy.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1402314/