"I Hope You're Happy Now, Jacob"--The LOST Season 5 Thread

oops, ambiguous flashbacks make me forget to finish sentences. All I'm saying is these people have a right to dissect this scene since we're usually given such definitive markers and this scene didn't seem to have much to do with anything. We just want it to mean something!

I really think they just chucked it in at the last moment as some sort of vague justification for Juliet being flaky and indecisive.

all I'm asking for is a nkotb lunchbox once in a while, why is that so wrong?

i don't know what you call dude's haircut either but no one was rocking that shit in the 70s

^^^ this! I'm not saying dad should've had a perm and chops, but he would've had something that pre-dated 70s style rather than something that post-dated 70s style.

Sorry, I had to get on a train and go to work. But I'm with n/a, basically.

you are fucking idiot too, then

OK, how old do we think Juliet is supposed to be? If she's the same age as Elizabeth Mitchell, then that scene takes place in 1980. Does that change anything? Maybe not.

1980 was still the 70's

But it's possible that she's playing younger. I mean, Jeremy Davies was born eight years before his character. Does that scene look particularly wrong for mid-80s? A lot less so, I'd think.

keep defending that shitty scene so help me god

Not defending it, just trying to figure shit out.

The furnishing of the Dharma houses didn't look particularly 70s either incidentally. I think they're just really lazy with interiors - see also Desmond knocking on the door of a terraced house on a British street then being seen inside an enormous American-style house with big windows. That happened a few times actually.

Alternatively ZOMG Juliet is from the future and lives with her future parents and Vincent and the horse.

from now on flashbacks should all just take place in the yogurt section of whole foods so we can tell if they're ok based on presence/lack of faggy yogurt.

LOOOOL

LOL Bean

here's an anachronism for you, if eloise is pregnant in '77 and daniel was born the same year, he'd be 19 in 1996 when he meets desmond.

we've been over that.

...and that was already discussed. he was apparently the youngest oxford dood etc

The British stuff is different because that's blatantly just a big wind-up.

s1ocki is my co-pilot

oh ok. damn long threads.

youngest oxford dude or whatever, did he get his first degree at 16 or something?

I really think they just chucked it in at the last moment as some sort of vague justification for Juliet being flaky and indecisive.

― Enormous Epic (Matt DC), Wednesday, 20 May 2009 15:06 (38 minutes ago) Permalink

^^What I'm thinkin. Lost does that a lot, right?--give us some shitty flashback to key events in a characters life so we know why they're about to make some shitty decision.

Totally willing to entertain Juliet Future Woman theories, tho.

would have been more effective if juliet just told the story of her parents. we didn't need the lame visual.

youngest oxford dude or whatever, did he get his first degree at 16 or something?

― Roz, Wednesday, May 20, 2009 3:59 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

that does happen... and he is supposed to be a prodigy so

farraday howser, phd.

would have been more effective if they introduced that backstory more than five minutes before they had her repeat her mom's speech word for word xpost

THIS!

would have been more effective if juliet just told the story of her parents. we didn't need the lame visual.

or perhaps an elaborate finger puppet display

when James told Jack "do your business!" i couldn't help but shout out "but what about the bomb?"

Maybe they also put that flashback in to show Juliet as the character who hadn't been touched by Jacob, in a "hey guess who's going to die?" way.

you know i always hated this thread title but the finale really made it work for me.

Yeah that whole Juliet turnaround was frustrating for a lot more than time continuity flashback stuff. I was so aggravated that she would bust her way outta that submarine at gunpoint to go back to the island she'd spent years trying to flee, all out of this conviction to save all these lives, and then to get there and instantly get all mehhhhh my boyyyfriend!

what'll we call the next thread? "GO OFF! GO OFF FOR FUCKS SAKE!" ?

the entire episode was pretty much meeehhh my boyyfriend! my girlfriend! my frenemy i can't kill! what about meeeee?!

"FOR THE LOVE OF HUGO"

Maybe they also put that flashback in to show Juliet as the character who hadn't been touched by Jacob, in a "hey guess who's going to die?" way.

― Enormous Epic (Matt DC), Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:03 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

part of me expected another w/ her mom being like, "meet your new father.... his name... is JACOB"

his name is jacob sladder

or to have her run out of the house after her parents divorce and theres jacob mowing the lawn

no it should be Frank mowing the lawn DYS

If she's the same age as Elizabeth Mitchell, then that scene takes place in 1980. Does that change anything? Maybe not.

― Bianca Jagger (jaymc), Wednesday, May 20, 2009 11:12 AM (6 hours ago) Bookmark

They should have used a set from Freaks & Geeks then.

In other places people are pretty convinced that Juliet was pregnant--I guess she touched her stomach during the Rose/Bernard scene.

So I guess the flashback would then have something to do w/ not wanting to bring a child into a loveless marriage. And the H-Bomb an extreme form of abortion.

The "it's Wednesday and there is no Lost" blues are starting to set in. Hold me, guys!

Buy the DVDs, watch one (or two or etc.) episode per week until the show is back!

I have all the DVDs and actually started re-watching s2 the other day at the cottage (my friend had only seen s1) … it's good, but it's not the same. Plus before too long I'll have to rewatch s3, which is a REALLY depressing thought. Hah.

So I guess the flashback would then have something to do w/ not wanting to bring a child into a loveless marriage. And the H-Bomb an extreme form of abortion.

I think even for Lost this is probably a little too extreme, to imply that Juliet would do this. Also there's still the chance that Kate is pregnant from the night before the Ajira flight, if they're going to use that as a catalyst for the pregnancy theme returning next year.

Re anachronistic Juliet flashback - remember when everybody (including me) was obsessing about the photographs on a wall in Miles' flashback? This is another one of those pointless details. (The woman being visible in the back of the shot in the Sun/Christian scene is for reals though as Lindelof dodged talking about it in an interview.)

Re Juliet not being touched by Jacob - maybe because of that she is 'the variable', the one that makes the big change happen that reroutes time?

(The woman being visible in the back of the shot in the Sun/Christian scene is for reals though as Lindelof dodged talking about it in an interview.)

Jorge Garcia says otherwise:
http://forum.thefuselage.com/showthread.php?t=110574

"I'm pretty sure it's a crew member. We were on set trying to figure out who it might be the other day."

Yeah, but wasn't Jacob a crewmember too? Maybe they wanted to suggest that Claire was hanging around but didn't want to fly in the actress for one shot.

I mean Jacob in the cabin Jacob from SSN 4.

Yeah, but that Jacob was clearly acknowledged by Locke as being seen by the character, while the other thing was a split second frame grab. And there are lots of ways creatively to imply that Claire was there, like how they brought back the crib and Driveshaft ring in the finale to bring back the idea of Charlie.