DocArzt and Friends Logo

Wild Speculation – “Dead is Dead”

By RandomZombie,

  Filed under: Lost News
  Comments: 72

Hello.

A few technical problems prevented this from being posted nearer to the air date, so I’m going to jump to the chase: I have a deep love of Lost and an overactive imagination, and am not content to watch an episode and wait calmly to see what happens next.  Like many viewers, my mind typically jumps into overdrive, trying to figure out anything and everything that might possibly happen (and usually missing the mark, but that’s not the point.)

So I’ve decided to write these things down and share them with whoever cares to read them.  Some of my ideas might seem implausible, or completely ludicrous, and I in no way mean to imply that I necessarily believe any conclusion that I may jump to.

If it gets someone thinking; great.  If it causes debate: beautiful.  If you hate it… we’ll deal with that when we come to it.  Feel free to shower my thoughts with praise or rip them to shreds. 

One note: there are no spoilers here!  Everything comes out of my own head, with little or no evidence to support it.  If you read it here: well, it probably won’t happen.

“Dead is Dead.”  I’m in it for the mythology, and this one was all for me.  Ben, Locke, and Desmond – three of my favorites (I miss Daniel!)  And no mushy stuff!

I’m assuming you’ve seen it.

Let’s start with Charles Widmore.  The only reason given for his banishment was regularly leaving the island and having a child with an outsider.  I have no doubt that there’s something deeper here.  My thinking is that Charles just wasn’t a fit leader.  Ben alone couldn’t banish Charles – the island, through Jacob, would have its say.  It’s pretty much a given that Ben had an active part in leading up to this banishment – serving his own needs as well as those of the island.

The reason that Charles’s banishment stuck and why Ben was allowed to return to the island is manifested through their behavior toward children.  Widmore admonished Richard for saving Ben, and insisted that Ben should have killed baby Alex.  In contrast, Ben spared Alex (and her mother) and backed down on his promise to kill Penny when little Charlie popped into the picture.  The island’s judgement stated that Ben was responsible for Alex’s death, but apparently his good deeds were enough to outweigh his crimes.  This isn’t an easy thing to imagine, but we have to try and look at this from the island’s point of view.

When Widmore claims that Richard should have let Ben die, Richard responds with “The island chooses who the island chooses.”  After taking Alex, Ben asks if killing the baby was what Jacob wanted, implying that Widmore made the decision on his own.  It seems that Widmore might have had his own agenda, or at least made some presumptions about what the island wanted.

“Jacob wanted it done.  The island chooses who the island chooses.”  We knew that Jacob spoke for the island, but this line seems to imply that Jacob and the island are one.  When Jacob cried “Help me.” to Lock in “The Man Behind the Curtain” it might not have meant Help Jacob, but Help the island.

Jacob could be a physical manifestation of the mind of the island.  If he is trapped in the cabin, as the ring of ashes implies, that explains why the island is reaching out to others to get things done: Christian in his function as a guide, Locke to move the island (though Ben took it upon himself to take his place) and whatever else Locke is meant to do, and the monster to put Ben in his place.

Speaking of Locke, what did he have to do off in the jungle?  And was his timely arrival supposed to put it in our heads that he may be a manifestation of the smoke monster?  It would make sense.  Christian’s body crashed and vanished, so did Locke’s.  He wasn’t there right after the crash, but was found later, standing in the water and looking off into the ocean.

I guess the whole thing hinges on whether you believe that Christian is the monster.  I’m going with no.  I’d like to think that Christian was resurrected similar to Locke, and is working alongside the monster as part of the island’s “team,”  I have no basis for this, it’s just my favorite version of things in my head.

I’d say that Locke was off communing with the island, nothing more.  That’s how he knew that Ben had to get to the temple.  He’s proven rather adept at it in the past.

Back to Ben (sorry for the jumping around, but everything is interconnected:) he told Locke that he expected him to be resurrected, but told Sun that he had no idea that it would happen.  Which is the truth?  If Ben admits to being scared, and more importantly admits that something wasn’t part of his plan (the return of Locke,) then that’s Ben being honest.  He knew that Locke had to die to get the 06 back to the island, and that the body had to be on the plane to help recreate the original crash, but had no idea that Locke would be waiting for him after his run-in with the oar.

I was bummed when Frank left Sun to return to the crash.  I like Lapidus, and with the death of Caesar (what a huge red herring he turned out to be!) I didn’t think that there would be much going on back at the beach.  Then Ilana, Bram, and a couple of friends pull out some guns and a giant crate!  Now Frank is on his own, being dragged along to who-knows-where.

There’s only two options for Ilana: either she’s working for Widmore or for some unknown third party.  Ben’s phone call from the pier would have been enough for Widmore to figure out what’s going on and make sure that his people were on the plane, so it makes sense that Ilana is working for him.  He would also have the knowledge that it was Sayid who killed his associate on the golf course, providing Ilana with the perfect story for Sayid (who seemed to be willing, if not happy, to accept the punishment for the crimes that he had committed.)

But Widmore didn’t just put Ilana and the others on the plane, he had her get Sayid beforehand.  So both the good guys (whoever they are) and the bad guys (whoever they are) wanted the 06 back on the island.  If a war is coming, it doesn’t look like all of our castaways are going to be on the same side.

What’s in the crate?  More weapons?  A bomb?  Some kind of device to use on the island, maybe?  Something to ensure that the island is at a particular place at a particular time, so that Widmore can finally return and the real battle for control can take place!

Can’t forget the hieroglyphics!  We see Anubis for certain (though I’m convinced that the statue is not Anubis,) and a squiggly thing with what appears to be a face that is undoubtedly the monster.  So it’s been around for quite a while, then.  Longer than I had anticipated.  The island is something special, a sacred place, and the description of the monster as a security system may not be too far off – some kind of force acting on behalf of the gods of the island.

But here’s where I take a few leaps: Richard has been described as someone who helps to choose the leader of the others – the monster is a judge, determining who is to be forgiven and who is to pay for their sins.  Richard seems to appear out of nowhere.  He’s ageless.

Richard is the monster!  Rather, the figure of Richard Alpert is a physical manifestation of the monster.

This idea first struck me during “Whatever Happened, Happened,” when Richard was holding Ben, standing with his back to the temple.  There was a moment when I expected him to dissolve into the monster and flow into the vent, taking Ben with him.

Am I right?  Probably not.  But I love the idea.

One last thing: Ben said, “Dead is dead.  You don’t get to come back from that.  Not even here.”  Taken on its own that doesn’t necessarily mean anything.  It’s coming from Ben, after all.  But the episode is titled “Dead is Dead,” and I think that does mean something.  Locke is back, but he’s not the same man that he was before.  And it’s not just his confidence and authority that makes me say that (though its wonderful to see Locke back to his old self.)  Just like Christian, I don’t believe that he’s quite as human as he used to be.

I’ll stop now.  Let me know what you think.  Ideas?  Suggestions?


Warning: fopen(http://tvfrenzy.com/latest-link.php): failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.0 404 Not Found in /home/sociaboo/public_html/docarzt.com/wp-content/themes/docarzt/includes/loops/content-single.php on line 28

Warning: stream_get_contents() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/sociaboo/public_html/docarzt.com/wp-content/themes/docarzt/includes/loops/content-single.php on line 28
From TVFrenzy:

  • Michel

    I think that, at least for me, Dead Is Dead defined Jacob as the bad guy. Forget about Widmore, or Ben, or even Locke… if the will of the Island is the same as Jacob’s will, then doing things “for the island” may mean doing the wrong things, for the right or wrong purpose. Jacob seems to be to authoritarian, secretive and flimsy to be trusted, and I haven’t seen one single piece of evidence that suggests that the Island is here on Earth for good reasons.

    Besides, Jacob said to ben taht he wanted Locke alive… but for what? It’s appaent to me that Locke is still the pawn he has always been, but Jacob needs him for whatever plan he’s incubating, and he wants Ben alive so he can help Locke do whatever he needs to…. like, staying alive. But that doesn’t mean it will be a good thing.

    • RandomZombie

      I don’t agree that the episode proved Jacob to be bad, but I’m with you that we still don’t know which side he is on.
      The only dividing line that we have so far is “for the island” and “against the island. I think that the island is good and I believe that Ben was telling the truth when he described the others as “the good guys.” There’s nothing to back this up right now, but it’s the way that I see things going.

      As for Locke: there’s a fine line between a pawn and a champion. I think that, in the end, he’ll live up to the greatness that he sees as his destiny.

      • Michel

        I agree, ti didn’t prove anything, it’s just terrifying to see so many people justifying their actions with “the will of the island”… and the fans are buying it. I did it because the Island/Jacob wanted me to. Kinda stalinist thinking, isn’t it?

        There is no actual difference between a pawn and a champion… the later is just a more important pawn. Locke is still oblivious to a huge chuck of meanings, secrets and reasons. Just because he is a major piece in Jacob’s intentions doesn’t mean he is more than just that… a piece. And an unknowing one. But that is what still connects him to his former self.

        Which is, after all, my main thesis for the BIG BIG DIFFERENCE between Christian Shepherd and John Locke. There were lots of events when Christian was, at least for a long time, ethereal… non-corporeal. He vanished from places, he was only present at Jack’s visions and nobody else saw him, Jacob talked through him and he seemed to know everything Jacob knows… AND, most importantly, he was not subject to space and time. He could move around along with Jacob’s cabin, could be in Jack’s hospital in LA and was ALREADY in Frozen Donkey Wheel in the times of acient statue but AFTER Ben took it off its edge in January 2005 (Is the FDW oblivious to time rules?).

        BTW, just to debunk the Alpert=Smokey theory… Smokey can’t go through the Sonic Fence, but Alpert can.

        • RandomZombie

          In regards to Alpert and the monster: I know, and it’s something that I’ve thought of. In defense of the theory itself, either 1) the smoke-form can’t pass through, but the human form can, or B) the monster/Alpert wants the people to THINK that they fence protects them from the monster.

          In reality, I know that Richard isn’t the monster, but I like the idea so much, I have to keep it alive – even if it’s just to appease my own imagination.

          • Michel

            For the sake of debate: 1) That’s probably the worst reason to keep the theory alive. No offense, mate ;). I’d like to think that Michael isn’t dead and all that jazz, since I liked his character so much. But humongous amounts of evidence contradict me. Even wild speculations have limits, and that is contradicting evidence.

            2) You are suggesting here two possible things, regarding Richard…

            2. A) That he can’t change forms voluntarily, which makes him some kind of were-wolf, but turning into a huge creature of smoke instead, and that brings new issues to the table: what circumstances make him turn into the smoke monster? What is his “full moon”?

            2. B) That he wants someone to think the fence protects them… but Who? It wouldn’t be the Dharma people, because he trespassed the fence when the truce was broken in 74. In fact, the only moment we ever saw the monster not being able to cross the fence was during Juliet and Kate’s exile from Otherville in 2004, but the Dharma folk weren’t around anymore to be fooled. Was Smokey/Richard fooling who, then? Kate? Juliet? Juliet was the one who guarded herself behind the fence, so it was a trait known by the Others. But Richard is part of the Others… so, is he trying to fool his own people? For what?

            Occam’s razor suggests the theory doesn’t hold any water. Too many questions arise, too many game-changers.

            The question is… why is the idea of Richard turning into the Monster appealing to you? Is it because of the imagery involved? I don’t know, it doesn’t seem that appealing to me. Yeah, it would be cool to see someone turn into a black smoke monster, but it would be WAY COOLER to actually confirm that this… entity… is a natural thing, a pseudo-intelligent wild phenomenom of whatever makes the island special… And Richard Alpert would be ANOTHER phenomenom: a man who stopped aging at some point, and hasn’t aged for decades, maybe centuries.

            The later idea, what the writrs have been suggesting so far, if 100% more appealing to me.

          • RandomZombie

            Michel –
            As I said, I don’t really believe that Richard is the smoke monster. Basically, I’m just humoring myself. Your points are valid and I agree 100%.

            Richard is just so darn intriguing! We really haven’t seen that much of him, and his appearances are always fairly short. He doesn’t do much, but there’s an aura of mystery and power around him that can almost be felt through the television screen!

            Of course, I could be mistaken and the aura actually surrounds Nestor Carbonell. It could be that there’s not much interesting about Richard, but the actor is hiding a deep and powerful secret.

            So, no: Richard isn’t the smoke monster, and you’re to blame for shattering the thin sheet of deniability that I was crouching behind.

            Also, I’m with you concerning Michael. I’d like to think that he’ll reappear with some monumental task to accomplish. But, yeah, he’s gone…

          • Michel

            My hopes lay with Walt. He’s the one who is special, he’s the one who’s supposed to do great things…. he’s Michael’s legacy. The last time he appeared, the only thing the writers did about him was to remind us he was special (“I’ve been having dreams about you” and all that jazz). If the writers fail to pick up Walt before the sixth season is over, I’m going to be seriously mad.

          • RandomZombie

            Definitely!
            His specialness was one of the earliest mysteries on the show; his kidnapping by the others began the shift from “people struggling to survive after a plane crash” to “people fighting for their lives against who-knows-what.”
            If Walt’s story is left to fizzle out to nothing it will leave a prominent and ugly scar on the series.

  • Dolce

    Well done. Thought provoking.

  • downthehatch

    Good Write Up! A greed pretty much with what you said. I think that Jacob + Island etc. Interesting you brought up the crate…I forgot about that. We’ll have to see where that leads. I too also think there is a meaning behind the title we aren’t getting. But Richard is NOT the monster. I think he is a Priest of some sorts. I am totally forgetting what a friend told me his purpose was. Richard plas a certian role among the others that doesn’t allow him to be the leader that most think he ought to be. He is bound by what he does…his purpose on the island. I really don’t think he’s the monster as he is a constant “person” in all of the time lines. Certainly Ben said they don’t know what it is. If it was Richard, I think that would have gone different and Richards Role would be that more like Christian who either represnts Jacob or is Jacob. I like to think Jacob has minions on and off the island. The monster is a different entity all together. Or an extention of the island.

    • RandomZombie

      For some reason your description put me in mind of Cthulhu: not really a Great Old One himself but akin to them – a priest responsible for their resurrection, when the time is once again right. Kind of an extension of the greater powers into the “normal” physical realm. The hand of the gods, so to speak.

      Richard could be the hand of the “gods” of the island. The monster is the sword and judgement; Jacob is the mind.

      I’m just throwing things out there, but I like it.

    • Michel

      Richard seems to be the only one fit to be the real leader… but for whatever reason there’s to it, he isn’t. And maybe he is not even interested. But yeah, he’s the only one who seems to be focused, calm, benevolent with children, loyal, magnanimous and eficient all the time. And yet he has to be baby-sitting these contestants of “The Island’s Next Leader: Super-villain Edition” all the time, all in the name of Jacob.

      With any luck, we will know Richard’s origins and true nature before the season is over… but I have the growing feeling that Jacob is the ture villain in this story, and Richard seems loyal to him.

    • WheresDesmond

      Downthehatch, your suggestion of Richard as a priest of sorts led me to wonder if perhaps there’s a Holy Trinity of sorts on the island…

      Jacob = “God the Father”

      Richard = Jesus, aka “God the Son”

      Smokey = “God the Holy Spirit” (or “Holy Ghost”)

      Thoughts???

      • Michel

        Nah….

        Jacob = The Father
        Locke = The Son
        Richard = Archangel Gabriel / John the Baptist
        Smokey = God’s puppy specially trained for punishment and guarding against any trespassers.

        • WheresDesmond

          Wouldn’t that make Smokey more of the Angel Michael? Or perhaps Lucifer, the fallen angel?

          • Michel

            I was being tongue in cheek. My point is that is wrong to attach these strict allegorical parallels to any element or character is LOST. The meaning overlap, the references are too many and the game keeps changing.

            For instance, if you see Locke as a kind of messianic figure… like Christ…
            then Ben would be something akin to Judas Iscariot (the betrayal and strangling)…

            … but he would ALSO represent the DEVIL and his temptation of Jesus in the desert to kill himself to see if he was really the Messiah, bound to be resurrected by his father (he told Locke pushing the button was pointless and that led John to stop pushing it and blow the Swan away)…
            except that Jesus never fell for that and John did (“I was wrong!”)…

            … but Ben was also the previous leader, so he could be some kind of hebrew leader, maybe a successor of Moses… let’s recall Locke calling Ben a pharisee and later blowing up the Sub (much in the vein of Jesus calling the jews priests pharisees and destroying their Temple)…

            … etc., etc., etc.

            Lost is a too global, wide and universal allegory to be read to strictly. Really. I’m a constant reader of a guy who has a blog arguing that LOST has usually made commentaries on the American post-911 political world, and from time to time he makes complete sense… but you can’t say LOST is an allegory about 911 only, because too many things don’t fit. That’s why I was being tongue-in-cheek… you’re trying to read too hard into something that is way more complex and blurry. Don’t simplify it.

            Take care.

        • Uncle Beaver

          Jacob = Moe
          Locke = Curly
          Smokey = Larry
          Richard = Shemp

  • downthehatch

    Jacob = Island.

  • jack

    I think there have been many times when people have used the name Jacob in order to justify their actions. I think for most of the time the leaders just freewheel and name drop him when someone confronts them about a descision. Locke “Jacob sent me”, Ben “This is what Jacob wanted” Charles “Jacob told you to kill a woman and her baby” etc etc etc. I think this has massivly overstated his importance with some people(fans of Lost not the others) If we hadn’t had seen the cabin in fact it would be fair enough to say that Jacob was just an illusion created by the leaders to keep the rest of the others in line and carry out orders.

  • Hello!
    I love this site, and your discussions, and I had to chime in!
    When Richard says that the fence can’t keep his people out…couldn’t he be referring to the fact that he has a sleeper agent named Ben the Boy who is letting them in???

    • Michel

      Not in 74. That must be the year Ben arrived to the Island, give or take a few months for the events prior to him walking out of the Barracks to unfold, and then we have our dates. No, whatever was getting “Richard’s people” through the sonic fence, wasn’t Ben.

      • 316 Tail Sectionite

        In 1977, I thought Ben told Sayid he’d been patiently waiting for the “Hostiles” to come get him for 4 years? That would make Ben Richard’s buddy for a year already in 1974.

        Though I personally don’t believe Richard needs Ben to let him past the sonic fence–it would show up on the video, and I’d guess a catacomb of some sort is doing the trick.

        • Michel

          Yeah, I forgot that line. I guess you’re right about Richard doing another kind of trick. But, then again, if the dates are right, Ben kidnapping Alex took place BEFORE the Purge, which mans he was moonlighting as a Hostile, going back and forth across the fence for some time. And when Ben encountered Richard for the first time, he avoided being seen deactivating the fence. The DHARMA Surveillance System is a true mess.

          • Cameras were pretty damn expensive in those days (and consider how, even today, every bank surveillance camera is pixelated and unclear, for some reason).
            I guess, tonight (maybe), we’ll see if they have Kate and LeFleur on video taking Ben to Tent City.
            But, yeah, it seems like their system has some Madonna’s teeth-sized gaps in it.

  • Nicole

    I’m not saying that I agree with Christian and Locke being manifestations of the smoke monster, but how else would Christian appear to Michael before he died? He just sorta appeared and if he was alive, he probably would have died. Just wondering…

    • Michel

      What we are supposed to inferr from taht is that the post-mortem Christian Shephard is not a material manifestation. Look at Jacob and his Cabin, sometimes there, sometimes not, not everyone can talk to him except those who are extremely special… Christian, Yemi, Alex, all of those appearances must be people whose bodies have arrived to the island and Jacob has taken some control over them, along with part of their memories.

      (I suspect that only the memories that the castaways they were related too posses… have anyone here seen Tarkovky’s SOLARIS? That would be the best example)

      My point is that Christian Shephard IS NOT a completely physical manifestation, ans is somewhat a mix between corporeal and mental projection of some castaways minds.

      John Locke has proven to be completely corporeal and exactly the same he was before dying, albeit some WiFi link to the Island’s History database 😉

      • I thought that the Monster was manifesting dead bodies, exclusively, until I remembered Kate seeing that horse.

        • Michel

          The horse may be a complete coincidence. Like Bakunin’s cat being identical to the cat of the woman Sayid tortured, and so on. Now that we saw Widmore riding into the hostiles camp, now we know there are/have been horses in the Island.

  • Gusteaux

    For the record, I’d like to remind everyone that I posted a theory on the old Tail Section site (when Doc was still running it) a few days after “The Man Behind the Curtain” aired in 2007 (Season 3). The title of that theory was: “Richard is Smokey.” I believed it to be true then and I still believe it to be true now.

    • Michel

      Based on what? I believe there is a significant amount of evidence that suggests otherwise.

  • LOST With Lyndsey

    Your thoughts make my thoughts happy.
    When I wrote that I thought that Locke was the Smoke Monster, I too was met with some mild derision, but just like your Richard theory, I was positing a notion that seemed somewhat logical in the moment, though as with anything on LOST, a million holes could easily be poked in the theory…
    I wholly agree that Locke is not ‘the same as he always was’ and there is something that caused this outside of the simple(HA!) resurrection thing…
    Thanks for the post! Awesome.

    • Michel

      I totally believed Locke when he said he was the same as he always was. Totally. This has not been the first time he has been given secret info (via prophetic dreams) or his ego has experimented a confidence boost. Locke has not done ONE SINGLE THING he hasn’t done before…. except resurrecting. That’s all.

      • LOST With Lyndsey

        Here’s the thing that is throwing me…Ben says that has never seen this before (re: the dead becoming live again) and that “Dead is dead.”
        Why would that line (and episode title, in fact) be based on an untruth?
        Sure, it’s BEN, thus everything is suspect, but it seems like a lot of leading down a path to nowhere and a lot of emphasis placed on a moot point simply to have “dead NOT-actually-really-always-BE dead.”
        I’m just finding it tough to believe that Locke’s calmer, sunnier disposition is solely due to that little resurrection thing.
        Alternately, what if Locke meant he is the same as he always was in his mind? Go with me…
        In high school, he wanted to be popular. He didn’t was to go to space camp or be stuffed in lockers…
        When he played war games at the box company and had a ‘relationship’ with phone-sex Helen, he was obvs. visualizing himself as another sort of being…a hunter not a farmer. Powerful, in charge, reliable and relied upon.
        I’m just throwing stuff at the wall here. I’m just saying that John being totally and utterly the same as always seems like a waste of an evolution…

        • Michel

          Ben also said that John Locke was wandering around in the Island. What I got from that is that Ben would’ve never thought resurrection was possible, even if it was the will of the Island. Heck, maybe even Locke is the first event of resurrection ever, rendering him even more special.

          When Locke told Richard – the all-knowing Richard – he was from the future, Richard couldn’t believe it. Because Richard didn’t know a thing about time-travel. Fifty years later, and Widmore was as stunned at the notion of time travel as the first day. There are things that are possible in the Island and escape the imagination of the biggest players in the story.

          I believe this: When Ben says he’s surprised and terrified of the fact Locke could resurrect, I believe it’s true. And when Locke said he was the same as ever before, he was right. I don’t think Christian can say the same thing… and Yemi certainly couldn’t, saying he wasn’t really Eko’s brother.

          Locke resurrected. Period. It may even be an unprecedented event.

        • Michel

          And by the way, last week Locke wasn’t any calmier and sunnier than he was in “The Man From Tallahasee”. Believe, if I died and resurrected, I also would have a huge confidence boost.

        • Iwantmykidneyback

          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!”

          • DezziesOtherLifeBrotha

            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)

  • Jacy

    Thanks for the recap. I agree with almost everything you are speculating except that I believe that Ilana must work for Ben. Why would Ben leave Ilana and her group to chance and shoot Caesar? Wouldn’t Ben suspect that Ilana works for Widmore or for the DI back in Michigan? They have guns and something in a large crate that could cause Ben a lot of trouble later on. I don’t believe he would just wish them a nice day and continue on his way. Ben would know what is in the crate and who Ilana works for, or he would find out. By the way, how did that crate get on the beach?

    • cap10tripps

      Ilana’s a double agent (Ben and Widmore). We’re just not sure which one she is actually loyal to…

      • Michel

        Where did you get that from?

        • cap10tripps

          Just more speculation…

          • Michel

            Behind the wall of the Donkey Wheel, there’s a mine of kryptonite.

        • cap10tripps

          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…

  • Devin

    “I’d like to think that Christian was resurrected similar to Locke, and is working alongside the monster as part of the island’s “team,” I have no basis for this, it’s just my favorite version of things in my head.”

    I’d like to think something similar to that, but remember that right before the freighter blew up in There’s No Place Like Home, Christian suddenly appeared in the engine room and said to Michael, “You can go now.” So clearly Christian isn’t JUST a resurrected dude walking around, but can appear in places where he wasn’t before.

    • Michel

      Bingo. Locke said to Sun he’s now the same guy he’s always been, and we should give him the benefit of the doubt. Ben seemed familiar with the name Christian, maybe he’s familiar with the fact that post-mortem Christian is going around…. but he seemed genuinely frightened of resurrected Locke. Something doesn’t add up here. Christian =/= Locke for a number of things.

      • RandomZombie

        I didn’t mean to imply that Locke and Christian were the same, only that there’s more to them than there used to be – something not quite mortal.
        In spite of Locke’s claim that he’s the same guy as before, you don’t get brought back from death without some major changes. His resurrection was recent, and he might not be aware of exactly how he is different.

        • Michel

          “You don’t get brought back from death without some major changes…”

          Hmm, really? Where did you get that from? Have we seen any hints pointing to that theory?

          Yeah, he may have some major changes… but, then again, he may not be different in any degree whatsoever. It’s too wild a speculation at this point.

          • RandomZombie

            Granted, I don’t have any evidence that being resurrected changes a person, but I don’t think it’s a crazy assumption. No more crazy than the idea of resurrection itself.

            Locke was supposed to die, according to Richard and Christian. His death wasn’t necessary to bring back the 06, Jack had already bought a ticket before Locke was killed (if Ben is to be believed.) So why did he have to die? It could be that his death was necessary to bring about some sort of change. He could just have easily been sitting on Ajira 316 with the rest and ended up with Sun and Lapidus. If he’s just the same old Locke, the results would have been the same.

          • Michel

            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?

      • Iwantmykidneyback

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

  • cap10tripps

    I’m starting to think that Smokey is Locke. Locke mysteriously disappeared and returned just as Ben says, “I can’t control what comes out of that jungle.” Then Locke knows the way to the underworld, and subsequently disappears while Ben is judged. Perhaps it is certain people’s destiny to be the human form of this “god.” Jacob (who was the vanishing human form of Smokey) says, “Help me.” The only one who hears this is Locke, because it is his destiny to be Smokey (who will eventually have a more appropriate name). Richard and the others look to John to light the way for a very good reason. He was destined to be (and now is) a deity…

    That being said, do not give up on your Richard is Smokey theory Zombie and Gusteaux. A good point has been made about Ben turning off the fence for Richard and his people. Another point here is that the only time we see “Smokey and the Fence” (a 2011 spinoff series) is when Juliet and Kate are together in the forest. It’s plausible that only Smokey’s human form can penetrate the fence. First, if he could transform into human form he wouldn’t do so in front of anybody. Second, an idea here would be that Richard is someone who has died or whose body was dead when arriving on the island (many speculated he was on the Black Rock back on Doc’s old site). This would fit in with a theory that Smokey was/is Yemi, Christian, Richard, and even Locke. If he can become these people who have passed on to another realm, then a sonic fence would surely not affect him while in these bodies. Just some more crazy speculation but possibilities nontheless on LOST. VIVA SPECULACION!!!

    • Michel

      I don’t think this makes sense, because those who have been appearing after their death have showed non-corporeal/ethereal traits… like appearing/disappearing suddenly or being in improbable places like Jacob’s cabin, the FDW cavern, the freighter or LA. I’m talking about dead Yemi, dead Alex and, of course… dead Christian.

      BUT… Locke has not showed any of these traits… and by the way, neither has Richard. Especially Locke, he hasn’t done any single thing he hadn’t done before his death. Like I said to Lindsey, this has not been the first time he has been given secret info (via prophetic dreams) or his ego has experimented a confidence boost. Locke has not done ONE SINGLE THING he hasn’t done before… except resurrecting. That’s all.

      The problem with uncontrolled speculation is that disables focus, and we are less able to predict what’s REALLY going to happen. Yeah, there’s a chance that Richard is Smokey but then again, so could be Walt, or Bernard, or Vincent.

      So here’s a rule: Absence of evidence means evidence of absence. When a theory is too far-fetched to successfully apply this rule, dismiss it and go after another, more precise one.

      • cap10tripps

        So here’s a rule, absence of speculation means are we watching the same show? It’s what makes LOST and Doc’s site for that matter so much fun. We discuss the possibility of things because it’s such a guilty pleasure that this show has brought out in theorizing geeks like myself. “Locke hasn’t done one single thing he hasn’t done before… except resurrecting?” Oh, so that’s all. You’ve contradicted yourself here when you say he hasn’t been in improbable places like the others I’ve mentioned (Yemi, Christian). He’s constantly in improbable places, because HE WAS MURDERED. The people I’ve mentioned in possible Smokey theories are all dead or possibly dead (Richard). It’s what makes the theories plausible.

        We know for a fact that Smokey has been Yemi and Alex. Of course it’s speculation without any indisputable evidence that he is using the dead to walk the physical world, but I’m not sure why I need that in our discussions. The problem with uncontrolled criticism of what other people think is that you disallow the possibility that you’re wrong. When this happens you become the pompous guy who nobody wants to get in conversations with. I know I (or Gusteaux and Zombie) could be completely wrong, but that does not negate the possibility that we could be somewhat right. Like I said before, VIVA SPECULACION!!!

        • Michel

          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.

          • cap10tripps

            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…

      • RandomZombie

        There’s a reason I decided to title this post “Wild Speculation.” One of the things that makes Lost so amazing is that there are a countless number of theories flying around, some much more plausible than others.

        By definition, speculation is speculation because there is no firm evidence. That was my entire point in writing this – speculation is fun! The more far-fetched, the better. And you never know what might just happen to be right.

        • cap10tripps

          Completely agreed sir. It’s the most fun part of the show. I’ve never been a part of a site like this, but the past few years I’ve been on here quite a bit. I love the theories people post no matter how far fetched they may seem. Great site Doc and love the article Zombie…

        • Michel

          Here what I think: there may not be firm evidence, but there must be SOME KIND of evidence whatsoever.

          That’s what separates Speculation from FanFiction.

          We should not aim, at any case, for what sounds like the most spectacular idea, but for what makes the most sense within what we have alrady seen in the show. LOST is already quite spectacular already and, in many ocassions, less is more, and subtlety is rewarded. If there is no firm evidence that Richard is Smokey, or that Naomi is Ilana’s sister (not that I’m suggesting you say that) why even bother to theorize?

          ONe thing is to theorize, and another to make a fanfic.

          • cap10tripps

            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…

          • Michel

            ???? 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.

          • RandomZombie

            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.

          • Michel

            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.

          • cap10tripps

            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…

  • chad

    I have to say I disagree that Ben was telling the truth about being afraid of Locke. I think he knew what would happen. He told Sun that because I think he is trying to get others to distrust Locke. Cause now Sun has some doubt whether Locke is to be trusted…

    • Michel

      I think he didn’t know squat. He wanted Locke dead… period. It’s not the first time he has tried to kill him, and he succeeded the second time (probably because it was in LA and not in the Island). But that’s all. Look at Emerson’s performance when Ben’s telling Locke he was expecting the resurrection. Now look at Emerson’s performance when he says to Sun he’s terrified. I’m almost sure this has been the very first time the writers told Emerson when Ben was lying and when he was being sincere.

    • RandomZombie

      The monster, as Alex, told Ben that it knew that he was planning on killing Locke again. Ben knows that Locke is supposed to replace him, and he doesn’t like it. He wanted Locke out of the way, but the island didn’t let that happen.
      If he knew that Locke was going to come back, why would he plan on killing him again?

  • ryan sims

    Side note,

    Caesar may not be dead. If we’re to believe IMBD’s accuracy, the actor is in part 1 of “The Incident”. It might be a flashback, a dead body on the beach, but he’s listed as an actor in that episode.

    http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0846548/

    • Uncle Beaver

      Some of you might consider this a SPOILER, so don’t go any further, but…

      Henry Ian Cusick, and Daniel Dae Kim are listed as “credit only”. So, they won’t appear in the finally? At least not the first part?

    • DezziesOtherLifeBrotha

      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…

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

  • Madonna is one of my top celebrities in the world. I really wish she keeps on performing.