Watch LOST

Tuesday 05.25.2010 03:34AM

I highly recommend it, from beginning to end.

This post will have two sections. The first won't spoil anything and is just about my experience with the show; the second is about the finale, after the clearly marked “Spoilers” heading.

I think I started watching LOST because Jeeves was saying it was awesome, and I respect his good taste in entertainment. I downloaded season 1 and watched it quickly, then picked up during season 2 broadcast and have been watching it ever since. The plot and the mystery certainly kept the show interesting, but I found the characters very accessible too. It was easy to get attached to the characters and even relate to parts of most of them. If I had to choose one word to describe the show, it would be “redemption”, as this theme was woven through everything.

I enjoyed introducing the show to people and having viewing parties each week with friends. We even watched the season 3 finale in my hospital room in 2007 when I was recovering from the surgery putting in my pacemaker. :) I will really miss the show, but I'm sure the discussions about it will keep going for a while. Not to mention, we can start up the LOST book club, reading through all the different books mentioned in the show. The producers and writers included these books for their influence / correlation to themes in the show.

S P O I L E R S   B E L O W

Really, stop reading now if you don't want the series finale to be spoiled.

. . .

I didn't really like the ending at first. I don't think anyone who was with us did.

My first thought was “But Darlton said specifically that this wasn't purgatory.” followed by “Well, I guess they said the island wasn't purgatory, which technically is correct with what they've shown us, but seems kinda cheap.”

The more I think about it and read comments / theories, the more I'm coming around to it. I plan to re-watch it soon, too. Maybe it's just because I want to like it and kind of feel defensive about it, but hopefully there's a bit more to it. I think there is. :) There's some pretty sharp “WTF, I hate you LOST! Waste of time!” reactions out there, which I don't really fall into.

I think a fair number of viewers took the ending to mean that the entire series has been “purgatory” - that everyone died in the 815 crash and everything since that time has been “purgatory”. I think this is incorrect, though. I believe the island is real, those people did survive the crash, went through everything, some left, then came back – yes, time-travelled – and finally Jack died in the jungle while the Ajira plane took off successfully from Hydra island.

Then we have the so-called “flash sideways” that started at the beginning of season 6. I don't think “flash sideways” is a very good term, though Darlton used it officially. It really wasn't a “time” in a timeline, it was the so-called “purgatory”. Or as Christian Shepherd tells Jack at the end, it's a place that all of the LOSTies “created” to meet each other, remember, and ultimately “move on”. If we want to place things on a timeline, imagine the island and the events we've been watching are at the beginning, then Jack dies and the Ajira plane flies away, then there's an undetermined period of time when they live on and Hurlinus (Hurley + Linus, get it?) protects the island, and finally at some point everyone dies, because that's how things go. After everyone's dead, they meet up in this “flash sideways”, but for whatever reason it's set up in such a way that they have to remember their lives, remember each other, connect before they “move on”.

It seems like a disconnect, and I think that's part of the reason I didn't care for it at first. Maybe there is more of a connection and I'm missing it. I don't necessarily think the island was something that the LOSTies had to experience in order to reach the afterlife – though it certainly brought redemption, love, and meaning to lives that were lacking all these things.

I'm ok with some things left unexplained. There are just some supernatural things: Walt's psychic abilities, the protector of the island living super-long lives and passing that torch to others, shirtless Sawyer, etc. I don't think when Jacob brought them there his idea was that they would have to go through all the hell to get to the point one of them could become protector of the island, it just happened that way. I think I was hoping for more of a connection between everything that happened on the island and the end. Instead the end is like fast-forward to when everyone is dead, then they meet up one last time to hug. In itself, I'm ok with that idea, and Christian Shepherd says some good things at the end, but it feels like it could be applicable to any story where a group of people become close. I'm not sure I'm portraying my thoughts on the “disconnect” part well, so I'll stop trying for now. The re-watch might help.

Some random thoughts / questions:

• In “Happily Ever After”, Desmond goes into the “flash sideways” from the main timeline when he's put in the giant microwave (“Hot Pockets”, brotha?). Obviously he's special in various ways, but it's interesting that he's the only one in the main timeline who saw the “flash sideways”. There's probably more to this that I'm just not getting.
• What really happened when Juliet hit the bomb? It just didn't go off and instead they time-travelled one last time to the proper time (2007)?
• An interesting user blog on LOSTpedia about the flash sideways, Buddhism, Narnia
• The church they were in is the same one that the Lamp Post station is under.
• LOSTpedia fan theory pages are fun to read
• I'm sure there's more I'm forgetting to type up, but I am le tired.

Update: I like how this post explains it, and it does seem to connect more this way:

But it wasn't only about helping Jack. The Losties all gathered in the church to cross over to the Light because Jack saved that very Light when he rescued the Island. As we were told this season, if the Light “goes out here, it goes out everywhere” and “everyone you love would simply cease to be.” If the Light had gone out, the Losties could never have reconnected with their loved ones again. But because Jack saved it, they all get to live blissfully ever after. The (brilliant) end.

Tagged: entertainment / LOST
comment (1) | add to del.icio.us

A new project

Saturday 02.27.2010 04:00PM

I have a new fun project – my friend Jeremiah and I started a podcast. It's called Late Night Toast and it is basically the two of us talking about things that interest us, late at night, with our brand of wit and humor mixed in.

Our friends Rachelskirts and Skittle_Brains started a podcast a few months ago called Bacon Famous and they put out two episodes which were pretty funny. Jeremiah and I have discussed making a podcast off an on for about a year, but in January we got more serious about it after talking about Bacon Famous and their apparent lack of episodes. We had the idea that we could make our first episode a friendly challenge/call out/one-up to their podcast; we would make it video instead of just audio; we wouldn't call them out by name, “but let's just say it rhymes with Facon Bamous.”

“Begun, the podcast wars has.” I said.

Jeremiah and I are usually up late and have some pretty funny discussions on IM, so it seemed perfect to capture for a podcast. Since we're fans of late night television (particularly CoCo) we settled on the name Late Night Toast and came up with this cool logo idea to have our faces on toast. Thanks to Jeremiah's artistic skills, we have the awesome logo below. We think the whole endeavor is worth it for the logo alone. :)

Thus, episode 1 “Facon Bamous” is published. It's a long episode, coming in at 56 minutes, but future episodes will be shorter and we will have an audio version as well. We would love if you'd check it out and give us your feedback. You can subscribe in iTunes, leave us comments on the blog, and send us email at latenighttoast@gmail.com.

Tagged: entertainment / podcast
comments (0) | add to del.icio.us

The Golden Compass

Saturday 12.15.2007 07:02AM

Lately I have been reading commentaries about The Golden Compass. Most of them have been negative; if you were not aware, there is quite a controversy over the book(s) and the film in some Christian circles. I have found most of them to be lacking in one way or another, so decided that I would write about the topic myself.

Disclaimer: I have not seen this film or read the books yet. I will be citing and linking to various sources, though.

Summary
The Golden Compass is a film based on the fantasy novel Northern Lights by Philip Pullman. This is the first book in a trilogy titled His Dark Materials. The trilogy's setting spans multiple universes and each human has a dæmon, which is a manifestation of their soul. These dæmons exist externally in some universes, in the form of an animal. They are closely bonded; if a dæmon is killed, the human often dies, and they usually must stay within a short distance of each other.

A religious organization called the Magisterium exercises control over practically the entire world. There is a fundamental particle called “Dust” that is attracted to people, though it seems to be less attracted to children. The Magisterium believes Dust to be evidence of Original Sin and scientists perform terrible experiments on children in attempt to inoculate them against its effects. Children are kidnapped in order to be experimented on, and this sets up the story of the protagonist's (Lyra Belacqua) journey to save her friend (and other children). There is a “God” figure known as The Authority; he is actually the first angel to come into existence and has used his position to trick other angels into believing he is the creator of the multiverse. Ultimately the protagonists find themselves opposed to the abuse of power by The Authority.

The controversy
The primary controversy is that Philip Pullman is an atheist/agnostic (depending which commentary you read), his novels are allegedly anti-religious in nature, and they allegedly have an agenda to teach atheism to kids. A secondary controversy – which is often cited to bolster the first – is that Pullman is quite opposed to C.S. Lewis and that his books are specifically a response/refutation to Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia novels.

I found out about the controversy back in October when the Catholic League started a campaign to boycott the film, claiming it was “pernicious, selling atheism to kids.” <sidenote> Generally, I am not a fan of boycotts and specifically, I am not a fan of most Christian boycott efforts. This topic could compose another post all by itself, but for now let me just leave it at a loose paraphrase of Bob Briner in his book Roaring Lambs: too often we Christians get up in arms over something and complain amongst ourselves, preaching to the choir. We make ourselves feel good but really are doing nothing to change the situation; we're doing nothing productive. Great, they know what you are opposed to, do they know what you stand for? Do we have anything to offer in the realm of the arts, or just our opposition to the “bad things?” </sidenote>

Back on topic. I kind of rolled my eyes when I watched their video about the boycott; Bill Donahue was rather loud and obnoxious. I can understand being passionate about the concerns raised, but the delivery really was a turn off. Then my jaw dropped as he explained they had made a 23-page booklet about the author and the film, and were selling it for $5. I can think of few ways they could make themselves less relevant, other than selling them for a higher price, of course. Yes, clearly there are costs involved, but if this is really such a matter of concern, why not make the information freely available? Surely your members who are supportive of your cause will be willing to help finance such efforts. 23 pages is not difficult to put into a PDF and make available for free download. Thankfully, as I re-visit their site at this time, I see they now have a PDF version available, though I wonder if that's only because they sold out of the print versions.

One of the first things I found lacking, in general, was that the commentaries seemed to rely heavily on the rhetoric about Pullman's faith, or lack of faith. He wasn't just an “atheist”, he was a “militant atheist.” Similarly, short quotes were given with little or no context, relying mostly on their emotional impact. “My books are about killing God.” We're left to assume the question was, “What are your books about?”

For those counting, Pullman technically meets the definition of an agnostic, not an atheist. I point this out not because the distinction matters much to me, but because “atheist” is often used in a derogatory manner (see rhetoric above). From his web site, emphasis mine:

His Dark Materials seems to be against organised religion. Do you believe in God?

I don't know whether there's a God or not. Nobody does, no matter what they say. I think it's perfectly possible to explain how the universe came about without bringing God into it, but I don't know everything, and there may well be a God somewhere, hiding away.

Actually, if he is keeping out of sight, it's because he's ashamed of his followers and all the cruelty and ignorance they're responsible for promoting in his name. If I were him, I'd want nothing to do with them.

I really like what Mike Furches said regarding this quote:

Christians, those who are concerned with how we practice the teachings of Jesus can and should, find points of agreement here. Pullman is actually stating he doesn't know about God; (note the reasoning for Agnostic as opposed to Atheist for at least me.) He is also saying though, that religion hasn't done a very good job at reaching, touching and helping the world. Pullman seems to have serious issue with religion. I would state there was another individual that Christians should know who had trouble with religion, in fact a great deal of trouble, to the point he was one of the greatest reformers and rebels who ever lived. His name was Jesus Christ. I fully believe, that pointing out those facts, pointing to specific issues and instances where Jesus had issues with religion, we can find common points of ground to begin a serious discussion.

There are certainly religious themes and parallels in the novels. Director Weitz pointed out, “in the books the Magisterium is a version of the Catholic Church gone wildly astray from its roots.” I have to say - with my basic knowledge of the trilogy's plot - it seems much more a story about opposing a totalitarian organization or ideology than about being anti-religious. Yes, in this story the organization happens to be a religious one, but does that make the point less valid? Does it automatically equate to an attack on your religion? As alluded to above, there have certainly been things done in the name of religion, and by religions organizations, that are clearly ignorant and downright wrong. Hello, Fred Phelps.

One sentence comes up often in this controversy, and that's Pullman saying, “My books are about killing God.” This line comes from The Sydney Morning Herald in 2003. For better context, here is the full quote:

“I've been surprised by how little criticism I've got. Harry Potter's been taking all the flak. I'm a great fan of J.K. Rowling, but the people - mainly from America's Bible Belt - who complain that Harry Potter promotes Satanism or witchcraft obviously haven't got enough in their lives. Meanwhile, I've been flying under the radar, saying things that are far more subversive than anything poor old Harry has said. My books are about killing God.”

Killing what God, though? The God that he admits he doesn't know whether or not exists? When you don't know the existence of something, why would you write a 1200-page trilogy solely about killing that something? I think the quote is rather tongue-in-cheek, actually. J.K. Rowling received criticisms for the setting in which she delivered her tales, disregarding the messages in them (which yes, have a lot of good moral and spiritual lessons to be drawn) - so why shouldn't Pullman receive similar criticisms?

(Spoiler warning!)
Yes, as part of the setting of this trilogy, there is a “God” figure called the Authority, who the children accidentally - and not maliciously - kill. In his old age, the Authority is imprisoned in a glass box because he is too weakened to survive outside. The children do not know this and they free him from the box, at which point he disintegrates and dies. As mentioned in the summary above, this figure is not the actual creator of the universe, he is one of the first angels. This angel is deceptive and uses his position to trick the other angels, and humanity, into believing he created everything and is the Authority. This could rightly be called a “false god”. There is no reference to an actual creator in the trilogy, or explanation of where the universe came from.

Yes, the trilogy does include the “killing of God”, then. Technically, it is not wrong to say the books are about “killing God”, but I believe it's very misleading to imply that is solely what the books are about, or that the author is militantly and single-mindedly seeking to “kill God” in the minds of his readers. There is much more depth here than can be put across in the simple sentence, “My books are about killing God.”

My conclusion
Philip Pullman is more complex than how the pundits summarize him. He has repeatedly stated that in the “large picture” of the universe he does not know if God exists or not. Articles and interviews indicate he has a strong distaste for “organized religion”, particularly when it becomes totalitarian. He is also consistent in this distaste not just across different organized religions, but with any ideologies that become totalitarian. He described this when saying:

“...there is a depressing human tendency to say 'We have the truth and we're going to kill you because you don't believe in it.'”

I have found nothing substantial to support the notion that Pullman is on a mission to “kill God.” He has made some inflammatory remarks, which I do not necessarily agree with or really aim to defend here, but these seem to be outweighed by his reasonable words. In the same article where he said his books are about “kililing God”, after explaining his agnosticism he said:

“That's not to say I disparage the religious impulse. I think the impulse is a critical part of the wonder and awe that human beings feel. What I am against is organised religion of the sort which persecutes people who don't believe. I'm against religious intolerance.”

The stories do not appear to me to be anti-religious or about teaching atheism. Rather they seem to be anti-totalitarian and teach some good lessons about questioning authority, particularly if the authority is doing heinous things. I plan to see the film and read the books at some point so I can say more authoritatively for myself, and I would recommend you do the same. Don't just rely on pundits and reviews, and that certainly includes me. I can understand the concerns, especially for Christian parents of young children; I'm not suggesting going into this blindly or without discernment. I just hope to encourage some deeper consideration on the topic than I have seen (for the most part).

This is quite long enough and now the whole “anti-Narnia” aspect of the controversy seems minor compared to what I have already said. Perhaps I'll leave that topic to the reader as an assignment. There are plenty of links below to start you off.

Lots more to read
Many of these are linked in this post, but here's a complete list, pro, con, and neutral:

Philip Pullman's official site
The Chronicles of Atheism by Peter T. Chattaway, Christianity Today
An Almost Christian Fantasy by Daniel P. Maloney, First Things
The Anti-Narnia, Basia Me
The Golden Compass, One Christian's Anti-Protest, The Virtual Daily Pew
Responding to the “Golden Compass”, Only Wonder Understands
Heat and Dust, Interview with Third Way Christian magazine
A labour of loathing by Peter Hitchens, The Spectator
The shed where God dies by Steve Meacham, The Sydney Morning Herald
Church of Scotland Rejects Call to Boycott 'Golden Compass', The Christian Post
Does 'Golden Compass' point kids toward atheism? by Jonathan Falwell, WorldNetDaily
Sympathy for the Devil, Plugged In Online
Wikipedia: HIs Dark Materials trilogy
Wikipedia: Northern Lights novel
Wikipedia: The Golden Compass film
Wikipedia: daemon
Wikipedia: The Authority
Catholic League boycott

Tagged: spiritual / books / movies / entertainment
comments (22) | add to del.icio.us

The power of large groups of people...

Friday 09.14.2007 01:34AM

...doing silly things. I saw this video from Improv Everywhere and it made my day. 826 people came together, pressed play on an mp3 at the same time, and had a blast following the instructions together. Watch:

Part I

Part II

I also just watched Sweet Land and found it to be an amazing movie. It's a nice, believable love story (read: not a “romantic comedy”, or even “chick flick”) about a German woman immigrating to rural Minnesota in the 1920s. It ranges from humorous, to adorable, to saddening (e.g. seeing some of the prejudices expressed by the characters) and altogether makes for a captivating story, I think. I highly recommend renting it, or I'll probably end up getting a copy soon and you can just borrow mine.

“Let us hope that we are all preceded in this world by a love story.”
– Don Snyder, Of Time and Memory

Currently Sweet Land - A Love Story

Tagged: entertainment / video
comment (1) | add to del.icio.us

next »

supplements