Official ABC 4.09 Discussion Thread - The Shape of Things To Come

[Hordriss]

Yes, that's precisely it. I've almost to come to appreciate Ana Lucia's at least acknowledging her own unlikeability ... though with both Widmore and Ana Lucia, it doesn't help me to actually like them. But I can enjoy watching Widmore in action in a way I can't enjoy Ben because he does at least seem to know who and what he is. A proper baddie. But mostly it's just that someone needed to look down his nose at Ben and call him 'Boy'. It's moments like that when I most miss Charlie.

Me too. He was the series' own Shakespearean fool - occasionally an annoying little bu**er, but dramatically essential if only to deflate the egos of the major characters. Sawyer's increasingly tired one-liners are no substitute.

What it implies to me (and I might make a thread on this) is that Widmore's the one that sets the rules and that he in some sense has a technical (if not moral) 'right' to change the parameters. As though it's unsporting but not 'illegal'. The two meanings of these 'rules' as far as I can see it is that either Ben and Widmore have an agreement between themselves, or that some higher power has been setting rules for both of them. I would've thought that meant Jacob until Ben repeated his accusation that 'You changed the rules' right in front of Widmore.

I also wonder if Ben's summoning Smokey was an alteration in the rules as well though - he certainly seemed to take it as a last resort.

I wonder if "changed the rules" implies that the game is actually between Ben and some other as yet unknown player, with Widmore in the role of "dungeon master", who thus sets the rules for both players). That would be intriguing (if over-complicated), although I feel from what we have seen that the "rules" as such were a contract of honour that Ben and Widmore were abiding by, until Widmore decided to get serious without warning...

Oh, I did mean that the irony was on the part of the writers, yes. Keamy's all rock between the ears, I'm sure. But yes, he could easily have thrown the glass houses line at Ben had he possessed the nous.

Oh, that someone would... but I'll settle for that superbly contemptuous "boy".

[Kiowa Warrior]

Oh wow that was a great episode! What any season/hiatus opener should aim to be like really.

Sawyer managing to dodge all those bullets - while the unlucky redshirts got picked off by a killed sniper - did seem pretty far-fetched, but it was still very entertaining though! And poor Alex, I never really thought she would be killed off.

And RIP Team Locke as well now really, since Alex, Karl, Danielle and various redshirts are dead and Sawyer, Claire and Aaron are heading back to the beach. So now it's just Locke, Ben and Hurley on there way to try and find Jacob.

And I don't care what he's done, how can you not feel sorry for Ben?! Just standing there in shock after seeing Alex gunned down, and then saying a tearful goodbye to her...and it still shapes his actions in the future as well, poor guy.

Loads more to say about this episode, but to give it a rating it's easily a 9 out of 10, most likely 9.6 to get picky.

[Murgatroyd]

Originally Posted by Ki

And I don't care what he's done, how can you not feel sorry for Ben?! Just standing there in shock after seeing Alex gunned down, and then saying a tearful goodbye to her...and it still shapes his actions in the future as well, poor guy.

I've seen people on other forums saying they were almost glad Alex was killed, not because they didn't like the character but because it was the level of punishment (and reality-checking) that Ben needed. I won't go that far, but certainly I thought it was a case of too little too late. He's never demonstrated an ounce of sympathy for all his victims and potential victims in the past. How much do you think he pondered Claire's feelings when he ordered Charlie's death, or Rose's when he ordered the deaths of any men who tried to prevent her being kidnapped? I doubt Desmond features much in his Penny-murdering plans either. I'm sure his grief at Alex's death was genuine, but there are so many ways in which he could've prevented it (not in that episode specifically but over the past three seasons), and he is, in my view, an astonishingly hard character with which to sympathise.

[Lauren [is Lost]]

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd

I've seen people on other forums saying they were almost glad Alex was killed, not because they didn't like the character but because it was the level of punishment (and reality-checking) that Ben needed. I won't go that far, but certainly I thought it was a case of too little too late. He's never demonstrated an ounce of sympathy for all his victims and potential victims in the past. How much do you think he pondered Claire's feelings when he ordered Charlie's death, or Rose's when he ordered the deaths of any men who tried to prevent her being kidnapped? I doubt Desmond features much in his Penny-murdering plans either. I'm sure his grief at Alex's death was genuine, but there are so many ways in which he could've prevented it (not in that episode specifically but over the past three seasons), and he is, in my view, an astonishingly hard character with which to sympathise.

I totally agree with that.

[Kiowa Warrior]

Originally Posted by Murgatroyd

I've seen people on other forums saying they were almost glad Alex was killed, not because they didn't like the character but because it was the level of punishment (and reality-checking) that Ben needed. I won't go that far, but certainly I thought it was a case of too little too late. He's never demonstrated an ounce of sympathy for all his victims and potential victims in the past. How much do you think he pondered Claire's feelings when he ordered Charlie's death, or Rose's when he ordered the deaths of any men who tried to prevent her being kidnapped? I doubt Desmond features much in his Penny-murdering plans either. I'm sure his grief at Alex's death was genuine, but there are so many ways in which he could've prevented it (not in that episode specifically but over the past three seasons), and he is, in my view, an astonishingly hard character with which to sympathise.

I guess part of it is that Ben received such a sharp shock in reality checking that can garner him some sympathy: like Ben said to Micheal when at war he does what he has to do, and even I won't argue that all of his decisions were right or justifiable, but if you're the leader with very high stakes to protect you have to close off part of yourself in order to make the hard calls.

It is of course possible (probably more than likely) that Ben doesn't feel a huge amount of sympathy for the people he sends to their deaths, but who's to say for certain that's the case? Even if they haunt his conscience he wouldn't be a very effective leader if he allowed them to interfere with every single action he makes. On the surface it does seem much easier - it's far more clear cut - to sympathise with someone who openly and freely expresses emotions, especially grief and regret, but just because someone may not choose to show them - or doesn't experience them to the degree that they 'should - does not, for me anyway, mean that they don't deserve sympathy at times. I'd say that Ben is a hard character, but I don't really find it that hard to sympathise with a lot of what he's gone through.

[Murgatroyd]

Sorry, feeling hidden remorse for your actions without undergoing any demonstrable behaviourable does not garner my sympathy either. Even Alex's death doesn't seem to have changed him. Had he thought to himself 'Oh my ... this is what it feels like. I need to pack this lifestyle in', I'd find it a lot easier to feel properly sorry for him, but actually he's decided to take revenge by killing an innocent party.

It's admirably humane to feel sympathy for a murderer who's suddenly been made acutely aware of the emotional consequences of murder, but personally, I feel much sorrier for Alex.

[Hordriss]

The revelation that Ben and Widmore have, apparently, been "playing" with other people's lives is not massively conducive to sympathy for Ben: so he didn't really mean it when he claimed Alex was a "pawn" to him, but he all-too-clearly thinks that so many other people are. I agree that his decision to avenge her by killing the (as far as we know) innocent Penny demonstrates an unreformed and immature personality. I will avoid the word "evil", as I still suspect that Ben has justified his actions within his own warped little ethical world. Nevertheless, we could hardly ask for more certain confirmation that Ben is indifferent to human life unless a) he has a personal attachment at stake, or b) he can use a person to achieve some end (whether it for assassination, sexual harassment, or sacrificial / revenge purposes).

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by Lauren [is Lost]

No, it appears that THAT wasn't selfish...until he let Alex sit there and be told that "she means nothing", and then let her get shot by Keamy. Nice one, Ben. No 'father of the year' awards for you. As soon as he knew Alex was being held hostage, he should have been out there like a shot (excuse the pun). Keamy shouldn't have even had to bring out the gun. What WAS he thinking? Not about saving his daughter's life, oh no, but about saving his own ass. Selfish bugger!

Ben was only saying that to create an advange for all of them - he clearly loves Alex..don't blame him for trying to buy thinking time. If he ran out there then Keamy would've taken him and killed Alex anyway!..Not to mention everyone else on that island. I don't think you'd want Sawyer dead? Ben is the only think standing in the way of the Losties and death.

I'm not sure what makes you think Keamy would have killed Alex and everyone else had Ben come out?

Interesting point. Could well be so. If we're with Locke and his 'everything happens for a reason' malarkey, the island could well be protecting Sawyer (at least for the time being).

Yeah, could well be. I guess the likes of Claire and Sawyer still have work to do, even though it may be short work.

Hmm...unless of course the island is protecting her too?

True.
Silly Island

I must admit, it was a great moment of the show!

You can say that again!

Of course, but doesn't he always? Benjamin Linus is a compulsive liar, end of story

I don't think that's true at all. So much of what he says IS true..it's just that we don't find out til later, or we don't understand what he means at the time. I stand by my belief that Ben was telling the truth when he said he doesn't know what Smokey is..why would he say what he said about letting Jacob tell Locke, if he had lied?

[Lauren [is Lost]]

Originally Posted by D-Roc

Ben was only saying that to create an advange for all of them - he clearly loves Alex..don't blame him for trying to buy thinking time. If he ran out there then Keamy would've taken him and killed Alex anyway!..Not to mention everyone else on that island. I don't think you'd want Sawyer dead? Ben is the only think standing in the way of the Losties and death.
I'm not sure what makes you think Keamy would have killed Alex and everyone else had Ben come out?

I dont think i did say that...?
Yes but who says that Keamy WOULD have killed Alex and the losties? BEN. And fair enough if you believe what Ben says, but i don't. He could easily just be saying that so the losties don't hand him over. Keamy did say "If you come out you have my word that no one in that house will be harmed". And yes i'm sure Ben did love Alex, but obviously not enough...let's be honest, any half decent parent would probably be out there straight away screaming TAKE ME INSTEAD if someone had a gun to their child's head. And i know that's an assumption, but it's probably true tbh.

I don't think that's true at all. So much of what he says IS true..it's just that we don't find out til later, or we don't understand what he means at the time. I stand by my belief that Ben was telling the truth when he said he doesn't know what Smokey is..why would he say what he said about letting Jacob tell Locke, if he had lied?

Ok put it this way...Ben MANIPULATES. You cannot deny that. He often lies, and he also often manipulates and twists the truth in order to get what he wants. An example could be...ok, maybe Ben doesn't know what exactly smokey IS (and therefore in his view he wasnt lying), however he could know what it does and could have 'used it' before, etc. And that's what Locke was asking...Ben just manipulated the truth. If that makes sense.

[KatesFate]

dont think i did say that...?
Yes but who says that Keamy WOULD have killed Alex and the losties? BEN. And fair enough if you believe what Ben says, but i don't. He could easily just be saying that so the losties don't hand him over. Keamy did say "If you come out you have my word that no one in that house will be harmed". And yes i'm sure Ben did love Alex, but obviously not enough...let's be honest, any half decent parent would probably be out there straight away screaming TAKE ME INSTEAD if someone had a gun to their child's head. And i know that's an assumption, but it's probably true tbh.


Although I totally love Ben as a character, I totally get what you are saying about the father issue. I am a parent and would not have hesitated to go out there. If you take my babies, you're taking me too. However, I do believe that Keamy would have still killed Alex if Ben had gone out there. He was shooting at innocent people for no reason when they arrived in O-town. Why should we think he would stop killing people just because Ben decided to come out. Whoever wants that island most likely doesnt want the people that come with it, so they are all pretty dispensable.

[Murg]

Another post I saved from a failed posting attempt several weeks ago. Again, the moment's past but I might as well make my point.

Originally Posted by Hordriss

The revelation that Ben and Widmore have, apparently, been "playing" with other people's lives is not massively conducive to sympathy for Ben: so he didn't really mean it when he claimed Alex was a "pawn" to him, but he all-too-clearly thinks that so many other people are. I agree that his decision to avenge her by killing the (as far as we know) innocent Penny demonstrates an unreformed and immature personality. I will avoid the word "evil", as I still suspect that Ben has justified his actions within his own warped little ethical world. Nevertheless, we could hardly ask for more certain confirmation that Ben is indifferent to human life unless a) he has a personal attachment at stake, or b) he can use a person to achieve some end (whether it for assassination, sexual harassment, or sacrificial / revenge purposes).

Yes, I agree with all of that. Even with the 'Ben isn't evil' thing - for all that I think Keamy could not unreasonably pull out the hackneyed old 'glass houses' line at Ben, he's in another league again. I feel as though Keamy obeys foul orders from above because he doesn't mind doing so ... perhaps because he even gets something out of it ... but not because he thinks there's anything meaningful at stake. Ben, on the other hand, has justified his behaviour to himself at least. It's still awful, but it makes him more than a 2D killing machine and I don't believe he either gets a kick out the killing/torturing etc. or that it doesn't personally affect him if he lets his guard down. I just think he has a horribly basic understanding of 'good' and 'bad' - equating to 'doesn't matter' - and a terrifying sense of his own importance, and that makes him able in his mind to do as he wishes to those that don't matter to him ('If anyone tries to stop you, kill them') if it keeps him where he wants to be (eg. he reasoned killing Locke when his own special relationship with Jacob was under threat).

Ki - I made a post to you that disappeared this morning, so sorry about that. I just wanted to update my previous post to say I didn't mean I couldn't empathise with Ben in the moment of his suffering, but it was kind of hard to feel much in the way of sympathy when my overwhelming feeling was 'Now you know what it's like'. I also think it's likely to be better for Ben's character if he isn't protected from personal knowledge of grief ... or I would think that if I hadn't seen his flashforward at any rate.

Reminds me of, oddly, a scene from an episode of All Creatures Great and Small when a man who'd recently lost his mother took out his anger in killing a dog. He regrets this and asks the vet what he's going to say to the dog's owner, and Farnon says: 'I'm going to say to them exactly what I'm going to say to you now - I'm terribly sorry for your pain, and I wish I could do something to make it better'. That broke the man up a bit - being made aware that he'd caused someone else the same kind of awful pain he was currently experiencing - and it's the kind of sympathy I'm able to muster for Ben. He must be in the same sort of terrible pain that his own victims have long experienced and will, if he has his way, do again in the future.