?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Lost: Thoughts on crime & punishment

Just spec. No spoilers.



What happens when they all find out about Michael's betrayal? They haven't really faced this situation before. I've always wondered what kind of justice they would mete out on the island, assuming they get the chance. It seems to me that, plotwise, Michael can't be allowed to get away with it. The writers could always take the route they do in so many Disney movies, with the villain (and yes, Michael is a villain now, isn't he?) simply falling to his death so that no one is actually responsible for his death.

I don't hate Michael. My reaction to him has always ranged from mild indifference to boredom to intense dislike. I did kind of hate him when he blamed Sawyer for Walt's kidnapping and refused to acknowledge Sawyer a) getting shot trying to save Walt, b) Sawyer saving Michael's life and c) his own bad parenting. But that's how I judge everyone: Are they mistreating Sawyer? If so, grrr! Of course that's not real world ethics or even ideal Craphole Island ethics.

But given what Michael has done, I don't see how he can live. Assuming he doesn't die in the finale (and I've heard nothing to indicate that he will), how will they treat him once they know? Mere shunning won't do it this time. There would have to be an island death penalty. He could strike out on his own, like Danielle. But the way I see it, the only way this can end is with Michael's death. I've wished more fervently for other characters' deaths (mostly for the crimes of being boring or very bad actors), but his seems inevitable.

Here's a list of how they've handled justice on the island previously. Aside from some shunning, no one's had to answer for any of their misdeeds.

1. Crime: Boone steals the water
Outcome: The makings of an ugly mob scene until Jack arrives in the nick of time and delivers his "stick together" speech. Boone is snubbed for a while, as Sawyer points out he's now "at the top of the most hated list."

2. Crime: Sawyer withholds Shannon's asthma medicine
Outcome: After talking to him doesn't work, Jack tells Sayid to go ahead and torture him. When it comes out that Sawyer is innocent, Kate is sympathetic, but everyone still considers Sawyer the island pariah.

3. Crime: Sayid stabs Sawyer
Outcome: Sayid exiles himself temporarily. No one ever calls him on what he did and eventually Sawyer forgives him.

4. Crime: Locke knocks Sayid out and ruins the transceiver
Outcome: Sayid is upset when he finds out much later, but chooses to do nothing

5. Crime: Charlie shoots Ethan, killing him before he can tell them anything
Outcome: People's opinions of Charlie dip a little lower

6. Crime: Locke deliberately leads Boone to his death
Outcome: Shannon and Jack both blame Locke. After Sayid won't kill Locke for her, Shannon tries to shoot Locke herself but misses. Jack is visibly disappointed, LOL. Jack never fully forgives Locke, but they mostly put aside their differences on a day to day basis

7. Crime: Jin is blamed for the boat being torched
Outcome: Sawyer tracks him down and brings him back to face Michael. Jack wants to stop Michael from beating Jin up, but Sawyer and Sayid hold him back and everyone just watches as Michael beats Jin. When Jin is revealed to be innocent, he and Michael team up to build a new boat and become unlikely friends.

8. Danielle steals Aaron. Later, Charlie steals Aaron
Both are shunned and shamed. Locke beats up Charlie.

9. Crime: Ana accidentally shoots and kills Shannon, then freaks out and takes Sayid hostage, after also deciding to leave Sawyer to die
Outcome: The other Tailies turn against Ana, leaving her alone with Sayid. He declines to shoot her. When she comes back to camp, she is quickly welcomed as one of them and becomes a trusted leader/soldier. The only ones who keep their distance are Sayid, who is still in mourning, and Kate, her rival for Jack, and Sawyer, who understandably doesn't like her for her continued abuse. Sayid ends up teaming up with her(!) to find The Others, and tells her he blames them, not her. Sawyer also doesn't hold a grudge for long either.

10. Crime: Michael K.O.s Locke and steals the guns to go look for Walt
Outcome: No one blames him and they rush to bring him back

10. Crime: Henry Gale is thought to be one of The Others
Outcome: He is tortured until he admits the truth

And I've left out Kate manipulating Jack to get the suitcase (outcome: some yelling, some disappointed looks, temporary shunning), and Sawyer stealing the guns (same outcome, really) and countless other stuff, probably.

So all these "crimes" have been overlooked or forgiven or forgotten. But what Michael did, once revealed, cannot be forgiven. Regardless of how you feel about Ana and Libby -- I want to applaud him, myself -- cold-blooded murder can't be shrugged off.

Whether you like Michael or not (and he's actually finally gotten interesting to me now that he's gone over to the dark side), is there any way he can live freely among them after this gets out? I just don't see how. I know that forgiveness and spirituality are huge on the show, but in this case?

Comments

( 39 comments — Leave a comment )
eponine119
May. 20th, 2006 05:12 am (UTC)
They really are in kind of a bind, if Michael doesn't die.

Based on the existing pattern, what would happen would be that Sawyer would drag him back, there'd be some yelling and posturing by the group, possibly an attempt to kill Michael or some torture, and then they would get distracted by something shiny and wander away and forget all about it. And I have no trouble imagining the writers actually doing that, because I think little of them.

If done well, the darkest thing that could happen would be if Michael did live among them without forgiveness and they all had to live with that. The alternatives are darker but easier to live with in that they'd end quickly: exile, or they kill him.
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 05:28 am (UTC)
LOL. The writers really lack conviction, don't they? I think the forgiving and forgetting would work better with a RL timeline. But given this has all happened in a very compressed timeframe, mere days apart, it really makes no sense. *sighs*

I'm not bloodthirsty but if they just shrug this off, I won't be the only pissed off fan. Given that ABC/Disney called for the dismissal of two actresses for driving drunk and (possibly) the two characters who had committed faux!incest, I can't see them letting a murderer get off scott free. I can see fic exploring all the ramifications of having a murderer live among them, but I don't see the show doing it justice, given their, as you put it so well, inclination to go chase after shiny things.
eponine119
May. 20th, 2006 05:51 am (UTC)
Oh, wow, very good point there. DUI and fictional fake incest are taboo, but murder's just fine. Maybe they can shrug off Michael's crimes, but put in those terms, I don't think I can.
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 06:05 am (UTC)
On the one hand, those were (apparently) external decisions to kill off those particular characters. Boone's death is the only one that seemed integral to the show and each successive death kind of cheapens the emotional impact of it. But if they don't have a mandate from above to kill someone off, will they? Will there be consequences? I've always wanted to see the "Lord of the Flies" chaos that they've hinted at several times. We've never actually gotten it -- not when the Tailies were so easily assimilated into the bigger group and not with The Others so far.

I hate it when everything is just swept under the rug. I guess it's too much to ask for complex, consistent character motivation. But it shouldn't be. :-/ So Michael has to pay, somehow. Please!
isis2015
May. 20th, 2006 05:15 am (UTC)
Something that's always bothered me about the castaways is the "forgive and forget" attitude. Forgetting the bad things people have done just because you don't have an established government or system of dealing with people who do stupid crap, and in some cases commit murder, is no way to deal with or discourage behavior. I don't feel like Michael or Charlie killed because they knew they could get away with it. I think they did it in the heat of the moment when they thought it was their only option (though I teeter on the edge with Michael because he didn't have to kill Libby and Ana). But that doesn't excuse it or make it better.

But to be honest, I don't see them doing anything about Michael. I think they'll do what they've always done and forget about it, assuming that Michael lives to see next season. Their on a freaking island in the middle of nowhere and I don't think they're actually going to form any set kind of government, what with Locke's "Who are we to tell anyone what to do?" attitude and Sawyer with his irritation with anything resembling authority. I can't see them doing anything but what they're doing right now. Is it right or good for them? No. But I just don't think they're going to change.

:/ Is that overly pessimistic?
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 05:34 am (UTC)
Oh, that's bugged me immensely! Not just because I'm a champion grudge holder myself, but because those are some serious grievances that no real person would let go that easily -- especially since these have supposedly happened just a few weeks or days apart. It's TV reality, to be sure, but once you stop believing in it, your emotional investment in the show is in jeopardy.

They have to do SOMETHING. Killing Michael off, at the hands of The Others or accidentally, like everyone else, would solve that problem. If they don't take that route, and Michael lives and there are no consequences, I think everyone watching the show will cry foul.

I've had my faith completely shaken in the show and the writers' visions ... but can they really just cop out like that? I have to hope that's not the case. I could be letting myself in for a lot more disappointment. We'll see!
isis2015
May. 20th, 2006 05:42 am (UTC)
To me, just killing Michael off seems like the cop-out. It's like, after he's dead, everything will go back to the way it was and no one will learn anything from it...*sigh* I don't know. I can't really tell what the future holds for Michael or for anyone. But given what Michael has done, I don't see things going well for him from here on in. Something has to be done with him, that's for sure. If he just skates on this, I will cry foul. I think even the people that didn't like Ana and Libby will. Because there's being glad someone's dead and then there's totally ignoring your moral compass.
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 05:52 am (UTC)
Well, you're right, it is a cop out ot just kill him off too. But to let him get off scott free would be even worse, so I'd settle for death-by-Other or whatever.

I guess I didn't ask - can he be redeemed? I don't see how he can. He didn't just betray them -- he murdered two of them. It doesn't really matter who he killed. His fate should be the same. That they were two characters who weren't pivotal to the show and who were disliked is beside the point, I agree. I'm not the least bit sad they're dead but that doesn't affect the fact that Michael's a murderer.
isis2015
May. 20th, 2006 06:02 am (UTC)
I really don't think he's coming back from this. He's to determined. He's to...I don't want to say sadistic because it's not that, but it's the only word I can think of. He just seems like he has a plan mapped out and he's doing what he can to get it done. He's leading four people into danger knowingly. He killed two people. He seems guilty, sure, but he keeps doing it. So no. I don't think he can be redeemed.

The thing that I keep coming back to is, he could have come back and laid it all out straight, told Jack what the Others wanted and taken the time to from a plan to get Walt back. But instead he trusted a bunch of people he doesn't know who kidnapped his child instead of the people he's been living with, who've defended him and protected him and helped him. What I'm saying is, he had more options than this and it didn't have to be this way. But he made it this way and everything that happens from here on in is on him.
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 06:09 am (UTC)
You know, I think that's always been the case with Michael -- look, consistency, LOL! He was so eager to sell out Sawyer after the raft incident and he was either 'every man for himself' or willing to cooperate with their captives, while Sawyer was loyal only to the people he knew. He risked life and limb for them and got no thanks. And look at Jin's loyalty to Michael! Michael has *never* shown that kind of loyalty to anyone on the island. He's just a selfish ass. That's really nothing new and all the boo hooing over Walt doesn't justify his actions. Not by a long shot.

He absolutely should have trusted Jack and Sayid to come up with a plan. And that he'd even be willing to sacrifice Walt, rather than lead others to their death. Everything *is* on him. I feel no sympathy for him whatsover. If he had been at all sympathetic at any point on the show, maybe that would give me some pause, but he's only ever bored me. :-/ I was shocked and upset when they took Walt, but all his actions since have been completely foolish and selfish. I just don't see how anyone could defend his actions.

isis2015
May. 20th, 2006 06:21 am (UTC)
You're completely right. And Michael gets a posse of girls running up the beach to greet him. Now granted, Sawyer doesn't exactly make it easy for people to like him or be his friend, because after the whole "Everybody loves you now" thing we got The Long Con then everyone didn't like him again. However, your point is completely valid. Sawyer does trust the people around him. I'm going to use Jack as and example because of the recent episode. Sawyer confiding in Jack shows trust. It shows that he's willing to bend and consider things and is actually smart enough to see a bigger picture.

Micheal's actions are motivated by one thing: Walt. It doesn't make it right. Yes, Walt is his child. That's a strong bond. But it doesn't justify anything that he's done. I feel no sympathy for him. I feel more sympathy for Walt. Michael has made his own bed. His actions have shown his selfish, self-serving nature. But that's the way he's always been: impulsive, hot-tempered, short-sighted. That's a recipie for big trouble.
alliecat8
May. 20th, 2006 05:24 am (UTC)
Are they mistreating Sawyer? If so, grrr!

Uh huh, high five.

I'm always reactionary at the get-go when he's involved. Like, for instance, I haven't even finished reading this post.

tbc
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 05:37 am (UTC)
LOL! ;-) I did get long and rambly! I didn't really need to list all the "crimes" but it is kind of shocking to see how they do forgive and forget at the drop of a hat. As a friend used to say, "TV logic!" Except on a show with life and death stakes, it would be nice to not have to roll your eyes and ignore farfetched stuff, like you do on a thrillride kind of show like 24.
alliecat8
May. 20th, 2006 05:41 am (UTC)
ACCOUNTABILITY. Have they ever heard of it???

cold-blooded murder can't be shrugged off.

And yet it was, with both Ana and Kate.

My head has gone to a very dark place now, where it's all about judgment, and the survivor's lack of it is going to be a huge issue. Whoever He is, he's not forgiving. Unlike the bewildered survivors.
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 05:56 am (UTC)
Do you mean Ana having killed on the island or before? Because I'm kind of going with the show here, and giving the pre-island stuff a free pass, more or less. We know they're all a bunch of dysfunctional, fucked-up types, and some of them are even killers. Although many of those crimes aren't known to anyone but the people who committed them. And so there is no accountabilty for that, except in whatever kind of island redemption arc is planned for them.

But on the island, with no chance to hide or run from their crimes, shouldn't there be consequences? That's always been my beef with the show - that everyone forgives and forgets. But everything so far (on the island) pales in comparison to what Michael did. They can't let this go? Can they?

alliecat8
May. 20th, 2006 06:40 am (UTC)
No, they can't. Expect a long, really long, thinky reply tomorrow when the time-difference thing isn't making my brain stupid.
arabella_hope
May. 20th, 2006 06:21 am (UTC)
One change: You have Ana takes Sawyer hostage, but I know you mean Sayid ;)

I don't know. I mean, Sayid has clued Jack in that Michael is 'compromised', but I'm feeling that in the finale it won't really be 'known' that he caused whatever happens, or addressed. Either a> He'll get away with it (but magnet energy will draw the boat back later) or B. he'll get shot and no one will ever know or c. THEY (someone) gets captured (most likely) and he's with them and...I'm just drunk and making scenarios and not adding to the covo at all. SORRY!
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 06:45 am (UTC)
LOL, oops! It really is all about Sawyer here! ;-)

Hmm, I hadn't thought about that. Leaving it as a cliffhanger? Or maybe some other scenario, where Michaell's betrayal actually isn't even discovered? Hmmm. *ponders* that would be interesting. Although I think fans will want justice!
crystalkirk
May. 20th, 2006 06:24 am (UTC)
I honestly don't know what they'll do. Hadn't really thought about it further than "let's hope he's eaten by a polar bear" which, wasn't a serious thought, lol. (Though fun!)

I see him getting a "redemption" storyline, that ends in his death "heroic" death. Whatevercakes.

If not that, honestly, I kinda think he'll just get away with it. The Losties have short attention spans, and by "Losties" I mean "The Writers" of course. If they have MDK locked in, and back, for next season, I think they'll want to traipse through that storyline more than worry about what's "fitting" for what Michael did.

I don't know anymore. I've learned I can't predict anything these yayhoos anymore. Like my Dad likes to bitch about, EVERY SINGLE WEEK, "They're still just moving sideways!" Which, I do agree with, though, I'd really like to not hear about it anymore, lmfao. They're pulling new things out left and right, never answering anything big, and I'll never be convinced they have any fucking clue what the endgame is, no matter what they say. In the beginning, I didn't think I was signing up to watch a show about hatches and an evil company and Others that put on grand stage productions with fake-ass beards. But I'd deal with it, and even be totally on board, if they wouldn't cast all the current on island character development aside to keeping pulling "tricks" out of their endless hat.

I'm really not as bitter as that sounds, lmfao. I'm more ambivalent. Though, I'd give a lot to go back to when it was a kickass, character driven drama.

That's the show I fell in love with, and I kinda, really, totally want it back whenever they're done fucking around.
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 06:49 am (UTC)
I don't think even their short attention spans can overlook THIS. But then again, the writers and I clearly don't see eye to eye, LOL! Not this season anyway!

I didn't think I was signing up to watch a show about hatches and an evil company and Others that put on grand stage productions with fake-ass beards.

And that is why S2 has sucked so damn hard. This isn't the show any of us fell in love with. Take back your damn hatches and orientation videos, kthx!

I'd give a lot to go back to when it was a kickass, character driven drama.

WORD.



rogueapprentice
May. 20th, 2006 01:09 pm (UTC)
I have HEARD (and this very well could be untrue) that HP will only be a guest star next season. Maybe the tribal council decides to vote him off the island/exile him?
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 06:34 pm (UTC)
Could be exile or he could flee into the jungle, like Desmond or Danielle. Except i don't see him surviving on his wits because he doesn't have any!

zelda_zee
May. 20th, 2006 04:21 pm (UTC)
One of the things that has bugged me most about the show is the lack of accountability. It is simply not in the least believable. I know it's done just to serve the purposes on the series, to keep everything moving forward, but to me it's just bullshit. As if.

I don't know what they could do in that situation, not like they could lock people up, but I'm sure they wouldn't all be welcomed back into the group with open arms after committing some heinous crime.

And if they do that w/Michael... I just hope they don't, it's gonna strain my ability to just roll with the show too much. They would probably go w/some "it's for Walt's sake" thing. I think they have to kill him off, either that or he goes to live w/the Others, now that he's become as bad as they are.

At any rate, it would be a relief to me if something happened to him, and we don't have to put up with him anymore.
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 06:38 pm (UTC)
Word, word, word. Accountabiity is definitely lacking. On the one hand, what are they going to do, set up a tribunal and render legal judgments? Actually execute someone? But on the other hand, just shrugging things off isn't working either. Even if the characters don't remember or choose to let stuff go, the audience doesn't. And all that ends up undermining our faith in the show. The circumstances might be far out but there has to be a degree of realism and some kind of internal logic. I've said it before and I'll say it again -- the writers have ADD. And they don't trust their audience, apparently.

The "for Walt's sake" thing could be an interesting angle. I won't miss Michael if he leaves. I haven't missed him this whole time he was away. The only time I ever liked him is when his storyline wasn't exclusively about Walt -- when he was building the boat. That's why Claire is so dull too: she only exists to be Aaron's mom. I would have loved to see these characters have at least one other dimension to them.
zelda_zee
May. 20th, 2006 06:49 pm (UTC)
I agree, the parental characters are so dull! Maybe the writers are all childless and think that parents are one-dimensional or something. But I'm childless and I don't think that, so what's their excuse? I actually think both Michael and Claire have interesting aspects to their characters that have just not been developed in favor of the whole mommy/daddy thing.

It's true that Michael is more interesting now than he's ever been. What made him go so far off the deep end that he decided the only way to get the four specified by the Others to go w/him was to start shooting people? I doubt the show will adequately go to that dark place. It was quite shocking to me to learn that the Others hadn't demanded he kill Ana, or apparently, release Gale.

Well, like Sayid said, Michael is compromised. In the grand scheme of the show, I think his time must be up.
aldo_77
May. 20th, 2006 05:33 pm (UTC)
I think Michael will die sooner or later, getting chased over a cliff or something. That would be OK. I cant see him living among them if they knew what he had done. It would be exile to the "Other" group, or killed by accident.

However, if they start with death-penalties on the island, then there is the end of the show for me. I wouldnt be able to stand anyone of them if they turned all Governor Devlin on me.
I could see a lynchmob though, someone who takes the law in his/hers own hands and revenges the killings, like Shannon tried to do with Locke?
halfdutch
May. 20th, 2006 06:41 pm (UTC)
I'm thinking death-by-cliff or fleeing into the jungle are the most likely options. They can't really start executing people. But it irks me no end that no one is ever to blame for anything. Locke was guilty. Ana should not have been made as welcome as she was, accident or not. Real people hold grudges over these things! I could see some mob justice, like when they almost went after Boone for the water and Jin for (supposedly) burning the boat, except that those were both stopped before any real damage was done.

If Shannon had shot Locke, I don't think anyone would have blamed her. Same with Sayid, if he'd shot Ana. And I would have been OK with that. I guess I have a vigilante streak in me.
demonqueen666
May. 20th, 2006 08:59 pm (UTC)
The show might take the easy way out and either have him killed off, join the Others, or just wander into the jungle of his own accord.

Realistically, however, I see only a few ways this can go down with any success. No, Michael definitely shouldn't be forgiven for this, but even if they attempt some sort of organized group justice, I don't know if they'll kill him. I'm sure most of the group would just call for his head, but there will probably be at least some anti-death penalty folks or aomeone who makes the "making us no better than him" speech (*cough*Jack*cough*).
I think "group justice" (ie that select Tribal Council makes their own call on what's best for everyone) would either sentence him to be their new hatch prisoner, or exile him. If it's the first, it won't be for long: someone will eventually go vigilante and sneak in there to finish him off. The people in charge might even look the other way. If it's the second one, it could be interesting, because Michael would probably come into conflicts with the group, either stealing supplies from camp or maybe trying to capture or kill them if they cross paths in the jungle.

Of course, there's always that chance that he'll "accidentally" be killed when they try to drag him back for justce in the first place.
halfdutch
May. 21st, 2006 04:47 am (UTC)
Very good points.

Do you think Jack would forgive him? He has forgiven Kate several times but he really didn't want to forgive Locke. He looked very disappointed when Shannon missed, as I recall! And this is the man who authorized torture and condoned keeping Henry Gale a prisoner, although he stopped both from going too far. Jack walks a fine line there. I think it would be Kate doing the protesting, at least harking back to her behavior in Confidence Man.

I could see Michael being the scary island outcast. I wonder if Walt would go with him or stay in the camp.

If anyone does kill Michael, accidentally or otherwise, I think they'll get a free pass. His only hope for redemption is to sacrifice himself saving someone else. There really is no other way, given his complete lack of remorse so far. He's always been an incredibly selfish ass, hasn't he? It's just this time other lives are at stake and that's a price he's perfectly willing to pay.
demonqueen666
May. 21st, 2006 10:31 pm (UTC)
You're right, Jack does walk a very fine line. I guess I could see him being conflicted enough that he decides to just stay out of this one, neither vocally calling for Michael's head nor defending him. I doubt that he would ever forgive Michael, regardless of the outcome, particularly since Jack trusted Michael and came thisclose to doing exactly what he wanted; a mixture of betrayal and guilt over how bad things could have gone, and how it would have been Jack's fault (at least, in his mind) will be keeping him far away from putting Michael in good graces.

If Michael becomes the outcast, assuming Walt isn't still stuck with the Others (and I'm kind of assuming he will be, to counter that pesky growth issue), Walt will probably be not sure what he wants to do...Michael is his father, but he's also being really scary (I'm trying to think with 10 year old POV here). The other Lostaways will probably make the choice for him and keep him away from his father, which will lead into conflicts as Michael repeatedly and obsessively tries to get back "his boy".
ficangel
May. 20th, 2006 11:08 pm (UTC)
The big, big thing that got me about Michael's and Eko's scene in "Three Minutes" was the lack of remorse that Michael felt. As Eko said in "?", you can't be forgiven unless you're actually repentent. Michael is the boy who beat his dog, not truly sorry and realizing that he did a wrong thing, but only worried that he might be caught. He's upset by what he had to do, but he still thinks that it's a worthy sacrifice. That's the big thing that keeps me from forgiving him, frankly. I've had a lot of murderers on my list of fannish favs, Sawyer included, but they all reached a point where they realized that what they were doing was wrong independently of whether or not they were caught. That's my big reason for thinking that, yes, he's going to have to die at the end of the season. Without actual remorse, there's no guarantee that he won't turn on them again the very moment that an opportunity presents itself.

I could see an exile situation happening. A tropical island gives a lot in the way of resources, but there's a reason that exile was equated with deal in prehistoric societies. Humans just aren't very good at dealing with harsh nature unless we run around in packs. An organized, unified decision to cast Michael out-without Walt-would be that final push towards actually developing a system of laws that I've been waiting for. However, I agree with you, I think they'll go for the death scene. More dramatic.
ficangel
May. 20th, 2006 11:08 pm (UTC)
Equated with death. Exile was equated with death. Sometimes I should not be allowed near keyboards.
halfdutch
May. 21st, 2006 04:40 am (UTC)
Very good point. Do you think Eko knows? Or is just extra spooky? And Michael has shown absolutely no remorse. He's only anxious about being caught. Even his anxiety about involving extra people seems to be more about being exposed than risking more lives.

Since they landed, and especially since the raft was attacked, he's shown zero loyalty. Whereas Sawyer, of all peple, is loyal to his own tribe, even when they don't return the favor. And Sawyer's gone out of his way to be a good guy on several occasions, an impulse Michael has never felt and doesn't even acknowledge in others. I don't think Michael would have hesitated to sell Sawyer out (and possibly also Jin) to Eko & Ana without even knowing who they were or what they wanted. I am somewhat glad to be vindicated for taking Sawyer's side this whole time, given that Michael really hasn't changed from Day One. It's just the circumstances that have changed.

I think an exile situation might be too complicated to maintain and that a quick death might be easiest. But then again, could they have kept this quiet about another death? But it's hard to imagine them letting Michael get away with it. I suppose he could disappear again, to make a dramatic appearance later. *scratches chin*





foxxcub
May. 21st, 2006 12:28 am (UTC)
Well, according to the trend as you've mapped out, I'm pretty sure that if Michael gets Walt back, everyone will eventually understand and go on with their lives.

O_O
halfdutch
May. 21st, 2006 04:28 am (UTC)
Urgh. There would have be some extreme fan backlash if that happened. Not that anyone is really missing Ana or Libby but he can't just be allowed to skate!
themoononastick
May. 21st, 2006 10:08 pm (UTC)
You missed out a crime - Sawyer and Charlie fake kidnap Sun in order to get petty revenge on Jack and Locke. So far the punishment has been some vague temporary shunning for Sawyer and everyone forgetting about Sun getting hurt. I think it will be interesting to see if that particular storyline is ever returned to (for example someone actually gets a clue and realises that Sun's injury was actually part of Sawyer's plan and finds out who did it) as it was one of the most selfish "crimes" to have been commited by any of the castaways and can't really be explained away that easily. For example, IMO it is way worse than Michael knocking out Locke and stealing a gun in order to go look for Walt. *shrugs*

I think it is interesting that I seem to be the only person who thinks that Michael is feeling some kind of regret for his actions - directly after Eko's speech in the hatch, Michael was outside in the jungle throwing up... to me that seemed like him reacting to both what Eko had said and to what he (Michael) had done. I do think he is aware of just how bad a thing he has done and is about to do but I think he is so blinded by his need to protect his child that he feels forced to go thru with it. I'm not defending him, I agree that he has gone way beyond any form of rational and/or acceptable behaviour, I just think it is interesting that no one else interpreted his behaviour in the way I did.

Personally I don't think he will die, I think that would be too simple (even for Lost) I think he will end up joining the Others - not necessarily by choice but more because I don't think he will feel he can return to the scene of his crimes. He asked the Others to give him their boat when he made the deal to get Walt back and I think that his plan all along has been to do what the Others have asked of him and then attempt to leave the island with Walt. I assume that the Others will double cross him in some way and that will lead to people finding out what he has done and thus him being cast out from the group and having to stay with the Others or strike out on his own.
halfdutch
May. 21st, 2006 10:21 pm (UTC)
I didn't include the attack on Sun because as far as I know, everyone still believes that was The Others. I was looking at known crimes that were being judged by the rest of the group, so everyone's pre-island rap sheet is also not relevant here. I'm not saying it wasn't deeply wrong of Sawyer and Charlie, just that no one knows it *was* them and so they've never had to decide how to punish them for it. But since no one ever holds a grudge, if it ever does come out, I don't see them doing much about it, honestly. It would probably play out like Sayid finding out much later about Locke bonking him on the head. :-/

If Michael joins The Others, I guess we won't be seeing much more of him, although if he's not leaving the show he'd still be around in some episodes, I suppose. Would they have a whole separate Others episode then? I'm not really anxious to have more screentime for them. They really are scarier the less we see and know about them.

I could see Michael striking out on his own, but with or without Walt? It would be interesting if Walt found out about what Michael had done and refused to go with him. Or if *he* killed Michael! That would be a helluva twist!

I think Michael is feeling some guilt, but clearly not enough for him to stop his plan to hand over 4 or 5 people for their probable death. So the audience sympathy for him is pretty much hovering around zero.

themoononastick
May. 21st, 2006 11:20 pm (UTC)
You know, I wonder if the reason that I am not so up in arms about Michael as other people are is because I haven't been thinking that he is leading the four people on the list to their deaths - I just assumed that the Others need them for some reason - Hurley because he is the only one of the survivors who had a connection to the island "mystery" before the crash with his knowledge of the numbers and the effect that they have had on his life and the other 3 because they are the lead characters in the show and thus have to be involved - not that they want to kill them. If they wanted them dead then they could have killed them already - when they went running after Michael the first time for example. Again, it doesn't lessen the stupidity and selfishness of what Michael is about to do but if he doesn't think that he is leading them to their deaths then perhaps that is why he feels it is acceptable to do it.
And yeah I know he killed AL and Libby in order to free Faux-Henry but I can't help but feel that was purely because of the need to write them out as opposed to a genuine attempt by the writers to make Michael evil.
Eh, I'm probably too cynical to be entering into discussions like this. I shut up now.
halfdutch
May. 21st, 2006 11:29 pm (UTC)
Could be!

For all Michael knows, they are going to kill them off, though. So he's really on the hook for whatever happens to them. Hey, for all we know it's because The Others' orgies aren't what they used to be and they need new recruits. ;-)

And even though I feel zero sorrow over Ana and Libby's deaths, I still want Michael to pay. Because a world where he gets off scott free is just one overlooked misdeed too many.

But enough of that: OMGZ! '80s videos galore! You'll die!!! Not the best quality, but still I'm grinning like an idiot over here. *squeeee*

I need all '80s icons!!!
( 39 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

Batman/Superman by me
halfdutch
halfdutch

Latest Month

July 2016
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow