Lost Seaons Three Episode One Reviewed
True or False? Foiler or Spoiler? Here is the first review from someone who claims "extremely privlidged access" to the LOST production quarters.
UPDATE: Jeff Jensen from Entertainment Weekly has verified that this is mostly "crap". I’ll leave it up for entertainment purposes.
"Hey Doc! Call me ‘Super-Sock’. We had a small party and under threats of death if any details are leaked, we were allowed to watch a "Work Print" of "Tale of Two Cities". First the overall impression. I know alot of people are saying that they will drag out the reveal of who the others are and what they are doing, I was stunned by how much was revealed. It wasn’t 100% but you will know, roughly, what they do and how long they have been at the ‘island’. I quote that because, honestly, I’m not so sure it is an island. There was a lot of unfinished effects work in the print we watched but it was clear they wanted to give it the look of an artificial land mass. But on a scale that no human could ever build. The episode is mind game after mind game. First you think their free, then their captive, then their free again. The "others" idea of testing is seeing how they will react in different situations. In the end of it, Fenry makes Jack an offer which will just blow your mind, but it looks like another test. It ends with Hurley finding Desmond naked in the Jungle. There are some very cool things shown, there is a connection between Sarah and Locke, there are definite signs in the flashback that there were forces at work pushing Jack, at least, towards his encounter with a predetermined destiny. Jack is definitely left in a very strange headspace. There was no music and the effects were only partially done but it seemed like there was a LOT of CGI. Oh, and at one point you definitely hear the monster in the others habitat. There is no doubt he is "one of them". ‘
Well it makes sense that the first episode would have a lot of SFX, because (1) the SFX guys have had a lot of time to generate new assets for the show over the break and (2) J.J is co-directing so he’d want to make the most balls-out episode he could, reminescent of the original LOST pilot. But the lack of specific details about the show make it seem fishy.
Comment by Ralph from Dharmalars — September 28, 2006 @ 7:24 pm
wow thats pretty cool I was expecting some spoilers to leak seeing as its soon gonna be shown in Hawaii.
Comment by Damien — September 28, 2006 @ 8:09 pm
Producers have already said that, just as we didn’t catch up with the raft folks in the first episode of the second season, we won’t see what happened to Eko, Desmond, and Locke in the first episode of the third. So, I’m very sceptical of this one.
Comment by Christopher Culver — September 28, 2006 @ 8:58 pm
Wow. It sounds like there’s a lot more “Others” stuff than other Losties stuff. I’m not entirely convicned it’s true, but it sounds true. I guess it’s gonna be like last year where they don’t really show anything of one of the stories until the 2nd episode. Can’t wait. LESS THAN A WEEK!!!
Comment by Davis — September 28, 2006 @ 8:59 pm
This sounds sooooooo awesome. I HOPE IT’S TRUE, I HOPE IT’S TRUE.
Well, you know what? Some of the people who catch the uberspecial premiere in Hawaii are bound to dish what happens. We just have to wait a day or two for their info.
Comment by Amber — September 28, 2006 @ 10:05 pm
Wanna see people flame me for spamming my newslink? lol. But seriously. If you like this thing, go to digg and “digg” it, let’s see if we can get tts on front page of digg! http://www.digg.com/television/SPOILER_First_Review_of_LOST_Season_Three_a_Tale_Of_Two_Cities (if you don’t have digg, it takes TWO seconds to sign up.)
Comment by DocArzt — September 28, 2006 @ 10:41 pm
i find it hard to believe anyone who can not spell basic words correctly nor use the proper forms of there, their and they’re…this also flies in the face of almost everything the producers have said over the summer…
Comment by techteach — September 28, 2006 @ 10:59 pm
Sounds good. I hope Mr Locke is more like he was in Season one again.
Comment by James — September 28, 2006 @ 11:30 pm
I didn’t edit the mechanics (I rarely have time to correct my own) but I fail to see what they have to do with the validity of the information.
Comment by docarzt — September 28, 2006 @ 11:49 pm
I believe this is exaggerated on a scale… look at tv guides info on the shows…
Episode Detail: A Tale of Two Cities - Lost
In the third-season opener, Jack, Kate and Sawyer begin to discover what they are up against as prisoners of the Others. Christian Shephard: John Terry. Sarah: Julie Bowen. Mr. Friendly: M.C. Gainey. Ethan: William Mapother. Goodwin: Brett Cullen. Karl: Blake Bashoff. Amelia: Julie Adams. Adam: Stephen Semel.
Sayid’s plan to find Jack endangers Sun and Jin; Kate and Sawyer are forced to work in harsh conditions by their captors; and Henry makes an offer to Jack that might prove difficult to refuse. Mr. Friendly: M.C. Gainey. Alex: Tania Raymonde. Colleen: Paula Malcolmson.
The fates of Locke, Eko and Desmond are revealed after the implosion of the hatch, and Hurley returns to the beach camp and explains what happened when he, Jack, Kate and Sawyer encountered the Others. Meanwhile, Claire is shocked to find Nikki and Paulo (Kiele Sanchez, Rodrigo Santoro) in Jack’s tent. Boone: Ian Somerhalder. Eddie: Justin Chatwin. Mike: Chris Mulkey. Jan: Virginia Morris. Sheriff: Joel Himelhoch. Kim: Dion Donahue.
As you can see the offer doesn’t come until the second episode… so who knows what he is telling us is completely true.
Comment by mdog — September 29, 2006 @ 12:48 am
im sorry, it didnt copy right.. the episode breaks are after all of the names listed…
Comment by mdog — September 29, 2006 @ 12:50 am
the episode info that was pasted above says “Boone: Ian Somerhalder”. we all know Boone isn’t gonna be in this first episode, but episode two, “Further Instructions”. he is supposed to appear in a Locke dream sequence. seems like the TV guide is mixing it up a little.
Comment by Preach — September 29, 2006 @ 4:19 pm
stupid people are often wrong about many things…
Comment by techteach — September 29, 2006 @ 5:40 pm
You all are non-believers. This is true; and the person left out the details because they wanted to leave it open. Doctors mispell words. I find your lack of faith disturbing. I can say this is valid. You won’t believe me, but I am at least one other person who can say this is not fake. I’ll leave it at that.
Comment by Refused Name — September 29, 2006 @ 9:48 pm
..and to be quite honest; from my “point of view”….this makes me less than pleased that this person did leak. It takes a lot of people to make this show; and this person is indeed spoiling it for everybody.
Comment by Refused Name — September 29, 2006 @ 9:51 pm
If you are so disappointed, why would you come on here saying it is true.. If anything you would want to deny what was said. That way people still don’t really know what is actually going to happen.
Comment by mdog — September 29, 2006 @ 10:37 pm
Anybody can post as anybody in a non-restricted message post. Could they have been possibly be two separate people? I never thought of that…..then, does that make me the third?
Comment by Refused Name — September 30, 2006 @ 4:49 am
woot, Refused Name #4. I don’t see what the problem is here. Read the post if you want, don’t read it if you don’t want to. Why argue about it’s validity when it’s obviously not an official source (i.e. producers). Just read it, smile and wait until next week.
Comment by Refused Name — September 30, 2006 @ 1:15 pm
Hey. Jeff Jensen with Entertainment Weekly here.
I’ve seen the premiere.
This review is mostly total crap, and at the very least, extremely misleading.
Comment by Jeff Jensen — September 30, 2006 @ 5:50 pm
Ah… thanks for the heads up Jeff… I didn’t think it was too likely it was real, hence the copious disclaimer.
Comment by docarzt — October 1, 2006 @ 12:32 am
this is a false spoiler nothing is true!!!!
Comment by Nichola UK — October 15, 2006 @ 8:53 pm
ionolsen20 I am really impressed!www_4_2
www_4_3
www_4_4
www_4_5
www_4_6
www_4_7
www_4_8
www_4_9
www_4_10
www_4_11
Comment by topicstarter — October 16, 2006 @ 10:36 pm
rsuodnmvg mdbsql qibrcso msrtqeu xhpkyzu jsxtcqf gisynpked
Comment by ykejr nfykjbous — August 28, 2007 @ 5:18 am
csgfzjq lpzxhkunb wgsoexyr nuspg hatdg hrgqzmsb puelnrci http://www.fzkeoaiyl.rtoscxfla.com
Comment by qvzofw eblg — August 28, 2007 @ 5:19 am