Last Doc Jensen of the Season
Our good friend Jeff "Doc" Jensen has published his final immersion into all that ranges from enlightening to the absurd. Many of you, particularly those of you who engaged me pitched denial-saturated battle over whether or not Christian is alive, will be very displeased to know that Jeff is a little more open to the possibility:
1. IN THE FUTURE, WILL JACK’S DAD BE ALIVE?
Why I’m intrigued: Because Jack’s Dad should be dead! But in the flash forward, Jack referred to the unseen Christian Shepherd in the present tense.
we’ll see, i still think he’s dead unless we discover he’s been working with the hanso foundation in someway and did a bit of barganing to get him of the island, don’t think its got anything to do with time warping though, to much wishful thinking that doesn’t add up to what they know about the island
Comment by nickk — May 30, 2007 @ 10:21 am
I have always been able to count on Jensen’s article for a laugh. There’s something to be said for theorycrafting, but this is out of control.
90% of Jensen’s articles are one step removed from the Lostpedia theorycrafting. Just look at all the ludicrous ideas listed for who the “he” was Kate had to get back to: http://www.lostpedia.com/wiki/Kate_Austen/Theories.
Just because it could be such a thing doesn’t mean that idea should be entertained.
Enough of the bashing, because the end of this article had a very interesting idea: “Season 6 will be the return [to the Island], and THAT will close out the series. Am I out of control?”
As a viewer, I could be totally satisfied with the hit-and-miss “planning” if the ending of the show involved Jack somehow (Walt maybe?) sending Jack back to his body in the past, just before the crash, and the last shot of the entire series is Jack waking up in the jungle, camera looking down on him, just like in the pilot.
Comment by icyone — May 30, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
Icyone: If all I do is make you laugh, then I’ve done my job. But I wonder: what are the proper rules for “theorycrafting”?
Comment by Jeff Jensen — May 30, 2007 @ 8:09 pm
I thought for a bit about how to not be cruel about this. I’m not knocking your fandom, but how can you expect to be taken seriously when you’ll entertain any theory, no matter how totally outlandish?
Is it fair to encourage people like Droobieboy to think that because there has been no explicit explanation, that the explanation must be outlandish?
I certainly don’t think its “kosher” to posit a complicated theory when a simplier one will suffice - its kind of embarassing for Lost fans to say how smart the show is when they’ll concoct any ridiculous narrative because well, in this case, a cover-up to prevent anyone from finding the island is in play.
Of course, maybe you can write about how aliens cloned the passengers of 815, dropped them in the ocean, and telepathically guided the rescue teams to it. It’s certainly no less possible than a parallel universe.
Comment by icyone — May 30, 2007 @ 8:37 pm