Crumbs: REVIEWS » Lost » Season 6 » Everybody Loves Hugo
Login/Register
68
/100

Lost

Lost is a drama about a group of plane crash survivors. They land on an unknown Pacific island and have to learn to live together. ABC 2004-2010

58
/100

Episode 12 - Everybody Loves Hugo

18 April 2010

Review

Present: Michael visits Hurley and warns him that people will die if they blow up the plane. Ilana blows herself up after collecting dynamite from the Black Rock. Hurley agrees to go get more but upon arriving he blows up the ship and with it all the dynamite. Richard is angry and insists he will go to the Barracks and find more explosives. Miles and Ben agree to go with him but everyone else follows Hurley who wants to go talk to Locke. Hurley gets further direction from Michael and learns that he is trapped on the island. Others like him are responsible for the whispers. Meanwhile MIB takes Desmond to the well and throws him in.

Flashback: Hurley took over the Mr Cluck franchise and is now a hugely wealthy and well loved benefactor. His mother sends him on a blind date and Libby comes over to say hi. She is sure that they have met before but Dr Brooks takes her back to Santa Rosa. Hurley is depressed and bumps into Desmond who encourages him into seeing her again. Hurley goes to see Libby; she tells him she thinks they knew each other in another life. He asks her out on a date and they end up having a picnic at the beach. When they kiss he remembers his other life. Desmond waits outside Ben and Locke's school and then runs Locke over and drives off.

The Good: The Hurley sideways story was pretty straightforward. Instead of being a slacker who won the lottery, he is a smart businessman. Instead of losing friends over his riches, everyone loves him including the very much alive Pierre Chang. And finally he gets to be with Libby, the woman who loved him for who he was. They even got to go on their beach picnic date at last. With Desmond on hand to nudge him toward her it all played out as you might expect. It was gently touching but completely predictable. I did like that his relationship with his mother had barely changed though, she treats him the same way no matter what he does in life.

The final scene of the flashsideways was entirely unexpected as Desmond ploughed into Locke leaving him in a desperate state. It was certainly unpredictable and intriguing. I actually thought the best written dialogue of the episode was Ben quizzing Desmond over why he was loitering outside the school. Ben was just as suspicious as he was on the island but for positive motive. I loved his interrogation style quick follow up question of "what's your son's name?", rather like the way Sayid once tested him (214).

On the island Ben rightly pointed out what Ilana's death might mean for the rest of them. Since he killed Jacob he has become cynical about the use the island puts people to and it was nice that someone acknowledged her death in some way. He and Miles choosing to stick with Richard made sense. Ben has more personal reasons but Miles pointing out the rampage of murder he recently witnessed was good logic. Hurley admitting his lies and fear to Jack was very consistent behaviour. Hurley has never been a confident leader and he raised decent questions throughout the episode about what might happen under each scenario being discussed.

MIB's facial expressions when responding to Desmond's "What is the point in being afraid?" were suitably chilling.

The Bad: I thought this episode was inefficient and frustrating.

Each of the major developments in the plot were handled in ways which didn't have much emotional impact. Ilana blew up which was something of a shock. But in the fine tradition of Lost no one seemed to care or react with much emotion. Without debating the reality of that or not I was left wondering what the point of Ilana's character was after all this (See The Unknown). Surely a character dying should have more impact than that?

Then we had the Black Rock being destroyed by Hurley. Surely that was a huge moment for his character? He had to be so sure that it was the right thing to do and he had to be incredibly brave to do it. Yet none of those emotions was the focus of the scene, it was more of a device to divide Richard, Ben and Miles from the rest of the survivors. In fact the focus of Hurley's emotional state was in his statement that "dead people are more reliable than alive people." That's quite a claim. Of course it's not entirely surprising considering Hurley spent the last two years in a mental hospital talking to ghosts. But we have never had a story focussing on how upset, scared, disturbed or otherwise affected Hurley must have been to come to that conclusion. It's very difficult to relate to a character who says something like that when we haven't had an episode designed to get us in an empathetic state with him.

Which leads into his conversations with Michael. By this point in the game Michael's return was an anti-climax. Especially as his relationship with Walt is the real unresolved emotional storyline, not his status as a killer. We have already seen him attempt to atone for that. Michael's instructions to Hurley are of course vague, yet Hurley risks his life twice in order to carry them out. Again there is no emotional journey for us to follow because although we can imagine why Hurley might trust him, it's not made relatable.

Michael is then revealed to be a trapped soul unable to leave the island because of the bad things he did. Hurley guesses that this is the cause of the whispers and apparently that is the case. If that is the whole story then it is a major disappointment. It's possible that there is more to it but on the surface that revelation means the whispers played almost zero role in the story (see The Unknown). But whether that is the truth or not the revelation was delivered in as flat and uninspiring way as possible. With no emotional connection to our story the reveal didn't really matter.

The disconnection from an emotional journey goes deeper into the writing though. Richard is now convinced that he must stop the MIB. Fine, he has plenty of reason to believe that from his own experience. But presumably a day or two ago Hurley passed on the words of his long dead love for him. Those words were what reinvigorated him and led him to decide to destroy the plane. So why didn't he have more of an open discussion with Hurley? This guy was present for one of the most intimate moments of his life. Wouldn't it be reasonable to show Hurley some respect and discuss openly all the options they had? In fact wouldn't Richard have asked Hurley directly why he was seemingly contradicting the instructions which Isabella gave him only days ago? The lack of any hint of that story felt weak.

But it goes deeper than that. I have talked about the frivolous way death is treated on this show before, so I won't dwell on Ilana's end but the absence of much emotion from the other survivors was disappointing. Then you have Frank, to everyone's knowledge the only qualified pilot on the island remaining mute throughout these discussions. Doesn't it stand to reason that he might be asked to play a crucial role in actually flying the plane? Shouldn't he offer an opinion on whether the plane can be flown? Doesn't it need fuel or air in its tyres or something that it would be difficult to get? Shouldn't Richard be upset that Frank is leaving him and walking into the arms of the MIB who wants to fly off the island?

Then there's Jack bringing up the fact that he promised to get Sun off the island. Why did he do that? It runs contrary to his stated belief that he is on the island to do something important or indeed to let go of trying to fix things. If you are letting go Jack, stop making promises.

Finally we have Desmond pushing Hurley into seeing Libby, following him to the beach and then mowing down Locke. Intriguing as it is it also raises so many questions that it becomes difficult to buy into (see The Unknown). Just on the surface it seems very convenient that he would be able to catch Hurley at the exact moment he was in a mood to talk about the key relationship which could make him remember the island. Even more implausible that Desmond could discern from the beach that some positive resolution had been reached and of course completely confusing as to what he thinks attempted murder is going to achieve. I am sure that these issues will be addressed but their presentation actually frustrated more than it intrigued. Again Desmond's emotional journey is being concealed and not made relatable. Yes it might lead to a satisfying conclusion but there's also a good chance that it will lead to a deeply unsatisfying one. If Desmond is running people over on a hunch I will be as happy as I was when Jack thought setting off a nuclear bomb was a reasonable course of action.

The Unknown: Another truckload. Do Hurley and Libby now remember everything about their other lives or just flashes of things? Same goes for Desmond. And how does he know what to target in these individuals? Was he just going to see where Hurley's mental state was at or did he know Libby was the key? Does he remember Charlie as his son's name or is he just throwing that out there? Why did he run over Locke? What does Widmore think he's doing right now?

On the island Desmond's zen state was confusing too. Did he know there was something different about Sayid and Locke? Did he realise why he should be scared of Locke? MIB throwing Desmond down the well was another big moment which was ruined by its presentation. Again I'm left to wonder whether he just wants Desmond out of the way or if he intended to kill him. Clearly Desmond won't be dead. But if later MIB implies he meant to kill him then this reeks of poor writing. Writing which would make MIB look implausibly stupid. If he just intended to keep him out of the way, then why? Who is the slightly older boy now grinning at MIB? Was MIB lying when he said Widmore was only interested in power or was that close to the truth?

Will we ever see Ilana again? Did she really train her whole life just for this? It seems like such a waste. What did Hurley see in that bag that was so important?

Is that all there is to the whispers? At least five or six times they were heard just before a character appeared or disappeared. Do they not have any more significance than being trapped souls like Michael wandering around watching the action? If so that sounds like a complete waste of time.

Best Moment: Ben interrogating Desmond.

The Bottom Line: A deeply frustrating episode. The show attempts to push forward with big developments and bumbles them all. The mystery in the show has become why certain characters are behaving the way they are. Good drama connects you to the emotions of characters. The disconnect here is deep and irritating on several levels.

Feedback

Add your comments on this episode below. They may be included in the weekly podcasts.

Post your comment

Comments

  • Paul, in some ways I have a similar take on the approach Robin takes. However, at the same time i really appreciate his consistency and systematic way of approaching the show. It's a really good way to process what I've just seen, I find. It's one of the few places to get objective, level-headed week-by-week reaction that pays as close attention to the show that I do. I usually just can't make it through a Doc Jensen column, much less his two a week, he's just so all over the map with theories and allusions, etc. Other than him, I don't know where such close critical attention gets paid on a weekly basis.

    That said, I agree with you about the focus Robin puts on what are by his own admission minor flaws in logic, as well as the downside of the weekly score. If the logic problems don't REALLY detract from the experience that much, why do we hear so much about them? And if they do, then it seems the show should suffer more overall and have a lower average score for it. And certainly we all understand that Lost doesn't lend itself to the episode-by-episode grading system as well as some shows might, but that is simply Robin's system for all the shows he reviews, and it can be fun to try to anticipate his grade and compare what one's own would be.

    One thing to keep in mind is that, while many of us probably watch maybe only one or two other shows at a time as closely as we do Lost, Robin is applying the same system to a pretty hefty number of them at a time. A big part of his thing is not to meet a show entirely on its own terms, but rather to apply a more-or-less uniform standard to everything he reviews. So there will be

    So I'd say, Paul, that while I understand your objections, if you at all like what you see here stick around for the rest of TheTVCritic's treatment of Lost. (I'm hoping for some great series wrap-up material next month.) The approach grows on you, even as the ways it doesn't fit with the show so well become something of a running laugh in my experience. [No offense Robin - ;)]

    Anyway, that's my take. Probably I should let Robin speak for himself (and I will), but I wanted to speak up b/c I both completely understand where Paul is coming from, but also appreciate what Robin is trying to achieve with the site overall and how his Lost criticism fits into it.

    Posted by Mike Drew, 23/04/2010 6:33am (2 years ago)

  • Hey Paul - thanks for posting. I really appreciate it because most people who don't like something will never say anything and so you don't hear any feedback. I appreciate that you explained your point of view about TV. I disagree obviously but I would like to go into detail and I will try to do that on the podcast this week, so give me one more listen. Thanks.

    Posted by The TV Critic, 22/04/2010 10:20am (2 years ago)

  • KC - I tend to agree. I think both Sawyer and Kate are strong characters. I think his fan favorite status definitely played a role in his rising profile, especially in the LaFleur episodes. I also tend to agree also with Roblin that while Sawyer is a fairly straightforward characters, especially once we know his backstory, Jack (and Kate i would say) are quite complex ones for network drama, which endears them to me. Some of the things Robin finds unconvincing about the Kate character (gotta look at previous reviews for that) I actually find very intriguing. Ie, why WOULD a person con a group of criminals into robbing a bank just fto get a toy plane, or how does a person convince herself she's going to be able to be happy marrying someone with as a fugitive under an assumed name? I see a very consistent portrayal of a person who is driven to frequently unreasonable places by a passionate belief in the importance of the symbolic meaning of action over its practical result. At the same time, she can be deviously results-oriented. I find that mix fascinating.

    So, it's done. I'll start a Jack, Sawyer, Kate and Locke thread. I don't have time now, but hopefully soon I'll have something to say about one of them. Can't wait to hear what folks have to say about the main characters' of this great show.

    Posted by Mike Drew, 22/04/2010 8:50am (2 years ago)

  • I have listened to 2 of your podcasts and perhaps I need to hear more but I must admit you frustrate me with your incesant whining about wanting more information and explaination and discussion from characters. Really? Exposition is the most boring part of TV & film. ABC doesn't want viewers to get bored and start flipping channels because the actors are sitting around explaining what they are doing, did or going to do. It is the first thing to be edited out of film. I would think you being in the industry and all that you would understand this concept. And this whole concept of critique-ing episodic television... I don't get it.. its like reviewing a book a chapter at a time. I mean, you can go ahead and do what you want and pick apart each episode but in the end I judge the season as a whole. To me, the best way to watch LOST is in its entirety over a weekend a season at a time. Waiting week to week is quite difficult. i will try to continue listening to your podcast but be warned, I am hanging by fingernails.

    Posted by Paul Korman (paulkorman@hotmail.com), 22/04/2010 8:27am (2 years ago)

  • Great idea, Mike--I would love to participate in a discussion about characterization of the major characters. And no, you are not the only one regarding Kate and Sawyer. From the beginning, Kate was one of my two favorite characters, but really feel that the writers have underserved her, particularly in the last few seasons--so much so that I have trouble liking her at times, either. In contrast, I feel that they have overserved Sawyer, who I always kind of liked but not loved, but felt the writers were overemphasizing at times (perhaps to please his many fans?) It's a shame, because I feel that the main female character on the show sometimes get passed over to emphasize one more male character.

    Posted by KC, 20/04/2010 5:54pm (2 years ago)

  • I definitely realize I'm in the minority on both Sawyer and Kate. It's not that i don't like Sawyer, though I didn't at first. it's just that I don't pull for him for some reason. Perhaps we should start a character thread for each of the four major characters (or one for all) to discuss their development, shortcomings and strengths as written creations, and our reactions to them.

    Ryan, I understand your point better now, sorry to have been dismissive. There are certainly inconsistencies. I'm not so sure always how easily they could be avoided. I wonder if they're actually minor or if they're more the result of structural problems in the show, which is kind of what I was getting at with saying there are definitely things that might keep it out of the best ever convo, or else are simply decisions of the writers we simply don't react well to. I guess as minor lapses, i am simply prepared to look past them, and it doesn't even take any doing on my part. But this might be because I accept the structural limitations that they come from as a basic fact of the show, and look for ways to make sense of what I'm seeing in that context. I'm working on a forum entry about all this now.

    Great discussion this week, everyone.

    Posted by Mike Drew, 19/04/2010 1:48pm (2 years ago)

  • I'm not saying Ilana's poorly written death is what takes LOST out of the all-time discussion. I'm saying this is one example of an easily avoidable writing lapse that continues to plague LOST, despite its overall brilliant construction (another example that Robin also touched on was the Faraday Logic Leap in "Happily Every After." Or how about Juliet's decision to go back to the island and help Jack blow the bomb up? I'm still trying to figure that one out. Or how about Richard knowing what the island is and nobody asking him about it? Same goes for Juliet and The Others and Ben and Dharma. Or how about Jack smashing the magic lighthouse suddenly and illogically? That's an example of LOST's absolute worst habit, which is to excuse a character's lack of questioning and curiosity by way of rage and manic, reactionary behavior. I could unfortunately go on and on.) All-time great shows don't make mistakes like these over and over, which pains me to say because I'm a big fan of the show.

    Posted by Ryan, 19/04/2010 11:57am (2 years ago)

  • Hey guys, thanks for commenting again, much appreciated.
    KC and Lynn - points well made. This is the trouble with me reading the written word and missing your point slightly :-)

    Mike - thanks also for elaborating. Yeah good comments about the central characters. Definitely agreed about Jack. With the rushed way he came up with the nuclear bomb decision I almost feel he has been sidelined since returning to the island.

    I always liked Sawyer for various reasons. But his story has always seemed the most straightforward of the major characters and that simplicity was appealing. As in he was a bad guy because of what he was clinging onto. Once he let go of that pain he became a good guy. Pretty simple.

    As for Kate, yeah we should probably start another thread. I certainly don't dislike her in general...

    Posted by The TV Critic, 19/04/2010 11:42am (2 years ago)

  • Robin, as to our discussion of the 'core' characters. You've actually one-upped me: I would include Hurley, if only because he was there from the beginning. By that standard I guess you'd have to include Sun and Jin, but I agree they were never close to being even as involved as Hurley has been in the show. The other reason to include Hurley is that he served as something like the source of one of the central mysteries of the show - the numbers. That's a pretty crucial role in the story.

    To my regret, i have to agree with you about Desmond. I want to say that he and Penny's story has 'earned' a place at the center of the show, but really it's more that it has been by far and away the most successful side-plot.

    Ben is an interesting case. I for one have been extremely skeptical about the notion of redemption for Ben, because I just am not sure redemption of leading villains in standard drama is a process that works too well. This character was so well-conceived as a villain that I find myself perpetually suspicious of him, and my sense is that the writers are aware of this and may be holding it as an ace in their hand. either way, i think that fct for me means that the resolution to his story is not crucial to the show; I'd be fine whichever way it went.

    Who does that leave? Your four are obviously correct; the only other I'd have perhaps thrown in before this season was Charlie, if in some way it was to be suggested that death could be finally transcended. But the way the season has gone, it seems clear he has something of an onlooker's role, which is probably more appropriate and believable.

    Wait! How could I forget Sayid. Again, as a primary season-one castaway, I think we inherently care about how his story ends up. I also thnk he's been quite integral to a good deal of the plot development. I personally don't think that happy endings for all those characters are necessary, though; only interesting ones. The happy thing doesn't seem to be happening for Sayid at this point, but interesting at least possible.

    So that would be my core: jack, Kate, Locke, Sawyer, Hurley, and Sayid. Charlie definitely if he had survived. Sun and Jin almost get pushed out of the inner circle by Desmond. I guess I have a residual interest in Claire, and as she occupies something of the Blessed Mother position in the story, she has a certain iconic significance, but again, I think her character has been one of the most underdeveloped of the original castaways, so I think she gets left off as an inessential story nevertheless of some interest.

    As has been said many times, it's hard to know what to root for at this point because we don't know which reality will prove viable, sot it's hard to determine who is really at the center of the show at this point. The producers have stated this is a show about Jack, but then it seems almost unfathomable how much he has been sidelined this season. At this point, "Locke" (i.e., including the MIB manifestation) seems to be running ahead. By leaving the other major characters largely out of the season this far, the producers left themselves a huge bit of work to do in the last few episodes to put the attention back on them. In my view they must do this, but I have very little confidence there is time left to do it convincingly.

    Last thing I'd say here is that I am in long-term disagreement with you and just about the entire fan base over the character of Kate. There are flaws, but overall I find her compelling. And likewise in contrast to nearly everybody, i cannot seem to warm to Sawyer at a fundamental level, though moment-to-moment he has grown on me. (For me his resolution really just rides on his ending up at peace in some way, whereas for other characters more specific plot elements have to be incorporated.) But that is probably the topic for another thread. :)

    Posted by Mike Drew, 19/04/2010 5:22am (2 years ago)

  • Great podcast. Robin. I really enjoy hearing all the thoughtful comments and perspectives. I should have made clear that my remark about the writers' middle finger was sarcastic. The scene was so bad, regardless of how the plot point eventually plays, that I'd almost rather they deliberately did it as a fan message than thought they were delivering something respectable. I don't think that would make good television, but it would at least explain how something so apparently ripe with possibilities was so badly handled. Cheers!

    Posted by Lynn, 19/04/2010 4:28am (2 years ago)

1 2 3 4 next »

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments