By Todd VanDerWerff
Sayid Jarrah (Naveen Andrews) has always been one of Lost’s most under-served characters. If you go back and look at the Pilot, the revelation that he’s an Iraqi is played for friggin’ COMIC EFFECT, for God’s sake. Andrews’ performance is so solid (to the point where he’s one of the few Lost cast members to score an Emmy nomination, somewhat inexplicably) and his presence is so great that he’s been kept alive long after other characters the show had no idea how to service would have been killed off. Every season, the series tosses in an episode that pretty much boils down to, “Hey, Sayid used to torture. Isn’t that MORALLY AMBIGUOUS?!” and calls it a day. Without Andrews, most of these episodes would be complete yawns (only “Solitary” and “The Economist” are really worthy of his talents), but the actor has managed to save most of these by just gritting his teeth and pushing through the pain. Like, pretty much all I can remember about Season Three’s “Enter 77” is that the Sayid flashback was ridiculous (I think it involved a mystical cat?), but Andrews was SO GOOD that I liked it more than I probably should have.
“He’s Our You,” written by Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz and directed by Greg Yaitanes, is Season Five’s Sayid episode. It’s also the first episode of the season to feature character-specific flashbacks, a la how the show told stories for its first four seasons (though at least in this case, the flashback scenes were flashbacks from a character point-of-view but actually took place 30 years in the future from the A-plot … ahh, Lost), so it has a fairly heavy burden to bear, considering just how much ditching the character-specific flashbacks juiced a number of episodes from the season’s first half. The episode also has to follow the largely enjoyable, heavily Sawyer (Josh Holloway)-centric midseason duo of “La Fleur” and “Namaste,” two of the most consistently entertaining episodes Lost has ever produced. Yet, even with all of these strikes against it, “He’s Our You” is a pretty good episode, even if it’s a step down from the previous two. Credit for that may go to Andrews (in a few years, I may look back on this one and wonder what the hell I was thinking), but I think the episode does about as good a job of establishing the old, oft-loathed template as it could have, and it closes on a terrific cliffhanger that the entire season has been building to.
One of the more enervating things about Lost is the way that it will occasionally mistake name checking, say, a famous philosopher for depth. There was even a pretty good joke about this earlier in the episode, when Widmore (Alan Dale) told Locke (Terry O’Quinn, still absent from this episode) that his parents obviously had a sense of humor to name him John Locke. Lost is interested in philosophy, religion, history, etc., but largely in the sense of a 101 student of any of those subjects. Now, obviously, I’d rather watch an entertaining show than watch Jack (Matthew Fox) and Sawyer debate Hegel over scones, but Lost will occasionally engage these sorts of questions and then act as if merely raising them is as good as actually trying to illustrate them via the narrative or using the narrative to poke and prod at the various limitations of these theories. Lost, instead, will often just stroke its beard, look over at you and say, “Have you ever considered that there are men of science and men of faith?” Then it will nod knowingly, not even noticing if you are completely blown away by this notion or wondering if it’s going to go on with that point, at which point, it will turn around and say something like, “I was recently reading the book of Nehemiah, and I thought I’d just throw that out there.” This sort of thing reached its nadir in the second season, when every other episode was as full of name checks of famous historical thinkers as a pot smoke-filled freshman dorm room.
This is all a way of saying that Lost actually has been engaging with notions of free will vs. determinism in a pretty successful way this season, and pretty much no one is giving them credit for doing so (possibly because we’re all so used to writing off the show’s philosophical ramblings). At the heart of any time travel story is one kernel of an idea: Can you change the future? Obviously, we’d all like to go back and give our younger selves SOME piece of advice, but in science fiction, this sort of thing usually goes horribly awry, “The Sound of Thunder”-style. Lost has built its theory of time travel very rigidly from a deterministic point-of-view. In Lost, you can’t change the past because it’s already happened. If you alter the past in any way, you’re not really altering it because you’ve always been there, 12 Monkeys-style (I think Alan Sepinwall first suggested Terry Gilliam's film as the ideal time travel companion to this season of Lost, and it mostly works). There is only one time stream, and no matter where you are in it, you always do the same thing, unless you’re Desmond (Henry Ian Cusick).
Sayid’s storyline in “He’s Our You” also has a deterministic bent. Sayid is a killer, we’re reliably informed by Ben (Michael Emerson), who is trying to draw the guy back into his web after Sayid left Ben’s employ to go build housing for poor people (of all the Lost characters, Sayid is very obviously the most hardcore about doing penance). We even get to see Sayid killing chickens as a young boy, just to drive the point home that much more. Sayid’s a guy who always needs a purpose, which makes it that much more curious that he’s never seemed to go in for all of the “The Island NEEDS US TO DO THIS!” sort of talk that Jack and Locke will occasionally engage in. Sayid often has his own personal purposes, but it’s distinctly unlikely that he’ll be trying to do things for the Island in any given moment, which makes his statement that he’s realizing his purpose on the Island that much more curious. And then he escapes with the help of a flaming van apparently sent by lil’ Ben (Sterling Beaumon), heads into the jungle with the kid, knocks out Jin (Daniel Dae Kim) and shoots lil’ Ben in the chest. Lil’ Ben sinks to the ground, apparently dying, and we either have a major chapter of the Ben backstory filled in or we have one heck of a time paradox, of the sort we were informed was impossible in the Lost cosmos. The very fact that Lost harped on the latter point so much makes me think that, yes, indeed, we’re going to see some paradoxing very soon, since Lost, if nothing else, plays against expectations fairly well. By living up to what he resignedly believes to be his predestined purpose, Sayid just might have struck the biggest blow for free will in the show’s history.
So far, we’ve been led to believe that only Desmond can change the future, because of his unstuck-in-time nature (or something), but I’m kind of hoping that it turns out Sayid DID manage to kill young Ben, just because I like the idea that you can change the past when you think you’re supposed to and when you’ve got the gumption to do so. Sayid hasn’t been filled with Faraday’s (Jeremy Davies, and where is he, exactly?) theories about how it’s impossible to change anything, so you shouldn’t even try, so he just goes ahead and does what he wants. The power of positive thinking, I guess. It’s an interesting tack for the show to take, and while I’m generally not in favor of time paradoxes, which were among the many, many things that sank Heroes in the last few years, I do think there’s room to play with this story and find new angles to tell that sort of a story in. It also provided a contrast between Sawyer and Sayid. Sawyer, having found happiness for the first time in his life, really, just wants to let the DHARMA ride go on as long as he possibly can (even if his lover, Juliet (Elizabeth Mitchell), seems to know that the return of Jack and Kate (Evangeline Lilly) means that can never really happen). He knows that death is coming at SOME point, but he’s also blithely unconcerned with the purge at the moment. Sayid knows the same information and decides to do something about it.
The episode also marked the return of another of the show’s more overly deterministic elements: the flashbacks. In the show’s first season, the flashbacks were often pretty interesting, simply because they filled in the plot background of just how all of the Oceanic passengers came to be on board the fateful plane. The second season flashbacks were more problematic, centered, as they were, on questions of how the castaways came to be the people they were. While these flashbacks were often well-acted and usually well-written as tiny character vignettes, they were suddenly structurally unnecessary (the Hatch gave the show somewhere non-Island to cut to at any given moment), and tying these tiny stories to the goings-on on the Island often gave them a much, much greater sense of import than they really deserved. It was taking a minor moment in someone’s life that might have contributed in a small way to that person becoming who they were and putting it all in caps. “WHEN SHANNON (Maggie Grace) WAS GROWING UP, NO ONE REALLY PAID ATTENTION TO HER, AND THAT WAS WHY SHE WAS SO NEEDY,” the show would declaim, and I think it was that disconnect—between the tones of the flashbacks and the Island scenes—that led to the gradual sense that the flashbacks were completely unnecessary. As the third and fourth season flashbacks went on, the show increasingly abandoned the tiny vignette flashbacks and embraced plot-heavy flashbacks, and it is the plot-heavy flashback that “He’s Our You” indulges in, more than others. Sure, there was that scene of Young Sayid killing the chicken, but that was presented more as a prologue to his actions in the episode than an attempt to explain why he was the way he was. The flashbacks here mostly fill in back story that’s sort of useful to know, answering, for example, how Sayid came to be in the custody of Ilana (Zuleikha Robinson) when getting on the plane or where the rift between Sayid and Ben opened up. The flashbacks didn’t convince me that we need a return to the concept permanently or anything, but I also didn’t find them horribly obtrusive.
Mostly, though, “He’s Our You” was a chance to just revel in the fine work Andrews does week after week, even when it seems like the show has forgotten he exists. That Sayid is the one man in 1977 who has no one to turn to seems both somehow apropos and a nice meta-commentary on the show’s propensity for not using the character very well. Sawyer may try to save Sayid, and so may Jin, but he realizes that the only way he’s going to accomplish much of anything is by forging his own path, by striking out into the jungles of the Island and its complicated history. There’s a scene midway through the episode where the DHARMA gang takes Sayid before an interrogator named Oldham (William Sanderson), who mostly gets Sayid to tell the complete truth (he comes from the future, etc.) but disbelieves it because, well, it sounds crazy. This is a scene you’ve seen in every “visitor from the future” movie and short story known to man. (“Hitler must be stopped!” etc.) Here, it verges on cliché, but it works because Andrews is always playing every side of the scenario. In his hands, Sayid seems both a grave prophet of doom and a crazy man on the edge of falling completely into his own insanity. It’s a great little scene in the hands of Sanderson and Andrews, and it reminds us of the idea that things become cliché for a reason: In the right hands, these old story elements can sing again.
Some other thoughts:
House contributor Todd VanDerWerff is the publisher of the pop culture blog South Dakota Dark.
Lost Thursdays: Season 5, Ep. 10, "He's Our You"
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Lost Thursdays: Season 5, Ep. 10, "He's Our You"
Labels:
Lost,
Lost: Season 5,
Todd VanDerWerff,
TV Recap
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
A strong episode that blended the breathless forward-moving, plot-driven episodes of this season with the compelling flashback structure of seasons past. LOST is making for a beautiful structural ride, a mosaic of time and place, emotion and intelligence.
And that last story beat? I think very few would have thought Cuse and Lindlof would have carried that through with such satisfying abruptness. Even if the Island's not through with young Ben and he's miraculously revived next week, at least for a moment I was knocked on my ass.
Yea, this was great. I liked how well they've set up Sawyer's arc from reluctant leader to finally finding happiness and now willing to do almost anything to protect that happiness.
And I really wasn't expecting that ending. After all the talk about how the past can't be changed, how "what happened happened," that was a real mindfuck.
My best guess is that lil Ben does not die, somehow, and this is how he develops his interest in haunting Sayid for the rest of his life.
However, if the show does branch off, then, well, great. Even if dialogue and action get clunky, the narrative imagination never fails on the show; the structure will adapt in a fun way, I'm sure.
I don't know why a big deal is being made of the flashback to explain how Sayid ended up on the plane. This really isn't a flashback since Lost has been telling stories from the different time periods that the characters have inhabited all season long. The only true flashback was little Sayid, chicken killer...
I love the idea of Lil' Losties, or Lost Babies, especially since you had just mentioned the Muppets.
Maybe Mojo from the X-Men comics can make child clones of all of them, a la the X-Babies.
Sayid's killing of the Young Ben Linus was not completely unexpected, but then again, it kind of was. Sayid's a killer, sure, but I did not honestly expect him to kill a child. Maybe he lives like John Locke lived, and Ben becomes special for a while. Perhaps this is where Ben meets Jacob. Ahh.
I thought this was a great episode, as I am a fan of Sayid. I also liked William Sanderson's acting as Oldham for the episode, too.
"Sayid’s storyline in “He’s Our You” also has a deterministic bent. Sayid is a killer, we’re reliably informed by Ben (Michael Emerson), who is trying to draw the guy back into his web after Sayid left Ben’s employ to go build housing for poor people (of all the Lost characters, Sayid is very obviously the most hardcore about doing penance)."
I thought that was a stupid statement for Ben to make. There is nothing special about Sayid that makes him a killer . . . other than the fact that he is a sentient being. And like all sentient beings, Sayid will find a reason to kill another.
He knows that death is coming at SOME point, but he’s also blithely unconcerned with the purge at the moment. Sayid knows the same information and decides to do something about it.
Killing Ben will not stop the Purge and perhaps there is a reason why the Purge happened in the first place.
So far, we’ve been led to believe that only Desmond can change the future, because of his unstuck-in-time nature (or something), but I’m kind of hoping that it turns out Sayid DID manage to kill young Ben, just because I like the idea that you can change the past when you think you’re supposed to and when you’ve got the gumption to do so.
You had no problem with Sayid trying to kill an unarmed child, even if that child grew up to be someone like Ben? All Sayid did was lower himself to Ben's level. I thought it was sick.
And by the way, I doubt that Ben will end up dead, because of Sayid's act.
Wasn't Bentham basically an episode-long flashback? I didn't remember "years earlier" title cards in it.
Like 'em or not, you can't say you didn't see the return of the flashbacks coming. Three or four episodes back, when we saw everyone get on the plane without knowing how most of them got there, I thought it was fairly clear that they were setting up new flashback episodes for Sayid, Kate "Don't Ask Me What the Hell Happened" Autsin, Hurley and Ben and/or Desmond.
I don't read spoilers, but would be surprised not to see those flashbacks soon—unless Jack decides to say, "You know, I only agreed to not ask about Aaron to get you here, so why don't you tell me what happened" and she spills the beans.
Of course, part of the fun of the show is HOW they're going to unravel these things. I think the writers are hesitant to use the 30 year cuts and the flashback structure in the same episode—which is find as it helps it avoid the structureless overload of shows like Heroes. But at the same time, it means if we have a Kate flashback, we probably won't see any Ben, Locke, Sun, Desmond or anyone else who isn't in 1977—unless they just pop up inexplicably in 1977, demanding more flashbacks. Luckily the show has a strong enough cast to proceed without some of its best actors.
Of course the past didn't change. The writers are just baiting people to think that just like the game the characters play with what they believe about the Island. They want you to say, "How can he do that? Doesn't that make a paradox?" Time after time the writers keep "testing" the viewer in their relation to the show just as the Island has tested John, Jack, etc. But nah, they'd only do that in this case if they had an equally strong answer to it. Ben's going to live out to the purge just as we saw it happen. Hell, Sayid even tried using future knowledge to affect things when they interrogated him, but that never changed anything because they simply thought he was nuts – but I loved how he got slapped right after mentioning "the incident," which they have know idea about yet... which means it will happen just as it did the one and only time it happened, as will be shown in the season finale episode titled "The Incident".
Also loved the concentrated shots on the chickens at the beginning, which begs the "chicken vs. egg" argument displayed in this very episode. Ben calls Sayid a killer because Ben saw what he did to him as child, and thus, like a circle of defined fate, Sayid accepts just that and shoots Ben as a child. I think a major part of the show is about a game and one aspect of that is escaping the circle of fate that they are purposely stuck in order to find the outlier (like Desmond) and avoid a huge catastrophic future event that's quite literally referenced with all the "saving the world" and "God help all us" comments.
Rush: Would you kill baby Hitler? is a pretty classic SF time travel storyline, and this is essentially Lost's version of it. These stories almost always end with the character trying to kill baby Hitler inadvertently creating dictator Hitler, so I assume we're headed in that direction. As for whether or not I find the depiction of child murder reprehensible in a moral sense, I don't, so long as it's grounded in some greater narrative thrust, as it is here. I more object to the random killing of characters' children on something like Rescue Me, where it's just done to put the main character through more shit.
Jeremy: I, too, was pretty sure flashbacks were coming back at some point. Didn't mean I had to be happy about 'em! I think Bentham is substantively different, as it's structured as one long flashback, like season three's "Flashes Before Your Eyes," still one of my favorite episodes.
I predict a future episode (perhaps this season's finale) in which Sun Lee (sp?), searching with Ben for her husband, finds him.
He's old. They are ALL old. They never left. They ARE the others.
I think that's where this is all heading.
It occurs to me that Sayid may have made a fatal mistake in his interpretation of what his 'purpose' back on this island is.
Maybe instead of killing poor, tortured young Ben, he should have let his own sense of compassion do the talking and befriended him. (this is assuming young Ben lives and grows up into a vengeful, destructive Ben). They both could have escaped into the forest and Sayid could have been the father Ben never had.
If it turns out that the 'real story' of Lost is that the characters are in some sort of time loop - its possible Sayid's decision to shoot Ben is perpetuating the loop and not finally bringing it into an end.
Another observation in light of Sayid's chicken incident : if memory serves, when young Eko's village was invaded by guerrilla soldiers, Eko's brother was unable to shoot an innocent person so Eko stepped in and shot the person for him.
Also, Sawyer killed Locke's father for him and Locke presented the corpse to the Other's as his own handiwork.
So wonder if this is just an instance of the writer's lacking imagination or if there is some deeper intent. Can this all this proxy-killing be seen as linking into the Cain and Abel story?
now what if "little ben" isn't "older ben" but just some harry potter kid that happens to have the same name?
but maybe i'm just missing a detail.
I'm completely willing to accept Faraday's rule that nothing in the past can be effectively altered because it's already happened. Honestly, I don't think Desmond can actually change the past either. Faraday just realized Desmond has an ability to recall a "new" past moment no one else could (hence the message he left Desmond with).
So, it's unlikely young Ben will die. It's unlikely the purge can be stopped. And it's impossible for Sayid to have altered Ben's future in any significant way.
The only real question to ask now is how much information did young Ben retain of the Losties from his childhood? Did he recognize Sawyer, Kate, Jack, and Hurley and this was why he singled them out to be prisoners of the Others in season 3? Or is that just chance because young Ben didn't have enough interaction with them to remember who they were/are/would be? Young Ben likely doesn't learn about the plane crash, hence he could not have been prepared for it, as his reaction to the crash indicated long ago (season 4?).
Anyway, the paradoxes are beginning to pile up. Lost is skirting the edge of becoming logically ridiculous soon, but it's been fun to watch.
Rush: Would you kill baby Hitler? is a pretty classic SF time travel storyline, and this is essentially Lost's version of it.
No. Because it doesn't serve anything to kill someone WHEN they are still an innocent. Just because someone might be destined to be a monster does not excuse killing them when that person is an innocent. It just makes the killer a monster, as well.
Which is what Sayid has become.
"It’s just a fun, poppy show, a blend of pulp, goofy sci-fi and basic character drama."
"Will Lost ever be as deep or profound as some other shows? Probably not. But it’s always going to be a lot of fun."
Quoting the reviewer from last weeks review: If this is all you think the show is, why would you write about it every week?
I don't know where I get the stones to lecture you and Alan about such things... but you guys know that 12 Monkeys is an adaptation of a pretty classic French short film right?
Sorry, Terry Gilliam. I'm being a stickler for credit where credit is due.
I love your reviews, although I'm not nearly as hopeful that mini-Ben will stay dead... this is The Island here!
Here's the Lost babies...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLyfgvByE7Q
Post a Comment