So Michael comes out with a story about the others being in rags and worse off than themselves. Then offers to kill Henry. Then kills Ana Lucia and Libby (although I think the crazy one survives- thick blankets).

Then he opens the vault and - I think - shoots himself in the arm without a word to Henry.

I'm not sure what is going on, but I would like to think through his actions.

Whatever he thinks now, he views the 815ers as expendible. I think that whoever had been sitting in the sofa, he would have shot them.

Whatever he thinks, he now views the 815ers as not his friends, and he cannot take them into his confidence.

He apologised to Ana before killing her. He has honour and knows what he is doing is wrong - so I don't think he has been brainwashed. If he had been, he would just shoot her and not feel it was wrong.

He must be acting in what he believes to be the greater good.

He must believe that whatever the abilities and resourcefulness of the 815ers, it is not enough to help him, otherwise he could have asked them for help.

He still does not have Walt. Any parent will know the all consuming anguish he must be feeling. That anguish would make a parent do alot on behalf of their child.

Sorry - no answers - just observations.

Would he have shot anyone that got in his way??

Jack? Locke? Sawyer? An innocent Claire? or Rose?

Or would he have waited for a more "expendable" character??

Was he supposed to kill AL too??

More questions no answers....

I think that they have tried to brainwash him in a way, I.E. they've told him that some of them are 'evil' and some are still 'good'.

He must know Ana has killed many people, and so he feels 'less' about killing her.

I'm also confident they made him believe they would give Walt back.

is there any parent who would not kill if they had been told they would get their son back? maybe the others told michael and maybe they specified it had to be anna lucia heshot as she was a bad one

quote:

Originally posted by d.o.n.n.a:
is there any parent who would not kill if they had been told they would get their son back? maybe the others told michael and maybe they specified it had to be anna lucia heshot as she was a bad one

I don't doubt that a parent will do almost anything to get back a son or daughter. But it's a matter of how far you would go. How much is 'almost' anything? Would *you* kill to save someone?

I don't know...I'd kill to save my girlfriend i think...It's a really hard position. But if i thought that there was a big chance that the people that said 'kill X and you'll get your girlfriend back' could be lying...i'd try to find another way....

Indie, lets just hope your girlfriend doesn't read this!

Lol, i'm not saying i wouldn't save her. Not at all.

I'm just trying to point out that michael must know that The Others aren't fully trustworthy, so rather than offering to swap Walt for Henry, they've probably said 'Get henry back - or we kill walt!'

quote:

Originally posted by kitiara:
Would he have shot anyone that got in his way??

Jack? Locke? Sawyer? An innocent Claire? or Rose?

Or would he have waited for a more "expendable" character??

expendable characters only-
especially characters whose actors had become a liability due to bad behaviour off-set.

maybe the writers also had a grudge against fat people and killed off Libby so Hurley wouldn't get any.

quote:

Originally posted by kitiara:
Would he have shot anyone that got in his way??

Jack? Locke? Sawyer? An innocent Claire? or Rose?

Or would he have waited for a more "expendable" character??

Was he supposed to kill AL too??

More questions no answers....

Yes - I think whoever was on the sofa would have been killed. But the writers would not have put Jack or Locke in that position - Ana Lucia as a character was finished anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by Dharma is the Truth:

Yes - I think whoever was on the sofa would have been killed. But the writers would not have put Jack or Locke in that position - Ana Lucia as a character was finished anyway.

I think that it was Ana-Lucia was important to the story. It showed that A person can go through being every kind of person in the world, and not change a bit, and the end is just the same. Ana was obviously the kind of person that signs up to the 'force to protect people, yet she killed a man in cold blood. But when she nearly dies again at the hands of a man she despises, she can't bring herself to kill, because of the values in her heart. But she died anyway. Whether or not she had killed Henry, She would've died. Because Michael did not know the condition of Henry.

So presumably, death is her punishment for her killing the man that shot her.

quote:

Originally posted by Indie88:
But she died anyway. Whether or not she had killed Henry, She would've died. Because Michael did not know the condition of Henry.

So presumably, death is her punishment for her killing the man that shot her.

I think if she'd have killed Henry she'd still be alive as she wouldn't have stuck around and given Michael the gun. She would know that they would all know it was her that shot him when Sawyer told them that Ana had his gun.

Hmmm. She must've known that anyway...

What is she going to say when jack asks her about it? Oh, i'm being dumb...she's dead.

What *would* she have said, then?

I think she would have gone off into the jungle and been like Rousseau - hard as nails, bitter and twisted, and killing the Others where she could but staying away from the plane survivors.

I thought she was a great character. I was waiting for a girlfight (geddit?) between her and Kate, either over shagging Sawyer or who got to be Jack's buddy on missions, but it never came. Boo hoo. I wouldn't have missed Libby, but then like others, I reckon she probably survives, but maybe getting shot will send her bananas again... it'll be fun finding out.

i think micheal has said go free henry if u haave to kill people to do it then let it be then we wont harm walt, - coz i know i would shoot someone if i was in micheals position to save my daughter getting hurt what parent wouldnt?
and maybe to keep peace and alliances on both sides he shot ana ( not popular with the survivors) so it could look like a henry did it scene! ???

quote:

Originally posted by Indie88:

quote:

Originally posted by Dharma is the Truth:

Yes - I think whoever was on the sofa would have been killed. But the writers would not have put Jack or Locke in that position - Ana Lucia as a character was finished anyway.

I think that it was Ana-Lucia was important to the story. It showed that A person can go through being every kind of person in the world, and not change a bit, and the end is just the same. Ana was obviously the kind of person that signs up to the 'force to protect people, yet she killed a man in cold blood. But when she nearly dies again at the hands of a man she despises, she can't bring herself to kill, because of the values in her heart. But she died anyway. Whether or not she had killed Henry, She would've died. Because Michael did not know the condition of Henry.

So presumably, death is her punishment for her killing the man that shot her.

Which kind of perpetuates the 'purgatory' theory that we have been told is not 'it'. Everyone who has 'died' on the island has had their life issues resolved somehow. Ana Lucia had an issue of being a killer, but the minute she changes and says 'I can't do this anymore' she dies. Libby had an issue of unrequited love for Hurley. When Hurley loves her back, she dies. Shannon's issue was selfishness or not feeling that she could love or be loved, then she loves and is loved by Sayed, and she dies. Arzt had an issue of not being in the 'in crowd' and when he gets to join the 'in crowd' he gets blown up and dies. Boone..... what was Boone's issue? Was it cowardice and selfishness? But he risks his life by staying in the plane in the tree to call for help, thinking of others before himself? Watch out for the 'aha' moments of the cast. The minute a life issue is resolved - they die.
Can anyone find any holes in the theory - other than that the writers have said this isn't the case?

i was going to say the exact same thing bluebell. i really dont understand why the writers have said its not purgatory even if they didnt wrte it with purgatory in mind thats what it is i think they are worried and said its not that because we all couaght on too quickly. surley its a good thing that we are all speculating what its about y would they stop us from speculating along one path unless we were following the right one.

quote:

Boone..... what was Boone's issue? Was it cowardice and selfishness?

He was fixated with Shannon!

All the characters have issues, so the only problem with this theory are the characters who have resolved their issues but haven't died.
I'm thinking of Charlie conquering his drug problem, Mr.Eko getting his life back on the righteous path, possibly Jin & Sun, Rose & Bernard...

quote:

Originally posted by Hooting Heck:
[
All the characters have issues, so the only problem with this theory are the characters who have resolved their issues but haven't died.
I'm thinking of Charlie conquering his drug problem, he very nearly died! Mr.Eko getting his life back on the righteous path, I think he may actually be dead! possibly Jin & Sun, Oh come on! Rose & Bernard... Well, yeah, i'll give you this one.