Author Topic: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet  (Read 2002 times)

Offline WhatThe

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1421
    • View Profile
I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« on: February 24, 2010, 04:34:17 AM »
At the beginning of the season, Sayid is brought to the temple on Jacob's orders to Hurley. He's dying from a (gunshot?) wound or whatever type of wound it was (weirdly enough I can't remember how he became injured lol).

After the leader of this new group of Others breaks open the wooden ankh and reads the piece of paper inside of it, they take injured Sayid into the temple to try and save him. When Hurley demands to know what the piece of paper says, the wimpy 2nd-in-command guy says something like "It says if your friend dies, we're in big trouble".

After trying to save Sayid in the discolored healing waters and it appears it didn't work, the head "Other" checks Sayid out, and then rather dismissively says something in his own language and walks away. Wimpy 2nd-in-command guy says "Your friend's dead" in matter-of-fact tone and walks away as well. What happened to "If your friend dies, we're in big trouble"? lol...They didn't seem to care too much that he didn't survive.

Then, of course, Sayid actually does come back to life, and the new Others promptly try to kill him again lol...they say he's "infected" (I'm guessing it was evilness/smokie/whatever that discolored the water and entered Sayid's body that way) and that he needs to die because of it. Well, whether Sayid dies from his original injury or he dies from being infected and poisoned, he still ends up dead either way. So what happened to "we're in big trouble" if Sayid doesn't make it? Does it now no longer matter if Sayid lives or dies? And did Jacob know ahead of time that Sayid would end up infected?

So now, apparently the entire temple population is looking at Sayid and freaked out by him...the head Other tried to get him poisoned...they all feel he's "infected" and thus somehow a danger while still alive....but NOBODY tries to kill him other than through the poison pill? Is he now unable to be killed except by poisoning? Nobody's taking aim at him with a bow and arrow and just shooting him through the heart? Rousseau was apparently able to kill off her entire team after they became infected and she just used a gun, not poison...couldn't the Others do the same with Sayid? Maybe not with a gun (although Ben's group of Others had guns and were damn good with them, too lol), but with whatever manpower and weapons they DO have? And why didn't they just kill Sayid while they were torturing him?

Did I miss something important that helps make Sayid's storyline a little less headscratching? lol :)

Offline KoKoNut

  • DHARMA Scientist
  • ******
  • Posts: 7886
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2010, 04:38:35 AM »
No, I think you're as sufficiently confused as the rest of us. Oh and wasn't  Sayid shot by the Dharma peeps?

Offline WhatThe

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1421
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2010, 04:42:30 AM »
No, I think you're as sufficiently confused as the rest of us. Oh and wasn't  Sayid shot by the Dharma peeps?

Whew, that's a relief lol.

Offline KoKoNut

  • DHARMA Scientist
  • ******
  • Posts: 7886
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2010, 04:45:58 AM »
What I don't understand is if Sayid is such a threat to the Others, why are they allowing him to remain at the temple? Like you said, they are not acting too concerned about him either way!!!

Offline jamesl

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 724
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2010, 05:19:12 AM »
...

the head "Other" checks Sayid out, and then rather dismissively says something in his own language and walks away. Wimpy 2nd-in-command guy says "Your friend's dead" in matter-of-fact tone and walks away as well. What happened to "If your friend dies, we're in big trouble"? lol...They didn't seem to care too much that he didn't survive.

...Well, whether Sayid dies from his original injury or he dies from being infected and poisoned, he still ends up dead either way. So what happened to "we're in big trouble" if Sayid doesn't make it? ...

So now, apparently the entire temple population is looking at Sayid and freaked out by him...And why didn't they just kill Sayid while they were torturing him?
you misinterpreted his tone of voice
it wasn't dismissive, it was "we're screwed and there's nothing we can do about it"
so he did care, but what's he going to do ?

he came back to life, but did he really ?
have you ever seen the movie "pet cemetery" ?
they bury their dead pet in a cemetery with supernatural powers. The pet comes back to life, but its evil, wild, dangerous; almost like it has rabies.
So even though it looked like their pet, it didn't act like it. That's the same with Sayid. He's "back alive", but its not really him. So its ok to kill because its not really him. Its the zombie, possessed, infected thing that's inhabiting his body.
 
maybe they're not allowed to kill candidates
maybe only candidates can kill candidates

Offline WhatThe

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1421
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #5 on: February 24, 2010, 06:58:41 AM »
you misinterpreted his tone of voice
it wasn't dismissive, it was "we're screwed and there's nothing we can do about it"
so he did care, but what's he going to do ?
I don't know...I didn't pick up any "we're screwed" tone of voice at all in that scene. It came across more callous and cold, as if they didn't care that Jack and Hurley's friend had just died.


Quote
he came back to life, but did he really ?
have you ever seen the movie "pet cemetery" ?
they bury their dead pet in a cemetery with supernatural powers. The pet comes back to life, but its evil, wild, dangerous; almost like it has rabies.
So even though it looked like their pet, it didn't act like it. That's the same with Sayid. He's "back alive", but its not really him. So its ok to kill because its not really him. Its the zombie, possessed, infected thing that's inhabiting his body.
Then why go through all the hoopla of trying to trick Jack into giving Sayid the poison pill? Just bury an ax in him like Claire did to that one guy lol....Also, why lie to Sayid if he's nothing more than a "zombie"? (the wimpy 2nd-in-charge guy said to the leader "I just lied to him, didn't I?" after he told Sayid not to worry about the torture he just went through and that he "passed the test").

And using the Pet Sematary example, imagine having your undead, evil pet strapped to a table, and you now realize and KNOW he's undead and evil...what better time to kill him, no? Would it make sense to unstrap your undead, evil pet, open up the door and let him outside...THEN try and figure out a way to kill him? lol

 
Quote
maybe they're not allowed to kill candidates
maybe only candidates can kill candidates
Well, they said the reason they asked Jack to give Sayid the pill was because they knew Sayid would never trust them after the torture they put him through. Yeah, maybe that was a lie...but if they can't kill candidates they sure as hell can beat the crap out of them and torture them lol :)...and don't forget that one guy out in the jungle was about to pull the trigger on the gun he held at Jin's head. He didn't seem too fazed by any rules not to kill a candidate (we don't know if it's Jin or Sun--or both--who is the candidate).

Offline grizn0

  • DHARMA Work Man (or Woman)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3057
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2010, 09:15:06 AM »
Well the other other who was there said they couldn't kill Jin because he's "one of them". I'm guessing he meant candidates.

But as far as Sayid goes. Assuming the same thing happened to him as Claire then Smokie is going to probably come after him to recruit him. And guess who's left at the Temple? Sayid is. Miles is there too but I sure hope he gets out cause it sounds like Smokie is coming to the Temple to tear it up.

Offline Walkabout V.2

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 118
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #7 on: February 24, 2010, 09:36:26 AM »
At the beginning of the season, Sayid is brought to the temple on Jacob's orders to Hurley. He's dying from a (gunshot?) wound or whatever type of wound it was (weirdly enough I can't remember how he became injured lol).

After the leader of this new group of Others breaks open the wooden ankh and reads the piece of paper inside of it, they take injured Sayid into the temple to try and save him. When Hurley demands to know what the piece of paper says, the wimpy 2nd-in-command guy says something like "It says if your friend dies, we're in big trouble".

After trying to save Sayid in the discolored healing waters and it appears it didn't work, the head "Other" checks Sayid out, and then rather dismissively says something in his own language and walks away. Wimpy 2nd-in-command guy says "Your friend's dead" in matter-of-fact tone and walks away as well. What happened to "If your friend dies, we're in big trouble"? lol...They didn't seem to care too much that he didn't survive.

Then, of course, Sayid actually does come back to life, and the new Others promptly try to kill him again lol...they say he's "infected" (I'm guessing it was evilness/smokie/whatever that discolored the water and entered Sayid's body that way) and that he needs to die because of it. Well, whether Sayid dies from his original injury or he dies from being infected and poisoned, he still ends up dead either way. So what happened to "we're in big trouble" if Sayid doesn't make it? Does it now no longer matter if Sayid lives or dies? And did Jacob know ahead of time that Sayid would end up infected?

So now, apparently the entire temple population is looking at Sayid and freaked out by him...the head Other tried to get him poisoned...they all feel he's "infected" and thus somehow a danger while still alive....but NOBODY tries to kill him other than through the poison pill? Is he now unable to be killed except by poisoning? Nobody's taking aim at him with a bow and arrow and just shooting him through the heart? Rousseau was apparently able to kill off her entire team after they became infected and she just used a gun, not poison...couldn't the Others do the same with Sayid? Maybe not with a gun (although Ben's group of Others had guns and were damn good with them, too lol), but with whatever manpower and weapons they DO have? And why didn't they just kill Sayid while they were torturing him?

Did I miss something important that helps make Sayid's storyline a little less headscratching? lol :)
Just a flash in my brain... Did Dogen say through his do boy Lenon that if your friend Sayid dies we are all in big trouble? Because after watching last night I think he was referring to Jack because wouldn't he have Hurley lead Sayid on a treasure hunt through the woods? I mean, just paraphraing here, Jake did tell Hurley bad stuff was about to hit the Temple fan. Jus' saying.

Offline Optimus J

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 797
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #8 on: February 24, 2010, 10:02:43 AM »
That's why I simply assumed they are stupid persons without a clue of what they are doing.
Every move is just a panic attack very well hidden under a poker face.

Offline BobBX542

  • DHARMA Work Man (or Woman)
  • *****
  • Posts: 4070
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #9 on: February 24, 2010, 10:38:01 AM »
We still don't know for a fact that the poison in that pill would have killed Sayid, or just the "infection". I think it's reasonable to assume that if the ultimate end game regarding the Others and Sayid was that Sayid needs to die, he would be dead by now. Just like everyone is saying, they have had multiple occasions where they could have just killed him.

Offline lovinlost

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 253
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #10 on: February 24, 2010, 10:47:53 AM »
We still don't know for a fact that the poison in that pill would have killed Sayid, or just the "infection". I think it's reasonable to assume that if the ultimate end game regarding the Others and Sayid was that Sayid needs to die, he would be dead by now. Just like everyone is saying, they have had multiple occasions where they could have just killed him.

If the "poison pill" wouldn't have killed Sayid, why did Dogen freak out when Jack tried to swallow it?

Offline Walkabout V.2

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 118
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2010, 10:58:43 AM »
We still don't know for a fact that the poison in that pill would have killed Sayid, or just the "infection". I think it's reasonable to assume that if the ultimate end game regarding the Others and Sayid was that Sayid needs to die, he would be dead by now. Just like everyone is saying, they have had multiple occasions where they could have just killed him.
What I am laughing about is LOST fans, myself included, are using selective assumption. We choose where to make assumptions based on how we would like the story to unfold. Jack haters are more ready to assume the note was specific to Sayid because Jack cannot be important in their minds. I won't lie because I assumed that it was about Sayid until last nights epi.

Offline vickilynn

  • DHARMA Work Man (or Woman)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3880
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2010, 11:09:05 AM »
The whole "only candidates can kill candidates" thought rings true to me; there might be something there!

Ben gets manipulated into killing Locke and bringing him back to the island.

What other examples do we have?


Offline lovinlost

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 253
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #13 on: February 24, 2010, 11:23:11 AM »
The whole "only candidates can kill candidates" thought rings true to me; there might be something there!

Ben gets manipulated into killing Locke and bringing him back to the island.

What other examples do we have?



I don't know, I kind of get the impression that Flocke is using Sawyer for the same thing.  Maybe MIB cannot get off the island and go home until all the candidates are dead?  But if HE cannot kill them, then he has to use someone to do it.  Sawyer. 

I like this reasoning.  Only candidates can kill candidates.  Hmmm....I wonder if there is anyone out there with the time to start logging how many times this has happened?

Offline lostfan777

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1477
    • View Profile
Re: I Don't Get The Sayid Subplot Yet
« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2010, 11:41:48 AM »
First, Sayid was shot by Ben's father while he and Jack were trying to escape Dharmaville with the core of Jughead.

Next, I think they've made it clear that it's a big no no to kill one of Jacob's candidates, so although Sayid may be 'infected' he isn't yet showing signs of being dangerous so they have some time to plan their next move.  I don't know about one candidate being allowed to kill another, but it's certainly a possibility since we've now seen 'Linus' on the wheel of candidates and he killed Locke.  But then why did Ben and Widmore seem to also have to abide by the 'rules of the game'?  Were they the same rules?  Or a different game completely?

OK, I took a minute to think....how about this?
If someone on Jacob's side kills a candidate (MIB tricked Ben into killing Locke), that body/soul is forfeited to the other team,in this case the MIB.  Sayid may fit this idea because even though Ben's father shot Sayid, he wasn't dead until the others 'helped him along' in the pool.  MIB has restrained himself from killing the candidates and therefore has not permanently lost anyone to Jacob's side yet (I think?).  Maybe he was able to kill Eko and the pilot because after scanning them, he saw they weren't on the list.  I don't know yet how this would apply to Claire, any ideas?