I feel embarrassed not to notice that Easter egg. That's truly awesome.

you think Oliver Queen didn't give Alex Kingston a go?

Mr Terrific is Bradley Wiggins. Mr "I got bronze" is Chris Froome.

40 hours a week watching TV and you can't spare 45min for Arrow? Ouch. You must be watching unusual stuff.

I don't think he was a lawyer at all, it was just a cover so he could draw a salary. He was the guy running things, hence why the photocopier problem was brought to him and he made the exasperated comment about people being unable to find their own solutions - major foreshadowing.

From the comments here and elsewhere it seems this episode has really worked. It throws the current situation in the face of people's innately racist attitudes and makes them angry. Sure, it means lots of them just react with fury but there will be some that consider their own views and wake up to the reality that…

Caity Lotz was not cast until Season Two. The Sarah in the flashback in Season One was different actress. I actually took the time to check back when Season Two started and it's not Lotz in the boat scene (they actually re-shot that scene for Season Two).

It's bizarre to see the rating for this episode given that it undermines the entire motivation for the Garveys moving to Jarden. According to the Lindelof apologists they moved because Nora needed to feel safe. The same Nora who stated in the episode that she was an investigator of secondary departuress and implied…

Lol, there are no strict "fire codes". The fire department are used as a secret police to evict undesirables. How can you spend so much time mulling over non-existent subtext and meaningless mysteries and yet not even see what is clearly there on the page.

Actually it continues to mention David Burton (he;s the Aussie Jesus) in most of the Australia references. Again, it;s just Lindelof trolling his fanbois.

It's Lindelof piece, expecting any exploration of what is presented is asking far too much.

It adds a whole new dynamic, when he's punching his fanbois in the face repeatedly, then you come to forums like this and those self-same fanbois are continuing to analyse the "mysteries" that are beyond analysis because the author doesn't intend them to mean anything and will never offer any explanation.

Yeah the trolling of his fanboys in Eps 1 and 2 didn't stop me continuing to find the characters compelling and watchable. But the way he actually laughed in his fanbois face in Ep 3 (while repeatedly punching them), well, my reaction wasn't far from yours.

The White Shirts are the strange obsession that Garvey has with white shirts, not related to the Guilty Remnant.

Yes, you're not convinced because you've not watched Lindelof's stuff before. He doesn't plan ANYTHING. If anything does get a resolution it is not planned (meaning it is unsatisfying and never changes how you view what has happened before), is off the cuff to drive a new and deeper question. That's how he works.

I don't see why she thinks moving to Jarden will provide her with safety or why she feels that safety is necessary. It may come through over the next few episodes (she's only had one so far) but it would be very disappointing if the writer doesn't deliver this.

That's not the problem with Lindelof's work. The problem is not about how you interpret the overall work, it is that the work is NOT COMPLETE.

Here's the problem.

Yes and as I understand it, the book is about how people cope with the emotional and psychological impact of the Departed. I liked that part of it, as a one off, I can accept the Departing as a one off, without a need for an explanation. This was the good part of Season One that got me watching.

Going on the road with no plan on where to go other than "away" is generally considered risky or at least unsafe. The relationship with Garvey was clearly a dangerous one from the outset, she knows full well he has a deep, dark streak,