disqusoruspj7bmo--disqus
Line on the Horizon
disqusoruspj7bmo--disqus

Good catch!

Liv only fucks guys to get them pregnant.

I was gonna say the same thing. This was the worst episode of the season. It's still a great show, great writing, interesting story etc. But this episode was a little weak.

Thank you!! I got into so many arguments with people here on that very question in the "No Room At The Inn" review. I'm glad to see at least someone else agrees with me! The writers should clarify Mary woke up.

Very interesting catch! I know nothing about religious opera or Verdi's work. What's your take on it? What symbolism do you think the operatic interludes are trying to hint at?

Lol. What would've been funny is if Jack Nicholson's burgundy jacket and plaid shirt were hanging in the closet among the international assassin suit and dress shirt.

Ah… I see. Very cool.

Exactly. This episode just screamed Kubrick. I'd bet if Lindelof does an interview or does commentary for the season 2 DVD he'll say he wrote this episode as an homage to Kubrick.

"For me it's just a crazy guy's imagination."

In all fairness Liv Tyler's minute or so of screen time this season did include raping Chris Zylka in "Off Ramp." So that effort alone gets her a star billing this season. Lol.

Parallels? Please explain…

While David Lynch has done some great abstract work, this episode totally brought to mind Stanley Kubrick. It's as if Kubrick directed a spinoff pilot episode of "The Shining: The series." Kevin Garvey staying at a resort with allusions to the one where Jack Nicholson went crazy years ago. Virgil playing a retooled

Lol.

Very true. You make some very valid points. I realize this is a story with fantasy elements that dont happen in real life, so I go along for the ride and accept things I don't believe happen in real life. It's a story afterall. I love the ambiguity for the exact reasons you described. My feeling (which started this

The point I've been making his about sympathetic protagonist characters and how far is too far before the audience doesn't agree with their actions. With guys like Matt and Kevin, we've seen them do very admirable things. They've helped people in need, tried to break up fights and stand up for people. Etc. They've

"Matt having previously shown no signs of having psychotic breaks isn't particularly relevant…"

"But he didn't have a blow to his head right before his wife woke up the first time so why would he make that connection?"

We're talking semantics. When I said no sexual desire, I meant Matt needs to take into consideration the fact that his wife is in a vegetative state. She is not returning his love or sexual affections at that point. It's only him having those desires or affections for her.

Kevin Garvey sleepwalks, not Matt. The problem is that I'm applying real-world logic to fictional world circumstances. In the real world Matt would be charged with rape unless he could somehow prove he had a psychotic break or was delusional. (Google the 2008 Wisconsin case of a man charged for sex with his comatose

Thanks, I truly appreciate the compliment. The problem, as I've mentioned elsewhere in this comment section, is that I'm applying real-world logic to fictional world circumstances. If this case was on Law and Order SVU, the audience would judge Matt differently. But this takes place in a tv world where ghosts,