|
|
Post by truthful on Sept 25, 2008 11:17:26 GMT -4
The announcement is made at about the 2 minute mark of the video. Michael's face is on the second screen to the left, between Danson and Ivanek. oh yes sure..thx bobdoc  ...mhm...it seems that he was shocked  ...i feel so sorry for him!!! |
|
|
|
Post by snivellusfriend on Sept 25, 2008 18:23:01 GMT -4
As a long-time fan of the show, Michael really turned my head in "The Shape of Things to Come" (it's about time I opened my eyes!) as to his great range as an actor, and that scene was really heartwrenching if you've been watching all these years, but I thought the Season 4 finale was much more representative of his character's development and his acting in that was even more amazing than in "Shape." I thought 'The Shape of Things To Come' was too melodramic, with all of the guns, explosives, Sawyer shouting, again, for what must be the 10th time, (subtlty, variation?), too many reaction shots of Ben (which lost it's emotional value for me), present and flashforward scenes, with the sudden death of Alex and how abruptly Ben went from shock to crying and burying her within 20 minutes in the episode (they said, "It's going to be dark in 20 minutes before they'll come after us." which was literally around 5-8 minutes of screentime) then leaving with the Losties, as though, "That's that...moving on.." That seemed very flippant to me and not realistic, as though the writers really wanted to kill Alex, quickly, because they couldn't think of anything to write for her character. People don't get over someone's death within 20-30 minutes or the same day and continue on with their lives. (They did the same thing with Claire: In one scene, she's devastated about Charlie's death, then that's it; She's happy, afterwards, then only mentions him when she's injured.) Since Michael won his Emmy for his guest role in 'The Practice,' but not for playing a major character on 'Lost,' after being nominated twice, I'm guessing that the Academy Members feel that he shines more in small roles. And I got really upset with them cutting off people's speeches as well. (Apparently, this was the lowest-rated Emmy broadcast ever, and the late-night hosts, especially Craig Ferguson, tore it apart.) I don't know why they don't let Don Rickles host the Emmys; I enjoyed hearing him talk and was sad to see him leave the stage. |
|
|
|
Post by Maeve on Sept 27, 2008 3:03:05 GMT -4
I thought 'The Shape of Things To Come' was too melodramic, with all of the guns, explosives, actors' shouting, a lot of close-ups, present and flashforward scenes, with the sudden death of Alex and how abruptly Ben went from shock to crying and burying her within 20 minutes in the episode (they said, "It's going to be dark in 20 minutes before they'll come after us." which was literally around 5-8 minutes of screentime) then leaving with the Losties, as though, "That's that...moving on.." Yeah, but you can't tell a story in real time. It's just not realistic. As it is they show one or two days in one episode. In most shows a season is a year. On Lost it is a month. Otherwise it would be "24" and we'd only have seen four days! I really loved TSOTTC. It moved along quickly, had Ben doing things we never thought we'd see him doing and explained how Sayid became his hit man. Alex's death was handled well and really shocked me. Then the whole smoke monster bit with the hieroglyphics on the wall. The writers needed something for Ben to do off island. Something that would motivate him to move the story along. Revenge is a great motivator. The only reason a character like Alex is written is to motivate a main character down the line. She really only was there to die to motivate Ben to do something. Plus you are right, the character was at a dead end. She was not one of the Losties and she had betrayed the Others and directly caused the deaths of ten of them. Ben might have sent her to the Temple but she would not have been welcomed there. Her arc was finished. I thought Claire was criticized unjustly for that and her actions were more realistic than most on Lost. We forget that Claire only knew Charlie for a few months while we have known them for four years. Claire was the mother of a month old infant and he was rightly the focus of her whole life not Charlie. An infant keeps you busy all day long so there wouldn't be time for more. Charlie was not her husband or even her boyfriend. The most she gave to Charlie was her friendship and for a time not even that because she banished him for a time when she feared he was using drugs. Charlie loved her but she didn't love him. She was too busy being a young mother. I really hated to see Charlie die but Claire was sad not devastated at his death. She owed it to that tiny infant to be happy for him. It's also a practicality issue; people don't want to see characters moping and crying for the whole season. The Emmy voters only saw one episode of Michael on Lost and they only saw one episode of Michael on The Practice. So Hinks was not a small role; it was just as large as Ben's role. The problem is that it is hard for someone (Emmy voter) who does not watch the show to understand the nuances when they see a single fourth season episode. Hinks was in seven episodes or so? I think it was that one scene where Michael transformed from innocent to killer in front of the lawyer's eyes that won the Emmy for Michael. He's had some good scenes on Lost but nothing that showcased his talent like that one scene on The Practice. That scene scared the hell out of me! |
|
|
|
Post by greenleaf on Sept 27, 2008 10:37:09 GMT -4
Sometimes, I think, some people have ability to see his talent? Or they have no heart and eyes? Really, Michael is most not appreciated as actor
|
|
|
|
Post by snivellusfriend on Sept 27, 2008 17:35:57 GMT -4
Yeah, but you can't tell a story in real time. It's just not realistic. As it is they show one or two days in one episode. In most shows a season is a year. On Lost it is a month. Otherwise it would be "24" and we'd only have seen four days! It's also a practicality issue; people don't want to see characters moping and crying for the whole season. My problem is that, like Michael said, the actors are just playing what's in the scene, and not their character's overall, emotional storyarc; It seems like a problem to me because then their characters don't seem consistant, like a couple of weeks after Charlie had only just died, when Sun and Claire were hanging clothes on the clothesline and, I believe, Sun asked her how she was feeling. She smiled and giggled with Sun and only finally mentioned Charlie after she'd been hit with the explosives. I thought she should've laughed with a bit of sadness in that scene, to show that she was still thinking about Charlie and was still upset; Her pure joy at that moment didn't make sense to me. What made 'Lost' interesting to me and why I began to watch the show was that they took their time, in seasons 1 and 2, exploring each character's emotions, their psychological issues, how their backstory, their past, still effected their present life. The characters still had issues that lasted throughout the entire season and that seemed more realistic to me, like real people in life. Otherwise, how can anyone care about the show or the characters if everything is unrealistic? (ie: slow motion shot of Sawyer running towards the Other's house, as it explodes; I might've liked that slow motion shot if was from his point of view, only). I would've liked to have seen and thought it would've been a lot better, more subtle for the audience to figure out, if Ben was talking and we heard the gunshot, off-screen, then cut to the Losties' reactions, to Ben with his back to the camera, standing still for a long time as they talk about them "leaving her body, there," then he says, quietly, back still at the camera, "He changed the rules," then finally turns to the camera, moving towards his secret cave; Then we'd finally see Ben's reaction, him crying and Alex's body at the end of the episode. From usinfo.state.gov/infousa/life/artsent/ijse0698/eyman.htm, written 10 years ago; Funny how it's still relevant, today. My thoughts, exactly. |
|
|
|
Post by bobdoc on Sept 28, 2008 11:15:58 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by greenleaf on Sept 28, 2008 11:35:04 GMT -4
Very fair judgement. Hope, Michael's acting will be appreciated in the future
|
|
|
|
Post by fin on Sept 29, 2008 5:19:44 GMT -4
maybe this is new for you... or you already saw it and like to watch it again. *g*
|
|
|
|
Post by tigerlily on Sept 29, 2008 10:36:03 GMT -4
ooh I haven't seen some of these - can't wait to get home tonight to watch them!!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2008 13:11:51 GMT -4
Well, the consolation prize in watching these videos is that it's clear Michael gets it. I think he's that smart. He can understand it and maybe even manage it even if he's not making the decisions about it. Perhaps the other cast members do as well, but their answers always seem less perceptive. I might be biased about that. I think what's happening in Michael's case is rare, and it's doubly good that he's enjoying it but doesn't seem to be giving any more of himself to it than it deserves. If that makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by mooncove on Oct 5, 2008 5:14:09 GMT -4
Yeah, but you can't tell a story in real time. It's just not realistic. As it is they show one or two days in one episode. In most shows a season is a year. On Lost it is a month. Otherwise it would be "24" and we'd only have seen four days! It's also a practicality issue; people don't want to see characters moping and crying for the whole season. My problem is that, like Michael said, the actors are just playing what's in the scene, and not their character's overall, emotional storyarc; It seems like a problem to me because then their characters don't seem consistant, like a couple of weeks after Charlie had only just died, when Sun and Claire were hanging clothes on the clothesline and, I believe, Sun asked her how she was feeling. She smiled and giggled with Sun and only finally mentioned Charlie after she'd been hit with the explosives. I thought she should've laughed with a bit of sadness in that scene, to show that she was still thinking about Charlie and was still upset; Her pure joy at that moment didn't make sense to me. ... I have to agree with Snivellusfriend, for the most part. I took Charlie's death much harder than Claire did! (I almost quit watching the show because of that, but they tricked me back into it with that first-episode guest appearance. Little did I realize then that I was about to fall crazy in love with the man who ordered Mikhail to kill him! If I reacted that badly to Charlie, I hate to think what I'd do if anything untoward happened to Ben!) Anyway, you're right, Maeve, she has Aaron to worry about, but I think it would be reasonable to have Claire be a little more downcast about Charlie within the context of the show. I know she didn't know him that long, but he willingly gave his life to get her and Aaron rescued; I like Claire, but she seems a bit callous to me in that regard. Whereas Ben, who almost never shows emotion, is still mourning Alex's death over a year later ... when technically he's not even her real father but her kidnapper. And then you have Hurley going all the way to Korea to mourn with Sun. Also, it seems to me that it is almost told in real time since one day often spans several episodes, especially in Seasons 3 and 4. So I don't think the audience would find it tiresome or unrealistic for Claire to be sad about Charlie. At least I wouldn't. I also agree with that quote, Snivellusfriend, and I don't like graphic violence (I'd be very happy if Ben would stop getting beaten to a bloody pulp; it's really getting hard to believe he still has all his teeth!) ... but I have to say the way they filmed and edited Alex's death and Ben's reaction was perfect for me and should have won an award in itself. That was the scene that turned my whole impression of Ben around, and I think we needed to see her get shot in order to feel what he felt. I don't think my jaw would have dropped if we'd just heard the gunshot because there'd be that slight bit of doubt as to whether he'd really killed her or if it was a trick. It was really shocking and probably the most visceral moment of television I've ever seen. As for the "No Sex Love for Ben" article ... Did anybody catch "The Practice" this time around on FX? (It was six episodes, BTW, but he's only really in four of them. It was amazing. My favorite part: "Do I get a vote?" I saw something like that coming, but it was still great the way he said it. And he was truly scary. If I didn't already know Michael Emerson from LOST, Hinks would have probably given me nightmares!) Anyway, to add insult to injury, during one of the commercial breaks in the very next episode after the Emmys, they had a salute from FX to "Emmy winners" Glenn Close and Zejlko Ivanek from "Damages." Talk about pouring salt on a wound. "The skill with which Emerson portrays the character, walking the line between sympathetic father figure (like when his daughter Alex was mercilessly shot by Keamy) and calculated, manipulating killer (like getting revenge on Keamy and not thinking about blowing up a freighter full of people in the process) has no equal on television. Many viewers, me included, can't wait to see what Ben really is or what he will evolve into. So I find some consolation in the fact that this won't be the last time he is up for an Emmy honor (nor is it the first--he's won in this category before). However, I still maintain that the statue was rightfully his." AMEN, brother! Thanks for the videos, Fin. I did see the one of them picking out their jewelry; that's why I was so disappointed none of the major entertainment pundits talked to them at all. I'm glad to see somebody paid them some attention. "The Benjamin Linus Show" ... Yes! I would tune in for that! (IMO, one mark of a great actor--and character--is that he leaves an impact on you far greater than the actual amount of screen time he has so that you feel his presence in every scene, even when he's not there.) BTW, Mythicfeline, back on the fashion issue (not that I've ever been a fashion maven), I'll concede I wasn't crazy about the top of Carrie's dress, but I really love the interweaving of the colors and floaty skirt. And from the pictures I've seen, it's just my personal taste, I guess, but I thought the cut of Michael's jacket made him look too big and boxy. (Guess I'm just too used to the striped-shirt/pajamas look! ) |
|
...mhm...it seems that he was shocked 
...i feel so sorry for him!!!
