Why is it that Michael, who I would describe as one of the the top 5 major characters on this show, has the least amount of posts and topics on this website? Is he not controversial enough? Is he too nice? Is there not enough trouble brewing around his character? Not sure, what do you think?

I was just about to start a thread about this same topic!

Actually, Michael AND Walt have the least number of posts, the two bottom spots by far. I wanted to start a thread about whether or not their being african americans had anything to do with it, or what the real reason was for their being so unpopular, but then I saw this post, and also, thought better of it. People just get offended easily with any discussion that involves race and bias. But, it makes you wonder, that they are the least favorite characters....

I am constantly disappointed with Michael's screen time on LOST. He is one of the most
intriguing characters and he is never featured. I blame the writers/producers for that. They'd rather
give us three episodes of "Kate" (like watching paint dry, her stories) than scenes with Michael.
It's a shame as Harold is one of the best actors on the show. Too bad they dont take advantage of him.

Because he's a total jerk yet not charming with it like Sawyer. Thinking its because he's black is foolish.

He's mostly just a side character in Walt's life anyways.

I completely disagree with characterizing Michael as a "total jerk." He's definitely had some blow-ups and I hope that we're going to see less of that in the future but he's been incredibly helpful on the island. He showed up immediately to help Charlie/Jack in the cave-in, organized a search party for Claire, etc. He also loves his son; he's simply still learning how to be a father.

Absolutely Bliss! Michael has a temper....and he can sometimes come across as rough...but he has been MORE than willing to lend a hand anywhere he was wanted...and he has been doing the best he possibly can with Walt under the cirumstances! Walt is an angry kid and Michael barely knows him. He doesn't know how to deal with him. And his biggest problem is that he can't find a balance between being firm with Walt and keeping him safe...and also being his friend. He's finding his way though...and if you watch the finale, it's obvious that Walt is really warming up to him.

As for why he has the least posts...well I think it's not even that people hate him, it's just that he doesn't spark as much 'contraversy' or obsession as some other characters. He's not really the hearthrob type, so that leaves that out...and he's not 'strange' or 'funny' enough to have a fanatical following like Locke or Hurley

The simple fact of the matter is that Michael is a fairly normal guy, trying to raise a son he never knew. And maybe some people find that hard to get excited about. I love Michael...but there does seem to be a lack of interest in him among the fans :-\

I have a feeling that after the finale, and through the beginning of next season, Walt and Michael are soon going to become more popular.* It was nice that Michael and Walt shared their little moment last night.* I also think its cool that Michael and Jin have made up now.* Looks like this little cliffhanger might just add a little spice to the story as far as Michael and Walt go though.* They will finally get the attention they deserve.

The last three posts are right on. If the Michael-Walt cliffhanger isn't resolved successfully in the next season I've had it with this show. That would just be too cruel.

I don't know, I gave up on Michael when he threw Walt's comics into the fire. Then again, the season finale made me care more about the guy more then ever so maybe a change is coming for me...

See I agreed with Michael when he did that actually (the comic thing). I mean it may come across as harsh...but Walt DOES seem to think he can walk all over Michael because Micheal's at a disadvantage.

The way Walt treats Michael is the way a kid would treat a new step-father. He figures Michael can't really tell him what to do because he didn't raise him. He knows that Michael is going to go out of his way to get Walt to like him...so he purposely disobeys him and is rude to him because he figures Michael won't do anything about it.

Look at that scene in the airport! Michael is trying to EVERYTHING to get Walt to communicate with him and Walt just sits there completely ignoring him. Now I'm not saying that Walt doesn't have a right to be acting the way that he does. That kid has every right to be angry...but it's unfortunate because Michael is not the person he should be angry at.

Michael is a victim in the situation. He gave up his son after being pushed into it by his horrible ex-girlfriend...and then suddenly after 8 years of being shut out of the kids life everyone expects him to just pick up where he left off and be the perfect father. It's not that he doesn't love Walt...but he's upset because he was FORCED to resign himself to he fact that he'd probably never see his son again. And now Walt is suddenly in his life again and he's torn between being happy that he actually has a chance to reconnect with his son...and really bitter about the entire thing.

And I understand why Walt is being difficult with Michael...but he's still a belligerent kid who thinks that he can get away with not listening to his father. And if Michael just lets him get away with it...Walt's never going to respect him or start to obey him. Michael asked Walt to come help him with the raft and Walt refused, so he threw the comic book in the fire. Seems logical to me! It's not like the comic book even belonged to Walt anyway! But the point is that when your kids don't listen to you...you take something away from them as punishment.

Are you telling me that if your parents wanted you to do chores and you were sat there reading a book...and told them you were too busy to help out....they wouldn't snatch that book right from your hands? ;)

Well, yeah true. But I don't think it's so cut and dry. He's what, about 12-13 years old or so, his mother just died and his "father" just gave him away to some guy he not only doesn't know but never even knew existed. And now he know's his father isn't his father. This random guy is. That's enough to ruin his life but then he gets in a plane crash and stuck on an island with nothing but strangers and his dog. That's horrible. He's only his his new father about a weekend more then he's known any of these people. Hence why him bonding with Locke isn't all that surprising. He doesn't know Michael at all.

He's just a little kid and his whole life has been pretty severely damaged in a VERY short time period and I think that deserves way more paitence then Michael gives him. No?

Let alone Michael's stupid attitude with everyone else most times.

But yeah, as I said, the Walt is Missing/Michael is Going to Find Him storyline next year may change my mind quite drastically.

I agree with you about Micheal being stupid to other people sometimes. He is to quick to judgement and I didn't like the way he behaved with Jin in "In translation" (although Jin DID try to drown him earlier so ;)) and I really hated him accusing Sawyer of poisoning him automatically in "Born to Run".

HOWEVER I DO think Michael has shown Walt a lot of patience. He offers to do things for him....get things for him. He tries to find common interests. He attempts to start conversations. And Walt often shuts him out. It's not Walt's fault that he's a messed up kid for sure...but it's not Michael's either. And Walt does seem to think that he can do whatever he wants. Michael needs to show him that he CAN'T. Whether or not Michael has been his father for his whole life...he is NOW and Walt can't ignore that fact.

Walt has frozen Michael out many times when Michael tried relating to him as a friend. For example, with the comic book Michael tried to talk to Walt about how he liked to draw as well...and Walt refused to acknowledge him. But when it comes to Michael's authority, Walt needs to realize that he cant' ignore him. Michael has to be firm...or Walt will walk all over him and he'll NEVER be able to establish a real father son relationship.

If they were in the 'real world' Michael might be able to afford to give Walt a little rope...but the island is dangerous and his priority needs to be to keep Walt safe. So yeah he went beserk when Walt was hanging out with Locke...for good reason! I was incredibly pissed that Locke was teaching a 10 year old ( not 12-13 btw) to throw knives!!! >:( And I would never want my kids alone with someone like Locke either. And YES he occassionally snaps at Walt when he doesn't listen to him...but it's because the stakes are life and death. It's more important that Walt is kept safe...than that he like Michael right now.

Micheal gets flack for being hot-headed. They all seem to be that way.* But look at the situation they are in. I think Micheal is doing well being placed in an impossible situation. Part of what's going on is the both of them learning each other too. Where the boundaries are.* It's supposed to be like this. It's part of the process. Micheal seems like a character that has had allot of crap thrown his way and has tried to take it all in stride. Can't wait for more backstory. Seeing him in the water screaming Walt hurt me to my heart.* :'(* His son taken from him again. How does someone even withstand that?

I was so impresed by Micheal in "Special". He took responsibility for some things that weren't all his fault. He didn't put the blame anywhere. He was diplomatic about Walt' s mom instead of calling her an evil beyotch. He did everything in his power to protect Walt's feelings and let him know that he was wanted. He did better than most people would have done in that situation.

Congratulations to Michael for overtaking Walt in the posts count. Now, if he could just catch up to the dog, Vincent. Are you kidding, this is a major character here and people are talking more about a dog.

I am doing my part dammit!!! lol...

GO MICHAEL!!! ;D

Because he's a total jerk yet not charming with it like Sawyer. Thinking its because he's black is foolish.

He's mostly just a side character in Walt's life anyways.


Sawyer is charming huh? ??? Did Michael lie to everyone about having Shannon's inhalers just ti get Kate to kiss him? NO! >:( Sawyer even saked Kate if she was gonna let that poor girl suffocate just so she didn;t have to kiss him. Did Michael grab Kate and knock her down in front of the other Lostaways and out her motives like a spousal abuser? NO! >:( Michael has only resorted to violence when it ABSOLUTLY needed! Did Michael pull a gun on Jack and make Jack think he would shoot him? NO! >:( Sawyer even pointing the gun at Jack in a kidding way is NOT funny at all! You dont point a gun at someone unless you intend on using it. What if he had accidently pulled thew trigger and shot Jack dead? Peeps everywhere would be calling for Sawyer's head on a stick. Did Michael beat the crap out of Boone only because he was looking for his sister's meds? NO! >:( Sawyer didn't ned to do that. He couls have explained to Boone why he had his book and where he found it(remember, Boone told Jack that if Sawyer had his book, he had his luggage and if he had his luggage, he had the meds).

These are just a few of the more "charming" ways that Sawyer is better than Michael-------NOT!!! ::)

I'm not really going to get into this with you krazy1....because we DO agree that Micheal is a good guy and should not be killed off

However...Sawyer's charm (which MANY people can vouch for) has nothing to do with the merits of his actions....it's about a quality that he has that is unique. I think Justin meant that Sawyer was ALSO a jerk like Michael, but Michael was less charming than Sawyer and therefore less endearing.

Sawyer is the type of person who will do something unsavoury and then break out into a grin, and you love him in spite of yourself. People started off hating the guy...but he has such charisma and charm onscreen that people are drawn to him...despite his many faults. They learn to love him FOR his faults because of how captivating he is to watch.

When I first started watching Lost I wanted to kick Sawyer in the head. I hated him in the pilot and I never re-evaluated my impression of him until "The Moth" when I realized I was taking his side and feeling justifed when he tried to hurt Kate by keeping the information about Jack and the cave-in from her and then throwing it in her face. I suddenly realized that he'd been slowly charming me for weeks without me realizing it...lol...

Now you don't have to enjoy the character...but it's pretty obvious that the reason he is so popular is because he's a charming bad-boy...not JUST a jerk.

I agree Michael was annoying at first, and made a lot of mistakes, but that is understandable given the highly unusual circumstances he finds himself in.* What has been terrific is that Michael has been improving greatly as a father and a person in the last quarter of the season (his last "bad" action being wrongfully beating up Jin).* I appreciate the character development.* It was slow in coming, but is indicative of good writing.* I just hope the writers handle the search for Walt story well in season 2.* They may experience more hardships, but that could make the eventual reunion more dramatic.
And if Michael and Walt don't ever meet again, I will be disgusted to the point of abandoning Lost, and perhaps all of ABC as well.* *Not my idea of primetime TV entertainment.

Thank you, Queen, couldn't have put it any better myself.

Its getting heated in this thread! :o
Who knew that the least popular survivor on the island (well second least now thanks to Walt) could generate so much heartfelt discussion.

Someone should make a Michael fan group!

I think it is interesting to see the different perspectives. I have read in other threads and a little bit hear that Michael is Hot Headed and angry. That he has been put in an untenable situation, the funny thing is his situation in many ways mirror's Jack's. Michael has been thrust into the responsibility of raising Walt which he was unprepared for, to the point of trying to get his mother to take responsibility for Walt. Jack has been thrust into the role of leadership that he never wanted and wished to avoid. Michael has been known to get angry and fly off the handle, Jack has been known to get angry and fly off the handle. Neither Jack nor Michael wanted the responsibilities that they inherited.

So why is there the difference in interest? I think it's the backstory. We have learned a lot about Jack and what happened to him prior to the "Island". The same can be said about Locke, Sawyer, Kate, Charlie, Sun, Jin, Sayid, Hurley and Claire. They have all had at least one full backstory that was solely about them. Shannon, Boone, Michael and Walt had only a portion of one Backstory each. Boone's popularity,IMHO, was because he connected with the 20 something people who were able to see themselves through him and wanted to see someone in their age group developed into a strong self sufficient character and his looks also helped. Shannon was portrayed as the consumate *B* using whoever she could and just worrying about herself, this created a lot of animosity especially after her affair with Boone which was her using her feminine wiles to get what she wanted a trip back home. Then she was useless on the Island. Now she has begun to develop, It hasn't hurt that for many she was pleasant to look at. Michael and Walt have been viewed as extras even though the writer's have given us enough clues to know that Walt was going to be extremely important to the overall mystery.

What I trying to say is the backstory wasn't compelling enough to evoke enough passion from the viewing audience. The finale has changed all of that, at least IMO. Walt is now shrouded in mystery: Why do the "Other's" want him and will he be saved? Will Michael survive? And now that he was finally connecting with his son, how terrible it is that he is taken away again.
Much of Season 2 will have to revolve around this subplot. If Michael survives and makes it back to camp, it will be his resolve to find Walt that will lead to many of the discoveries on the island. We should see a spike in the post about both characters through the summer and into next season, IMHO.

What I trying to say is the backstory wasn't compelling enough to evoke enough passion from the viewing audience.

:lol2: You may be right about the backstory part of it, but I've been in some pretty passionate debates about Michael. I've been defending him for a long time to some people who were pretty brutal about his skills as a father. I kept saying, "he's a rookie father, he just hasn't found his stride yet." People got really angry. ??? Maybe the problem is that we were posting over in general theories. ;) It's really a shame Michael hasn't got more posts. I feel guilty, because I have liked his character ever since Special. I thought what they did with his character was really classy, and very telling.

Specifically, I liked that he tried to let Walt believe that Brian really wanted to keep him. I believed, and still maintain, that that was Walt's flashback in that epi. It showed Walt's intuitiveness. He realized at that moment what Michael was doing. I think he appreciated that Michael was trying, but he was angry that Brian didn't want him. I think he thought that Michael wouldn't want him either once he got to know him. His behavior, and reluctance to bond, was a defense mechanism.

You made some very valid points Shootfire.

The way his part was written I always expected him to be the one killed off. I thought Locke would try to undermine his relationship with Walt and then mentor Walt to realize the full potential od his abilities. Since then I have wondered if Michael might have been "Special" as a child as well. Both times that someone referred to Walt as different or special Michael has gone ballistic. It just reminded me of a parent who had gone through something in their childhood and were trying to protect their child from having to go through the same thing. We actually know very little of Michael's backstory, What was his life like prior to Walt? Maybe we'll find out more in Season 2.

Specifically, I liked that he tried to let Walt believe that Brian really wanted to keep him.*

I agree with this Shootfire, this does say a lot about his character. That was a very strong thing to do not to upset Walt about his stepdad who until that point was all he had to love (besides Walt of course).

Yeah I have defended Michael since the very beginning...when people were really harsh about his parenting skills and the like!

It seems like people aren't allowing him to make mistakes just because he is a father. And I realize the stakes are higher when you have a kid...but the guy is still human. He has to learn to be a real father in the middle of a huge crisis. I don't see why people aren't willing to cut him some slack.

And I was also impressed that he didn't try to taint Brian in Walt's eyes. I mean Brian basically admitted that he never wanted Walt...he only wanted Susan, and he took Walt only because he happened to be part of the package. He screwed Michael out of his own son...just because he wanted to be with Susan. That has GOT to make Michael seriously resent the guy. And yet he was still gracious enough to lie to Walt so that Walt wouldn't feel like Brian walked out on him. That really shows that he cares more about Walt's state of mind, than he does about his own plight.

As a parent myself, it aint no easy task. And I have been at it for 10 years! :D Michael is doing amazingly well under the circumstnaces. It would have been hard enough if he had been trying to connect with Walt this whole time in a city, but they are on a friken spit of land in the middle of nowhere. :o I am proud of the job Michael has done. He was right when he told Locke it is "his" job as a father to teach Walt stuff, including knife throwing if he wanted. Micjael looked so natural when showing Walt how to work the rudder. He also was VERY concerned about how Sawyer said he would have shown Walt the back of his hand if he were his son. I looked at Michael, and it was like he was saying, "Mental note, DO NOT leave only son in the care of Sawyer"! ;) That was the turning point in the father/son relationship then. :) However, that was short lived when Walt got kidnapped by the Gorton's Fishermen and his minions. Michael looked so devastated when he could do nothing to help Walt who was screaming for his dad to rescue him. My heart broke right then for the both of them. I hope they reunite, please PTB!!! :unhappy:

It should be interesting to see where the writers take it next season. I'm excited!! Too bad its still 3 months away. :(

I hope to God that they keep Michael. :unsure: He and Walt need to get to a better hather/son realtionship

However, that was short lived when Walt got kidnapped by the Gorton's Fishermen and his minions.
:lol2: :lol2: :lol2:
Who knew they could be so evil. I'm boycotting that fish now. Maybe I'll try Misses Paul. I don't think she's kidnapped anyone.


If they don't get reunited I will bawl. :'( I can't even rewatched the scene it was so painful. This is his second time losing Walt. Poor Mickey.

It just broke my heart to see how Michael felt so helpless as those b*st*rds drove off with Walt. :'(

Helpless indeed...Sad? Absolutely.
(Hello friend :),
another thread we will agree on ;) .)

I dig Michael I think/hope Season 2 will be his time to shine. I'm guessing most of it will be his search for Walt. Kind of (another) nod to Finding Nemo. Harold is a great actor, anyone see him in Romeo & Juliet? or OZ on HBO? I would definately like to see Hal get some more screen time. He was great on Kimmel too.

I dig Michael I think/hope Season 2 will be his time to shine.

I was coming here to post that. Great minds. This storyline will definitely thrust him out into the forefront. I'm oddly, optimistic.

Unless he dies in the water. Just kidding... But you never know with these writers. I can't figure out how they are going to get back to the island over 15 miles out. Are Fisherman Cletus and the rest of his gang going to come back and kidnap the rest of them as well?

I read many "favorite character" lists, and Michael seems to be at the bottom for most of them. It seems that this is largely because his character registers the least with the audience. To be fair, Harold does a good job with the role, and Evangeline gets FAR more criticism for her role in the show than Michael ever will. But he has many thing going against in preventing him from getting a more devoted following. He doesn't have the screen-time of Jake and Kate, or the instant affability of Charlie and Hurly, nor was given many Emmy moments to shine like Locke and Sun had. Probably wasn't fair that Michael had to share his only episode with Walt.

Yes, the writers have treated Michael rather badly in season 1 in terms of screen time and dramatic opportunities.* We can hope they make things right in season 2.

Frankly, has I have already said all over this board, I am SICK TO DEATH OF THE FAB 6! >:( Jack adn Charlie are the only ones of the Fab 6 that get my attention anymore. Sawyer does a little, but Locke, Sayid and Kate can get killed off at anytime and I would be alright with it. I have since night 1 been more interested in the "couplets(-Shannon), Claire and Hurley. The others get real old after a while. I am looking forward to more Michael/Walt and Jin/Sun in Season 2. :)

We can vent about this all day, but unfortunately I believe the characters and their screen time is not as balanced as it used to be. Several characters are always getting the screen time, and I dont' see this changing with MIchael. I wish it would, but I am not hopeful about this. Harold is a great actor,
it would be great to see him come back to the new york stage, but he probably doesn't have the time for it now.

I like Michael, but I think he just doesn't have as much going on with his character. Now that Walt is gone, he will probably pick up more screen time.

Michael hasn't been given enough time for us to really question things about his past. I hope
Michael gets another flashback before others get their fourth.

You all are right. I think next season, we will see MUCH more of Michael, now that he is near death at the beginning of next season, and having to fight for his son the rest of the season (hopefully). My only question is how are the 3 raftateers going to make it back to the island more than 15 miles out?

I don't know either :laugh: but I have faith that the writers will make it plausible.

Now, Michael will be a Father who has lost his child and doesn't know ,where to find him.

I don't think they will have to stretch to much to land our 3 back on the "Island". The raft was on fire but it was not destroyed, it didn't explode into pieces. I think there will be enough of it left for them to be able to climb out of the water and float on. We have already been shown the weird currents and tide so it won't out of the ordinary for them to end up back on the "Island".

I guess we'll see in 3 months.

I hope to see way more of Michael in season two, but why do I doubt I will?

More Michael, Walt, Jin, Sun and Hurley, but LESS Shannon, Sayid and Kate-----please! ::)

I agree except for Sayid. I like him a lot. To me the best episode besides the finale was Solitary with his flashbacks. I think the weakest character/actor on the show is Charlie. Every flashback episode featuring him is horrible. But sticking to the subject, Michael should definitely have more episodes focused on him next season.

Sayid is dead to me now. I used to like him, but he is repulsive with Shannon. :P

The more Michael the better I say. :)

Wow, strong words for Sayid. I wonder if Nadia is really dead, since Sayid obviously has fallen in love with a new woman. From watching the reruns now (The Pilot and Tabula Rasa), Michael really tries hard to be a good father. He tries to make Walt like him but still demands respect from him like a father should. Michael has really been put in a predicament.

Wow, strong words for Sayid.* I wonder if Nadia is really dead, since Sayid obviously has fallen in love with a new woman.* From watching the reruns now (The Pilot and Tabula Rasa), Michael really tries hard to be a good father.* He tries to make Walt like him but still demands respect from him like a father should.* Michael has really been put in a predicament.


"love with a new woman" ??? Now that was just plain funny as hell! :D

Micheal was really adorable in Walkabout. I felt bad about him trying to explain not having been with Walt before. He felt so bad and uncomfortable. Poor guy.

Congratulations!!!! We just overtook the dog, Vincent, in number of posts for Michael. Thanks to all who contributed. Michael beat a dog. Unbelievable....

Congratulations!!!!* We just overtook the dog, Vincent, in number of posts for Michael.* Thanks to all who contributed.* Michael beat a dog.* Unbelievable....


Lets break out the bubbly and hats! :jump1: :party:

Oh well, so much for the celebration. Vincent's back on top. :-\

Micheal was really adorable in Walkabout. I felt bad about him trying to explain not having been with Walt before. He felt so bad and uncomfortable. Poor guy.

I really liked his attempts to communicate with Sun before he knew she spoke English. It's a good thing she really did speak English. :lol2:

Thats because he saw her naked. I think there's an attraction there, on his part at least.

I really liked his attempts to communicate with Sun before he knew she spoke English. It's a good thing she really did speak English.

HA! Yeah, I adored that scene!!! LOL....

I always found it really hilarious that out of an island full of castaways he chose the one woman who he practically had to play charades with in order to communicate (or so he THOUGHT) to watch Walt ::)

:lol2:

It is even funnier to watch the scene now that you know Sun can speak English and she's acting like she doesn't understand the whole time. After Michael leaves for the boar hunt, Sun starts talking to Walt in Korean, and Walt's like "Whatever."

I think the irony of the situation is great. Michael has an attraction for SUn and ends up being good friends with Jin. So not only is he attracted to Jin's wife and saw her topless but he also has stated that Koreans and Blacks don't get along in the U.S. So of all the people on the Island they become fast friends.

Thats because he saw her naked.* I think there's an attraction there, on his part at least.


My hubby said that, "Hell, ya! I would be at a loss for words too" when he watched that scene when Michael see's Sun half nekked. ;D

Lostbylost, I had not thought of that, but he IS buddies with his sweetheart's husband now. That is pretty ironic. Maybe there will be some sort of love triangle in Season 2??? :o
Krazy, I have to agree with your hubby. Sun is HOT! (Get it, ha) :laugh:

Ok guys, the dog is catching up with Michael again in number of posts. We can't let the rising popularity die out. Post, post, post...

Nooo. Gotta keep the Micheal love going. Watching HOTRS really gives you much respect for Micheal. To end up befriending a guy who tried to kill you over a watch is pretty deep. Micheal deserves props for that. It must have hurt him severly for his son to ask him what he did to have Jin attack him. They have definitely come along way. Walt :'( :'( :'(. Sorry, I'm having an Exodus flashback.

The problem is not alot is known about Michael or Walt for that matter. Example: How much do we know about Kate, Jack, Charley, Hurley.......etc. All we know about Michael so far is, here sits a man with a child he didn't think he would have to raise and thats it. I truly believe that before its all over and when we really find out more, this place will be buzzing. I picture Michaels character like Shannon, we just haven't gotten far enough in the story yet to truly see what part they play.

Just my opinion.

I really like Michael as a character and his late-season interactions with Jin make me smile :) It's mostly Walt's fault that Michael is perceived as a bad person. He really is not.

It's mostly Walt's fault that Michael is perceived as a bad person. He really is not.

I'm not so sure it's Walt's fault, exactly. It is because of Walt that we are able to see that Michael wants to be a good father. Michael's best moment was the one in which he tried to allow Walt to believe he was the bad guy, and that Brian really wanted to keep him. Necessarily, Walt is a large part of what makes Michael an admirable character.

I think we'll see a whole different side of Michael this season as he turns courageous in looking for Walt.

I'm not so sure it's Walt's fault, exactly. It is because of Walt that we are able to see that Michael wants to be a good father. Michael's best moment was the one in which he tried to allow Walt to believe he was the bad guy, and that Brian really wanted to keep him. Necessarily, Walt is a large part of what makes Michael an admirable character.


That was one of the coolest moments in the season. I thought that was so classy. And later when he shows Walt the pictures he tries to paint Walt's mom in a postive light. Also, he was very diplomatic in Exodus when Walt asked about him and the mom. Just mentioning having different interests and all.

That definitely was one of Michael's finer moments. You can see a big difference in his paternal feelings from the beginning to the end of the season.

I wonder what triggered Michael and Jin's friendship. Did it take Jin to be a bigger man and offer to help with the raft? Have they officially become friends now? Has Michael matured and become a better father and person?

i beleive that micheal has improved himself from being on the island... a lot of people have... thats something to talk asbout

I agree fate. He has improved as a father especially. He also seems to be growing in responsibility and discipline. This can be seen in his willingness to build a raft to help the survivors and then to rebuild it when the first was burned. He is also less angry and confrontational than he was at the beginning. He acted like everybody was out to get him when he first got there. With Jin, he rushed to judgement about why he wasn't liked. He got mad when Locke didn't want him to come on the search party for Claire. But since then, Michael seems to have grown. He spends more quality time with Walt. He has purpose. And he's more friendly to everyone. What do you think changed him? Was it finding out that Locke wasn't so bad after he helped Michael save Walt from the polar bear?

i beleive that micheal has improved himself from being on the island... a lot of people have... thats something to talk asbout

The thing is, we have so little of his backstory it's hard to say if he has improved himself. From what we have seen, Michael has never been anything but a nice guy. Maybe he has a bit of a flashy temper, but mainly he's just a nice guy. When he told Susan on the phone that he was coming for Walt, I believe he meant it. Had he not been stopped in his tracks by a Buick Le Sabre, I believe he was on his way to Amsterdam to retreive his son. I'm really looking forward to his flashback episode this season because I think there's a lot more to Michael than meets the eye.

I'm not so sure he was actually going to Amsterdam to pick up Walt. I mean, Michael did write letters to Walt every year, but he certainly was hesitant on taking care of him when Brian came and told him the news.

I'm not so sure he was actually going to Amsterdam to pick up Walt. I mean, Michael did write letters to Walt every year, but he certainly was hesitant on taking care of him when Brian came and told him the news.

Yes, but that was after he had adjusted to the idea of not having Walt. When Susan took Walt and left, I don't think Michael balked because he wanted to use Walt as a weapon. I think he probably knew it was over, but I think he probably thought she would come back to NY someday with Walt. He probably didn't expect her to come back to him, although he might have had a small hope that she would. Michael is a man who means what he says. When he told Walt he would go look for Vincent as soon as it stopped raining, he followed through. The only time I can think that Michael said something he didn't mean was when he said that Koreans don't like black people. Even then, he explained to Walt that he only said it because he was angry. The only time he has said something he didn't mean he explained it. I think the only reason he signed over Walt to Brian was that Susan had him over a barrel and manipulated him.

Well, he did seem genuinely excited about having Walt in the beginning. You're probably right, Michael was hesitant about taking Walt back when Susan died because he had already given up. Its nice to see the transition that Michael has gone through from the beginning of last season to now about his feelings towards Walt. He doesn't seem to fuss at Walt nearly as much now. (Although, he does seem to keep losing him. :ohwell: )

I agree highrise, Michael does put others first. He steps up to the plate and takes initiative to get things done - building the raft, going after Claire, searching for Jack (like you said), etc... I think the writers will throw some unusual twists to his character this season, along with some of the other characters like Hurley, Jin, and Sun so they will become increasingly popular and controversial. It seems that recently, the writers are doing their best to throw curveballs and make viewers question and theorize on everyone and everything. I'm sure they will do the same in the next couple of episodes with these characters as well.

On the raft, when Sawyer said that Micheal had "the patirence of a Saint", I believe that his stock as a character immediately rose. There are no throwaway lines, and that hinted at some strong possibilities.

As to the future of his character, it has to be great. Even though his carpentry and engineering skills were clearly unique and very important amongst the islanders, it somehow didn't translate as well on screen as Jack's physician skills, or Locke's survival and prophetic skills.

However, I can think of no MORE POWERFUL base storyline to resonate with parents in the viewing audience than with losing a child.

Personally, the separation of Walt from Michael was one of the most powerful and horribly disturbing scenes I have seen in a long time on network prime time. This will certainly setup Micheal for some heroic and powerful scenes this season, and the audience will certainly benefit from this, though enduring a very uncomfortable situation dealing with the aftermath of an on screen kidnapping.

And don't forget that Micheal has already played important roles in Sun's transcendence toward independence, and has already helped Jin in the repurification of his soul of the Paik demons haunting him. We'll see where else it goes relating to them.

Worry not Harold Perrineau fans, Michael clearly demonstrated his acumen, and now that his story should be in the forefront and he should be able to continue to display his talent. Michael will lead the forces of "good" in an attempt to bring back his son (parallel to St. Michael)?

-Mang

On the raft, when Sawyer said that Micheal had "the patirence of a Saint", I believe that his stock as a character immediately rose. There are no throwaway lines, and that hinted at some strong possibilities

Ahh, true. On that note, here is a link to some St. Michael information.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10275b.htm

There are a lot of things in there that could apply to the lostaway Michael. Supposing that Walt is dead or sick, which I do not, Michael's battle could parallel his fight for the body of Moses. Interesting, also, that he guards the body of Eve.

To rescue the souls of the faithful from the power of the enemy, especially at the hour of death.

Hmmm...

Tradition relates that St. Michael in the earliest ages caused a medicinal spring to spout at Chairotopa near Colossae, where all the sick who bathed there, invoking the Blessed Trinity and St. Michael, were cured.

I'm wondering how his aqueduct might fit in here.

Supposing that Walt is dead or sick, which I do not, Michael's battle could parallel his fight for the body of Moses. Interesting, also, that he guards the body of Eve.


As I recall, St. Michael is as an exalted Archangel, high among the Seraphim. He is the patron saint of police and of mariners (fitting). He also led the forced of God against evil, and rescued the sould of the faithful at death.

The first parallel is obvious, as with Walt's kidnapping we'd expect Micheal to lead the battle to get him back, and confront "the Others".

Death aside, Michael might already have helped rescue the soul of Jin through the process that lead him to his own self-atonement. Michael was an intermediary to Jin's cathartic journey leading eventually to penance working on the raft and eventually reconciliation with Sun. His journey seems complete now by shunning Paik, breaking his previous ties with him and giving away Paik's watch to Michael. With the help of Micheal, Jin's catharsis is complete, and he now works toward a new (old?) life again. Sounds like Michael helped rescue his soul ala St. Micheal.

-Mang

You could say that Michael and Kate were the cause of Sun's changing as well. Michael was the first person Sun talked to in English.

You could say that Michael and Kate were the cause of Sun's changing as well. Michael was the first person Sun talked to in English.

True, but I don't think Sun is finished. She still has that tainted water issue up in the air. I think she has to come clean about that, or at least have it found out by Michael or Jin before she can be at peace with it. Personally, I think learning English pales in comparison. When Jin finds out what she tried to do to him, and that his new friend Michael was an innocent victim, there's going to be trouble in paradise. I think it's going to be hard for him to shake the mindset that he is responsible for controlling Sun's actions.

Enjoyed your comments shootfire. I'm just hoping it turns out differently.

Oh, I definitely think forgiveness is out there for her, but I think there will be fireworks first. I just don't think letting it fester for an extended period of time is a great idea. The longer it takes for the truth to come out, the longer she will be plagued by her "telltale heart." Highrise, I have enjoyed everyone's comments in here, yours included.:) Good discussion all the way around.

He's a great character and I like supporting an underdog.

Well, in all honesty, have you seen some of the threads out there for some of the other characters? 101 reasons why a certain character will not die? It's no wonder their numbers are soooo much higher. :wink1: It's not that I think there's anything wrong with supporting your favorite. I've posted in some of those threads. I just don't think we have followed all the clues for Michael's character. You know what they say about not working with kids and animals. Well, Michael's working with both. :biggrin: Hmmm...maybe it's time to start a new thread.

Wow, Michael came across as a bit of a punk this last episode. I can understand him being upset for losing Walt, but why blame Sawyer? He just saved Michael's life and just risked his own life to try to save Walt (by using the gun). I felt like Michael had grown and matured to be less selfish and more friendly with the other survivors and Walt. Now it looks like he's back at square 1.

Wow, Michael came across as a bit of a punk this last episode. I can understand him being upset for losing Walt, but why blame Sawyer?

The thing is that Michael was still in the moment of losing Walt. It was just a few minutes ago for him that Sawyer subtlely threatened him with a gun if he didn't fire that flare gun. I can see how his first reaction, before he has thought everything through, would be anger toward Sawyer. If you recall, soon after the season finale aired similar discussions took place about the others and Sawyer's insistance that they had to fire the flare gun. Yes, Michael came off like a jerk, but their arguing and tossing blame around reminded me of brothers. In the end, Michael didn't blame Sawyer. He blamed himself. The fact is that the others are to blame. Neither of them knew that the others were after Walt, and therefore the blame is misplaced. It was just a very human reaction for me. When the chips were really down, I think Michael did come through.

After watching the episode again, I must agree that Michael did revert back to the mature Michael by the end of the episode. It seemed that he did come to his senses by the end and then vowed for revenge instead. Sawyer's really growing on me lately. He's become less of a bad guy and is actually growing a heart.

It seemed that he did come to his senses by the end and then vowed for revenge instead. Sawyer's really growing on me lately. He's become less of a bad guy and is actually growing a heart.

I can sum up his reaction in 1 word: kidnapping. I was still horrified at seeing Walt in that scene, and in Michael's reaction and post-reaction. There's not much worse I can imagine, nor more horrific, I would think, than losing one's child.

I believe that Micheal has touched not only Jin and Sun, but also Sawyer, and perhaps Walt has finally accepted him off screen. It seems that Micheal has played an important part in all of them, whether in a supportive way, or in a confrontational, he is helping all of them with their journey, a transformation of what they were into what they're going to become (no Brady Bunch songs here please).

His unique and important engineering, construction and designing skills aside, his most important mission is upcoming, the salvation of Walt, and the subsequent battle against this foe.

Irrelevant? Never.
-Mang

He definitely shows motivation and engineering skills by his building the raft and the excavation to save Charlie and Jack in the cave. Now if he could just overcome his selfishness and anger, Michael would be a greater asset to the island....

Hey, Michael is one of my middle favorite characters. Jack, Shannon, and Charlie are on the bottom of my list. *jabs pins in voodo dolls*

I'll agree with you on the Shannon and Charlie deal. Charlie is way overrated to me. I do like Jack though. And I must say, Michael is probably my middle fav as well. Jack, Locke, and Sawyer are probably my most favorite characters.

Funny, I don't really have a least favorite character. I love them all, even Shannon!
*dodges flying rotten tomatoes* I guess I just see them like I see most people. Sometimes I dislike certain behavior, but I see the value in people/characters in spite of it. I don't always behave well, so I don't necessarily expect others to always behave well. :redface: I think that's the really great thing about this show. It reveals people/characters the way they really are.

I can relate to Michael in that my wife had two sons (11 and 12) prior to me and the eleven year old has autism. It is hard to be in a situation of an authority figure to boys who don't know you and won't listen to you. It is a major process and yes...VERY frustrating because they can push you to the wall. I hope Michael and Walt end up like me and the boys...they are my sons now and while I can't be their father..I can be their dad. They listen, love and respect me. I couldn't be more blessed because if you look at my "Avitar" that is my little angel....

Yea, I'm sure Michael will do all that he can to find Walt. It should be a fun year watching Michael go through what he must to find Walt. Michael has stayed consistently motivated on the show and I think now all of his efforts and energy will go to exploring the island and looking for his boy.

Michael has stayed consistently motivated on the show and I think now all of his efforts and energy will go to exploring the island and looking for his boy.

Scubagert, great choice of words! Maybe that is why Michael is a bit less controversial than some other characters on the show. We have been shown what motivates him. We're still guessing about a lot of other characters. What did Kate do to become a fugitive? Why does Sawyer feel the need to be punished to the point of torture? I mean, we may be able to make some pretty good cases for what motivates them, but we don't know exactly.

I am ready for Michael to become more mysterious and controversial. I think that would really spark an interest into his character.

i thought micheal's behavior towards sawyer after the raft was blown up was pretty childish. I don't care how in shock you are. Pull yourself together. Sawyer saved your life Mike.

That was my reaction too Ultra. I know he was upset that Walt was gone but why blame that on Sawyer. But I must say, Michael did get over his immaturity and seemed to realize that Sawyer was only there to help by the end of that episode.

I agree, I think Michael should get more attention... Harold is a great actor, and Michael is pretty important.... Why isn't there much stuff about him on here? ^-^
--Katie--

I agree, I think Michael should get more attention... Harold is a great actor, and Michael is pretty important.... Why isn't there much stuff about him on here? ^-^

I think Michael's story is pretty compelling. He gets discussed pretty regularly on other forums. It's just that few people post in his subforum I think. At least there are plenty of Michael hating threads out there since Adrift aired. :biggrin: I think they will get past the Michael hating though. Right now some folks think he's being mean to Sawyer, not considering that often Sawyer brings it on himself. I think when the dust settles though, Michael and Sawyer will be great friends.

He does act pretty mean to Sawyer still. I'm not sure what his problem is. He just doesn't trust him yet I guess.

Yea, I was gonna post something too... But you got it first.. So I just wanna say i agree.... Comeone people let's talk about something other than the island couples. I mean sure it's fun and I do it myself.. But we know something is up with Walt and right now Michael is trying to find his son and quite possibly may get cuaght.. Ihope not but he did JUST almost run into the others.
--Katie--
Michael is one of my faves :)

Sorry guys, Michael just doesn't do it for me, although he is starting to step it up as a father - about time though. Generally he is selfish, sullen and childish - he loses the plot and sulks when he doesn't get his own way, he is jealous of Locke, he puts himself first all the time - even with Walt. Really, there's not much to admire about the guy.

I don't think he is the least popular but I do think he is the least mysterious,people want to know about what Kate did ,or why Locke is in the chair , why isn't Jack married anymore? MR. Eko? I think we pretty much know Michael's story

he loses the plot and sulks when he doesn't get his own way, he is jealous of Locke, he puts himself first all the time - even with Walt. Really, there's not much to admire about the guy.

I don't understand what you mean when you say he loses the plot? I strongly disagree that he is jealous of Locke. I think he just wants Locke to stop interfering in his relationship with Walt. There is a subtle difference. He does NOT always put himself first. His actions are almost always for Walt's benefit. I can only think of one example of Michael putting himself before Walt, and that was when he was playing golf. I can forgive that because he's new at fatherhood, and I think we've got to cut him a little slack if he starts acting like a human being with his own needs for a few minutes every now and then. I suppose we will have to agree to disagree about Michael.

I think we pretty much know Michael's story
I think we're being misdirected. We just think we know Michael's story. The thing is, Michael has been camoflaged by a child and a dog. :smile:

I don't think he is the least popular but I do think he is the least mysterious,people want to know about what Kate did ,or why Locke is in the chair , why isn't Jack married anymore? MR. Eko? I think we pretty much know Michael's story
Jontar, you might have hit it perfectly. I think Michael may be the least mysterious and that is why no one seems to care about him on these boards. He's not controversial. His backstory is fairly boring (it's Walt that makes his story interesting). BUT my big complaint with this argument is Walt's post numbers are low too. In fact, sense I've started this thread, Walt's numbers are lower than anyone else's including Michael now. You definitely can't say Walt is not mysterious.

So, now what? Why are these two so unpopular?

Jontar, you might have hit it perfectly. I think Michael may be the least mysterious and that is why no one seems to care about him on these boards. He's not controversial. His backstory is fairly boring (it's Walt that makes his story interesting). BUT my big complaint with this argument is Walt's post numbers are low too. In fact, sense I've started this thread, Walt's numbers are lower than anyone else's including Michael now. You definitely can't say Walt is not mysterious.

So, now what? Why are these two so unpopular?

I don't think it's that Michael is not controversial. I've gotten into some really controversial discussions with people about Michael in the Adrift subforum. I think it's because you almost can't discuss one without discussing the other. Therefore, their numbers are split. Between the two of them they have about 850 posts. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Walt's too young to have fangirls. :biggrin:

We really have no way of knowing if Michael's backstory is boring. We haven't seen any of it that doesn't pertain to Walt. :frown: I think there's probably a very good story there. What is it about Michael's artistic talent that Susan finds rare? Why does Michael know so much about designing things simply because he works in construction? I have family members in construction, not laborers, project managers, foremen, draftsmen, and such. They know some things, but designing is not inside the scope of their expertise. Did Michael go to engineering or architecture school after giving up Walt? Impact velocity is not a term that construction people toss around a lot. I have a lot of questions about Michael, but it seems I have to post a topic in another forum to find anyone willing to discuss.

I agree that Michael probably has things going on that we don't know about. I mean, so far the writers have thrown us a curveball on just about everyone with the flashbacks. But I don't think this is so with Michael yet. There's really nothing that I would call surprising with Michael yet on his backstory. Maybe he will wind up not being Walt's dad or something. You may have a point with him going back to school after the accident. Hopefully the writers will find something to stir the pot with Michael though. I'd like his character history to be a little more exciting. That should get people talking more about him.

Well thanks to your efforts, Michael is way out of last place now in posts. He has quite a few posts left to reach Locke, Sawyer and Charlie, but at least he's out of the bottom now. I still don't understand why there is so little following for Michael or Walt.

Well thanks to your efforts, Michael is way out of last place now in posts. He has quite a few posts left to reach Locke, Sawyer and Charlie, but at least he's out of the bottom now. I still don't understand why there is so little following for Michael or Walt.

Methinks scubagert, of the 108 post Michael thread, is being modest. You're the one who sounded the alarm. I might not have looked as deeply at this character were it not for you. I think there are great surprises ahead for us in Michael's story.

Thanks Shootfire. You had a lot to do with the big increase as well. I hope Michael's story becomes more mysterious/controversial so it will increase the discussion on his section. I have a feeling you're right though. We have a lot more in store for his character. I can't wait!

My biggest hope is that Michael gets together with Libby. She sure stood up for him with Ana Lucia. I think she looks better with him than Sun did(Sun is my favorite female though. Sun&Jin are adorable now). :biggrin:

I've thought that Libby and Michael would make a good couple as well. They do seem to have a nice relationship going.

I've thought that Libby and Michael would make a good couple as well. They do seem to have a nice relationship going.


Good smokes! Your avi only proves why JJ&Co have to "shelve" Walt for a while. He looks 5 years older than he was last season in that pic. He is gonne be one tall dude.:)

I love Michael! And Harold! He's a fantastic actor and his character is awesome because, like all the others, he's not perfect. He's one of those people on the show who knows that they are a certain way and knows that he's got to change and that things in his future will change him but it takes him time. He resists it but is still changing gradually.

He's ambitious and a strong character. I like how he's trying so hard to get off the island, we need a character with his motivation.

He's also amazing in his interactions with different people. I loved him and Sun, not because I like the idea of them getting together romantically (I'm a massive Jin/Sun fan) but his compassion and fondness for her. He was otherwise so concerned with Walt and getting off the island, it was nice to see that side of him.

I saw a potential for something between him and Libby but if it doesn't happen than that's cool too. I just really hope we see alot more of him on the show.

I really want Walt back as well. I think that Malcolm is also fantastic! He's so creepy with the bird thing and all that. Not to mention how curious I am about what's happened to him since the raft!

I don't think it's that people don't like him as much as other characters it's just that we haven't had alot of mysterious incidents with Michael like we have with say Kate or Hurley or Claire. We don't know alot about his connection to other people or items (i.e the numbers).

He was my least favorite..then enter Ana Lucia..

Krazy, I still don't see a big difference between Walt now and Walt last season.

Madameripper, thanks for your opinions. I agree with you totally. And it seems that they are emphasizing Michael lately. They showed him investigating the hatch and the computer, watching the film, and best of all, talking with his son (I think). Michael is becoming a major character this season and I think he will play an important part in discovering the other side of the island and finding out more about the mysterious hatch and project. Eko, Locke, and Michael will be the answers to alot of these mysteries - Eko and Locke because of their curiosity, and Michael because he's going to find Walt.

Baileysdad, I don't agree about the Michael part, but I will agree that AL is my least favorite too.

I used to hate Michael especially when he was running through the bloody jungle screaming "Walt, Walt, Walt, Walt,.......". I think he's alright now, he's been nicer to people and has finally acknowledged that Sawyer wanted to save Walt (that had been bugging me, Sawyer trying to help him and Michael saying Sawyer's not his friend). Michael seems like a really, really selfish person and I don't like people like that!

Of course, now he's messed up with the computer and might cause another "incident", so I'll just wait till I decide if I like him or not.

I think he's alright now, he's been nicer to people and has finally acknowledged that Sawyer wanted to save Walt (that had been bugging me, Sawyer trying to help him and Michael saying Sawyer's not his friend).

That bugged me too. But he seems to be maturing. He doesn't seem to jump to an opinion as quickly now and he does seem to be more trusting than at the beginning. I'm sensing a bit of friendship between he and some of the other characters now - he hugged Jack when he got back, he does seem to care about Sawyer and Jin now, and he's willing to work with Locke and Eko on figuring out the hatch and project.

Welcome, by the way, to the thread LIT. :)

Krazy, I still don't see a big difference between Walt now and Walt last season.

Madameripper, thanks for your opinions. I agree with you totally. And it seems that they are emphasizing Michael lately. They showed him investigating the hatch and the computer, watching the film, and best of all, talking with his son (I think). Michael is becoming a major character this season and I think he will play an important part in discovering the other side of the island and finding out more about the mysterious hatch and project. Eko, Locke, and Michael will be the answers to alot of these mysteries - Eko and Locke because of their curiosity, and Michael because he's going to find Walt.

Baileysdad, I don't agree about the Michael part, but I will agree that AL is my least favorite too.


I did not mean that I am glad Walt is gone, I want him to return ASAP! I was just saying that JJ&Co made a good desision in "allowing" Malcom to grow up some like all boys do, then bring him back when the growth spirt of the moment ends. He is sprouting faster than I think they thought he would. It needs some time to explain believably why Walt is all of a sudden 6 feet tall.:biggrin:

Michael seems like a really, really selfish person and I don't like people like that!

I can see what you mean by this but I think that it's got alot to do with the fact that he doesn't know how to be a parent, he doesn't know what his responsibilities and limits should be or how to even create such boundaries. I don't think he's selfish, just unsure of how to behave.

scubagert, thanks for making me feel welcome. :smile:

First Post!

I'm surprised that Michael and Ana Lucia are so unpopular. I'd figure that Sawyer and Kate would be most hated; they're certainly my most hated. I've been away from the States since before Lost aired and have just discovered this show. I was hooked from the first episode and watched the whole first season over the span of a few days, so the characters have unfolded in a different way for me I think.

Michael is one of my favorite characters on the show because he really comes through as a nice person dealt a rotten hand who is trying to make the best of his situation. He's one of the most "innocent" on the island considering his backstory, is that why people don't like him? I don't understand the accusation of hothead; virtually everyone on the island has jumped to conclusions without adequate information. In fact, people coming to conclusions with inaccurate information seems to be one of the themes of the show.

It is really weird how one the most important characters is so unpopular, and Walt who seems to be an important key to unravelling the mystery of the island isn't even as popular as his own dog!

First Post!

I'm surprised that Michael and Ana Lucia are so unpopular. I'd figure that Sawyer and Kate would be most hated; they're certainly my most hated. I've been away from the States since before Lost aired and have just discovered this show. I was hooked from the first episode and watched the whole first season over the span of a few days, so the characters have unfolded in a different way for me I think.

Michael is one of my favorite characters on the show because he really comes through as a nice person dealt a rotten hand who is trying to make the best of his situation. He's one of the most "innocent" on the island considering his backstory, is that why people don't like him? I don't understand the accusation of hothead; virtually everyone on the island has jumped to conclusions without adequate information. In fact, people coming to conclusions with inaccurate information seems to be one of the themes of the show.

It is really weird how one the most important characters is so unpopular, and Walt who seems to be an important key to unravelling the mystery of the island isn't even as popular as his own dog!

Welcome to the lage. I highly recommend you go to the button up top that says Threaded Board and checking out the Michael section. Not everyone hates him, and some really interesting discussion has gone on there.

Naijeru, welcome to the thread, to the lage, and to Lost ;) . I don't agree with you on Sawyer and Kate (as I like these two characters very much) but I do agree with you on Michael and Walt. I just don't understand why these two are so unpopular. WIF, sure there's discussion about the two, but the fan following is so much different from that of every other major cast member. Naij, have you seen all the episodes now? There are certain instances where Michael does seem quick to judge and does seem to have a major temper. But as you were saying, so do most of the other survivors on the island.

Why is it that Michael, who I would describe as one of the the top 5 major characters on this show, has the least amount of posts and topics on this website? Is he not controversial enough? Is he too nice? Is there not enough trouble brewing around his character? Not sure, what do you think?
Well, I love HP and Michael. Witness: http://www.thefuselage.com/Threaded/showthread.php?t=25983

Yea, Michael's great. I'm glad he seems to be in a more dominant character role so far this season. He's had a lot of screen time this year compared to last.

Joining in this thread (belatedly, but I have a limited amount of time to spend surfing for threads :p):

I have mad love for Michael. He's one of my favorites. And he keeps going up in my esteem. When he demanded answers about Desmond and the film and then immediately started investigating the hatch and the hardware in "What Kate Did"? I couldn't stop grinning. I knew Michael would be the one to go all logical and thorough on this mystery...

Locke: I think the film's pretty self explanatory.
Michael: Really? All I heard was something about electro-magnets and an incident. What about all the missing pieces?

So, love also to the writers for supporting me in my adoration of Michael. :whistling :wub:

I love that Michael is the only person that has been given lines that actually get some questions answered. He is methodical when his life is threatened but then he uses his good instincts to make a run for it!!! I love this actor a lot. I love everything he has ever done. I think the popularity of his character will be on the rise.

Joining in this thread (belatedly, but I have a limited amount of time to spend surfing for threads :p):

I have mad love for Michael. He's one of my favorites. And he keeps going up in my esteem. When he demanded answers about Desmond and the film and then immediately started investigating the hatch and the hardware in "What Kate Did"? I couldn't stop grinning. I knew Michael would be the one to go all logical and thorough on this mystery...

Locke: I think the film's pretty self explanatory.
Michael: Really? All I heard was something about electro-magnets and an incident. What about all the missing pieces?

So, love also to the writers for supporting me in my adoration of Michael. :whistling :wub:

Yes! I posted in another thread somewhere that I couldn't wait for Michael to get inside the hatch. He does seem to be one of the few people on the island to challenge what he is told. I think that's a big part of his conflict with Locke. Locke doesn't like to be challenged that way. I also think it strengthens the relationship between Michael and Jack. They're just more compatible.

I love that Michael is the only person that has been given lines that actually get some questions answered. He is methodical when his life is threatened but then he uses his good instincts to make a run for it!!! I love this actor a lot. I love everything he has ever done. I think the popularity of his character will be on the rise.

I love Michael's character too. As I have said before, it has been difficult in the past to know much about Michael because his character is entwined with Walt's much of the time. With Walt out of the picture, which I hope is a brief circumstance, we should be able to gain insight into Michael's character with more clarity.

It seems like something is about to be revieled about Michael....most likely his knowledge of more than art.

Welcome to the thread Chica and Iam. To me, Michael and Locke seem to be the only 2 on the island that are acting how a normal person would act in this situation. (I know Locke doesn't seem very normal but just hear me out) I've always thought that if I were put in their shoes, I would immediately go exploring to see what was on the island - like Locke has done. After figuring out there's not going to be a rescue team coming after them, I would try to figure out a way off - Michael. Upon finding the hatch, they seem to be the only one's interested in figuring everything out. Maybe its just me and my curious ways, but that would be exactly what I would want to do. I think Locke and Michael (and probably Eko now) are our eyes and ears for this season. Through them, we will find out about the hatch and the other side of the island, and more about the others and security system. They seem to be the only one's interested in getting some answers.

To me, Michael and Locke seem to be the only 2 on the island that are acting how a normal person would act in this situation. (I know Locke doesn't seem very normal but just hear me out) I've always thought that if I were put in their shoes, I would immediately go exploring to see what was on the island - like Locke has done. After figuring out there's not going to be a rescue team coming after them, I would try to figure out a way off - Michael. Upon finding the hatch, they seem to be the only one's interested in figuring everything out. Maybe its just me and my curious ways, but that would be exactly what I would want to do. I think Locke and Michael (and probably Eko now) are our eyes and ears for this season. Through them, we will find out about the hatch and the other side of the island, and more about the others and security system. They seem to be the only one's interested in getting some answers.

Great post scubert!

I think that you are right about Michael and Locke. I think that Locke's actions may be appropriate considering the situation but I have to admit that some of what he says may be better kept to himself if he wants to be taken seriously by the others. The others just don't understand where Locke is coming from and I think an explanation perhaps about his walking situation would clarify.

I also think that Jack is pretty level headed in the matter. Of course there are some moments when I think he is a little bit off and says things he probably should not but at the same time he knows what he should be doing...except for when he went off to find Claire (probably not his best idea considering the fact that he was the only doctor) and he does it. He does what he sees fit and focusses on what he knows.

However, like you said, it certainly is up to Locke, Eko and Michael to find the secrets of the island because Jacks focus is elsewhere.

Thanks Madame. I like Jack as well, but I agree with you, I think his place is more with the survivors rather than exploring the other part of the island and figuring out the hatch. Although, there was that scene with he and Sayid exploring underneath the bunker. Since he is probably the major character/hero of the show, I'm sure Jack will have some part in finding out new info about the Others/island/bunker as well.

But I still agree that Locke, Eko and Michael will be our best bet in finding new stuff about the island. I wish I were there to urge them along. Go, shoo, start putting the pieces together. :biggrin:

I think I once saw Michael as a weatherman in a family guy episode.

"It's goan RAIN!"

Thats pretty random Overshot.

By the way, I can't wait for next year. I am ready for some new Lost epis. Its time for Michael to go hunting for Walt. Do you guys think he'll find Walt this season? I want to know more about what Michael found on the computer now.

Thats pretty random Overshot.

By the way, I can't wait for next year. I am ready for some new Lost epis. Its time for Michael to go hunting for Walt. Do you guys think he'll find Walt this season? I want to know more about what Michael found on the computer now.

Random...umm hmm...:)

Yes, I really hope he finds Walt! I've been missing him. In addition, it would be really satisfying to learn if he was actually in the jungle when Shannon and Sayid saw him...or not. :biggrin:

I know. I can't decide if Walt was a ghost or if it was really him? What do you think?

I know. I can't decide if Walt was a ghost or if it was really him? What do you think?

I'm not sure. I know I wouldn't be happy if Walt was a ghost, which would mean that he had been killed. I'm kind of fond of the Walt projecting himself theories personally. I hope it's either that, or he really was there.:smile:

Neither ghost (because I refuse to think that Walt might be dead) nor really there (because how would he be able to pull off the backwards-talking mysteriously-vanishing trick like that if he were really there?) Psychic projection. Some kind of vision. Something like that.

Neither ghost (because I refuse to think that Walt might be dead) nor really there (because how would he be able to pull off the backwards-talking mysteriously-vanishing trick like that if he were really there?) Psychic projection. Some kind of vision. Something like that.

Ahh, yes, that's another alternative. The losties are experiencing some kind of psychic phenomenon. Maybe Walt isn't initiating contact? The losties are, but once contact is made Walt is attempting to communicate?

That makes sense. It could be the same type of vision Jack had of his dad, or Boone had of Shannon, or Locke had of Boone. I'm glad I'm not on the island, pretty spooky if you ask me.
Chica, good point on it not really being Walt due to the backwards talking. I guess it takes talent to be able to do that really.

A talent I would love to have, personally. Can you imagine how easy it would be to freak everyone around you out? *starts daydreaming*

That would be great! I'm pretty sure you might just find yourself with less friends though. People would think you're possessed. :biggrin:

Micehal is my 3rd Fav character:

1. Charlie
2. Sawyer
3. Micheal...

In American society Dad's don't matter...

We'd rather look up to a guy that can throw knives, or seduce a chick rather than someone like Mike.

Mike is a typical American dad. 'Works too hard, or is divorced so he can't see his kid. Wants very badly to have a relationship with his son, but as stated earlier it's tough to be a Father AND a Friend. He hurts, but doesen't let it show. That b**** of a wife getting him to sign away his son so she can accept a higher paying job in Europe... "Walt will be better off". Baloney! Sons need their Dads, but in America it's just not an important or accepted concept anymore. Something like 80% of African American children are raised by moms alone. 1/2 of all marriages end in divorce.

Mikes not a hero because of the darkness in our own hearts. It shows what our priorities are, in my view.

In American society Dad's don't matter...

We'd rather look up to a guy that can throw knives, or seduce a chick rather than someone like Mike.

Mike is a typical American dad. 'Works too hard, or is divorced so he can't see his kid. Wants very badly to have a relationship with his son, but as stated earlier it's tough to be a Father AND a Friend. He hurts, but doesen't let it show. That b**** of a wife getting him to sign away his son so she can accept a higher paying job in Europe... "Walt will be better off". Baloney! Sons need their Dads, but in America it's just not an important or accepted concept anymore. Something like 80% of African American children are raised by moms alone. 1/2 of all marriages end in divorce.

Mikes not a hero because of the darkness in our own hearts. It shows what our priorities are, in my view.

Personally, I find the fact that Michael didn't go the friend route much more heroic, it's much more difficult to be a father than a friend. Under the circumstances it might have been much easier for Michael to have been Walt's friend, and let him do as he pleased. Walt would never have respected Michael had he done that though. Walt probably would never have looked to Michael as a father. I think Season 1 presented the boundary between father and friend fairly accurately. Michael had to be a father first. Once the father/son relationship was established, it opened the door to the friendship.

Still, it's a limited kind of friendship, because the father/son relationship has to be the priority. I've said before that Locke was trying to play the "good guy" and make Mike the "bad guy." It's the kind of scenario that sometimes plays out between mothers and fathers. The parent who is with the child day in and day out has to be the bad guy and set the limits. The parent who is part-time, whether because of working long hours or custody arrangements, often seems to feel the need to have the child always look favorably on their time together, and is often far too permissive. (My hat is off to families that can strike a balance in that regard.) I think it's a natural human dynamic in many families, but for Locke to be doing it seems pretty twisted, IMHO. :wink3:

He definitely shows motivation and engineering skills by his building the raft and the excavation to save Charlie and Jack in the cave. Now if he could just overcome his selfishness and anger, Michael would be a greater asset to the island....

Now, if ALL OF THE CHARACTERS could just overcome their flaws, they would prove to be a greater asset to the island.

One question - why didn't Michael tell Jack that Shannon's death had been an accident in "Collision"?

In the first season, Michael was my least favorite character. It isn't just that he has a bad temper; it is that he never takes responsibility for anything. When something goes wrong, he turns to the nearest other person and says, "It's your fault." Then he usuallyl becomes physical with them. By the end of the first season, he had become more interesting. I think it was largely his interaction with Jin that showed his growth. I think it was also interesting when he was forced to see that he was somewhat wrong about Sawyer (the raft incident)
when Sawyer proved that Kate was manipulating people to try and get on the raft (the driver's license and the fact she was the fugitive.)

By this season, he has actually had a moment that I found adorable. I loved the look on his face when he typed in "This is Michael. Who is this?" For him, he almost looked happy or pleasant.

Whatever size the chip on Sawyer's should is, Michael's is larger. Makes him harder to appreciate and enjoy - but he's getting there.

Now the new yeesh . . why are they showing him on the camera bad guy is . . . Charlie. Let him overdose and walk right into the Others. That's what I say.

Now, if ALL OF THE CHARACTERS could just overcome their flaws, they would prove to be a greater asset to the island.

One question - why didn't Michael tell Jack that Shannon's death had been an accident in "Collision"?
I think maybe the news of Sayid being held at gunpoint may have overshadowed the accidental nature of the shooting. AL certainly wasn't doing that by accident.

In the first season, Michael was my least favorite character. It isn't just that he has a bad temper; it is that he never takes responsibility for anything. When something goes wrong, he turns to the nearest other person and says, "It's your fault." Then he usuallyl becomes physical with them. By the end of the first season, he had become more interesting. I think it was largely his interaction with Jin that showed his growth. I think it was also interesting when he was forced to see that he was somewhat wrong about Sawyer (the raft incident)
when Sawyer proved that Kate was manipulating people to try and get on the raft (the driver's license and the fact she was the fugitive.)

By this season, he has actually had a moment that I found adorable. I loved the look on his face when he typed in "This is Michael. Who is this?" For him, he almost looked happy or pleasant.

Whatever size the chip on Sawyer's should is, Michael's is larger. Makes him harder to appreciate and enjoy - but he's getting there.

Hmmm...I don't recall Michael getting physical very often. Maybe it's just because I like the character, but there are only a couple of examples I can think of in which Michael actually initiated anything physical. One was when Locke was teaching Walt to throw knives. The other was the raft-burning confrontation. What other incidents were there? I can remember Jin jumping Michael a couple of times, but Michael didn't do anything to intitiate those confrontations.

I have personally always wanted Dave Chapelle to take over Michael's role.

The way he treated Locke is season 1 was just aweful.

The way he treated Locke is season 1 was just aweful.

I suppose it's a matter of perception. I thought Michael was pretty well justified in his response to Locke in season 1.

I see both sides. For all Michael knew, Locke was a freaky old man trying to get closer to his son. But knowing that Locke didn't mean any harm, then you can see that Michael's actions were a little harsh. Michael didn't know this at the time though.

Well, it didn't take long for Ana Lucia and Eko to catch up and pass Michael in post count. I just don't understand. AL is hated by everyone. But people like to post about that hatred. Eko is pretty much loved by everyone and therefore has a large fan following. Michael.... is he too bland? Not controversial? Not likeable?

I do think he's possessed by whatever he's seeing on the computer now. He acted really weird before he went to find Walt. Will we see Michael any more in the near future or is he another Lost vanish like the stewardess, Walt, Desmond, and Danielle. Are all of these actors taking a vacation together somewhere? I do hope he's back soon. I'm ready to figure out some more about the others and where Walt is.

Well, it didn't take long for Ana Lucia and Eko to catch up and pass Michael in post count. I just don't understand. AL is hated by everyone. But people like to post about that hatred. Eko is pretty much loved by everyone and therefore has a large fan following. Michael.... is he too bland? Not controversial? Not likeable?

I do think he's possessed by whatever he's seeing on the computer now. He acted really weird before he went to find Walt. Will we see Michael any more in the near future or is he another Lost vanish like the stewardess, Walt, Desmond, and Danielle. Are all of these actors taking a vacation together somewhere? I do hope he's back soon. I'm ready to figure out some more about the others and where Walt is.

Whatever is going on I don't like it. It makes me nervous. I would comment on where Harold is, but that would be gossip, right? :wink3: I think we will probably see him again. I hope we will see him again. It just bothers me because I remember an old spoiler about someone going into the jungle never to be heard from again.

I hadn't heard that spoiler. I hope its not Michael. The writers may see how he's the least popular on the these boards and think it might not be so bad to write him off. I can't imagine this being the case though because they have to show him finding Walt at some point.

I hadn't heard that spoiler. I hope its not Michael. The writers may see how he's the least popular on the these boards and think it might not be so bad to write him off. I can't imagine this being the case though because they have to show him finding Walt at some point.

Well, I don't think he's the least popular. :biggrin: BTW, Harold visited the VIP section today. You might want to go and have a look at some of his posts. I really hope he will make regular posts here in the future. As far as the spoiler goes, I'm hoping it was just something the writers were considering, but that they have changed their minds. I think I would find it particularly unsatisfying if Michael and Walt are never reunited.

I think I would find it particularly unsatisfying if Michael and Walt are never reunited.

Big understatement by my way of thinking. If I find out there won't be any reunion, there is no way I could enjoy the show under any circumstances and l'll quit the show for good. I'm already quite irritated by the complete lack of information on Walt, and the lack of concern of his fate by everyone except Michael. It doesn't have to be a perfectly happy reunion; it would be better if there are still some obstacles to overcome, but just nothing week after week makes me care less and less about everybody else.

Big understatement by my way of thinking. If I find out there won't be any reunion, there is no way I could enjoy the show under any circumstances and l'll quit the show for good. I'm already quite irritated by the complete lack of information on Walt, and the lack of concern of his fate by everyone except Michael. It doesn't have to be a perfectly happy reunion; it would be better if there are still some obstacles to overcome, but just nothing week after week makes me care less and less about everybody else.

You're right of course. It is a big understatement. Of course, I would be unsatisfied to have Michael gone from the show without learning more about him as an individual as well. Time will tell I suppose.

It is irritating that nobody except Jack and Jin seem to give one wit about the fact that Walt has been taken. He's a child! Everyone was up in arms when Charlie took Aaron, and he meant no harm. Nobody knows what the Others' intent is. Makes me feel like posting one of those "where's the outrage" threads. :biggrin: I mean Sayid, at the very least, should be making it his personal mission to bring Walt back to camp. It was the last thing Shannon tried to accomplish in her short life. :frown: Dont get me started, please. I'm trying to detach myself in case Michael is Lost....

Well, at least Jack, Locke and Sawyer went after Michael. But what do you do once you come in contact with Zeke and the Other army? I would be kind of scared to pry to much into the whereabouts of Walt at this point because well - what happened to Michael when he did such.

And what happened when Locke, Jack, and Sawyer met the Others and had the chance to ask some questions? They suddenly forgot about Michael and Walt. One throwaway line apiece -- Michael will never find us, and Walt is okay and special. And no evidence to back up even those statements. No questions as to why the Others want Walt, or what they will do with Michael. Locke, Jack, and Sawyer might not have gotten the answers, but the absolute least they could have done was ask, especially after all that trouble they went to. And they had the chance at the beginning of the encounter. It's coming to the point that if the other Lostaways don't care about Michael and Walt, they no longer have the ability to make me care about them.

These last several posts are all right on.

Well, I think they didn't ask these questions because of the same reason the survivors don't talk to each other. Because it makes for good TV. It keeps the mystery up. Also, it does make sense. At this point, they're out in the middle of the woods and are encountered by this creepy man that Sawyer recognizes is the one that took Walt. I'm sure they were a little afraid at that point.

Well, I think they didn't ask these questions because of the same reason the survivors don't talk to each other. Because it makes for good TV. It keeps the mystery up. Also, it does make sense. At this point, they're out in the middle of the woods and are encountered by this creepy man that Sawyer recognizes is the one that took Walt. I'm sure they were a little afraid at that point.

Scubagert should be a diplomat.

Also, I don't think they really had the chance. I don't think that was really meant to be a sit down and chat moment. It was more like a..erm..spitting contest...yeah spitting.:biggrin:

Nice use of good language mini mod. :biggrin:

Where do you think Michael is? With the others? Lost in the jungle? With Desmond? Off the island? With Walt? Will we find out this season? I hope so. They can't keep Walt AND Michael off the show all season.

Nice use of good language mini mod. :biggrin:

Where do you think Michael is? With the others? Lost in the jungle? With Desmond? Off the island? With Walt? Will we find out this season? I hope so. They can't keep Walt AND Michael off the show all season.

I'm hoping he has been exploring the Northern/Other section of the island, and will come back to camp lostie with some really useful intelligence. That would make him a rather key player in any "army." Perhaps he has determined Walt's location and will come back to get Jack's help freeing him.

I'm hoping he has been exploring the Northern/Other section of the island, and will come back to camp lostie with some really useful intelligence. That would make him a rather key player in any "army." Perhaps he has determined Walt's location and will come back to get Jack's help freeing him.
I tend to agree with you shoot, everyone kind of assumes that Michael has been captured but it would be so much cooler if he did just show up in a couple of weeks with the info that you were talking about.

Wow, that would be an awesome turn of events--and keeping right in with Lost's tradition of unexpected twists. ;)

I hope we find out soon. It seems weird without him or Walt. I hope they don't just write them off until the end of the season. Speaking of which, who's taking care of Vincent now? Ana Lucia?

Scubagert, interesting question about Vincent. I've been giving it some thought. I can only remember seeing him with AL, and with Sun right before Charlie grabbed her. Arguably, Vincent could have been out in the jungle with Charlie. Hmm...he does seem to hang more with people who are feeling kind of low doesn't he? My guess is he was with Charlie.

Next question...what happens to the whole Michael/Walt storyline if both ever leave the show?

The story of those two are kind of one of the cornerstones for all the weirdness on the island, the stories that connect the losties to the island in a really weird way. Yes, Locke got a miracle, but miracles happen sometimes. It's not really all that weird all by itself. Claire's story kind of works that way, but it doesn't have the impact without Michael and Walt's story to bolster it. Same with Hurley's lottery win story. It's those four stories together that, I think, give Lost an elegant foundation on which all of the weirdness is built. I suppose one could say the Eko's story will balance out the loss of one of these four, but his connection is far less subtle imho. It doesn't hold the same kind of mystery for me. It just has a different feel to it for some reason, maybe because it is more direct.
I mean when you think about it, weren't those really the big mysteries of season 1? Weren't they the things that had us the most perplexed? Jack, Kate, Charlie, Boone, Shannon, Sawyer, Sun, Jin, Sayid- none of them really have the same kind of mysteries in their background, at least nothing that seems metaphysical with just a touch of ambiguous. They seemed more like normal people in a weird/dramatic situation.

I think it's because his and Walt's story is probably one of the most integral to the show and therefore most covered up so far. Seems like half of the reason Dharma crashed the plane was to get a kid with psychic powers on the Island. If you reveal too much right now it may be too early. Especially if that whole Widmore Construction thing has something to do with Michael and his connection to the Island, which they said they are going to reveal soon. When that's revealed, I bet Michael's popularity on the show will be boosted alot. So far, though, Michael's story has been alot like paint drying (more so the legal battle with Susan than the 'Special' episode).

Shootfire, I'm kinda lost with your question. I understand that Walt, Locke, and Claire have had strange events happen to them, but what has happened to Michael? Are you just tying him into Walt's story, or is there something I'm forgetting? Some people have said that the whole computer thing wasn't real but some sort of vision, but that wasn't in Michael's background.
I'm still wondering if there's more to the car that hit Michael. There have been threads about this (and I might have mentioned this previously on this thread) but the car that hit him was the identical car that backed up into Locke in the WalMart? parking lot, and the same car that Kate and her boyfriend hit when they were coming out of the parking deck. Now that is a mystery to me.
100%
I think it's because his and Walt's story is probably one of the most integral to the show and therefore most covered up so far. Seems like half of the reason Dharma crashed the plane was to get a kid with psychic powers on the Island. If you reveal too much right now it may be too early. Especially if that whole Widmore Construction thing has something to do with Michael and his connection to the Island, which they said they are going to reveal soon. When that's revealed, I bet Michael's popularity on the show will be boosted alot. So far, though, Michael's story has been alot like paint drying (more so the legal battle with Susan than the 'Special' episode).
I hope so thansolost. At this point, I'm just hoping to see Michael and Walt back on the show again. Forget if they are popular on this site or not. They definitely won't gain fans if they are off the show.

Scubagert, yes, I'm tying the two stories together. That is the way they have been presented to us. I personally believe there is more to Michael than meets the eye, but that's speculation on my part at this point. At the very least it was strange that Michael was hit by the car just as he was on his way to retrieve Walt. Also, there's the weird juxtaposition between Walt and Michael, Walt being extremely "lucky," while Michael appears the unluckiest man on earth. On top of all that, there just has to be a reason that Michael reacts the way he does when someone says that Walt is different. :wink3:

Mainly, it's the fact that the weirdness in the other stories can be rationally explained more easily than Walt and Michael's story. I think losing this storyline would take away a huge chunk of the mystery.

You know, I've never thought about there being more to the car hitting Michael as he was on the way to see Walt. You think someone intentionally did that? I do find it odd that its the same car that ran into Locke in the parking lot and the same car that Kate and her doctor friend ran into as they were running from the cops.

Yes, between Walt's "different" powers, Claire's psychic, and Hurley's numbers (the curse and the freakiness of the numbers opening the box according to Lenny), I would say these are the best backstories that are too weird to be explained at this point.

FINALLY, Michael is getting the attention he deserves. Did TPTB listen to me? Are they trying to make him more controversial so he will become more popular? It is good to see people talking about him and the number of threads increasing. I guess it takes a few murders and some teeth chattering to get attention on this show.

At least he's not being ignored now, and for that I am grateful...I love that he's not only coming into the main storyline, but that he's playing the central role...I just wish it resulted in more people appreciating him rather than lambasting him.

I have only just watched Two for the Road, but I have to agree with the previous two posts. I've had this thread in my subscriptions for a while now, but really waiting for Michael's return before posting. Now I haven't seen "?" yet, so I have no knowledge of any repurcussions after TFTR, but I'm over the moon that Michael is back (and Harold P of course).

The reaction here on the Lage is the typical reaction I see here when an on-the-face-of it negative action is taken by a character. Same with Locke when Boone died. Absolutely no rational thought amongst those who claim they "hate Michael" right now. The look on his face when he shot Libby and Ana clearly demonstrated that he has not doing this off of his own back. Is Walt being threatened? Is it something else we haven't seen? (I haven't see ? yet btw).

I just really wanted to have my two-pence-worth in a thread where I won't get lambasted (I love that word Chica) for saying so.

So there

Peace
M

I agree with you Michaud and Chica, it is nice seeing Michael back again. I do get the sense that he is in a great deal of pain over what happened but something is clearly going on other than that he has turned bad. Either Walt has been threatened, or he is trying to get the Losties mad enough to wage war against the Others. At least Michael has finally gotten some attention on these boards though. Thats nice to see. Its still a shame that he had to kill 2 people to get that attention.

I agree with you Michaud and Chica, it is nice seeing Michael back again. I do get the sense that he is in a great deal of pain over what happened but something is clearly going on other than that he has turned bad. Either Walt has been threatened, or he is trying to get the Losties mad enough to wage war against the Others. At least Michael has finally gotten some attention on these boards though. Thats nice to see. Its still a shame that he had to kill 2 people to get that attention.

You're right.... it is a shame that two people had to die (although I'm less concerned about one of them - I just never thought Ana was much cop as a character), but Michael is clearly in turmoil at the end of TFTR. He didn't act without knowing at the same time that what he was doing was wronG - but he clearly had to do it. We've not seen anything in Mike's past that wopuld suggest he is naturally violent in that way. Although we've seen him aggressive at times, the same can be said of many of the male characters, and often far more aggressive than Mike was in Season 1 (I like 'Mike' - one of Sawyer's best 'nicknames').

Although I do not condone violence or murder, I am a mother and I would do ANYTHING for my child if he was in danger or in harms way. I believe Michael loves Walt with every fiber in his bone and that he would do anything for his son, even if he had to kill or betray his friends. What we watched these past couple of episodes was a desperate man willing to go at all lengths to get his son back.

You're right.... it is a shame that two people had to die (although I'm less concerned about one of them - I just never thought Ana was much cop as a character), but Michael is clearly in turmoil at the end of TFTR. He didn't act without knowing at the same time that what he was doing was wronG - but he clearly had to do it. We've not seen anything in Mike's past that wopuld suggest he is naturally violent in that way. Although we've seen him aggressive at times, the same can be said of many of the male characters, and often far more aggressive than Mike was in Season 1 (I like 'Mike' - one of Sawyer's best 'nicknames').

Oh, yes, I agree. In fact, quite the opposite--I'd be willing to argue that there's onscreen evidence that Michael has some pretty severe issues regarding guns--not Ana-Lucia-esque trigger-happy issues, but a deep dislike of the things. After all, he was pretty darned friendly to Sawyer on the raft until he found out Sawyer was packing a gun...


On a vaguely related note, I feel like it's worth pointing out, and that this is the thread to point it out in, that I was on LiveJournal recently and used my UK-Promo-Michael icon for a comment. I got jumped on by someone who recognized Harold and demanded details, and long story short, said person will now be running out to buy the Lost S1 DVD in order to see Harold-as-Michael. And this, apparently, is a person who watches very, very little TV.

Michael can be a selling point. Yes.

Oh, yes, I agree. In fact, quite the opposite--I'd be willing to argue that there's onscreen evidence that Michael has some pretty severe issues regarding guns--not Ana-Lucia-esque trigger-happy issues, but a deep dislike of the things. After all, he was pretty darned friendly to Sawyer on the raft until he found out Sawyer was packing a gun...

That's an excellent point Chica. Going back to previous episodes in this season, Harold does appear to have played Michael with an uneasiness around guns. When Locke was training him for example. In TFTR he almost looked at the gun as if it was alien before he shot Ana.

He also appeared stunned afterwards.... not the sign of a natural cold-blooded killer.


I got jumped on by someone who recognized Harold and demanded details, and long story short, said person will now be running out to buy the Lost S1 DVD in order to see Harold-as-Michael. And this, apparently, is a person who watches very, very little TV.

Michael can be a selling point. Yes.

Positive news indeed!

see kate run - I should also add that I do not condone violence or murder, but am adamant that I am watching a character who is not acting out of free will. It's a Jack Bauer ('24') situation for me. He's being given no choice.

I am watching a character who is not acting out of free will. It's a Jack Bauer ('24') situation for me. He's being given no choice.

I disagree that it's totally out of character. he threatened to kill Locke if he ever came near his son...an irrational and hostile reaction to someone teachig his son a few survival techniques in a place populated by polar Bears and "Monsters". Telling him to back off is cool...threatening to kill him is wacko. Burning his son's comic book was his way of dominating his son and making him feel powerless against him. No wonder Walt's mom felt to the need to move to another continent.

I think that Michael's story will end up being pretty straight forward:

He was caught by the others, held in captivity, and probably pumped for information, but shown enough to allow a "Stockholm Syndrome" of sorts to set in.

Then Henry is caught by the castaways, so Michael is turned against his former collegues with a promise that he can be with his son - after he frees Henry, and leads the main cadrey into a trap. Killing Ana Lucia may or may not have been part of the bargain.

The only mystery now is whether our heros will figure out the deception before being led into this trap. And as for Michal's future with the castaways, once his treachery is discovered, I do not believe there can be any forgiveness for his actions. And even if he follows through, I do not expect the Other's to honor any promise they made to him.

He's in a pretty big no win situation.

This is too bad, because I do like his character.

I disagree that it's totally out of character. he threatened to kill Locke if he ever came near his son...an irrational and hostile reaction to someone teachig his son a few survival techniques in a place populated by polar Bears and "Monsters". Telling him to back off is cool...threatening to kill him is wacko. Burning his son's comic book was his way of dominating his son and making him feel powerless against him. No wonder Walt's mom felt to the need to move to another continent.

Yes I agree... none of those actions were level-headed when looked at objectively, but understand Michael's situation from his perspective. He was never given the chance to be Walt's father when Walt was first born, and he was suddenly thrown into that situation when Walt's mother died. Michael wants more than anything to be a father to Walt, and yes, that means that we have seen him being overly protective in exactly the situations you describe. Remember also that Walt is not averse to the odd mind game himself. The scene in the airport where he's playing his Gameboy.... completely ignoring his father until he wanted something (batteries). These things work both ways - Walt was exerting power over Michael in that situation. It's simple psychology. Two wrongs don't make a right, but Walt frustrated Michael throughout Season 1 (until near the end) with his psychological games. They can both move past that stage in the relationship though.

Michael never showed any signs of wanting to 'dominate' Walt when his mother was around. He was deeply hurt when she said she was taking Walt away. It's since his reunification with Walt that Michael has been too protective (at times).... I don't think it's a natural tendency.

I suppose what I would ask is..... Would you have been happy to see your child playing with knives? (Polar bears or no polar bears). What if Locke had been teaching Walt to shoot a gun? There's no difference. They're both weapons designed with only one outcome in mind...... to kill. Not the domain of a child... no matter how special or mature.

Michael's a decent man trying to make good with a son he never got the chance to know and love. That's a very very hard thing to achieve when a child is already in its formative years, believe me.

Peace
M

I am sorry , there is not justification in killing innocent people in cold blood...not even for your own flesh and blood. That is just wrong, and he will pay for is actions as soon as they come to light. Trust.

I am sorry , there is not justification in killing innocent people in cold blood...not even for your own flesh and blood. That is just wrong, and he will pay for is actions as soon as they come to light. Trust.

Well my previous post was really trying to address the fact that Michael is not the only one who has acted negatively in the Michael-Walt relationship.

As I have said above...

see kate run - I should also add that I do not condone violence or murder

I never condone murder LadyEKO. As a lawyer I cannot do so, and I have met some truly dispicable people in my time - people who will kill in cold blood.... without hesitation. Michael is not within that profile. Not by a mile. I will stand by my view that Michael is being forced into a position whereby he believes he will never see Walt again unless he does what the Others order him to. We've seen that in 3 Minutes, and I am simply trying to put myself in Michael's position, rather than judging him purely from the basis of my own moral perspective. This is a fictional show after all, and it would seem that TPTB are making a serious attempt to take a different slant on morality.

There is a moral ambiguity within the show that is yet to be resolved. The good/bad distinction that the Others make, which is as yet unexplained, is just a part of that. I believe that this is key to understanding the characters' actions, and therefore, for me, Michael's actions cannot be definitively assessed right now..... only understood with reference to what we know at this time. I have not tried to condone his actions in my earlier posts.... and if it has come across that way then it's a matter of interpretation of my posts. What I have tried to do is understand (and perhaps you're right - justify), and perhaps present a balance to the weight of anti-Michael feeling on the board at the moment (which I do understand).

As I said a few posts ago... Michael is not naturally comfortable with guns, and not a natural killer. He clearly saw only one way out. Yes, he probably should face punishment if and when he is found out..... but that punishment should come with some understanding of what he has gone through. Nothing in this show is black and white.... and this situation is no different.

I am sorry , there is not justification in killing innocent people in cold blood...not even for your own flesh and blood. That is just wrong, and he will pay for is actions as soon as they come to light. Trust.

Not to try to justify Michael's actions, but just to clarify what the character might have been acting on, AL may not have appeared exactly "innocent" to Michael. His last serious interactions with her were not terribly pleasant. He watched Shannon get gunned down by AL, and saw others threatened at gunpoint, himself included. She did all of those things in the name of self-preservation and protection of the group. Clearly, Libby's death was not intentional. While it doesn't relieve him of responsibility, I don't think it's any more unforgivable than any other killing we have witnessed in the show.

It's interesting that AL killed Jason out of revenge for killing her unborn child. In Michael's eyes, he was protecting his son when he killed her. It's almost a circle of life story. Hmm...

Not to try to justify Michael's actions, but just to clarify what the character might have been acting o,

This is what I am trying to get across.... and I apologise if I'm not as clear as I would like.

I am not justifying what Michael did by saying "Oh, it's OK... he was under duress" or anything similar. I am just trying to understand his situation, and try to bring some justification (and reasons for) his actions based on the struggle and turmoil he finds himself in. I am not suggesting that his shooting of AL and Libby can go unpunished. That would be entirely wrong. What I want to see from the other characters, when they find out (and they surely will), is some balance.... some acceptance that Michael is in an impossible situation.

Nobody on this show is all good or all bad. The shades of grey on Lost are greater than any other show I've ever watched, and that's really interesting to deliberate and consider... especially coming from a background where a laid-down 'moral' (if you like) code is my starting point. It's interesting to watch TPTB play with exactly that code,... to quite an extreme at times.

It's interesting that AL killed Jason out of revenge for killing her unborn child. In Michael's eyes, he was protecting his son when he killed her. It's almost a circle of life story. Hmm...

This is one of the most insightful things I've read on the Lage. 'Hmmm' indeed

TNobody on this show is all good or all bad. The shades of grey on Lost are greater than any other show I've ever watched, and that's really interesting to deliberate and consider... especially coming from a background where a laid-down 'moral' (if you like) code is my starting point. It's interesting to watch TPTB play with exactly that code,... to quite an extreme at times.


Bless...I think if you worked out the statistics, at least 75% of the main characters have killed at least once--it's a recurring event in the show, being responsible for someone else's death.

Michael's motivations are understandable, and that's the point. It's not that his actions are justifiable, it's that we understand why he's doing what he's doing.

But WHY did he have to kill AL in the first place? Now that we've seen last week's epi, AL had already said she couldn't kill Henry. It looks like he could have gotten rid of her somehow (told her that Jack needed her outside or something) and just let Henry escape. I just don't understand why he immediately chose killing her to let him escape when that was not a requirement by the Dharma folks.

Maybe there was more to the Michael/Ms Klugh conversation than what they showed us. ?

One of the things that stood out to me after rewatching the episode is - Michael was staying pretty level-headed and on track until Walt broke free and ran to him and hugged him and pleaded for his Dads help. That was quite emotional after all the time Walt has been missing. After that happened Michael seemed to break and agreed to do what they wanted.

The whole Michael/Walt storyline got boring fast. We should have been shown more of Michael's backstory than just Walt. His character is one of the most poorly written on the show IMO and that is why he is so glazed over by fans.

The whole Michael/Walt storyline got boring fast. We should have been shown more of Michael's backstory than just Walt. His character is one of the most poorly written on the show IMO and that is why he is so glazed over by fans.

Perhaps that is still to come. The possible Widmore-Michael link to the island may be the reason for showing Mike on his own in a future flashback. To date though, the on-island Michael has been all about his relationship with Walt, and therefore it makes sense for the flashbacks to reflect that.

I agree M, with the direction that the show is going, and if we get to know more about Paik and Widmore, I have a feeling Michael (and Sun and Jin) may be the rising stars for next season.

I hope so scuba. I want to see those three explored to more depth.

psst.... I followed the van with 'www.scuba.co.uk' on the rear doors back from work again today. Always makes me think of you man.

psst.... I followed the van with 'www.scuba.co.uk' on the rear doors back from work again today. Always makes me think of you man.
Thats funny. Maybe it IS me... :eek2:

Thats funny. Maybe it IS me... :eek2:

A white Ford Transit (mark 3)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Transit

Not very stylish, and often used as a getaway vehicle in robberies. Seriously.... you do not want it to be you scuba ;) :biggrin:

:biggrin: Yea, you're right!

So, Michael's a traitor for his kid. What do you guys think? Of course most people would do whatever it takes for their son, but I don't know. Why did he have to kill AL and Libby? There had to be other ways to help Henry escape. He's obviously not telling the whole truth because he didn't reveal that he was taking the Losties somewhere other than the Others' base camp on the beach.

:biggrin: Yea, you're right!

So, Michael's a traitor for his kid. What do you guys think? Of course most people would do whatever it takes for their son, but I don't know. Why did he have to kill AL and Libby? There had to be other ways to help Henry escape. He's obviously not telling the whole truth because he didn't reveal that he was taking the Losties somewhere other than the Others' base camp on the beach.



I was kind of surprised that the writers turned Michael into a killer. I realize they had to get rid of Libby and Anna Lucia somehow, but for Micheal to have to murder them? That kind of sucked for me because Michael is one of my favorites. (actually I love all the characters in different ways) Now, will Micheal ever tell Walt what he had to do to get him back? I have a feeling we will see Michael again in the third season.

We have to remember that his son was taken from him and that's why he went "nuts", but the fact that he's now a killer, is kind of hard for me to stomach beacause I like him so much. I realize that Kate and Sawyer are also killers back home, but they had criminal pasts so it was kind of expected. Michael killed Anna Lucia and Libby point blank in cold blood. He seemed almost "posessed" when he did it. Desperate, obviously. I have a feeling "Henry" new that Michael would do that. The Others seem to be driving the survivors to terrible lengths for things in a subconcious way.

I dig Michael and hope to see him again next season.

I'm sure he won't just disappear. We will have to find out what happened when the Others had Walt - "We got more than we bargained for when Walt joined us".

Michael will have to come back, even if it's just to facilitate Walt's return to the Island (which I'm positive will happen).

Michael was the worst stereotyped character on television--The angry, cop-killing black man who wasn't there to raise his son and collected disability. It was almost painful to watch him shoot ana-lucia. ALMOST. Cuz', I didn't like her.

Just pointing that out! No need for a warning-- these are facts from the show.

I'm sure he won't just disappear. We will have to find out what happened when the Others had Walt - "We got more than we bargained for when Walt joined us".

Michael will have to come back, even if it's just to facilitate Walt's return to the Island (which I'm positive will happen).
I sure hope you're right M. How horrible would that be if both of them just disappeared forever without us knowing if they made it back to civilization or not. I read in a news article this week that Harold at this point did not know what his fate would be. They had not told him yet if he's coming back or not. That would be unfortunate because there is so much fun to be had with Walt and Mike's stories. We still don't know what Walt's big special power secret is. There would be some great tension between Mike and the rest of the survivors now. And surely Mike's conscience would get the best of him and he would try to rescue his new friends...
I guess we'll see.

And surely Mike's conscience would get the best of him and he would try to rescue his new friends...
I guess we'll see.

My thinking exactly at this point. Mike is not an inherently bad person, and he will return. Remember also that Sayid is still around solmewhere (with Jin and Sun).

I guess we'll see, but fingers crossed.

If they simply let the Walt story fall away, I'll be very disappointed and surprised. I think Walt's 'specialness' will be explained in season 3.

I hope it will.

I haven't forgot about Sayid. I think its great that next year we should have about 5 different settings for action - the dock, the beach, Walt/Mike's boat, Penny and her colleagues (wherever they are) and Sayid/Sun/Jin's boat. Should be a great beginning to next season. Let's just hope that all of them make it until next year (Mike, Walt, Eko, Locke, Des). I hope they all return.

I think they all will.... well I'm positive that Eko, Locke and Des will. Have you been listening to the podcats at all scuba?

They imply that those threee will return

Walt and Mike I'm keeping my fingers crossed for

Cool. No I don't listen to those. Are they interviews of writers and producers?

Cool. No I don't listen to those. Are they interviews of writers and producers?

Different people each week. Last time they interviewed Daniel Dae Kim.

This latest one had Damon Lindelof and Calton Cuse talking about the finale. They're good in that respect, but they can get a bit off-track and annoying when they start making lots of 'in' jokes.

Well, not so good news....
I have seen in 2 different news articles that Harold P. is not under contract with Lost next year. He is rumored to possibly be back for some epis in season 4 but as of right now (if these articles are valid) Michael and Walt are officially off the show and are supposed to be considered safe at home and keeping quiet about the whole Island incidents.

Yeah, I'd seen some stuff like that earlier this season.

I suppose that

if the focus of season 3 will be on the various little groups we have seen created created at the end of the finale... then there might be no need to have those two in season 3. I still feel that Walt's 'specialness' being dropped from the show without an explanation would 'clunk' in a big way. Perhaps they spent this season filming some material that will be used in flashbacks in season 4 or whenever. Harold could be brought back, but Walt would still have to be appear the same age, hence MDK's stuff already having been filmed. Just a theory. Didn't even know if I needed spoiler font :undecide:

I hope this is all false. Locke and a couple others don't have their contracts for Season 3 either so maybe they'll all get them soon, including Mike and Walt.

Fingers crossed scuba :63:

Michael was the worst stereotyped character on television--The angry, cop-killing black man who wasn't there to raise his son and collected disability. It was almost painful to watch him shoot ana-lucia. ALMOST. Cuz', I didn't like her.

Just pointing that out! No need for a warning-- these are facts from the show.
Overshot, if we ever make you a Moderator here, then we may allow your opinion to inform our decisions on whether or not there is "need" for Warnings to be issued on your (or anybody's) posts. Until such a time, I suggest that you refrain from making such remarks, as they appear to serve no other purpose other than to draw attention to your potentiallty inflammatory comments.

As far as your claim that your remarks are "all facts from the show", you may wish to reconsider the "facts"...

If you study the relevant scenes, you should clearly see that Michael shooting Ana-Lucia had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Ana-Lucia had been a cop, or whether or not he is a black man. It is pretty much canon that Michael shooting Ana-Lucia was all to do with the deal he made with The Others, and nothing to do with his race or colour, or her previous profession.

Why is it that Michael, who I would describe as one of the the top 5 major characters on this show, has the least amount of posts and topics on this website? Is he not controversial enough? Is he too nice? Is there not enough trouble brewing around his character? Not sure, what do you think?My guess is just not enough of an appeal. Also, they have made Michael rather annoying (though he never bugged me) as per a lot of comments I've read here. That might be it, too.

Well, I like his character. Hope he stays.:lost:

I hope he does too KMG. I can't imagine them letting Walt and Michael go and not be on the show any more.

I hope they don't bring Michael back. I never liked him. He was too unreasonable. All that screaming for Walt and that wild crazy hair. Hypocrit and terrible character. Good riddance!

Michael never bothered me, I had no problem with his character and his storyline with walt could have grown alot more and become more interesting than the way it has turned out so far. I like harold and think he is one fine actor, one of the best on the show along with Terry and Ian Cusick.

I can't believe that he is not going to be a regular this year. I hope they don't just leave his escape unanswered. They have to explain whether he and Walt make it back ok, etc...

My guess is they are just going to make people guess what happened to Micheal and Walt. How could they really explain that they actually got somewhere off the island? I am sorry to see them go.

I don't know, I think it would be great if they showed the two get back to the US and try to ask for help. People would probably think they're crazy and not believe them.

I'll put it simply. I hate Micheal.

I love Michael, and I hope he can eventually return and be part of the cast again. I also really want to know more about Walt. I don't think they will just disappear forever.

We are going into season 3 and we only just saw at the end of LTDA a little glimpse of what's going on in the outside world, with penny and the two men. Who's to say that IS even the outside world, you can never know with this show!! Anyhow my point is, I don't think we are going to see Michael and Walt get back home.

Well if they don't get home, then I want to see where they do go.

<snip>
I never condone murder LadyEKO. As a lawyer I cannot do so, and I have met some truly dispicable people in my time - people who will kill in cold blood.... without hesitation. Michael is not within that profile.


Well, this is my first post to this forum, but let me just say this; you, sir, are completely incorrect in your assessment of Michael in my opinion.

Now, I'm not questioning whether you are or are not a lawyer who has had exposure to the sorts of people you discribe. I do, however, question your statement that Michael is not within that profile.

Myself, I've worked as an intelligence analyst and linguist for NSA through the military and part of the skills set that the job (intelligence analysis) requires is a thorough founding in criminal psychology, mostly because many world and military leaders have very many of the mental traits that are typically found in habitual offenders. Understanding the motivations of such minds is part of being able to predict their actions.

All that said, Michael is a textbook example of a person without a functional moral compass. He'll do whatever he feels he must, purely in the pursuit of his goals, and without care for who gets hurt along the way. You may "feel" that he is not in that profile, but look at the actions leading up to ALC's death. He took off without concern for others, when he knew that his presense was needed to help get the tail section survivors back to the Losties camp. When he did return, he withheld vital information in an effort to knowingly entrap others and put their lives at risk. He lied to ALC, telling her that he would kill Henry in an effort to get her gun from her. He then put her at ease, acquired the combo to the cell, and shot her with full knowledge of what he was doing, and without a known threat to Walt's physical well being. That is premeditation and planning in the commission of murder...and clearly shows that he is perfectly willing to sacrifice others to get what he wants... and thus nothing less than cold blooded murder.

The thing is, rescuing walt from life threatening danger is one thing.
Killing people simply to "possess" control over access to Walt is another.


Not by a mile. I will stand by my view that Michael is being forced into a position whereby he believes he will never see Walt again unless he does what the Others order him to.
He may have been pressured into bringing other members of the Losties to theOthers, but the methods were his own. Thus he bares full responsibility for them.
But as a lawyer... explain to us how his being pressures is in any way shape or form mitigating for his deception and murder of ALC.
Clearly, other options were open to him, he could have taken the gun, opened the door, and pretended to have been taken by Henry unawares and knocked out. ALC could have been held at gunpoint and forced to take a drug to knock her out, or made to turn away and be coshed from behind. He choose to kill her. He was not under orders to kill her, he did that on his own.
Likewise, his regret for killing Libby is not material. He knew what he was doing was wrong and CHOSE to do it anyway. Was Walt in immediate danger of injury or death? No. All evidence shows that Walt was not in physical danger... and thus once more we come to the central point of my arguement for why Michael precisely FITS the profile of a killer.
He has shown that he is willing to do whatever it takes to get what HE wants, and it appears that his desire has always been to control Walt and the access that others have to him. Perhaps this is because he was the victim of someone doing that to him (Walt's mother baring him from access to Walt) and now that he has the power to do this to others he's unconsciously now taking on the role that Walt's mother previously filled (that of the person who controlled access to Walt).

Regardless, and back on topic, habitual criminal offenders almost universally are people who simply do not care what risk they post to others, who they hurt, or what consequences might follow, so long as they get what they want. This fits Michael to a T. He is willing to run off without thought of others safety, threaten, hurt, or now kill others without hesitation so long as he gets what he wants. I'd suggest reading An Anatomy of motive by John Douglas. The book does have its weaknesses in that the author will use loaded words to discribe the criminals studied, but the points he raises are rock solid. From the Pyromanic who does what he does ot feel power and control (seeing the multitudes of people scurrying about beacuse of the fire he set) to murderers who kill for the power or personal gain they feel they get from their act... all of them "get their fix" without concern for the cost to others. In much the way that Charlie was a heroin addict, Michael is an addict of a different sort.


We've seen that in 3 Minutes, and I am simply trying to put myself in Michael's position, rather than judging him purely from the basis of my own moral perspective. This is a fictional show after all, and it would seem that TPTB are making a serious attempt to take a different slant on morality.

There is a moral ambiguity within the show that is yet to be resolved. The good/bad distinction that the Others make, which is as yet unexplained, is just a part of that. I believe that this is key to understanding the characters' actions, and therefore, for me, Michael's actions cannot be definitively assessed right now..... only understood with reference to what we know at this time. I have not tried to condone his actions in my earlier posts.... and if it has come across that way then it's a matter of interpretation of my posts. What I have tried to do is understand (and perhaps you're right - justify), and perhaps present a balance to the weight of anti-Michael feeling on the board at the moment (which I do understand).

As I said a few posts ago... Michael is not naturally comfortable with guns, and not a natural killer. He clearly saw only one way out. Yes, he probably should face punishment if and when he is found out..... but that punishment should come with some understanding of what he has gone through. Nothing in this show is black and white.... and this situation is no different.

Whether he is or is not comfortable with guns is not at issue. He clearly is comfortable with putting others at risk, and fully willing to kill simply to save the life of his son.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not judging his acts without due consideration for his son's wellbeing. But let's be clear here.
Was Walt in physical danger of death?
If he was not, Michael can never be justified in his killing of ALC or Libby.

I for one fail to see how choosing to kill two people, then choosing to risk the lives of multiple other people afterwards in a deception, is in any way morally ambiguous.

Sorry... morally, legally, philosophically... Michael was totally in the wrong with taking the lives of two others and placing multiple other lives at risk. Noone has any moral right to place the lives of others at risk without their knowledge, ever. He should have come clean with everyone and let them make the choice of whether or not they wished to risk their own lives for his son. Anything less is immoral.

I used to like and care for the Michael character, but at this point the only reason I hope he may return is purely have him return to the Island alone. I feel it would be poetically just to have him reveal that after they left that Walt died in front of him from "the sickness", thus rendering his actions and betrayal all the more empty of reward for him and showing that the 12 pieces of silver that he got (freedom from the island) were all the more valueless in the end.

Perhaps have him return and show him seeking punishment for his actions as some form of atonement, but getting rejected by both the Losties, and the Others as well (being told that he can't be trusted ever again by the Losties, and then being told by the Others that he isn't worth anything to them anymore.) Then realizing that redemption is personal, not something others give you.

The thing is, rescuing walt from life threatening danger is one thing.
Killing people simply to "possess" control over access to Walt is another.

He may have been pressured into bringing other members of the Losties to theOthers, but the methods were his own. Thus he bares full responsibility for them.
But as a lawyer... explain to us how his being pressures is in any way shape or form mitigating for his deception and murder of ALC.
Clearly, other options were open to him, he could have taken the gun, opened the door, and pretended to have been taken by Henry unawares and knocked out. ALC could have been held at gunpoint and forced to take a drug to knock her out, or made to turn away and be coshed from behind. He choose to kill her. He was not under orders to kill her, he did that on his own.
Likewise, his regret for killing Libby is not material. He knew what he was doing was wrong and CHOSE to do it anyway. Was Walt in immediate danger of injury or death? No. All evidence shows that Walt was not in physical danger... and thus once more we come to the central point of my arguement for why Michael precisely FITS the profile of a killer.
He has shown that he is willing to do whatever it takes to get what HE wants, and it appears that his desire has always been to control Walt and the access that others have to him. Perhaps this is because he was the victim of someone doing that to him (Walt's mother baring him from access to Walt) and now that he has the power to do this to others he's unconsciously now taking on the role that Walt's mother previously filled (that of the person who controlled access to Walt).

Regardless, and back on topic, habitual criminal offenders almost universally are people who simply do not care what risk they post to others, who they hurt, or what consequences might follow, so long as they get what they want. This fits Michael to a T. He is willing to run off without thought of others safety, threaten, hurt, or now kill others without hesitation so long as he gets what he wants. I'd suggest reading An Anatomy of motive by John Douglas. The book does have its weaknesses in that the author will use loaded words to discribe the criminals studied, but the points he raises are rock solid. From the Pyromanic who does what he does ot feel power and control (seeing the multitudes of people scurrying about beacuse of the fire he set) to murderers who kill for the power or personal gain they feel they get from their act... all of them "get their fix" without concern for the cost to others. In much the way that Charlie was a heroin addict, Michael is an addict of a different sort.

Whether or not we thought Walt was in danger is irrelevent. Michael believed Walt was in danger. If someone takes a child by force, someone who has no right to do so, what is your first thought? My first thought would be that this criminal was doing unspeakably horrible things to the child. It has far less to do with control of the child than fear for the child's safety. In that place, with the history the Others have with the Losties, after hearing his son beg him not to leave him there, seeing the fear in his eyes at the mention of "the room," Michael is completely justified in believing something terrible is happening to his son. I also think it's a huge leap to assume that Michael's concern for Walt is in any way an addiction. A drug isn't a person who can be harmed, or for whom someone can feel the paternal responsibility for their safety. On this point the argument falls flat.

Whether he is or is not comfortable with guns is not at issue. He clearly is comfortable with putting others at risk, and fully willing to kill simply to save the life of his son.

I thought it was your belief that Michael did not kill to save the life of his son?:confused:

I think his being uncomfortable with guns is a clear example of Michael's characterization in the show, which makes it perfectly germane to the discussion. Michael is not a natural born killer. He is not amoral. It took holding his son hostage to coerce him into killing. The problem comes in when he negotiates with the terrorists kidnappers. It was bad policy, but I think Michael was suffering from diminished capacity to make a rational decision. That's why parents are not allowed to call the shots in a kidnapping case. The authorities handle it because parents are too emotionally involved. Unfortunately, there were no authorities on the island, at least no authorities who were handling the situation for Michael.


I for one fail to see how choosing to kill two people, then choosing to risk the lives of multiple other people afterwards in a deception, is in any way morally ambiguous.

Going with the diminished capacity argument, Michael saw no other way. Had he been thinking rationally, he might have seen one of the options you gave. However, wouldn't most people choose to pay any ransom to get their child back from a kidnapper? In this case, the kidnappers weren't demanding money. There was no FBI maneuvering, calling the shots, and standing between Michael and the kidnappers. Michael was a builder, not a tactician, so his lapse in tactical reasoning under duress comes as little surprise.


Did Michael make the wrong choice? Yes. Was what he did possibly stupid? Yes. Was it done out of malice? No He did what he did out of love. The point is that stupid and tragic things are often done out of love. That's where the moral ambiguity lies imho. That's not to say that what he did was not wrong. It was wrong. Should he pay a price? Yes. It's a matter of degree of guilt, and letting the punishment fit the crime imho. The question is whether it was redeemable, which is highly subjective.

Sorry... morally, legally, philosophically... Michael was totally in the wrong with taking the lives of two others and placing multiple other lives at risk. Noone has any moral right to place the lives of others at risk without their knowledge, ever. He should have come clean with everyone and let them make the choice of whether or not they wished to risk their own lives for his son. Anything less is immoral.

Actually, J/K/S/H did willingly choose to risk their own lives for his son. It was the nature of the risk Michael hid from them. Simply undertaking the rescue mission was a risk. Based on your morality argument, Jack and Sayid bear equal responsibility with Michael for putting K/S/H at risk without their full knowledge. Jack and Sayid had knowledge beforehand that Michael was compromised and did not share that with the rest of the group, and since it's immoral to ever do such a thing, your argument would seem to imply that Jack and Sayid are immoral also.

I used to like and care for the Michael character, but at this point the only reason I hope he may return is purely have him return to the Island alone. I feel it would be poetically just to have him reveal that after they left that Walt died in front of him from "the sickness", thus rendering his actions and betrayal all the more empty of reward for him and showing that the 12 pieces of silver that he got (freedom from the island) were all the more valueless in the end.

I think that's awfully harsh, and I wouldn't like it. I also don't think most of the viewers would find that particularly satisfying. Having even a fictional child die to teach Michael a lesson doesn't sound like good television to me. I do like the idea of Michael returning to the island alone with the knowledge that Walt is safe though. I wonder what kind of Michael we might see emerge if he didn't have to worry for Walt's safety. I think I would like to see him redeem himself somehow.

..... and the debate carries on.


Glad to see this kind of talk happening again. I for one think we are missing a HUGE part of the story still, and can't wait to see where the writers are taking Michael and Walt's storyline.


What was with the computer message Michael got? Who sent it? What happened to Michael while he was gone for those days? What really happened besides the little scene we saw at the others camp? What did the others ask Michael to do? What is the Others objective? What happened in the Room? What does Michael know that we don't. Why did they take his blood and question his parentage?


I find it hard to believe Michael is a cold blooded killer. I hope there is more to his killing AL then what we've seen, and if there isn't they got some spainin to do.

I liked Micheal the first season but not the second season. I agree with you SILVER KANE I hope they don't bring him back.

I wonder how many people who had their own child grabbed by someone out of their own arms, without knowing who the person was, where they live, where they took him/her, what they were doing to him/her, or if they were alive or dead.. would not do whatever it takes to get your kid back.

Michael didnt make a good choice in shooting Libby and Ana, but how sane can someone be after crashing on a freaky island with people who kill and kidnap?
It was ok for Ana to freak from the crash, and the scary island, and shoot whatever was in her path... but Michael - whose CHILD WAS TAKEN FROM HIS ARMS, deserves death? I can't agree with that.

Michael is completely justified in believing something terrible is happening to his son. I also think it's a huge leap to assume that Michael's concern for Walt is in any way an addiction. A drug isn't a person who can be harmed, or for whom someone can feel the paternal responsibility for their safety. On this point the argument falls flat.

Umm hate to bring this up... but he did corresponded with Walt on the computer in the Hatch and had opportunity to discover his son's physical wellbeing. That said, Walt having access to a computer generally does not equate to him having to undergo horrible physical punishement and torture.

As to an addiction, the analogy is to Michael's desire to control and sequester Walt.
In a survival situation, you do NOT want your child to be cut off from contact with the other members of the survival group. Why? Because in the event something happens to you, that you know that the child has been able to establish a trust relationship with other members of the group and learn friends from foes. Also this allows others to develop emotional attachment to the child as well so they're less likely to abandon the child should you not be there to protect said child. Michael was at nearly every turn attempting to keep Walt away from everyone else. In short, he was a developing addict for the sensation of control.


I thought it was your belief that Michael did not kill to save the life of his son?:confused:

Honestly...I thought I'd edited that... it should have read simply to regain possession of his son, without concern for the price others would have to pay.


I think his being uncomfortable with guns is a clear example of Michael's characterization in the show, which makes it perfectly germane to the discussion. Michael is not a natural born killer. He is not amoral. It took holding his son hostage to coerce him into killing. The problem comes in when he negotiates with the terrorists kidnappers. It was bad policy, but I think Michael was suffering from diminished capacity to make a rational decision. That's why parents are not allowed to call the shots in a kidnapping case. The authorities handle it because parents are too emotionally involved. Unfortunately, there were no authorities on the island, at least no authorities who were handling the situation for Michael.

Diminished capacity?
Bull.
To have diminished capactity he would have to not know or comprehend the nature of the act that he was engaging in.
Michael had presence of mind, he even appologized to ALC for what he was going to do... and still shot her. He knew what he was doing was wrong... his appology makes that clear. He also showed clear thinking and guile in regards to how he got the gun and combo from her. He knew what he was doing.


Going with the diminished capacity argument, Michael saw no other way. Had he been thinking rationally, he might have seen one of the options you gave. However, wouldn't most people choose to pay any ransom to get their child back from a kidnapper? In this case, the kidnappers weren't demanding money. There was no FBI maneuvering, calling the shots, and standing between Michael and the kidnappers. Michael was a builder, not a tactician, so his lapse in tactical reasoning under duress comes as little surprise.

A lapse in tactical reasoning does not excuse the taking of human life. He had the presence of mind to decieve ALC who should was a trained officer and someone that should be able to note the signs of a person behaving in an agitated manner. Michael's manner was not agitated beyond offering to do the killing for her. He acted angry... but toward the Others. that he was able to act as such in connection to a planned deception shows that his mind was focused and he had intent and understood what he was doing.


Did Michael make the wrong choice? Yes. Was what he did possibly stupid? Yes. Was it done out of malice? No He did what he did out of love. The point is that stupid and tragic things are often done out of love. That's where the moral ambiguity lies imho. That's not to say that what he did was not wrong. It was wrong. Should he pay a price? Yes. It's a matter of degree of guilt, and letting the punishment fit the crime imho. The question is whether it was redeemable, which is highly subjective.

Wrong choice? I agree, Stupid? Again, I agree. Done out of Malice? No, I'd agree that he bore her no malice. Was his actions done out of love? Perhaps. But doing things " out of love" does not make everything done "out of love" morally right. People throw words like "love" and "empathy" and "understanding" around as if they're panaceas. As if saying "he did what he did out of love for his country/god/people" excuses everything. It doesn't. Each person is placed on this ball of rock with the ability to choose. They can choose to do the easy thing... or the right thing. In Michael's case, he kept choosing to do whatever was expedient to HIS goal. He never thought about even giving other people the right to decide on their own.


Actually, J/K/S/H did willingly choose to risk their own lives for his son. It was the nature of the risk Michael hid from them. Simply undertaking the rescue mission was a risk.

We're talking Michael's motivation. He attempted to mislead the Losties. Giving them false information to lead them into a trap. To his mind, they didn't know, so their actually knowing isn't revelant toward establishing guilt.

If this wasn't true, then police sting operations would not be admissible, because clearly the police aren't actually intending to provide criminals with illicite goods. They entice them into engaging in activities that establish guilt.


Based on your morality argument, Jack and Sayid bear equal responsibility with Michael for putting K/S/H at risk without their full knowledge. Jack and Sayid had knowledge beforehand that Michael was compromised and did not share that with the rest of the group, and since it's immoral to ever do such a thing, your argument would seem to imply that Jack and Sayid are immoral also.

I agree that Jack and Sayid do bear equal responsibility with Michael in this. Frankly this is what happens when you have hollywood writers writing a millitary man like Sayid. They get it wrong. A millitary analyst or interrogator usually goes through resistance and survival training in addition to their intel training (I know I did) as well as tactics, logicistics, and strategic planning training. Why? Because to be able to analyze intelligence, you have to understand what it means in the big picture.
Sayid and Jacks actions were simply put, bone headed.


I think that's awfully harsh, and I wouldn't like it. I also don't think most of the viewers would find that particularly satisfying. Having even a fictional child die to teach Michael a lesson doesn't sound like good television to me. I do like the idea of Michael returning to the island alone with the knowledge that Walt is safe though. I wonder what kind of Michael we might see emerge if he didn't have to worry for Walt's safety. I think I would like to see him redeem himself somehow.

So long as Walt is anywhere other than the island, we won't see Michael again I'm afraid. Would Walt's death be that meaningless to simply say it was "teaching Michael a lesson"? No... That's an over generalization on your part. This season it's been hinted that with the "event" in the Swan hatch having transpired that we'd see some interesting changes with Rose and Locke. Besides, with the whole hanso 70 part message having been decoded I'd not put it past the Others to use Walt as a test subject since they are losing him and he was "more than they bargined for" Numbers that they can't control to change the equation and all that.

..... and the debate carries on.

Glad to see this kind of talk happening again. I for one think we are missing a HUGE part of the story still, and can't wait to see where the writers are taking Michael and Walt's storyline.

I think so too WIF. I really hope we get the blanks filled in some this season.

What was with the computer message Michael got? Who sent it? What happened to Michael while he was gone for those days? What really happened besides the little scene we saw at the others camp? What did the others ask Michael to do? What is the Others objective? What happened in the Room? What does Michael know that we don't. Why did they take his blood and question his parentage?

See that's the thing, we don't know for certain that whoever was communicating with Michael was even Walt. It could have been a trap from the onset.


Michael didnt make a good choice in shooting Libby and Ana, but how sane can someone be after crashing on a freaky island with people who kill and kidnap?
It was ok for Ana to freak from the crash, and the scary island, and shoot whatever was in her path... but Michael - whose CHILD WAS TAKEN FROM HIS ARMS, deserves death? I can't agree with that.

That's what I mean by letting the punishment fit the crime. Yes, what he did was criminal, but it doesn't mean he's irredeemable or a habitual criminal. I really want to see him get the chance for redemption.

Umm hate to bring this up... but he did corresponded with Walt on the computer in the Hatch and had opportunity to discover his son's physical wellbeing. That said, Walt having access to a computer generally does not equate to him having to undergo horrible physical punishement and torture.

Actually, the communications I saw were extremely brief, and I'm not certain that it was Walt at all. Also, physical punishment and torture are not the only ways for the Others to do irreparable harm to a child, and might not be the worst they could do.

As to an addiction, the analogy is to Michael's desire to control and sequester Walt. In a survival situation, you do NOT want your child to be cut off from contact with the other members of the survival group. Why? Because in the event something happens to you, that you know that the child has been able to establish a trust relationship with other members of the group and learn friends from foes. Also this allows others to develop emotional attachment to the child as well so they're less likely to abandon the child should you not be there to protect said child. Michael was at nearly every turn attempting to keep Walt away from everyone else. In short, he was a developing addict for the sensation of control.

Ummm, no, he did not try to sequester or otherwise isolate Walt. In fact, he encouraged a relationship between Walt and Sun, Claire, Hurley, etc. The only person he didn't want around Walt was Locke, and he had good reason for that imho. There was a moment on the raft when he decided that he didn't want Sawyer around his son either, but that was because of Sawyer's unrepentant criminal tendencies, another good reason.

Diminished capacity?
Bull.
To have diminished capactity he would have to not know or comprehend the nature of the act that he was engaging in.
Michael had presence of mind, he even appologized to ALC for what he was going to do... and still shot her. He knew what he was doing was wrong... his appology makes that clear. He also showed clear thinking and guile in regards to how he got the gun and combo from her. He knew what he was doing.

Actually, that's a pretty narrow definition of diminished capacity. Diminished capacity is not an all or nothing construct. It is only a lessening of capacity/lessening of responsibility. It doesn't remove the burden of responsibility altogether.

Legal dictionary definition:

Diminished Capacity

This doctrine recognizes that although, at the time the offense was committed, an accused was not suffering from a mental disease or defect sufficient to exonerate him or her from all criminal responsibility, the accused's mental capacity may have been diminished by intoxication, trauma, or mental disease so that he or she did not possess the specific mental state or intent essential to the particular offense charged.

I think that because Michael was traumatized by the kidnapping and circumstances his culpability is diminished. He didn't kill Ana Lucia because he hated her. He didn't do it for material gain or revenge. He didn't do it for the thrill of it. He did it because it was the only thing he could think of to do at the moment to save his son from the evil Others. In his mind there was no other way to save Walt. In other words, his mental state was not one of a murderer, but of a desperate father.


Wrong choice? I agree, Stupid? Again, I agree. Done out of Malice? No, I'd agree that he bore her no malice. Was his actions done out of love? Perhaps. But doing things " out of love" does not make everything done "out of love" morally right. People throw words like "love" and "empathy" and "understanding" around as if they're panaceas. As if saying "he did what he did out of love for his country/god/people" excuses everything. It doesn't. Each person is placed on this ball of rock with the ability to choose. They can choose to do the easy thing... or the right thing. In Michael's case, he kept choosing to do whatever was expedient to HIS goal. He never thought about even giving other people the right to decide on their own.

I'm not saying, and never said, Michael bore no guilt or responsibility. I'm saying that I think the degree of his guilt is less than some would argue. Had Walt not been kidnapped, he would not have murdered anyone or betrayed his friends, which goes to being a redeemable character. I'm saying that his child was his one great weakness of character, which was used against him and is a mitigating factor. Doing things out of love is no panacea, and I never claimed such. That's an over-simplification of what I said. I just don't believe that an isolated incident like this, committed in desperation, makes a character irredeemable or should warrant death.


If this wasn't true, then police sting operations would not be admissible, because clearly the police aren't actually intending to provide criminals with illicite goods. They entice them into engaging in activities that establish guilt.

On the contrary, police sting operations are not used to entice people to commit crimes. They are used to catch people in the act of committing a crime. Enticing someone to commit a crime is called entrapment and is not admissable.

I agree that Jack and Sayid do bear equal responsibility with Michael in this. Frankly this is what happens when you have hollywood writers writing a millitary man like Sayid. They get it wrong. A millitary analyst or interrogator usually goes through resistance and survival training in addition to their intel training (I know I did) as well as tactics, logicistics, and strategic planning training. Why? Because to be able to analyze intelligence, you have to understand what it means in the big picture.
Sayid and Jacks actions were simply put, bone headed.

No argument here.

So long as Walt is anywhere other than the island, we won't see Michael again I'm afraid. Would Walt's death be that meaningless to simply say it was "teaching Michael a lesson"? No... That's an over generalization on your part. This season it's been hinted that with the "event" in the Swan hatch having transpired that we'd see some interesting changes with Rose and Locke. Besides, with the whole hanso 70 part message having been decoded I'd not put it past the Others to use Walt as a test subject since they are losing him and he was "more than they bargined for" Numbers that they can't control to change the equation and all that.

Sorry if I over-generalized, but I was basing my comments on what you wrote and the tone of it, which sounded pretty harsh. Aside from that, I don't see the creative team killing Walt. It would just be too disturbing. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

ETA: If Walt died because of some experiment that the Others conducted on him, that would only prove the Michael was right that his child was in grave danger. Thus, proving my point.

..... and the debate carries on.


Glad to see this kind of talk happening again. I for one think we are missing a HUGE part of the story still, and can't wait to see where the writers are taking Michael and Walt's storyline.


What was with the computer message Michael got? Who sent it? What happened to Michael while he was gone for those days? What really happened besides the little scene we saw at the others camp? What did the others ask Michael to do? What is the Others objective? What happened in the Room? What does Michael know that we don't. Why did they take his blood and question his parentage?


I find it hard to believe Michael is a cold blooded killer. I hope there is more to his killing AL then what we've seen, and if there isn't they got some spainin to do.

Hi WIF, its good to hear from you again. I'm glad to see this discussion as well. Do you think we'll ever see Mike or Walt again?

Ifurita - Sorry not to have responded to your post(s), but my recent time here at the Lage has been limited. I will get around to responding to what you have said in due course, though I share much the same view as Shootfire. I will come back to you.

:wavey: scubagert. Interesting what WIF has asked about 'the Room'. Has Michael learned anything about the Room that we hasn't been showin in his flashbacks? I wonder....

Hi Michaud,
Nice to see you again. I haven't been on as much lately either with our break and all. (I have a feeling I'll be on a lot more starting next week ;) ) I bet Mike does know more of what is going on than we do at this point. I hope we at least see his flashbacks eventually. It would still be nice to know where he winds up boating off to as well. If he's not in this season, maybe he will rejoin the cast next year or something. There's still to many unanswered questions with him and Walt.

I agree that Jack and Sayid do bear equal responsibility with Michael in this

How? Sayid and Jack didn't kill Ana and Libby. Sayid and Jack didn't make a bargain with the others.

Yes Jack has some responsibility in that he agreed to Sayid's plan. He did however want to tell K/S/H about the plan but in the end trusted Sayid's judgement, fair enough with Sayid's military background. Sayid has more responsibility in the fact that he came up with this far from foolproof plan.

However there is no way that they have equal responsibility with Michael. If he hadn't made that agreement with the others, then Sayid and Jack wouldn't of had to formulate any plan. Michael bears the most responsibility.

In fact, he encouraged a relationship between Walt and Sun, Claire, Hurley, etc. The only person he didn't want around Walt was Locke, and he had good reason for that imho. There was a moment on the raft when he decided that he didn't want Sawyer around his son either, but that was because of Sawyer's unrepentant criminal tendencies, another good reason

What parent wouldn't be worried about their kid hanging around an old single man with a box of knives. :biggrin:

Walt has had very little airtime and therefore doesn't get many posts due to not having anything to base chat on, other then we ALL miss him! :o) It would be nice/soothing to replace a character as we've lost so many to sad deaths. He could also renew his relationship with John Locke if indeed Michael does die if they returned. (See theories on Michaels demise on his thread). And Michael has been such a pain in the @$$ about so many things that people choose not to post..."If you can't say something nice don't say anything at all" thinking. I think those getting the most posts are those with interesting, productive characters...and a great deal of sex appeal!

What Michael did was wrong. It's true. He should not have shot Ana Lucia or Libby. But Michael does not deserve to die.

But in the days leading up to the shooting, his kid was kidnapped out of his hands. He was held hostage TWICE. During his entire stint as a hostage of the others, he believed that they were going to kill him. After about a week, they finally showed him his son, who mentioned being experiment on. And to top it off, they told that he would never see his kid again if he didn't do what they said.

And besides, it's not like he's the only character on the show to murder another person. Charlie, Eko, Kate, Sawyer, Sayid, and Ana Lucia all killed people out of cold blood. And non of them (except for Ana) had nearly as good a reason as he did.