Season 3 Isn't that what family's for?

[lenafan]

Azalea Posted on Jan 21 2004, 09:58 AM

When Katya said something about Irina's intentions presenting themself to Jack one day, well, it just made me think that Irina has been up to something for the past thirty years - something besides being a double agent for the CIA/KGB back in the day. I think that Irina isn't really a bad "guy" - that she's made the choices in her life because she had to, not necessarily because she wanted to. There is a something more going on here, and I think it's something big, something that goes back to when Sloane, Jack, Irina, Bill Vaughn, etc. were all in the CIA together in the 70's - right around the time when Sloane and Irina got Rambaldi fever. QUOTE]
A very interesting perception...I have thought there was a helluva lot more to Irina Derevko than they ever told us. I know she was KGB while married to Jack, but we do have lots of space between then and the present. (This makes for a lot of writers including me having a good time filling the space in with stories). No one has explained what she did the first ten years, because it wasn't until 1991 when the KGB broke apart that she began "working for herself?" with a world-wide criminal organzation and was know as The Man. Who set her up with money to start it? Did she have it, or was the Russian government behind it?
And there's something going on about Jack that we've not been made privvy to either. After all he is a man with many secrets! h34r:
The Rambaldi fever: Sloane or Irina, who was actually first. In Full Disclosure Kendall mentions the DSR became interested in Rambaldi as early as the 40's. What's not to say Irina was aware also? of if not, her, the KGB? Perhaps her agenda in the long run was the Rambaldi fever and Sloane's involvement?
(She laughs long and wickedly)

 

[leila6]

Just because Lauren helped Sydney escape from the NSC's custody does not necessarily make her good at that time. She could have had other motives besides what everyone thought (namely, that she had been duped by Lindsey and wanted to help Syd get safe). The capture by the NSC was the impetus for Syd's finding Lazarey's hand, undergoing the memory retrieval procedure, meeting up with Will, and subsequently finding the Cube, exactly as the Covenant had wanted it. They sped up her search by making her a fugitive from the government and were able to track her movements much more easily than if she had pursued her search on her own time. And, as viewer comments have proven, Lauren's participation in Syd's rescue made her appear innocent.

I obviously don't know if that's how it happened, but I wouldn't rule out that Lauren has been evil the whole time based on her aid to Sydney.

 

[SydneyFan]

I obviously don't know if that's how it happened, but I wouldn't rule out that Lauren has been evil the whole time based on her aid to Sydney.

That would be my obvious choice but how do you explain the sudden nervousness and bad acting? Just bad television? I was looking for something to explain the sudden change.

 

[lenafan]

SydneyFan Posted on Jan 21 2004, 09:36 PM

That would be my obvious choice but how do you explain the sudden nervousness and bad acting? Just bad television? I was looking for something to explain the sudden change

Another thing to ponder: the scene between Lauren and Sark in the garage when he gives her the pictures of Sydney "killing" Lazeray. Obviously, Sark did not know Lauren was Covenant -- I mean, why the coverup since if they both work for the Covenant?

 

[ivand67]

I'm never gonna miss this column.

Great job. You definitely asked a lot of good questions. I think you did better this week than the last. Last week there was so much speculation about all the characters and their motives. Now, at least with Lauren, we know what her motives are and who she's loyal to. And with the other characters at least we're getting more clues. Of course, there are new questions.

But most of these questions are gonna be history after the next few episodes of this season.

There are some disappointments for me when it comes to the plot right now, but I'll keep the faith. I think JJ knows what he's doing!

:asleep: Now it's 1:17 am I gotta go to bed!

 

[Milferd]

Lauren was upset over the guards beating Sydney with no one watching her so unless a deliberate trick on the part of the show on the audience, we have to assume Lauren’s upset was real. Plus if truly Covenent why not join forces with Vaughn when he confronted her instead of saying she trusted Lyndsey.

Melissa George can act. I have seen her in other things and liked her performances. In my opinion She is not as good the more mature actors on the show or Jennifer but I think she is as good as Vartan and the rest of the supporting cast.

Ignoring performance the way the character of Lauren was described and her role in the show indicates to me that she was to be a antagonist to Sydney from the beginning and have many flaws with a few good traits. I liked Lauren but I can understand why a lot of people do not like flawed characters that are not special in some way like Marshel and Wess. I feel that characters like Lauren was are needed in a more rich developed story. This is sort of like adding something bitter or sour to a recipe to get the taste just right but it does take a developed taste to like complex foods.

Lauren’s nervousness and conflicted emotions indicate that something is up with the writers with the character. I suspect blackmail over her father or mind conditioning that is not working fully. Lauren went though a bunch of different emotions. Clearly the director wanted her to look with regret at the photos and the way the steal the plane info scene was filmed you can tell nervousness is intended.

 

[jems]

When Lauren helped save Syd the covenant were trying to keep Syd alive remember to find the cube!!!


breat chat guys!! i love all the theories VH generates with her column!!

 

[SydneyFan]

When Lauren helped save Syd the covenant were trying to keep Syd alive remember to find the cube!!!

Ahhhhhhh!! Yes. very true. good one.

 

[verdantheart]

SydneyFan Posted on Jan 21 2004, 09:36 PM

That would be my obvious choice but how do you explain the sudden nervousness and bad acting? Just bad television? I was looking for something to explain the sudden change

Another thing to ponder: the scene between Lauren and Sark in the garage when he gives her the pictures of Sydney "killing" Lazeray. Obviously, Sark did not know Lauren was Covenant -- I mean, why the coverup since if they both work for the Covenant?

Well, obviously they don't! Otherwise Sark wouldn't have to ask Zisman who the mole is because he would already know. And he wouldn't have to have pinned Lauren down, he would have just called her and dropped the photos for her.

But there still IS a big problem. No, I didn't say Lauren couldn't be "evil" and still help save Sydney, but that her behavior is incredibly inconsistent! These last episode when she's been revealed as a Covenant agent, she seemed nervous and a bad actress who couldn't keep her cool. If she has always been an agent, this is not how she has behaved in the past! She has been far too cool and reacted far too naturally. Is it bad writing? Bad direction? Bad acting? Darn it, the thing that all of these share in common is "bad." Something I'm not used to associating with Alias. I can only hope that (as appears that there is not from the cited interviews) there is an upcoming explanation that explains the apparent character inconsistencies.

 

[verdantheart]

Perhaps a little of " it was you fredo " was also in there.

Egad! Comparing Jack to Fredo? I hope not!

I think Irina knows she has Jack's loyalty or atleast enough of it for whatever she needs whenever she needs it

Not so sure I'd go that far when discussing the man who set her up for execution. They might love each other, but they can never trust each other--a condition initiated by--guess who?--Irina. How do two porcupines make love? Very carefully. Which is to say that it's possible for them to be "in love" and even to be "together"--from time to time, anyway (and, yes, I think they probably did get together during Sydney's "missing time")--but they can't ever have a truly close and trusting relationship. They can never rely upon one another because Jack can never rely upon Irina. Jack can never have what he really needs from Irina--nor can he trust her to give Sydney what she needs, which is why she makes him so desperately sad.

Sydney was honest with Vaughn whether she "deserved" to be or not

The way I'd put it is "whether Vaughn deserved it or not."

The Rambaldi fever: Sloane or Irina, who was actually first. In Full Disclosure Kendall mentions the DSR became interested in Rambaldi as early as the 40's. What's not to say Irina was aware also? of if not, her, the KGB? Perhaps her agenda in the long run was the Rambaldi fever and Sloane's involvement?

I suspect that the Russian interest in Rambaldi goes way back. Note that there appears to be a fair amount of Russian involvement in the MOR. It wouldn't be surprising at all if the KGB was at least as interested as the DSR. But we know that Sloane's interest in Rambaldi goes back to his time in the army (the 60s). See my upcoming Spy dad column for another suggestion about this.

I'm never gonna miss this column.

OK, that's what I love to hear!

 

[SydneyFan]

Egad! Comparing Jack to Fredo? I hope not!

I love Jack and certainly don't mean to push your buttons but in this instance I think so a little bit. He showed no hesitation to turn on Arvin and take advantage of whatever he had established between the two. I know it's Sloane but still. I thought he could have weighed his options a bit more but maybe he felt he didn't have time. Either way to exterminate Sloane when he still had the choice of using Sloane to get Sydney out as an option also, I think he deserves a little Fredo. But when I refered to Fredo I was refering more from Sloanes perspective and how he must have felt and why he was letting Jack know. To let him know he had been betrayed.

Not so sure I'd go that far when discussing the man who set her up for execution. They might love each other, but they can never trust each other--a condition initiated by--guess who?--Irina. How do two porcupines make love? Very carefully. Which is to say that it's possible for them to be "in love" and even to be "together"--from time to time, anyway (and, yes, I think they probably did get together during Sydney's "missing time")--but they can't ever have a truly close and trusting relationship. They can never rely upon one another because Jack can never rely upon Irina. Jack can never have what he really needs from Irina--nor can he trust her to give Sydney what she needs, which is why she makes him so desperately sad.

I think I was caught up in thinking of situational time realms. Overall I think Jack has a good perspective of Irina and how to handle her. But I think when he's in a situation, I think he's bound to let go more to her favor still. I think she has the lead there and has mastered that situation. And yes , I forget when it was but I'm pretty sure they got together. I remember a scene it showed them starting to kiss and lay down I think and then the scene cut away. I took that as a sleep over.

The way I'd put it is "whether Vaughn deserved it or not."

That's how it sounded in my head. :lol:

 

[Milferd]

Dixion’s flat removed performance has now been given an inferred reason from the fact that he knew about Sydney’s two years. I believe that the way Lauren has acted this year has been deliberate on JJ and staff not a poor performance. I don’t know how you can think Mellisa George is doing a poor acting job without knowing what mood she was supposed to portray in a scene. I have noticed that people often have a way that they think the character is supposed to act without knowing if there assumption is right. Also many hated Will first season and that turned out to be a poorly working plot line not bad acting on BC’s part.

I do wonder about the very crude way Jack was going to kill Sloane. Making an appointment in his own name and shooting him in his office making Jack the clear killer does not seam Jack’s style. Maybe poor writing on the writing staff part or Jack knew that the killing order would be reversed or planed to make some sort of arrangement to fake something with Arvin.

 

[lenafan]

Once youve read VH's columns you don't want to miss them. (I hate it when I go on vacation and just might!) It's too bad JJ or some of the other writers don't read it either. If they did, inconsistant scripts would show up less often.

I am still not sure WHY they said that Jack was married to IRina for only 5 years? (We know Katya said it, but the writers wrote it!)According to the first season and the promotional material...they were married 10 years. Sydney was six when her mother "died."

 

[SydneyFan]

am still not sure WHY they said that Jack was married to IRina for only 5 years? (We know Katya said it, but the writers wrote it!)According to the first season and the promotional material...they were married 10 years. Sydney was six when her mother "di

I think if I'm not mistaken that's when Katya said Jack found out she was a spy(after 5 years). That's why VH said what'd they do for the other 5 years and should Jack have turned her in, I think. Thinking that Jack lived with her for 5 years knowing that she was a spy. That's why I was a little confused not having put this info together as a possibility. I still don't know if it's a mistake or if Jack was a part of a conspiracy . Nice catch though VH. It's in the spy daddy column.

 

[verdantheart]

I am still not sure WHY they said that Jack was married to IRina for only 5 years? (We know Katya said it, but the writers wrote it!)According to the first season and the promotional material...they were married 10 years. Sydney was six when her mother "died."

You didn't see this paragraph in my column?

And we can look to Jack’s own behavior to back this opinion up. Katya gives form to a question that’s been nagging at the back of my mind for some time--that Jack might well have known about Irina’s status well before things blew up and she disappeared. “As observant as you are, you were married to my sister for five years [until 1976, after Sydney was born] without suspecting who she really was. Her love must have been intoxicating.” So, did Irina, realizing that Jack was catching on, do the one thing she knew that would keep him from acting on his knowledge--become pregnant? Irina, knowing the type of man that Jack is, would know that he’d put his child first, before country. Or was that simply a happy circumstance for her? For Jack could not stand to take Sydney’s mother away from her in appalling circumstances, as a reviled foreign spy--an assassin. He could not be responsible for that. So there was, in fact, solid basis for the government’s suspecting Jack of conspiring with the enemy.

I do wonder about the very crude way Jack was going to kill Sloane. Making an appointment in his own name and shooting him in his office making Jack the clear killer does not seam Jack’s style. Maybe poor writing on the writing staff part or Jack knew that the killing order would be reversed or planed to make some sort of arrangement to fake something with Arvin.

Didn't I mention that as a possibility? Of course, Jack was squeezed for time and had the threat of Sydney's life over his head. I don't know how anxious he was to roll the dice on that . . . but Jack has shown himself willing to gamble . . .

I love Jack and certainly don't mean to push your buttons but in this instance I think so a little bit. He showed no hesitation to turn on Arvin and take advantage of whatever he had established between the two. I know it's Sloane but still. I thought he could have weighed his options a bit more but maybe he felt he didn't have time. Either way to exterminate Sloane when he still had the choice of using Sloane to get Sydney out as an option also, I think he deserves a little Fredo. But when I refered to Fredo I was refering more from Sloanes perspective and how he must have felt and why he was letting Jack know. To let him know he had been betrayed.

Not really "button" there, it's just that Fredo is an incredible weakling and Jack is not. As far as the betrayal parallel goes, I suppose I can see that, but can Sloane really expect fidelity? He has already been "betrayed" by Jack in the past--he knows that both Jack and Sydney were doubles in SD-6, betraying him on a daily basis. Not only that, but a few short months ago, Jack even told Sloane, "I will bury you"--not exactly Fredo-like conversation. Sloane may play the wounded friend, but that's all it is--play-acting. Yes, he wants Jack to be his friend, and maybe he even feels that he is in some ways--he certainly doesn't have friends in any ordinary sense--but down deep, he must know that he can't expect Jack to be the true friend that he might desire. And Sloane knows why Jack is not, too--it's because of the threat Sloane poses to Sydney (again, who started this betrayal-chain? Not Jack, I assure you.).

 

[SydneyFan]

Not really "button" there, it's just that Fredo is an incredible weakling and Jack is not. As far as the betrayal parallel goes, I suppose I can see that, but can Sloane really expect fidelity? He has already been "betrayed" by Jack in the past--he knows that both Jack and Sydney were doubles in SD-6, betraying him on a daily basis. Not only that, but a few short months ago, Jack even told Sloane, "I will bury you"--not exactly Fredo-like conversation. Sloane may play the wounded friend, but that's all it is--play-acting. Yes, he wants Jack to be his friend, and maybe he even feels that he is in some ways--he certainly doesn't have friends in any ordinary sense--but down deep, he must know that he can't expect Jack to be the true friend that he might desire. And Sloane knows why Jack is not, too--it's because of the threat Sloane poses to Sydney (again, who started this betrayal-chain? Not Jack, I assure you.).

All good points, but assassination? And like I said I know it's Sloane but still. He did save Jacks life. I may just be falling for Sloane a little bit. Maybe he does expect such. I just got the feeling that in the past few months he had felt that he was starting something of a new friendship with Jack. Building on a new trust. Especially after the mission or missions and saving Jacks life. But you're right, Jack has betrayed him before and Sloane I'm sure expects as much.

I will bury you : yes not Fredo like. I was not saying that Jack is like Fredo. I was using the Fredo example as an isolated incident to explain the one time betrayal of Jack's "almost" assassination of Sloane. Or what we were led to believe was going to be. Obviously Jack bares no resemblance to Fredo in character but coming from what appeared to me to be an almost saddened Sloane,( I may be reading this wrong) I could see a Fredo like conclusion coming from his lips after what he must have surmised was a budding friendship. Even though this may not have been the case in the eyes of Jack. And yes I realize that Sloane keeps things in perspective too ,and knows that Jack doesn't trust him but I think he felt he had made atleast a little ground;enough to not have to worry about Jack killing him perhaps. I think Sloane has since regrouped and will now be playing hardball with Jack even though he may be doing so with a smile on his face.

Can someone refresh my memory of the threat that Sloane poses to Sydney. Is it because of the Prophecy? or something else?

 

[karlee]

very nice!

 

[SarahVartan85]

In response to the part about Vaughn drawing a line and then trying to rub it out, I have to disagree. I think that, until Vaughn can figure out his emotions, he'll try to act like everything is normal with Lauren - making things a bit uncomfortable between him and Sydney. But Vaughn's heart is with Sydney - it always will be. I mean, it's not like he can just go back to LA, walk up to Lauren, and be like, "Sorry, Lauren, but I never loved you." It takes time to deal with that kind of stuff...

 

[Milferd]

I do wonder about the very crude way Jack was going to kill Sloane. Making an appointment in his own name and shooting him in his office making Jack the clear killer does not seam Jack’s style. Maybe poor writing on the writing staff part or Jack knew that the killing order would be reversed or planed to make some sort of arrangement to fake something with Arvin.

Didn't I mention that as a possibility? Of course, Jack was squeezed for time and had the threat of Sydney's life over his head. I don't know how anxious he was to roll the dice on that . . . but Jack has shown himself willing to gamble . . .

You mentioned the fake something with Arvin but not the crudeness of the assassination attempt.
Yes Jack was rushed but he could have tried the following.
1. Arrange secret meeting at a warehouse instead of making office appointment.
2. Sniper rifle through Sloanes window
3. Plant bomb during meeting with Sloane
4. Use disguise and come as someone else that Sloane would see quick. Maybe not enought time for this option.

Katya could of off camera told Jack to do it the way he was trying to do it so that she could monitor but the bomb and sniper rifle both still work with the monitoring.

Jack agreed way to fast to kill Sloane if he had to kill him in a way that he would be caught and convicted. Plus why would Irina make Jack get himself convicted of murder that way?

To me Jack’s lack of resistance and crudeness of the plot indicates the most likely answer is he was calling Irina or Katya’s bluff and did not care if he upset Sloane actually. Or Jack warned Sloane to play along again.

 

[lenafan]

Milferd Posted on Jan 26 2004, 12:19 AM

Yes Jack was rushed but he could have tried the following.
1. Arrange secret meeting at a warehouse instead of making office appointment.
2. Sniper rifle through Sloanes window
3. Plant bomb during meeting with Sloane
4. Use disguise and come as someone else that Sloane would see quick. Maybe not enought time for this option.

In order to move the plot along the writers wanted Jack to confront Sloane. Katya would have no control of the situation in the first three you mention. The disguise might baffle the secretary, but not Sloane, especially if Jack spoke. And there was time since Jack had to fly to Zurich to see Sloane. How long does it take to don a disguise?

To me Jack’s lack of resistance and crudeness of the plot indicates the most likely answer is he was calling Irina or Katya’s bluff and did not care if he upset Sloane actually. Or Jack warned Sloane to play along again.

Jack would do anything to keep SYdney safe and if the price was Sloane's death then sobeit. -_- If he was arrested for SLoane's murder, then who would be around to protect Sydney? So I suspect you are right. He was calling IRina and Katya's hand.