Claire arrives at the temple and warns the inhabitants that the being inhabiting Locke wants to talk, but Dogen sends Sayid to kill him instead. In Los Angeles, Sayid saves his brother, who is in trouble with a loan shark.



(created by), (created by) | 3 more credits »

Watch Now

From $1.99 (SD) on Amazon Video





Episode cast overview, first billed only:
Richard Alpert (credit only)
Desmond Hume (credit only)
Hugo 'Hurley' Reyes (credit only)
James 'Sawyer' Ford (credit only)


Sayid asks Dogen why he wanted to kill him and they fight; Dogen banishes Sayid from the temple. Meanwhile Locke and Claire head to the temple and Claire tells Dogen that Locke want to see him outside the temple. Sogen asks Sayid to kill Locke to prove that there is goodness in his soul. Kate returns to the temple and Miles tells her that Claire is prisoner in the temple. Kate tells to Claire that she raised Aaron in Los Angeles. Sayid stabs Locke in the chest but he does not feel anything. Locke asks Sayid to tell Dogen and his people that they have until the sundown to leave the temple. Sayid destroys the only protection of the temple. In the parallel reality, Sayid visits Nadia and her husband Omer, who tells him that he has been pressed by dangerous people from whom he borrowed money. Omer is stabbed and goes on surgery. When Sayid is abducted by the gangster Keamy, he gives the ultimate solution to the situation. Written by Claudio Carvalho, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Plot Summary | Plot Synopsis


TV-14 | See all certifications »




| | |

Release Date:

2 March 2010 (USA)  »

Filming Locations:

Company Credits

Production Co:

,  »
Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs


Sound Mix:


Aspect Ratio:

1.78 : 1
See  »

Did You Know?


As Sayid and Nadia are entering the hospital, Jack is seen in the hallway walking toward them. See more »


John Locke: What if I told you that you could have anything you wanted. What if I said you can have anything in the entire world?
Sayid Jarrah: I would tell you that the only thing I ever wanted, died in my arms, and I'll never see it again.
John Locke: What if you could?
See more »


Catch a Falling Star
Composed by Lee Pockriss and Paul Vance
Recorded in 1957 by Perry Como
Performed by Perry Como
Sings by: Emilie de Ravin and Evangeline Lilly
See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

Flash Sideways - a crock
23 December 2010 | by (New York, New York) – See all my reviews

As fans ponder & enjoy the final 15 episodes of LOST, I am annoyed by the writer/creators' cavalier attitude, in the form of the so-called "flash sideways" material (plural to this awkward, made-up term must be "flashes sideways"?). It's a fake, anything goes ploy.

The cumulative power of this series rested with its back stories, presented in copious flashbacks each week. In a feature film the use of flashbacks, or worse yet, narration (and I'm including documentaries here) is always a potential pitfall. In film school you learn to keep this material to an absolute minimum -it's an obvious narrative crutch. An analogy would be Silent Era film-making: the fewer the inter-titles the better (Murnau's THE LAST LAUGH proving the point).

Cuse & co. got away with this trick for five years, creating a virtually Pavlovian response from the fans, who love watching how their dear protagonists behaved before the plane crash. It kept the show from becoming (as I had jokingly thought just prior to its launch) a dark re-imagining of GILLIGAN'S ISLAND, the way so many childish pleasures (BATMAN, anyone) have been "reimagined" with a currently hip emphasis on the "dark side".

But for Final Season 6, they have substituted this "what if" material: What would happen to our dear characters in 2004 upon safe arrival of Flight 815 in L.A.? This is familiar science fiction territory: the "Worlds of If" approach to parallel worlds and alternate realities. But the writers immediately violate all sci-fi standards of conduct by (in hack fashion, reminiscent of those oh-so-campy later seasons of Irwin Allen's VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA series in the '60s, when each cast member would be taken over by some alien force and turned into a monstrous villain each week) foolishly positing an "anything goes" history for the cast. As revealed in the "pop up" annotation captions for week-later repeats, Jack did not have a son, yet we see him getting to know the estranged kid. Ben grew up on the island and was NOT a resident of L.A., yet here he is a stereotypical tight-ass school teacher cutely meeting John Locke in the faculty lounge. More compelling is Sayid's film noir-style family story with bro and lost love sister-in-law in L.A., but it doesn't jibe with his past life either.

The problem is that the "sideways" story of L.A. in 2004 has to follow from what we know about the characters' previous life experience. No series of "meet cute" footage can compensate for invention of NEW past lives for these actors. They might as well turn Jack into Hamlet, Kate into Lady Macbeth and John Locke into King Lear -what's the point of botching up the past just to create an arbitrary, convenient 2004 future? The lamest sci-fi author would not be permitted to change the prior lives, though I'm assuming the LOST hacks are going to use circa 1977 events including Juliet's successful detonating of the bomb to sort of explain to the logic-impaired viewer how EVERYTHING has changed (but how that gets Ben to L.A. to become a teacher makes no sense to me).

Rather, good science fiction is way more subtle and logical, but applies proper limits -you have certain degrees of freedom in characterization & plotting, but you have to keep contrivances to a roar. Best example would be the familiar sci-fi story structure of presenting a normal, current world in which a few things are "off". The reader follows along with great anticipation, and gradually comes to the realization that we are dealing with a parallel universe where the Civil War never happened, causing many changes over the decades leading to now. That is how it is done, and the frisson of discovery is what makes it a fun read. In LOST, the contrivances, interconnections between the characters and completely arbitrary twists & turns are way overdone. Sure, like that old Control Voice on the original THE OUTER LIMITS series used to say "We are in control of everything you see and hear", but the LOST auteurs are out of control.

In the island footage, the gimmick of Smokey (that's what I call him) being trapped in Locke's body except when he goes on a killing rampage in his alter ego as the smoke monster, is nonsensical -just a lame excuse for keeping fan favorite Terry O'Quinn on the payroll. It's just another example of how these "tv gods" in charge of LOST take advantage of the fan's unearned slavish adoration of their product.

3 of 9 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Message Boards

Recent Posts
Worth finishing? ronindave
Reboot Strongtower145
Shows that are similar to Lost? GuyfromCanada
Help Sell Me on This Show, Please deanalland
Dr. Juliet Burke? delphia2014
Need answers cheryllchance
Discuss Sundown (2010) on the IMDb message boards »

Contribute to This Page