Question about "Luminary"

[Guest Drysarcasm]

If Frank already knew that the floater wasn't Alex Glaser, why did he go to the place where the body entered the water to search for Glaser? Was there a connection established between Glaser and the floater that I missed?

[Guest Moriarty]

If Frank already knew that the floater wasn't Alex Glaser, why did he go to the place where the body entered the water to search for Glaser? Was there a connection established between Glaser and the floater that I missed?

Well, the whole floater thing was not quite obvious to me either. We never got to knew who he was. But hey, Luminay was a great episode. But it had some flaws in it, like the thing with the floater. Maybe Raven can bring more light on this matter since it is here favorite episode...

[Guest SouthernCelt]

If Frank already knew that the floater wasn't Alex Glaser, why did he go to the place where the body entered the water to search for Glaser? Was there a connection established between Glaser and the floater that I missed?

I always asssumed that while Frank's "gift" told him the floater wasn't Alex, his practical nature disagreed and made him wonder if it could be Alex. I guess he thought that since Alex had gone into the Alaskan outback, trying to find the origin of the floater was as good a starting point as any to verify if it was Alex or to begin a search if it wasn't. Frank seemed to be running on a lot of intuition in this one. His discovery that Alex was disposing of his possessions and identity indicated Alex's intent to withdraw from society and what better place to do that than in a remote but accessible wilderness area.

[Guest MillenniumIsBliss]

I always asssumed that while Frank's "gift" told him the floater wasn't Alex, his practical nature disagreed and made him wonder if it could be Alex. I guess he thought that since Alex had gone into the Alaskan outback, trying to find the origin of the floater was as good a starting point as any to verify if it was Alex or to begin a search if it wasn't. Frank seemed to be running on a lot of intuition in this one. His discovery that Alex was disposing of his possessions and identity indicated Alex's intent to withdraw from society and what better place to do that than in a remote but accessible wilderness area.

Good answer, and my sentiments as well. A good part of the reason Lance went to begin with was as a favor to Alex's parents, and the police seemed determined to call them and tell them Alex was dead. The first priority for Frank would be to prove or disprove this. Also, where there is one crazy outdoorsman, there is bound to be more, and Frank probably figured that this kind of remote location where the floater was found could have attracted Alex as well. He really had little else to go on.

[Raven Wolf]

Frank was trying to keep an open mind... telling them they shouldn't tell the parents anything until there was proof this was there son. Also, his flashes of seeing the Aurora....his "gift" gave him a hunch that this might not be Alex. If you remember, he then pulled a piece of a tree leaf out of the man's cracked head/neck. He checked on a computer to see exactly what kind of tree it came from, and when he found that part of the puzzle, said that this showed where the body entered the water. This was the only refference point he could find to know where to go next.... but he was having to lean hard on his own intuition to find the truth.

No, the dead man was never IDed, and it is thought that he was a tribute to Chris McCandles, who's story as told in the book "Into The Wild" inspired "Luminary".

[hippyroo]

I like Luminary better now. I understand the "chucking it all and getting away" thing better.

I think the idea that where there's one woodsman there's likely to be another is a good answer. In the woods, or forset , or bush or what ever, animals and water sheds, and the terrain foster natuarl footpaths,and any human in the area would tend to use these same paths.

[Guest Drysarcasm]

I would have liked it if the floater had had something on him belonging to Alex.

[HighPlainsDrifter]

Hey Drysarcasm if you like Luminary alot i highly recommend reading "Into The Wild" by Jon Kraukauer.....not sure if thats the correct spelling of his last name

[Guest F_Black]

You know, I just watched that episode a while back and I had the same thought. I'm a bit unmoved by the explanations offered above though. That doesn't seem like the sort of plot hole that Carter would let pass, even though he was apparently not that much involved in that season, so I am going to watch it again and see if there is any justification given. Frank seemed to be very logical about the whole thing, despite "seeing" the aurora and trusting that vision that Alex was still alive. He was adamant that the body was NOT Alex, therefore logically it shouldn't have anything to do with Alex.

But, you know, maybe there's some tidbit of dialog that would make him suspect he'd had recent contact.

[Guest MillenniumIsBliss]

You know, I just watched that episode a while back and I had the same thought. I'm a bit unmoved by the explanations offered above though. That doesn't seem like the sort of plot hole that Carter would let pass, even though he was apparently not that much involved in that season, so I am going to watch it again and see if there is any justification given. Frank seemed to be very logical about the whole thing, despite "seeing" the aurora and trusting that vision that Alex was still alive. He was adamant that the body was NOT Alex, therefore logically it shouldn't have anything to do with Alex.

But, you know, maybe there's some tidbit of dialog that would make him suspect he'd had recent contact.

I don't remember all of the previous discussion, but here is my take on it. I think Frank figured that if he could go to where the floater was, he could disprove that it was Alex, be able to tell Alex's family that he is not dead, stop the police from notifying Alex's parents that his body was found, and maybe, if he proved the dead body was not Alex, he could get some help in looking for him. Also, he would be able to satisfy any lingering doubt in his instincts, which told him it was not Alex. As mentioned previously, it was kind of a crap shoot as to where to begin looking for Alex, so why not go to an area that another outdoorsman was, given the possibility that some of the things that drew the other hiker to that area would have peeked Alex's interests as well. Also, if someone was out there living off the land, it would stand to reason that they would set up camp near the river, both to provide a source of water, and to give them some idea of location and sense of direction, so why not start the search there? I guess it's just one of those things that remains open for debate, and there is not right or wrong answer, but it works for me and it's not a big enough problem to detract from the episode. At least not in my opinion. I too am interested in going back and watching it again to see if they make it more clear. I guess it's also possible that they cut a scene or some dialogue in the script that made it more clear. You never know.