Talk: Lost: The Story of the Oceanic 6

Article[]

I have created this article based on this, since the show and the title appear on the ABC shedule. If it should have been left until after episode 13, feel free to remove it :)--Baker1000 13:30, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

This blows[]

This blows. Why do they waste a week with a recap episode?! I agree, one at the start of each Season is relevant, but not at this stage.--Ben 10:05, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Well more than likely it was so ABC can air the remaining episodes in the May sweeps. But you just know that they're going to be promoting the hell out of the episode after the break being the 100th episode. I agree, it does suck, especially after being told the remaining 3 seasons would air with no breaks. Season 4's break was out of their control, but if they had aired just one episode instead of two on the premiere night, then they could have avoided the break before "Namaste". But I guess getting two episodes at once has it's consequences after all. In fact, if they had aired it in the last week of January like everyone expected then they could have avoided all the breaks altogether.--Baker1000 16:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I hate breaks too, they make me want to stick a hot poker in my eye. On the plus side the commentator for the preview for next week said the "the tale of the O6" would be told from a different point of view So maybe we'll get something useful or insightful out of it. And I do think (hope) the 100th episode will be something special.--Mrnotwen 03:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Come on, it just wouldn't be Lost if we didn't have a clip show to complain about SOMETIME this season. :p Rawr? 21:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

If the clip is from the perspective of Bram/Ilana/Caesar/Lapidus, then it might be worth watching. You know, let's say whoever is watching the O6 is briefing his new team on the situation... that could be cool. Jack Dutton 04:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure if anybody remembers me, but I am the guy who complained about the last break between the episodes, which can be found here for convenience. Whoever wrote that comment below mine was spot on with the eerie (and albeit disappointing) prediction. It does suck, but my friends, take solace in the fact that this means Lost is coming to an end and we, as fans, will have to wait a much longer six months (or more).--Countdown 23:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Was this just the DVD extra from season 4 with all the O6 clips in chronological order? Or was it something new? ---- LOSTonthis darnisland 21:14, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hasn't aired yet, but I hope it's different than The Oceanic Six: A Conspiracy of Lies. The title isn't the same, so it hopefully will be a new clip show.-- Steele talk contribs 21:40, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I don't think it will be the DVD feature. The press release said it will also focus on the events which happened on-island in the 3 years after the Island was moved. So it can't be the Conspiracy Documentary.--Baker1000 22:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

This is terrible. The Spark Notes version makes the show seem really melodramatic. Jack Dutton 01:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
- Agree. This is just having me further speculate on The Swan and The Incident. I am really waiting for the Finale (but will gladly see all the (new) content available). This doesn't qualify as new content :( Ahrotahntee 01:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Awful awful. i couldnt watch more than 15 minutes of this. at least it wasnt popup video lost like theyve done. Honestly, I hope ABC dosnt think they are going to increase viewership with this garbage. it makes lost seem so cornball. i been trying to get some of my friends to get into lost, but these recap things are just useless. they turned off a few people i know. the best thing for increasing viewership is the free online episodes (fantastic make sure to feedback ABC for this). this is why i started watching, and where my obsession grew from. ABC could have done better with a 30 second ad about the abc lost webpage and the free episode player. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mattw1027 (talk • contribs) 2009-04-23T14:54:27.
This page isn't a forum and opinion comments really shouldn't be posted here. That said, I agree with all the above. This clip show was an unmitigated disaster. Robert K S tell me 00:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I know this isn't a discussion forum, but I must say that I thouroughly enjoyed this clip show. It was different from all the other common recaps we usually get. It also had some good tidbits of info. -- CTS Talk Contribs 01:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Updates Needed on Episode Pages![]

I have been suggesting for a while that all the synopsis headings titled "2008" that occur on the Island be changed to "2007" since there have never been scenes from 2008 on the Island, and flight 316 went through a time warp sending the plane back to 2007. Since this was again confirmed via the narrator of the recap, I suggest that the corresponding subject heads be changed accordingly. For example, on "The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham" page, the 2008 needs to be changed to 2007. On the "Namaste" page however, there needs to be a 2008 section for the events that happened before the time warp and a 2007 section for the events that happened after it. I am not going to list all the pages but all the episode pages need to be reviewed and modified accordingly. The point is that we have never seen the Island in 2008, and further, there is no evidence that the Island even exists in the year 2008. The 316ers are in 2007! --Mrmagic522 03:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree (mostly) and if anyone says recap episodes are "non-canonical" or something, I'm going to scream a little.--Znils 05:31, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Not only that, this combined with Locke's passport date lets us nail down a reasonable timeline with actual dates. See Talk:Timeline and Talk:Timeline:2005 and beyond --Pyramidhead 06:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Can we have the relevant direct quote to which you are referring please? --Jackdavinci 07:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually, there's evidence to suggest this may be wrong - Locke's passport was issued December 12, he killed himself at least a week later, then Jack said he was visited "about a month ago" at the funeral home. There's just too many extra days for it to still be 2007. So I think this should be considered non-canon, at least for now. --Pyramidhead 15:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
- No one is suggesting that the flight didn't take off in 2008. That part is agreed upon. The change is that the flight landed on the island in 2007. Therefore some kind of timewarp occured. We know this isn't impossible due to everyone/everything so far who has approached the island on the wrong heading, experienced a time differential of some sort. NEVERGIVEUP Contribs Talk 15:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Widmore staged the crash?[]

Did anyone else hear them say that Widmore staged the crash?! I really didn't think they would come right out and reveal that in a clip show. I was kind of hoping that would be a big secret to be revealed later. What do you guys think? Is this canon? Was there a use of the word "presumably" or something that I missed? Brotha305 03:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I was going to ask the same thing. I don't think they would just tell us like that, especially when they reminded us recently that it was an open question. I hope it is not canon, because that is a crappy way to reveal the answer. --Emissary23 04:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's sort of consistent with what they've been showing us on the show (re: Widmore/crash); we've seen been shown pieces/material of this from multiple angles - I wouldn't consider them talking about this outright as really a big reveal. Granted, its spelled out, but still, we've seen evidence from a few different characters at a few different points in time. By this point, we've also learned that Widmore has a huge interest in the island and is able to find John Locke right as he exits via the FDW mechanism and his own cameras/etc. While we still have much to learn about this situation itself, it's definitely consistent with the show's canon. Id go with majority on this for sure, just a thought AlaskaDave 04:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

- It's anything but clear, based on what we've seen in proper episodes, that it was Widmore. It could just as easily have been Ben. Think about it: whoever faked the wreckage presumably did it so that noone would go looking for 815. Widmore is already looking for the Island, so if anyone else is looking, he can just hijack their research and results. Ben is the one who has gone to great lengths to keep the Island hidden, so from a motivation standpoint, he is the more likely candidate. Either way, it was an open question for me before this recap episode, and I am disappointed that it was answered by a narrator in a clip show. --Emissary23 05:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's not crystal clear, but it's fairly obvious. The implication is that the documents Miles mentioned while reading the dead body were the same documents Tom showed Michael, and that Tom probably killed the guy to get them. Since those documents had Widmore's name on them and were receipts for his own activities, it's likely Widmore is behind the fake crash. Yes, Tom could have faked those documents, but if so he wouldn't have needed to kill Widmore's man to get them. He could have created his own. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions

Also, when Locke accused Widmore to his face that he faked the plane wreckage, Widmore didn't deny it. --Celebok 15:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

In that same episode, Abaddon (who we finally really see is working with Widmore) made the implication that the walkabout was a direct connection to Locke being on 815. Desmond turning the fail-safe caused the island to be seen for those who were looking for it (at the time, we only saw Penny's pov of it). I'm hoping we'll see a future episode that shows the same scene from Widmore's pov or something. But the connection between Widmore and the fake wreckage is talked about in a variety of ways, I still wouldn't consider this a "big reveal" - it's completely consistent with what we've seen on the show. AlaskaDave 02:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Someone not denying doing something is not evidence that they did it. Gohlkus 15:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Not sure. The implication being what it is, Miles only said that Felix was bringing the documents to Widmore. It could have been a second set of evidence implicating Ben. Think about it: If Widmore had faked the crash, why would he have his man bring him evidence against himself? Wouldn't he just order the reciepts and photos destroyed? It's more likely that a 3rd party, the "shadow of the statue" people, faked the crash and made sure that Ben and Widmore were each provided with evidence implicating the other. Divide and conquer, right? --Emissary23 06:19, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

The simplest explanation is that they were the same set of documents, because when Miles described them, the descriptions referred to the same activities which Tom's documents did. To say it was a separate set of documents referring to the same activities (digging up dead bodies, orderng a plane) is a bit convoluted -- not impossible, but convoluted. As to why he would order those documents? Well, Widmore is a businessman, and even if he is a shady one, he will naturally want receipts of everything he spends money on. I also think attributing the faked crash to a third party is a bit of a stretch as well. The simplest explanation is usually the best. While it's possible I'm wrong, until any evidence to the contrary is given (which seems unlikely as this clip show confirmed this hypothesis), the burden of proof will fall upon the more convoluted explanation. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions

Man, I'm so glad I'm not the only one who thought it wasn't so "clear." All my friends and family made fun of me for thinking that Felix was bringing evidence to Widmore of someone ELSE'S (i.e. Ben's) activities. I just thought that was the simplest, most obvious way to interpret that scene. So when they clipshow said it was Widmore I had egg on my face. I figured I had just missed something big or was overthinking it or something. So glad to see what I'm not alone! My guess is that whoever wrote the narration for the O6 Special made the same presumption that a lot of people apparently made, but that what they said shouldn't be taken as canon. I want to hear official ruling from Darlton on this matter. Jacob's Lather 10:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I second the request for an official ruling. --Emissary23 06:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

VOTE: YES this is cannon-I agree that before this recap show, it wasn't 100% clear that it was Widmore who staged the crash. From what I perceived, that is the way they were going. I do believe that this reveal is cannon because it is an ABC produced show. You could argue that Darlton didn't put the facts of this together, but there is no way that Darlton just let the show be aired without viewing it 1st. NO WAY. This show is their baby & wouldn't let ABC screw up something like this. The confirmation that while Ajira 316 departed in the year 2008, it landed on the island in 2007 is being considered cannon, & this (Widmore staged crash) should be too. I vote CANNON! NEVERGIVEUP Contribs Talk 12:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed - you can't say an episode is canon for one thing, but not something else, simply because it doesn't jive with what you thought was going on with the show. This episode was shown at the same time (and on the same day) as "regular" episodes are - and Darlton were involved with it, as they were with the previous clip shows we've considered canon - why would we change things now? I still don't see the "big reveal"; this is what I assumed was happening all along. You know, some narrative aspect of the show involves accepting things at face value - not everything is an Easter Egg or has deeper meaning.I think its a bit shortsighted to call non-canon, especially when we've considered previous episodes like this as canon, and when the marjority are using this ep to confirm the Ajira timeline - we can't say its canon for one thing and not another.AlaskaDave 13:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Agree - While I accept this revelation as canon, I do not believe that it was as clear as crystal. It's not a matter of accepting something at face value (like "Is it the same statue?" or "Is this really Faraday's mother?") or even deeper meanings. This was a scenario where two people were blamed for the same thing and evidence for both was given on the show. Granted the evidence was leaning more toward Widmore anyway but it was still opened ended as something Ben could have done. Anyway I think people (including me) are more bummed that this was just thrown out there in a clip show and not revealed in an episode. Kind of a crappy way to do it if you ask me. Brotha305 16:15, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Disagree - In the March 19, 2009 podcast, the producers confirmed that they do not regulate the pop-ups that air during the enhanced episodes and they should not be considered canon. I see no reason why we should consider this episode to be canon simply because ABC put it together when they are also responsible for the non-canon enhanced episodes. Ortrules 16:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

The reason they said the pop-ups we'ren't canon was because they didnt have time to regulate the information released in them - they didnt have anything to do with the text that went in the popups. However, these types of sit-down-and-re-focus (like this week clip show) are meant to bring everyone up to speed on the major chronological narrative of the show that we're up to, kinda clear the cobwebs before we move towards the finale. The difference between the enhanced episode text and these types of episodes are that Damon and Carlton are releasing the information with their own bodies, versus some marketing company they're not even affiliated with. While the enhanced eps were created by the same people that did of the other clip shows/summaries, keep in mind the enchanced eps weren't shown outside of the US and Canada (once in the UK), it makes sense the enhanced eps aren't canon, but these are different because they do regulate these types of shows - they're physically present for them. Thats my take at least. AlaskaDave 02:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Disagree - What's with all the canon-pouncing? I know we're all excited to talk LOST in a bye week, but D&C don't make the recap episodes, so we should exercise a little patience when parsing their reliability.--Do a cannonball 15:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree it should be considered canon, despite the fact that it was anything but clear to a lot of people, including myself, that Widmore did it. I would still like TPTB to come out and tell us that it's true, but as far as the wiki goes, we should consider it canon until/unless we hear otherwise. --Emissary23 16:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes this is canon. The enhanced cliff notes were created by a third party -- these clip shows are undisputed canon because they are created by ABC (Darlton). -- CTS Talk Contribs 02:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Actually no, they are not created by ABC or Darlton. They are done by the same production company as the enhanced episodes. CTS, you inserted clip shows into the top section at canon, but those other six points all have sourced references. Do you have one where TPTB comment on the canonicity of clip shows in which they don't appear? I've never seen it. Also, this really should be discussed at talk:canon instead of being voted on here. -- Graft talk contributions 04:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I started a discussion over there. Ultimately, though, I won't be satisfied until TPTB come out and confirm or deny that Widmore faked the crash...How do we make that happen? --Emissary23 05:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Easy, if you just watch The Variable, you'll see Charles Widmore state it explicitly :p AlaskaDave 08:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Now that Widmore has said he faked the crash in the last episode of Lost (The Variable), are you people satisfied it is now canon? Or do you still need to hear something from Darlton?--Countdown 10:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)