Just FYI
If you're checking up on this site around Tuesday, April 27th and are wondering why a new Lost hasn't aired on ABC, it is because The show is on a one-week hiatus and will return the next Tuesday, May 4.--Pittsburghmuggle 00:54, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
- Anyone know why it's going on hiatus for a week? Is it a production reason, are they trying to place the finale in a big time, is it to accommodate some other show...? --Golden Monkey 04:09, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
- My theory (and it's only a theory, mind you), is that they decided they wanted the finale on a Sunday night, so they moved all the episodes forward in time rather than shorting themselves a few days of production time.--Pittsburghmuggle 06:54, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
- You might be right about the gaining a few days and airing on a Sunday part, but all the other episodes are not moving at all. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions
- Okay, the real reason is when the smoke monster is in smoke form he only eats Apollo Bars, and they were out of them.--Pittsburghmuggle 07:41, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
- I think it was because May sweeps started on April 29, so if they pushed it back a week, then the final four episodes will begin and end in sweeps week. --SilentSpy 04:15, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- You might be right about the gaining a few days and airing on a Sunday part, but all the other episodes are not moving at all. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions
- My theory (and it's only a theory, mind you), is that they decided they wanted the finale on a Sunday night, so they moved all the episodes forward in time rather than shorting themselves a few days of production time.--Pittsburghmuggle 06:54, April 26, 2010 (UTC)
Episode connections
New guidelines
Recent reference guidelines, which allowed only explicit references through dialogue, excluded a lot of useful content. I've contacted several people over the past month about including more subtle connections. Everyone with an opinion agreed. Connections now appear under two subheadings:
- Episode references - when characters describe a previous scene
- Episode allusions - when scenes merely echo previous scenes
I've detailed elsewhere the differences between the two. Don't go crazy with allusions. We'll vet them through consensus, as we do with unanswered questions. When in doubt, first discuss. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 10:21, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
- Brilliant. We need this. I'm not sure when the "rules" changed, or who decided it, because it was never discussed. All of a sudden, a clear reference to a previous scene is no long a reference because the character specificaly refer to the scene in question. This meant "Locke's" bad day comment to Sun wasn't allowed, neither was MIB's "sooner than you think" line. I reckon you'll have to create the sub-headings yourself when the article is unlocked anyway, but hopefully no one gets carried away and starts removing the allusions heading because they disagree.--Baker1000 20:39, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
Centric?
Jack centric, right? Or Jack, Locke centric? SLRibs 01:59, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Both, I'd say. --LeoChris 02:03, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Wasn't it just Jack? There were definitely no flashes from Lockes pov. InflatableBombshelter 02:04, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- First flash started in Locke's eyes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SLRibs (talk • contribs) 2010-05-04T21:04:45.
- So? A flash has to start on the person whose centricity it is? Calling this a Jack and Locke centric episode is like saying A Tale of Two Cities is Jack and Juliet centric. Oh wait, people here don't understand the meaning of "centricity" so that is what it would be called.--HaloOfTheSun 02:09, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I say Jack centric. And remember Eggtown started with Locke as well, but that wasn't Locke centric.--Frank J Lapidus 03:36, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Jack and Locke centric. Jimbo the Tubby talk contributions 02:12, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
I'd say more on the side of Locke. He was the title character, and almost every Jack scene was about Locke and his past. Last episode was more on the side of Jack, this one more on the side of Locke. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions- I'd say Flash sideways to Jack and Locke, centricity to Jack. (Kdc2 02:14, May 5, 2010 (UTC))
- I agree with Jack + Locke. Not only were they the primary characters in the sideflash, but the on-island events were mainly a series of "moves" in a game between the two. Definitely Jack + Locke. --michael_is_NOT_in_the_coffin 02:22, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Im Jack + Locke, clear focus on both and both had multiple POV flashes. Thats usually the criteria. -- B1G CZYGS Talk Contribs 02:25, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Definitely Jack and Locke. --Bish-Fiscuit 02:33, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
Jack and Locke for sure. Sophia108 02:38, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
Jack and Locke. Jack had the majority of the POV flashes, but the first and last began with Locke's POV and the plot was much more about Locke than Jack. --Golden Monkey 03:13, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
Jack centric only. The episode starting with Locke means nothing. What matters is that the flash ended with Jack and the immediately following scene also focused on Jack. This is the case for every single sideways sequence in the episode. --Pyramidhead 04:25, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Didn't the Island sequence following the flashsideway with Cooper start with a close-up on Locke? (Going from Anthony onto Locke)? --LeoChris 04:29, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- So...what does that signify? Alt Locke wasn't in that that scene at all. Okay, so what I described didn't happen every time, but I couldn't even begin to list the times that a flash-whatever transitioned to something completely unrelated with different characters on the island. It doesn't change anything. --Pyramidhead 04:41, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- But the entire episode was about Locke. He was even the title character. Jack was just a facilitator for the audience to learn more about Locke. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions
- ...just as "The Brig" was about Sawyer, arguably. It's not always cut-and-dry, but the structure of the episode makes this a Jack episode. --Pyramidhead 04:41, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Also, the title character could just as likely refer to Jack, or to any of the five. There's always a double meaning. --Pyramidhead 04:46, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
Frank
- This may seem like a stupid question, but are we 100% sure he's dead? We didn't see him drown, unlike Sun and Jin... in fact, we hadn't seen him in a while, maybe he swam out somehow? --LeoChris 02:03, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
He was in a totally different room that flooded much faster and the door came out on him. I'd say he died. SLRibs 02:04, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I bet he's alive. We didn't see a body, and they need him to pilot the plane. Either way, like Jin on the Kahana, it's at least ambiguous at this point. --Butseriouslyfolks 02:48, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I think he's dead... Frank was below in the engine room. Hardly any chance getting above the water. Crappy send-off, but this episode was all around pretty crappy overall. Deadmaus 02:54, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I definitely don't think he's definitely dead. --Bish-Fiscuit 03:07, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- It could go either way, but I think that if Frank was dead we would have been shown it for sure. Of course, his body could just be discovered later or something, but I think there's a chance he made it. --Golden Monkey 03:17, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- We should keep Frank's status as unknown. I think there's still a good chance he's alive, we didn't see him again after the door hits him.--Frank J Lapidus 03:38, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
Rose and Bernard
It is yet undetermined what happened to Rose and Bernard, so the page should not note that there are only 6 left from Oceanic 815.--Shmibar 02:15, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I agree. We haven't heard anything about them since the Losties flashed out of Dharma times. We don't even know if they came with them. --michael_is_NOT_in_the_coffin 02:23, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
6 Left from Oceanic 815 entirely is wrong as well. Middle section - Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Hurley and Claire. Rose is unknown, Walt is off the island. That make 7 from the middle section. Tail section - Bernard is unknown, Cindy and the kids are unknown, the rest is fuzzy. All we know is that some people who were taken from the tail section, not sure if they were later killed, or are like Cindy at the moment. I've just updated Body count, this gives an overall status of the characters. Phobia27 03:08, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
Bomb
- Why does the bomb go off, but Jack and Richard are saved in the 1800s ship? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deadmaus (talk • contribs) 2010-05-04T21:57:46.
- Maybe because Sawyer tried to disarm it. If Sawyer hadn't tried to disarm the bomb, maybe it wouldn't have gone off as Jack stated b/c MIB can't kill them, but since Sawyer interfered with the bomb, it was able to go off. Alienux|talk|contributions 03:22, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Nope, Richard was the one that lite the dynamite so he would have been the one to kill them similar to Sawyer killing everyone today. My guess is because they were on the island in the boat but the sub was far enough off shore.Rukkis 03:38, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Richard's not a candidate. Only a candidate can kill a candidate. That's why Jack had to make Sayid take the pill. --Orhan94 03:42, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Smokey cant kill them, they cant kill themselves, but them killing each other is a somewhat hazy subject. And Sawyer definitely initiated the 'quick' countdown, insinuating that the explosion was his doing at it's core than the doing of Smokey. And let us remember; Sawyer did not die. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shatarlore (talk • contribs) 2010-05-04T22:44:32.
- What about, say, the Rousseaus? Keamy isn't a candidate, as far as we know ... --LeoChris 03:45, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's safe to say anyone who's been killed at this point was not a candidate. CaptainSmartass 03:53, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Except for all those candidates. But other than that, yeah.--HaloOfTheSun 04:04, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's safe to say anyone who's been killed at this point was not a candidate. CaptainSmartass 03:53, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- What about, say, the Rousseaus? Keamy isn't a candidate, as far as we know ... --LeoChris 03:45, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Nope, Richard was the one that lite the dynamite so he would have been the one to kill them similar to Sawyer killing everyone today. My guess is because they were on the island in the boat but the sub was far enough off shore.Rukkis 03:38, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe because Sawyer tried to disarm it. If Sawyer hadn't tried to disarm the bomb, maybe it wouldn't have gone off as Jack stated b/c MIB can't kill them, but since Sawyer interfered with the bomb, it was able to go off. Alienux|talk|contributions 03:22, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
Ilana
Did anyone happen to notice whether Zuleikha Robinson was credited for the episode? Jimbo the Tubby talk contributions 03:54, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- She was, I looked for it.--Frank J Lapidus 03:54, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
The "unspoken revelation" that Sun is the Candidate
What is this? Who put it there? When did this take place? Illyrias Acolyte 04:42, May 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Never mind, it was removed. If it comes back, kindly explain it. Illyrias Acolyte 04:44, May 5, 2010 (UTC)