Talk: The Cost of Living

To any SysOps, speak to User:GodEmperorOfHell about this. --SilvaStorm

This page has been deleted twice already. Why why why? As it says on Lost Season 3/prespoilers: "Do not create episode pages until the title is confirmed by an official source such as abcmedianet.com" --Minderbinder 08:42, 13 October 2006 (PDT)

Deleted it again. GEoH's talk page references to the new drafted theory policy, which he seems to agree with. It says not to post these until they're confirmed. If there's something specific from an admin that signals a change in policy, please point me specifically to it. Did you look at the prespoiler page, where it specifically says not to put these up? --Minderbinder 07:58, 14 October 2006 (PDT)

Ah! I have proof this episode exists. --SilvaStorm

Provide citation or the page stays protected. Thanks, --Nickb123 (Talk) 10:30, 15 October 2006 (PDT)

So where's the proof? --Minderbinder 11:57, 15 October 2006 (PDT)

=Deletion[]

Delete and/or Lock--Captain Insano 10:13, 15 October 2006 (PDT)

Air Date[]

Air Date should be changed to 11/1, not 11/25BrightStars1212 17:11, 16 October 2006 (PDT)

Well....[]

...that was anticlimactic.............--Mighty Rearranger 19:15, 1 November 2006 (PST)

Sure, but it was TOTALLY EXPLETIVING AWESOME!--NotARedHerring 21:55, 1 November 2006 (PST)

I admit, it was probably the best appearance of the monster thus far and the flashback was about ten times better than last week, but I didn't care for the overall hatch mission and killing of Eko. One would think that Locke's gonna be quite distraught now...--Mighty Rearranger 11:47, 2 November 2006 (PST)

Definitely the most predictable episode yet. So predictable in fact that many people were hoping that it wasn’t going to happen the way it did. I am so under impressed with the smoke cloud monster. I can’t think of any pseudo science explanation for it that I would find even remotely plausible (Nanobot cloud would have been the closest, but it has been stated that it isn’t that). If it is explained as some sort of paranormal reflection of a person’s nature I’ll frigg’n puke.--ASEO 06:06, 3 November 2006 (PST)

I don't think it's really fair to call an episode "predictable" when the biggest plot point was leaked out as ahead of time. Many people knew what was going to happen, but because they read spoilers, not because they figured it out. --Minderbinder 06:15, 3 November 2006 (PST)

My point being that they gave away to much in the previews...much like Soylent Blue. I noticed that at least where I was watching, there were no previews for next weeks episode.--ASEO 06:27, 3 November 2006 (PST)

Authors secret[]

Do the authors have a secret policy to kill off any character played by an actor who gets in trouble with the law? Eko’s death couldn’t possibly have been part of the over all story script. It was so weak…Oooo Smoke Monster gets him while he is just wandering around hallucinating. Heck it would have been more mysterious if he’d been hit by lightning, or more believable if he had been killed by the polar bear.--ASEO 06:06, 3 November 2006 (PST)

USA today ran an article saying that AAA asked to leave the show. Apparently both of his parents died recently and he wanted to return home and write and direct an autobiographical project. (Whether that's true or not, we'll probably never know) --Minderbinder 06:17, 3 November 2006 (PST)

Interesting, and that too would explain the untimley removal of the character.--ASEO 06:24, 3 November 2006 (PST)

To me it seems that Echo was to take the place of the 'warrior' while Locke was pushing the button. Since there is no button to push now and Locke being "reborn", having 2 similar character-types makes one of the expendible. Viewer loyalty lies with Locke, although I cracked a tear when Echo got smashed. mikepoz

Music[]

Gleefully and geekfully I ask... anyone peg the tunes? The funeral song, and if you're really good, the song in Eko's car. --Brother 19:25, 1 November 2006 (PST)

I would, but I think I got the last one wrong :) --Mighty Rearranger 19:30, 1 November 2006 (PST)

Locke[]

Don't you guys think it is strange to see Locke sort of 'expecting' the situations? Like for example, He seemed to be smiling and not in shock when he saw the Eyepatch Man on the video feed, and also he didn't seem distraught when Eko died. Nusentinsaino talk contribs email 11:32 PM, 1 November 2006 (EST)

Locke, even after the events of the Swan, still believes in Fate. I imagine he takes Eko's death as the intended end of his life, and gets nearly excited knowing there are other people, in other stations, on this island. Notice he immediately said "I guess he'll be expecting us", sounding like he wished to head there to get more answers. Joel Van Atta 20:35, 1 November 2006 (PST).

Theory[]

No suprise that the theory section lacks any real theories, and is jammed full of speculation. Take a look at the Theory policy page and clear up the mess you all made!!!!!!!!!

- Mikey - "so emo, it hurts"©

Moonlight Serenade?[]

Was the funeral song Moonlight Serenade? --Bremerton 08:48, 2 November 2006 (PST)

Theories/Speculation[]

Yes, I am aware that the theory sections get out of hand...and often need to be cleaned up. But, hello, the nature of the show is so serialized that "theoretical speculation" has got to be allowed to take place, as long as it's not TOTALLY RIDICULOUS (ie. The Polar Bear is a de-evolved Alvar Hanzo).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frankie Viturello (talk • contribs) .

Speculation is allowed. You just have to do it on the talk page, not on the article page. --Minderbinder 11:07, 2 November 2006 (PST)

From the section on posting theories - A theory differs from speculation in that it is backed up with logically consistent observations and facts. Without supporting evidence, statements are merely speculation.

Nikki claims that Marvin Candle / Mark Wickmund explains in the Pearl Orientation Video that there are six stations.(to be observed from The Pearl) This claim is false, as he never explains the exact number of stations present on the island, or how many are to be observed. (The only numerical evidence provided is the 5 of 6 on the opening title card.) This may be an early indication of Nikki (and/or Paulo) having more information about the island than we are lead to believe.

6 placards == 6 monitors == 6 stations. Wickmund/Candle said it was a monitoring station. She's allowed to jump to conclusions.

- Did anyone else notice the placards next to each monitor? I have a freezeframe that shows 6 monitors and 6 placards. Behind the ABCHD bug there's one that says "6" Lostfan612 20:33, 3 November 2006 (PST)

There's nine screens. ∇ϕ 23:36, 3 November 2006 (PST)

Well, from what I recall there are multiple cameras in each station? the "extra" three could just be the three cameras in the station being observed at the moment. But I don't recall seeing any numbers on the "extra" three which is why I pulled the shot that I did. Lostfan612 09:20, 5 November 2006 (PST)

If you go back to the ? episode, and look carefully, I'm sure you'll find the other numbers, if that's what you're really interested in. ∇ϕ 04:14, 7 November 2006 (PST)

I don't understand why this theory, which is backed up with "logically consistent observations and facts" that CAN be audio/visually VERIFIED per the episode and the orientation video, was deleted. If somebody can give me a reason other than that they "don't agree with the theory (based on their own bias)" (or some semantics that basically say the same thing), I'm going to return it to the page.

Frankie Viturello (sorry, forgot to sign it originally)

Please remember to sign your comments on the discussion page, so we know who we're talking to. Thanks!-Beardog4314 11:21, 2 November 2006 (PST)

See, the line between "speculation" and "theory" (or at least how they're described and qualified (and often debated) here is too amorphous. I backed up what I'd call a "theory" with checkable information and provided links, and yet it's still pointed out as "speculation". And, I'm not claiming that it's NOT speculation, however, it's also a working theory...and it's AS logical as most of the other theories on the episode page, as well as no LESS un-likely.

If the problem is in the read/wording, I can easily reverse the order of explanation (ie - "Nikki may know more about the island than has been revealed, as she revealed the number of hatches / stations on the island as "SIX". She claimed that on the Pearl Orientation Video Mark Wickmund stated the number of stations, which he does not.)

Though, again, it still says the same thing.

Frankie Viturello

I don't think Nikki saying there are six stations proves anything. The 5/6 on the title card is reason enough for her to think there are six. --Minderbinder 12:18, 2 November 2006 (PST)

It's not MEANT to PROVE anything, and the crux of what I was saying is not that SHE says there are SIX stations, she QUOTES Dr. Candle as saying so in the video that they just sat down and watched, A.) Which he doesn't say and B.) Which she doesn't play when she rewinds the tape to prove her point to Locke and the others. She MAY have ACCIDENTALLY slipped with information that she did not intend to. I think that I'm being rational and logical here, it's not like I'm pulling things out of thin air...there was a undercurrent of deception in that section of the episode that I could clearly feel, and I'm sorry you didn't/can't pick up on.Frankie Viturello

Look...goto YouTube and watch the Pearl Orientation video, at the begining, it clearly says Station 5 of 6. Problem Solved. She just didn't rewind to the correct place when she went to show Locke. Josh B

There's no way she could rewind it to the place where she claims "the guy said there are six stations" because he never says that. Even though the card says 5 of 6, Dr. Candle does not say anything about the number of stations on the island.Frankie Viturello

The theory is based on her dialouge. She claims that "the guy says that there are six stations" yet he DOES NOT SAY that there are six stations. The title card says 5 of 6 (does it say "station" in the non-bogus versions on YouTube?)...yet she doesn't say the picture says five of six, she says "the guy" says that. While, in other television dramas throw-away lines of dialouge like that are worth passing over, I think that we've all learned that LOST is a whole other animal. We need to pay attention to the details...most importantly the ones that SEEM mundane. If it bothers the collective so much as to not allow it to occupy the same space as other "theories" that are obviously equal parts "speculation" then I'll leave it off...but, I'm more than a bit peeved that people can't deal with these types of things in a more passive manner. Just leave it there and let it be what it is, a speculative theory. Frankie Viturello

If we leave one speculation, we have to leave them all. And then you end up with articles that are just tons and tons of unsupported theories. No thanks. I'll check the show when I get the chance, I remember both Candle and Nikki saying "stations" but I don't remember if either said six. It's entirely possible that the episode made a change to what Candle said, either intentionally or by mistake (but that still doesn't mean Nikki knows anything). --Minderbinder 13:53, 2 November 2006 (PST)

Almost everything in the theory section can be called "speculation". Any statements that use the terms "maybe" or "perhaps" or "could be" are speculative or show a modicum of DOUBT in their own point. Is it the brevity of the statements that make them "theory" and not "speculation"? Was my theory too wordy to be acceptable vs. a speculation that is one sentence long? Furthermore, in most cases, it appears that when somebody disagrees with a "theory" instead of deleting it, they provide a bullet counterpoint argument providing some type of rebuttal / factual information disproving said theory. I wasn't even offered that courtesy. --Frankie Viturello

Maybe Nikki just did not explain her reasoning properly, or it is a production error. Either way, the title card is enough information to assume that there is either six stations or six films. Nick2010 19:32, 2 November 2006 (PST)

The main point of lostpedia is not to further personal ideas about where the show is going, but to record facts about the show. Theories are secondary, and from what I can tell, that section was deleted correctly according to the policy; speculation is the perogative of any editor to delete. On the question about the video, check Pearl Orientation Video, where we have very properly recorded such canon (verbatum transcript of the video), another good example of why we need to focus on facts rather than theories here... rather than say "I think I heard that, but I can't remember", I can go to Lostpedia to check (no, not 100% reliable ALL the time, because of some of this speculative stuff going on, but because we have so many good editors here, more trustworthy over time than elsewhere, IMHO). --Pandora X 19:45, 2 November 2006 (PST)

Again, BRUTAL semantics abound! The bottom line (IMHO) is that contrary to what some users would have you belive, I DID my own fact checking before I posted the theory. I watched the epsiode and checked the video against the dialouge. I'd venture to guess that the user who deleted the theory didn't even bother to check the video against the episode dialouge. It's nice to believe that point of lostpedia is NOT to further personal ideas about where the show is going, but to even HAVE a section called "theories" which works in an open edit format for all lostpedia users to manipulate...well, come on now, you're going to get a LOT of "personal ideas about where the show is going" it's simply the NATURE of the section. I mean, WHERE ELSE DO THEORIES COME FROM? They don't just fall out of the sky, they're created by a viewer/lostpedia user who INFERS something from events/lines of dialouge/actions/incidental music/etc. etc. in any given episode where facts are not explicity presented by the writers/actors, hell it's the damned nature of LOST itself: to keep us guessing and theorizing! And while some theories are OBVIOUSLY inappropriate, ridiculous, and downright silly, it's frustrating and insulting to have to deal with such elitism while attempting to positively contribute to something to do with a show I surely feel the same way as the rest of you about. Whatever. I suppose from now on I'll just contribute to the hard fact/trivia sections where "speculation" and "theory" are nowhere to be found and/or debated. --Frankie Viturello

Theory/spec has nothing to do with length, whether there's potential doubt, it's simply whether a theory has facts to back it up. It's true that the theory section is often abused, but that's not justification for keeping in spec that deserves to be deleted. If there is spec or debating in the theories section, delete it or move it to the talk page. Your accusations of elitism and such are silly - you need to take the advice on the edit page to heart: If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here. As for the Nikki theory, it's true that Candle never says outright that there are six stations. I don't know if that's a mistake or the writers just bending things for dramatic purposes. But even though Candle doesn't say it, it's obvious that there are six stations from the video: the graphic says 5 of 6 and Candle says you are in station five. Any person with common sense would come to the same conclusion as Nikki, there's no reason to believe she has any other source of info. --Minderbinder 05:49, 3 November 2006 (PST)

Well, thank you for at least recognizing that in the video he doesn't say six stations. Part of my frustration had to do with the fact that people were questioning the validity of that part of the theory.--Frankie Viturello

I don't happen to think Nikki's slip up was anything more than just poor phrasage since the information was in the video albeit unspoken, tho I admit to finding it amusing that she emphasized the word *six* and then rewinded the tape to where he says 'stations' and then changed her emphasis to 'stationS'. On the other hand, despite people claiming that this is a speculation rather than a theory, there has been no actual evidence to support that assertion (so I guess they are just speculating that it is so!). It's clear that right now the line between speculation and theory is purely in the domain of the personal preference of the editors and not based on any coherent policy. I checked the page where it discusses the theory policy - it's vague, has no examples, and is basically useless, hence the resultant inconsistancy in compliance and disagreement as to application. I would vote to not delete anything in the theory section that isn't totally unreasonable until the theoery vs speculation policy can be properly defined. --Jackdavinci 17:07, 6 November 2006 (PST)

I'm sorry: I know I'm a year or five late to the party, but what were we talking about here? 8-) --stu4488 03:49, July 12, 2012 (UTC)

There is a part where Locke asks Eko what he saw, to which Eko replies "What did you see?" Locke says that he saw a beatiful bright light. However, then Eko mentions that he did not see that. Could it be that Locke saw heaven and Eko might have seen hell? Santiago Aguado

In this episode Eko said to Locke maybe that they are next. if this is correct I got my theory. First dies Eko, then Nikki and Paulo in 'Expose', then Locke in 'The Life and Death of Jeremy Bentham'. Sayid dies not, but he was shot in The Incident Parts 1 & 2. If Sayid dies, Desmond is next.--Station7 10:04, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Edit in order?[]

The "graveyard" is in very close proximity to The Pearl, which can be considered the central hub station of the DHARMA Initiative.
- The Pearl is centralized in PROXIMITY / LOCATION, however, it does not appear to have any further purpose than a "monitoring station" There are no living quarters like The Swan, or Staff stations, and no computer banks or industrial/scientific/medical equipment like The Swan, Hydra or Staff stations. Dharma members only serve daily shifts there, the return to the ferry for transport. So, I'm not sure if I'd go so far as to call it "the" central hub or elude to it being anything other than a monitoring station.

-Frankie Viturello

Monster issues[]

So i guess we can take it that the Monster not only can take different forms, but that it tailors them to the person(s) to which it appears.

Locke saw a bright and beautiful light. Eko saw the The Smoke Monster and possibly Yemi Kate would therefore see the horse but strangely so did Sawyer, who saw it before her.

So it might well take on a general 'physical' form rather than tapping into the mind of the viewer and just altering their perception of it. But this is by no means proved by the facts.

On top of this the Monster might be masquerading as a member of the losties... first thought this when Desmond was wandering around in the forest and then became suspicious of Hurley's appearance in the same episode.. now magically laden with supplied he didn't leave the Dock with and also his appearance we proceeded with that errie noise which prompted Locke's attack with the knife.

I think Desmond could now be excluded as he was with the team in the Pearl when the attack on Eko took place.

--MRNasher

I re-watched this episode today, and right before Ben says to Jack about "Two days before..." if you listen closely, you can hear mechanical noises that sound just like the Monster. Has anyone else heard this? --KittyLili

Hmm. I heard it, but I thought it was some kind of whale or other sea animal. That section of the Hydra is underwater, with metal walls; I'd imagine that would conduct any sounds coming from the ocean pretty well. --Shodan1138 15:20, 5 November 2006 (PST)

I also heard it and attributed it to the chains attached to bar that Jack was doing chin-ups on.

Take a look at the screen cap of the Monster retreating into the jungle after Eko turns to see it at the river (http://humpys.net/images/s3/monstergrab.jpg) -- it resembles the head of a polar bear. --maxximase

Hansco and Med deliveries[]

Was there anything that indicated that Hansco was involved with the medical Vacine deliveries? (Logo on van or boxes, that kind of thing?)--ASEO 08:23, 3 November 2006 (PST)

What is Hansco? --Ohmyn0 (talk) 15:48, 3 November 2006 (PST)

In the episodes it is explained tha the vaccine comes from the red cross. The logo on the van, while similar to "The Staff" logo, is simply the The Caduceus of Mercury, the universal symbol for medicine. --Arjayoh 06:17, 5 November 2006 (PST)

Cultural references[]

I deleted the following from the cultural references section, because it's too stretchy for the article. I could see someone making an argument for it being a theory, but while there certainly are several biblical references made in the show, there's no evidence that this was one of them. Even in spirit.

Furthermore, when Eko kneels before his brother and denies his need for mercy, his brother tells Eko, essentially, that he does not know him. Then he is grabbed by a giant hand that pummels him to death. This episode is very similar, in spirit, to Matthew 25:41, in which Jesus tells religious hypocrites who kept an external posture of religiosity but who did not have intimacy with Jesus based on his mercy, "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

-Beardog4314 13:24, 3 November 2006 (PST)

Watchmen / Eko Parallel[]

Just a crazy parallel I thought up after reading the Watchmen page, Eko believes he was in the right for killing people in order to save more people. However, this episode shows him refusing to repent for killing anyone in order to save his brother and such and thus he is killed by the monster. Perhaps the monster is angry at him not for his lack of repentence but rather because (this is of course assuming the 30% must die theory) he believed that the ends justified the means and thus killing people was reasonable if you were saving more people, and the monster disagreed.

Thoughts?

--11:38, 3 November 2006 (PST)

Maybe the black cloud, too, knows some must die to save the whole. It's not necessarily angry. It's just following the rule. --Brother 18:44, 3 November 2006 (PST)

Eko's whisper[]

Turning volume up makes it quite clear that locke is lying. To me it sounds like Eko is answering Locke's earlier question. "what did you see?".

Its muffled but it sounds similar to "I saw a black cloud". Which also explains the shock on Locke's face (having himself seen a bright light). Have a listen and give some feedback, worth putting up in main page? André-M13 15:29, 3 November 2006 (PST)

I don't know about that. I just relistened/watched that part and it was a soft word with a harsh syllable in the second. It could be You're next or You're dead or anything like that. Two, three syllables at best. Lostfan612

Im also taking into account the first mumble, he then takes a little pause and finishes with what i hear as "black cloud", because that harsh sound you hear sounds more like a C/K sound rather than an X. To me this just makes alot more sense than "your next".André-M13

Also, of course, if Eko says "you're next", how is Locke to know whether he should report it as "we're next" rather than as "I'm next"? TortureMeSayid 02:13, 5 November 2006 (PST)

On a practical note, the script might have just said "Eko whispers unintelligibly to Locke". Ya know how whenever people are whispering in TV shows, they're actually just going "fss pss hss fss"? 'cause that's what I heard. --Shodan1138 15:24, 5 November 2006 (PST)

Eye Patch Guy[]

Is it possible that the guy with the eye patch is just in the Arrow station behind blast doors and the reason the glass eye was just sitting there was because he couldn't get to it? He obviously knew there was a camera, but in the other hatches they were hidden, why does he know it is there? How could they find him? If the signal is one way they shouldn't be able to track where it is going. --Poppin' Fresh

in the episode where locke blows up the Flame station (Enter 77) there is a scene where locke notices the camera and it is flashing red. I would assume this flashing indicates that the camera view is "ON AIR". This may explain how Eye patch guy knew he was being viewed. It also brings up the question "Who was watching Locke?" in episode "Enter 77". --Indocid 09:32, 13 December 2007 (PST)

While/Whilst[]

It's not a "14th century" grammar issue. English-speaking people, from England, use "Whilst" in their regular speech. Kind of like how they spell color as "colour" or refer to gasoline as "petrol" -- it's called a dialect. Sociolinguistics and what-have-you. Don't be a grammar snob. --Amberjet11 09:59, 6 November 2006 (PST)

Sorry if I offended. I was not intentionally being US-centric (though it's hard to avoid as I am a US resident). I am aware of many of the differences between the US/UK English dialects, though this one was one I hadn't come across.

I spend much of my free time researching 14th and 15th century English cooking, so I'm fairly fluent in Middle English. When I came across the word "whilst" in the post, it read to me as someone from the US trying to sound intellectual. I've now mentally filed the "while/whilst" thing away for future reference.

What's the old bit about the US and England being two countries separated by a common language? Again, I did not mean to offend. Sorry. --Doc 09:33, 7 November 2006 (PST)

I appreciate the apology. I do know a lot of people who think their dialect is the *only* dialect, so I may have been a little harsh at first. I can see now why you made the error. Thanks! --Amberjet11 11:32, 8 November 2006 (PST)

Sayid[]

There are several mentions of Sayid in the main body of the text. To my recollection, Sayid, Jin, and Sun aren't back at camp yet. Could someone please research who it really was and change the text? Thanks! -- belle42

It is Sayid, however there's no trace of Sun and Jin in the episode - CJDTrismegistus

When last seen, Sayid was on the beach and Jin had just rescued Sun. How did all 3 make their way back to Lostie camp so fast (on foot, since the boat has been captured by the Others)? And why, after Hurley spills the news of Jack, Kate, and Sawyer being abducted, isn't the entire Lostie camp in a dither about trying to rescue them? -- lanespix

Juliet Video[]

I don't think anyone has mentioned this yet, but I noticed in the video Juliet showed Jack, Juliet was in a suburban house. The video obviously had to have been made for Jack which means it is pretty recent. Does this mean that the others are going to Otherville from the Hydra Island? I'm not sure if it means anything, but before that I kind of had the impression that the others weren't still living there after the plane crash. --108lawsoflost

Synopsis[]

The "On the Main Island" synopsis is far too long; it's comparable in length to summaries of some double episodes like Live Together, Die Alone. Furthermore, the synopsis reads as a action-by-action paraphrase of the transcript, rather than a synopsis of events. Will be attempting to rewrite soon. -- ^Contrib¯ _Santa_ ¯^Talk 00:43, 31 January 2007 (PST)

The ending, walking into the sunset...[]

I have thought from previously seeing this episode, that in the end, when you see Eko and Yemi as children walking back into the sunset, we are seeing the recycle of time on the island. It seems intended that the last shot seen is the same as the first shot seen, and the recent episode "Flashes Before Your Eyes" seems to back this up now. Any other thoughts? --Kilgore Trout 12:14, 15 February 2007 (PST)

Episode allusions[]

The final part of the section says Paulo was reluctant to oin the mission because people always come back injured and reference says it's from the previous episode. But there was no such thing mentioned in 3x04. Gevorg89 (talk) 18:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)