Lostpedia has arranged interviews with TLE blogger Speaker, and Lost writer plus voice of DJ Dan, Javier Grillo-Marxuach. Submit your Speaker questions here and your Javi questions here!
Do you have an idea for a new wiki? Please share it with us here

From Lostpedia

Fixes

Graft, glad you locked it, but there are a couple mistakes, specifically mentions to episode seven instead of eight. Could you fix it? --Minderbinder 14:28, 29 February 2008 (PST)

Yep, I got it - will create the ep template shortly. Thanks. -- Graft   talk   contributions  14:31, 29 February 2008 (PST)

Bullets

• I want to get some screenshot info on guns and bullets. Michael traded his watch for "a gun. A gun and bullets" (paraphrase). We only see what the bullet and gun make are when he whips them out in the alley in his suicide attempt. THEN there's the struggle with Tom, at which point Tom (I believe?) gains control of the gun. My question is: Did Tom switch out Michael's gun for a dud? One that won't shoot? Explaining him "not being able to kill himself" later in the (presumed) hotel room with the gun. I DEFINITELY want a screenshot of the gun's barrel in the hotel room when Michael, after shooting and the gun not going off, checks to verify that all chambers are filled. I want to see if we can read what type / brand of bullets they are and compare them to the box we see in the alley.--Overworkedirish 19:10, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• There are 6 bullets, 5 with the same brand "R.P 38 SPL" or "R-P 38 SPL" and 1 different "FEDERAL 38 SPECIAL". This one was probably loaded by Tom after the struggle.--Hulpap 07:03, 22 March 2008 (PDT)
• I think this one can be taken at face value. Mr. Friendly is telling us that the Island has powers we haven't imagined yet. Not only that, but it has concious thought -- it would have to. There's a whole new argument ready to go... --Litany42 20:35, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• This would assume that Tom knew what kind of gun Michael had and had a non-working duplicate. Or at least hoped Michael wouldn't notice a change in weight/style.--PappyBlueRibs 09:26, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Doesn't a shot go off during the struggle? And then the gun is full with 6 bullets later when Michael opens it? Merick 07:53, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

He has quite a number when he primarily loads it doesn't he? --Gredge 16:45, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Unanswered questions

• Who really placed the fake wreckage of Oceanic 815 at the bottom of the ocean?
  • Uhh, did you watch the episode?
    • Well, both Ben and Widmore (via associates) have pinned the blame for the fake wreckage on the other, so it's an absolutely valid question.--Overworkedirish 19:27, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
      • I remember the Captain saying it was Widmore as well. It seems everyone has said it's Widmore. It would be right to assume it's Widmore then.--HaloOfTheSun 19:28, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
        • Absolutely not. Gault pins it on Ben: "This black box comes from Oceanic Flight 815. A salvage vessel recovered it from the bottom of the ocean. It took a considerable amount of Mr. Widmore's resources to procure [as in, retrieve from the wreckage] it. It was found with the wreckage of the plane, along with all 324 dead passengers. (to Sayid) That's not the complete story, as you are well aware, Mr. Jarrah, given the fact that you're standing here, breathing... The wreckage was obviously staged. Now can you imagine what kind of resources and manpower go into pulling off a feat of that magnitude? Faking the recovery of a plane crash? Putting 324 families through a grieving process based on a lie? But what's even more disturbing... where exactly does one come across 324 dead bodies? And that, Mr. Jarrah, Mr. Hume, is just one of the many reasons we want Benjamin Linus."--Overworkedirish 19:40, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
          • Sayid & Desmond were told not to trust the captain, and the Others have more proof. I'll add the question, "Was it Charles or Ben that staged the crash". Fralfman
            • Yes, but it's possible (I'd almost say likely) that that note was from Michael, who is working for BEN. It's very unclear at this point, and I think presuming one over the other knowing only what we know would be a mistake.--Overworkedirish 20:42, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
          • Re-reading the captain's statement, I guess it's worth pointing out that he doesn't explicitly say *who* faked the wreckage.swishypants
            • Why do the people on the freighter not know that it was Charles Widmore that staged the fake plane crash, when the expedition on the freighter to look for the island was arranged by him? - Frank seemed to have beleifs that the plane crash was staged like the apollo mission, but it didnt seem like Charles Widmore told him

• Is the Temple a DHARMA station?
  • If you look at the map, you can see a Dharma logo marking the temple. It was a blank logo, with a line near the bottom.
    • Interesting. A Dharma station without a name, and The Orchid without a location... --Litany42 21:44, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
      • It does have a name - "Temple". At one point Ben refers to it as "Temple" and not "The Temple", an indication that this is the name of the station.--Cunningmunki 07:50, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
        • Could be a Buddhist Temple --CharlieReborn 19:19, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Why is Libby appearing to Michael?
  • It was guilt. He killed her, and can't get her out of his mind.
  • ...or is it the island? This is certainly not the first time "dead" people have appeared to our Losties.--Overworkedirish 19:27, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
    • Yes, and it's interesting how she told Michael "not yet" just seconds before the flag pops up with the words NOT YET... --Litany42 21:45, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
      • She just says "Don't do it" not "not yet"

Fralfman 19:19, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• I would say the Libby question might be kept, you can't say that he saw her because he was suffering from guilt. It could have been a vision from the island. Still, doesn't matter to me. Someone keeps adding these back though. --HaloOfTheSun 19:27, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• Still, it was cool that Nurse Libby was carrying a blanket (if I recall correctly), just as a nurse might, but it echos that she was also carrying a blanket when Michael shot her. --J.nc 20:32, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• The questions "What was Ben's intention when he gave Michael fake explosives?" & "What is the significance of Libby's reappearance?" should be revised/replaced. Ben explains his intention behind the explosives, so what is un-answered? And raising the point of the significance of Libby's appearance is theory baiting beyond the simple explanation that she is a manifestation of Michael's guilt. Perhaps this question should be "Why is it ONLY Libby that appears to Michael?".--Cunningmunki 07:50, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Because they could only get one actress back. Seems pretty obvious -Moo 17:05, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
    • Also, Michelle Rodriguez, who played Ana-Lucia received a DUI on December 1, 2005. Anytime someone from the show gets a DUI, they seem to be killed off. Maybe there was some bad blood between the show and Rodriguez. Before you all jump on it, Cynthia Watros, Libby, also got a DUI, I know. The exception seems to be Jin's actor...maybe...--frisbee2784

• The following should be removed:
  • How does Tom know that the Island has selected Michael for the freighter job and will thus protect him from death? - nobody said the island selected him.
  • How did Miles know that Michael was not who he claimed to be? - it was clearly ment to seems like a paranormal thing, and then when he explains he was just guessing because everyone on the boat is lying it dismisses itself. it's fine as a theory but not as a question
  • Who is the older man next to Michael in the hospital? - the episode did not imply he has any significancee. and no, it's not the actor that plays alvar hanso
  • How is Michael protected from death? - Tom explained "the island won't let him", it's not like we're waiting for the scientific explanation

Why not? It may be because he has a determined path, therefore can't die, maybe the people on the freighter will try to kill him and find him immortal?! Arniie 15:25, 24 March 2008 (PDT) ArnIIe 2008-03-24

• • Why does Libby implore Michael not to push the button on the bomb, even though it isn't an active bomb? - this is assuming libby knows the bomb isn't real, and that she didn't just want michael to do the "right thing"

--CharlieReborn 19:52, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• What happened to the shipping container(s) on the deck of the Freighter? On the close up shots on the freighter (before the automatic weapon target practice sequence), you could see the freigther had a 40 foot shipping container on the deck of the ship, later on it appeared to be two twenty foot containers "end to end", appearing to be a 40 foot container. Either way, what happened to them - they were gone from the deck by the time Sayid and Desmond arrived on the freighter with Frank as the "deck" of the freighter was perfectly clear of all cargo or other equipment by then. So, what is in the shipping containers and where/when were they "put overboard"? Maybe this was part of the Widmore plan to "discover" the remains of Flight 815 and these are now surplus to requirements? (or maybe these were put ashore somewhere on the island?).

-Number 6 03:21, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

I'm removing the following questions:

• What has happened to Walt since he left the Island? we know the answer from the episode... he gets off the Island, Michael confesses the murders to him, Walt can't deal with that, and goes to live with his grandmother
• How did Tom get off the Island and what does he do while off the Island? this question appears twice with different wordings
• Who is the older man next to Michael in the hospital? this is just the "Was it Tom in the hospital bed in 3x01?" thing all over again... we don't need to ask about the significance of every background character on the show because they're not presented as mysteries"
• Why can't Michael successfully kill himself? because the Island won't let him
• How did Michael's gun wound from "Two for the Road" heal so quickly? because the Island heals people

Jimbo the tubby 21:37, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

"Why do the people on the freighter not know that it was Charles Widmore that staged the fake plane crash, when the expedition on the freighter to look for the island was arranged by him? - Frank seemed to have beleifs that the plane crash was staged like the apollo mission, but it didnt seem like Charles Widmore told him" Should this just be removed entirely? It is an awful question on so many levels and I have no idea how it could be fixed. I'll remove, revert and fix if you can think of a way how. Kajillion 04:24, 24 March 2008 (PDT)

• How Tom gets off the island? By the submarine, isn't it? Or John below up the sub before he got to the island? Remove the question if you think I'm not mistaken. --Jack in the box 11:47, 24 March 2008 (PDT)

The problem with the submarine theory is that Ben said that the discharge (the purple-sky-thing) disabled the sub's homing mechanism or whatever, and consequently it wouldn't be able to return to the Island once it left, which is why he was reluctant to let Jack and Juliet go, since he needed his people to have the illusion that they could leave if they wanted to. It's possible that Ben is lying and that the sub still works to go to and from the Island, but as we don't know whether or not this is the case, I would suggest leaving the question. Jimbo the tubby 12:00, 24 March 2008 (PDT)

I'll leave it, but I vote for that being a lie. Ben also told everyone that the Looking Glass was flooded. Likewise, Ben probably used the purple haze as a convenient excuse to keep people from using the sub. Disabling contact with the outside world seems to be the running theme here. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 22:26, 25 March 2008 (PDT)

• Why is Rousseau so willing to take her daughter to the stronghold of The Others at the request of Ben. Considering they kidnapped Alex 16 years ago, and Rousseau has hated and feared them since. --Hugo815 10:28, 26 March 2008 (PDT)

• Just removed: 'Is Michael's story entirely true?'. Personally I think this is theory baiting, it's not a question explicitly raised in the episode nor is there any obvious reason to assume that Michael is lying.Liquidcow 12:06, 30 March 2008 (PDT)

"Not Yet"

• ...could Michael not see that note before he "pressed the button"?--Overworkedirish 19:28, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Guess not. The-room 19:49, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • If he could, he would have read it before he did, wouldn't he?
    • He had no reason to look for one, and in it's resting position if it wasn't obscured, it probably just looked like a part of the device.Frankie Viturello 20:52, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

This was a test devised by Ben. He knew that if Michael pressed the button, he would be committed to the cause and do anything Ben asked. After all, if you are willing to blow yourself up, is there anything you won't do? Michael waits the day or two, hits the button, reads the note. Another day or two later Ben calls to find out if Michael tried to set off the fake bomb, and if so, to give him further instructions. --Litany42 21:49, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

In the hospital, who is in the bed next to Michael?

The old man in the hospital bed next to Michael before he sees "Libby".

• Can anyone get a picture? I thought it was Alvar Hanso for a minute there.--Playsbad 19:54, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • When I rewatched the episode, I kept my eye open for that. In Michael's "vision" when Libby shows up, the guy does look like it is Hanso. But in the "reality" portion after the real nurse shows up, it looks like a different guy. --Litany42 21:39, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • In Michael´s vision with Libby in the hospital, the man in the bed next to him has a tube in his throat. The following scene shows him with an oxygen mask. It´s questionable that it´s the same guy. --Airedale 05:46, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

• Looked like the same guy to me. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 04:22, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
  • I just re-watched on ABC's site, and it looks to be the same guy. I originally thought they were different too.--Bdjsb7 12:05, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Did the writers really put him there just so the nurse could say "well, it sure wasn't him"? It seems odd. Merick 07:58, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Why is that odd? Unless you're rich you usually share a room. This guy is hardly significant.-Moo 17:04, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

This is Lost, everything significant and I think we got a pretty good look at him, so its possible he's not just nobody. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JustJared (talk • contribs) 2008-03-21T19:10:16.

Definitely the same guy, intubated in the dream but with oxygen mask + bag in reality. Robert K S (talk) 23:02, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

I'll go with "same guy, important presence" as well. The guy is seen twice for a curiously long time (two seconds, yeah, but "long" in TV terms), and the nurse mentions him in a quite conspicuous manner. I just don't have any idea who he is. If no one can answer that properly, it remains out of significance. -. Grillage .- 00:20, 31 March 2008 (PDT)

Maybe this guy was injured in Hurley's deck collapsing incident. --Petrarch1603 21:43, 6 April 2008 (PDT)

Different format / What do Sayid and Desmond Know?

did anyone notice that Micheal's flachback did not contain the standard "wooshing" sound you hear normally.

maybe this proves that it was not a flashback, but him telling the tale ( an like all good TV stories what the viewer sees is always more indepth than what the teller is actually telling).

• ....uh, it DID contain the standard whooshing sound. It's one long flashback, at the beginning and end of which there is a whooshing sound. Watch the episode again.--Overworkedirish 23:07, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• This was different from other flashbacks because Michael was telling the story, like a narrative, not a flash.--Playsbad 19:57, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • We don't know what story he told in the present or that the flashbacks have anything to do with that story. Dharmatel4 20:06, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
    • Very interesting point. I wonder if a podcast will clear up whether or not that entire flashback is to serve as what Sayid and Desmond now know.--Overworkedirish 20:16, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• Um, wasn't the entire flashback Michael telling Sayid and Desmond what happened? I could be wrong, but that was what I took from Sayid demanding answers and Michael relating the story... --Litany42 20:32, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• That question is unanswerable in story terms. A flashback is not the same as speaking a story to someone. I think it can be assumed for story purposes that Desmond and Sayid know roughly what was in the flashbacks. I dont think that we should treat the flashbacks in the episode as anything unusual because they just happened to be simultanious with Michael telling his story.Dharmatel4

• Most flashback/flash forwards have taken a slightly different twist this year. The four flashbacks at the beginning of the season (or was it five?), the Sun flash forward and Jin flashback last week, Desmond's struggle with time. Michael's is unusual as well since it seems to relate the story. It's just that "unusual" flashbacks aren't that unusual this year. --Litany42 20:43, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• We should keep in mind however, that Michael asks the other guy to go get some piece of equipment (not recalling specifics) which should really only take a max of a few minutes. By the time the story is "over" (i.e. post-flashback) the other guy still hasn't returned. This time contraint should be considered when evaluating how much Sayid and Desmond know.--Overworkedirish 21:01, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• I don't agree. The writers had Desmond travel 5+ hours by train without having a blackout in "The Constant" so I don't think they are counting the beats from when the other deck hand disappears. The guy's there, Michael gets rid of him, Sayid says "Start at the beginning. Tell us exactly how it is you came to be on this boat." And then Michael's flashback starts. I'm not sure how much more of a clue we could have that Michael is telling Sayid and Desmond the story. --Litany42 21:37, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• But this puzzles me. From Sayid's line that you quoted, you're saying Michael would start out: "So I was sitting in my apartment, writing a suicide note for Walt ...[fast-forward] crashed my car, was in the hospital - oh p.s. Sayid and Des, I think I saw Libby! Weird..." -- Don't you think Sayid would be like, "Whoa, hold up. Your apartment? How did you even get to the US??? Who found you and Walt on the boat???" This is still information that we, the viewers, don't know. It would seem that this, along with other simple story fragments would be VITAL for Michael's story to Sayid. Plus, why would he get into the personal issues of suicide that are so highlighted in the flashback. My opinion has, at this point, taken the turn that what we saw was Michael's experience, though not necessarily what he told Sayid and Des.--Overworkedirish 22:07, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Even if the flashback was meant to be what Michael was telling Sayid, a similar argument could be made for Ben's flashback being the story he was supposed to be telling Locke in that episode. --Jackdavinci 21:42, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

I would say Desmond and Sayid definitely know everything we do, because Sayid verified that he was working for Ben Linus at the end of the narrative. --Xbenlinusx 00:25, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• I'm sorry, but HOW would Michael be okay with sharing such personal information like his SUICIDE ATTEMPTS with Sayid, whom he hasn't seen in a while, and Desmond, whom he's never met??? Michael's not exactly the most sharing Lostie. He's pretty much kept to himself because he has his own agenda.--Overworkedirish 05:07, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Because he was trying to prevent exactly what eventually happened, being exposed to the captain before he could complete the task he agreed to do. Michael thinks he is saving the survivors on the island by following Ben's instructions. Being outed to the captain stops those plans. Therefore, he has two choices with Sayid and Desmond, either tell them the entire truth, or kill them both. We already know that he is consumed with guilt, so assumedly he would prefer telling the truth here. However, we see where that got him, eh? Oh, and Sayid would know how Michael got to the US, because he knows about the boat he and Walt got from Ben. We are to suspend disbelief a bit that it would have gotten them to the States. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 16:06, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• Regarding the original post, yes, we do hear the standard flashback sound. Regarding what Michael actually told Sayid and Desmond, I think we can at least assume he told them some sort of condensed/rough version of what we saw in the flashback. But as for specifics, the only thing we can say for certain is that he is working for Ben. We don't need to mention any more than that in the articles. -- Graft   talk   contributions  16:11, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• I think people are reading too much into this. The flashbacks are a story-telling device -- they always have been. This season, the producers seem to be purposefully mixing it up, playing on different variations. In this episode, the flashback is introduced with Sayid demanding to know the truth about Michael's background. Yes, he left out the part about getting to NY, yes he left out other key things as well. But this is a one-hour show; there's no room for every detail. There's little doubt though that this is a recount to Sayid and Desmond of Michael's time off the island. --Litany42 18:15, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

Numbers craziness

• "Michael enters the numbers 7 7 1 6 into the keypad on the "bomb" in the briefcase. ( (7 * 7)-(1 + 6) )= 42 (Numbers)"
  • I was going to go ahead and remove this because I think it is a pretty ridiculous connection, but didn't want to be an ass. Why not put that 42+42-4 = 80 (the percentage of people Miles says are liars). The numbers can be found in pretty much everything; should a multi-step process count? Danhm 19:59, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • multi-step processes almost never count. This one should not count. Dharmatel4 20:05, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • 80% or statistics are made up on the spot. Mapper 04:22, 27 March 2008 (PDT)

Here's a nice little loop: 7+7=14. 7+1=15 1+6=7. 7+(start again)7=14... (And yes, I know it's meaningless.) --Litany42 20:29, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

More likely, 71776 refers to July, 1776 - the month of the American Declaration of Independence.--MonsterEatsThePilot 05:12, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

July 1776 was also when Captain James Cook set sail on the voyage that led him to discover the Northwest Passage. Not incredibly significant to the Lost world, but fun fact nevertheless.--JoeyBags1138 11:52, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Most of this "number craziness" is rubbish. Every other number can be constructed from the Lost numbers if you choose the right combination of operations. I don't believe that such a complication would be added to the show. I only believe in the connection to the Lost numbers when they appear directly or in the form of simple combinations/operations, like 108, 7418880 or 423. Everything else is, as you say, craziness! Helvio 08:53, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

I have a crazy theory about that. Since every number on Lost has worked or was related to real stuff that happened or was happening. The numbers 7716 didn't activate the bomb because it was "not (77) yet (16)". I believe the writers will give a new activation code like 8815 or something related when it's (23) time (42). I think I should write this to theories. =) --Jack in the box 13:25, 24 March 2008 (PDT)

Going Nicholson

• Minkowski sports a haircut not unlike Jack Nicholson's in THE SHINING. Significant? --Frenkmelk 20:13, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• Yeah -- it wasn't just Minkowski's mind that was stuck in the 70s. --Litany42 20:37, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Ouch :S MeatyDoughnut 19:12, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Summary

It sounds like an amateur journalist trying to write a synopsis for their magazine. Therequiembellishere 20:23, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

It's a wiki engine. If you don't like it fix it. --Jackdavinci 21:44, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

Amateur journalist seems more qualified to write a summary than a math teacher. --Xbenlinusx 00:27, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

the episode summaries always need time till theyre finished, stop complaining.

I just did a revision to condense sentences and have a more factual tone. See if this is an improvement. --Emily76 18:35, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Flashback timeline

• All the flashbacks in the episode up to Michael's first conversation with Ben on the freighter have to take place between day 68 and day 82. Thats a very busy two weeks. Tom has to be in New York between Day 74 and Day 80.Dharmatel4 20:26, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Not at all refuting here - but can you please support these timeline constrictions with citation? How do we know when the boat was ported in Fiji? And why 74-80 for Tom?--Overworkedirish 20:36, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• Michael left the Island on Day 68. The others left the Barracks on Day 82. Ben talked to Michael from the barracks the first time so it has to be between those dates. Tom is at the Hydra day after day between when Michael left the Island and when the Others left the Hydra. Tom is next seen with Jack at the barracks on day 80. For completeness, Naomi arrives on Day 87. Dharmatel4 20:41, 20 March 2008 (PDT)]

• This was likely a busy trip for Tom, including a visit to Tallahassee as well as New York, since Anthony Cooper appeared on-island around Day 80/81. Locke also destroyed the submarine on day 81 (or did he?). Also, I assumed that Ben contacted Michael from the Flame, not from the barracks. Have we seen a radio room at the barracks?--Eyeful Tower 09:07, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Ben contacted Michael from the secret room in his house at the Barracks, as referenced by the Buddha statue and moved bookshelf. -Nate 12:22, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• • Whoops. My bad...I wrote day 90 didn't I? That's the day the Others broke camp leaving Locke. For some reason I equated camp with Barracks.--JoeyBags1138 20:54, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
• I think that a most important issue here is that the timelines in the island and the outside world match. There seems to be no time shifts as suggested in some theories based on the delayed rocket. In a previous episode, Sayid and Desmond said in the freighter that they've been gone for 3 days, which is the time that has passed in the island too. Michael had been gone for 2 months, as his mother says, which is more or less the time he spent in the island. If the difference between the time passed inside and outside the island was proportional to what we saw in the delayed rocket, Michael would have been gone from the outside world for much longer than 2 months.Helvio 08:44, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Here's a timeline issue that is bothering me...Michael hears the news story about flight 815 being found, and rushes over to the Earle Penthouse to see Tom. Tom already has him set up as a deck hand on Widmore's freighter that is leaving from Fiji "in a couple of days." At about the same time Michael finds out, Frank Lapidus also finds out (he saw it on the news as well), making a phone call to "authorities" that they have not found 815. Somehow, Frank's phone call gets passed up the chain of command, all the way to Widmore (per Frank's conversation with Michael while on the freighter). Frank gets added to Naomi's team over her objections and he gets transported from the Bahamas to Fiji. And this all happens in a couple of days.--Eyeful Tower 15:01, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

In season four, the careful attention to continuity the show used to have seems to have been mostly abandoned. As far as the submarine, I think its clear now that Richard and Tom have a different way of getting off the Island. As far as Ben's communications, if we take the destruction of the flame into consideration, he would have had to have made the first call, given michael time to put together an entire list of the crew and then made a second call before the flame was destroyed. I think it would be appropriate that Ben had a different communication channel off the Island via the looking glass before and after he left the barracks. Dharmatel4 16:17, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Possible blooper - nurse

• After Michael crashes his car and he wakes up in the hospital room, the nurse walks in and says "Sorry, Mr. Dawson. I didn't mean to wake you." (Paraphrase). Yet then she asks his name. This seems too obvious for a blooper, but what does it mean otherwise? Or did I miss something? --Litany42 20:26, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • The Nurse was "Libby" in some form or another so she knew his name - she was not the "real" nurse.--J.nc 20:28, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Not Libby -- the real nurse. I'll watch again when the Pacific episode comes on just in case I did miss something... --Litany42 20:30, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
    • I'm quite certain the "real nurse" didn't say "Michael" or "Dawson" - she in fact noted his lack of ID.--Overworkedirish 20:38, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
      • Yeah, you're right -- it was Libby. But another interesting thing I saw in that scene. The old man in the coma *does* look like Hanso in the first shot, but when the real nurse comes in, it looks like a different person. But how would Michael have heard of or even seen Hanso? --Litany42 21:22, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
        • It's the "Hurley-seeing-Christian-Shepard-in-the-cabin" conundrum. ;-)--Overworkedirish 22:10, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

Tom's Guy

So I'm thinking showing Tom living with a guy in New York is to confirm what was hinted at way back when, when he told Kate she wasn't his type. Not too extraordinary that he's gay-- but this does have some interesting implications for the show. The man didn't appear to be one of the Others. Does he know where Tom has been this whole time? Is he one of the Others permanently living off the island? And how many of the Others might have significant others off of the island?

I'm pretty sure the guy's a "professional". I can't imagine that (A) Ben would allow Tom to have a relationship off the island and (B) Tom would bother anyway. --Litany42 20:39, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• and I can't imagine that (C) Tom could get a young thing like that without paying for it. Sithboy 22:47, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

Tom did say something to the effect of "I don't get to the mainland often, but when I do I like to indulge myself". I'm thinking the professional angle too...for all we know, Tom could be a Governor somewhere! :-D --JoeyBags1138 21:20, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• If he's a Governor, he must be a Republican... --Litany42 21:42, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

That's right! Democrats have heterosexual sex scandals. Republicans have homosexual sex scandals... I need to remember that...--Chuck 22:26, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

Is this really necessary? I'll opt to ask first whether this would be considered offensive material.Mapper 06:27, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Well, from what happened in the episode, I am assuming that Arturo is a sex worker rather than in a relationship with Tom... so I believe, as the episode is in New York, there is some reference to Elliot Spitzer going on... Its not needed here though thank you people!!  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  06:49, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Even though this was filmed months before the scandal? Therequiembellishere 07:25, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Not the show, I mean everyones cheeky comments about politics above!!!  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  07:33, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Agreed, and Arturo could alternatively be a pick-up from a bar. Either way, it's obvious that it's not a long-standing, monogamous relationship because it would open up the line for too many questions being asked of Tom, such as "where are you when you aren't here?" -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 16:11, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

What about McGreevey? Nate811 01:31, 28 March 2008 (PDT)

Guys, it's called "joking around". Darlton does it all the time on the podcasts...you can do it do! :-D (the smile also indicates joking around...)--JoeyBags1138 11:47, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

The Hotel Earle : Cultural reference or Trivial error?

Before I go making an edit to the cultural references section, I just wanted to float this by the regulars ... ... The Washington Square Hotel in NYC hasn't been called "The Hotel Earle" in years, at least not in 2004/2005, or within the time frame of this episode. Since the placement of the line seemed deliberate enough, one of the other, most significant cultural references that came to mind was the FICTIONAL Hotel Earle featured in the Coen Brother's 1994 film "Barton Fink", in which a New York City playwright in the 1940's travels to California to write for big Hollywood studios and winds up in a metaphysical "living hell" which is The Hotel Earle. Barton Fink @ Wikipedia

Do you think that could be the LOST writers throwing some love the Coen's way by way of reference, or does it simply "date" Tom's frame of reference for the last time he was off the island and in NYC? (If not a cultural reference, then the fact that it is no longer called "The Hotel Earle" should go in a trivia and/or errors section.) Frankie Viturello 20:46, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

There's no real Oceanic airline either! --Xbenlinusx 20:49, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• Um, yes, but the Washington Square Hotel was ACTUALLY called The Hotel Earle at one point. I'm thinking it was either a reference to the fictional hotel from Barton Fink, OR Tom hasn't gotten off the island to see NYC since before the hotel changed it's name, which was sometime AFTER the 1960's. Frankie Viturello 20:55, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

If it was just a mistake of Tom's Michael wouldn't have found the hotel. It must be real (at least in the lost universe)

The themes of Barton Fink certainly seem to tie into the themes of Lost, so I think this could be Cultural, definitely.--JoeyBags1138 20:52, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

An anagram of "The Hotel Earle" is "Ethereal Hotel", which could be another name for PURGATORY. (Probably not, but could be...) --Litany42 21:31, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• I re-watched the episode, and the sign on the penthouse says "Hotel Earle" on it, so it wasn't Tom just calling the hotel by the wrong name, it exists in the LOST universe in NYC as the "Hotel Earle". Frankie Viturello 15:51, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Only one helicopter

After Naomi and Lapidus finished their argument--in which Naomi apparently insisted she would fly herself to the Island--shots of the deck clearly showed only one Huey on the two helipads. Production error or major clue? Robert K S (talk) 20:58, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• Good catch. I'm voting blooper. --Litany42 21:23, 20 March 2008 (PDT)
• Blooper. renting a second heli just for 5 seconds of the show would be pretty silly. --CharlieReborn 03:49, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Uh, yeah, but then you'd think they'd try and not point the camera right at the empty helipad. Robert K S (talk) 15:55, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
    • Was it ever confirmed that there were 2 helicopters? We never saw one crash only heard it when Naomi arrived on the island. It could be possible that there only ever was one. --El geeko 15:45, 22 March 2008 (PDT)
      • One heli could also be out on survey but that would included yet a third person with "pilot abilities"

Gay "Insinuation"

"Although insinuated in "A Tale of Two Cities", it is revealed that Tom is gay"

Since when does a man telling a woman she's not his type insinuate in any way that the man is gay and is not attracted to women? Maybe he liked blondes. Hell. --Xbenlinusx 21:13, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

In a future episode, Daniel Faraday will experimentally demonstrate it is impossible to be heterosexual and not attracted to Kate. :-) Robert K S (talk) 21:15, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

How do we know that? After all, DESMOND is his constant... :-D --JoeyBags1138 21:18, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

Well to be honest I'm only attracted to her when she's not smiling. She needs dental work. Jack was much smarter when he moved to Juliet. --Xbenlinusx 21:17, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

Yeah, I really don't think that should count as an insinuation. I could say that a certain blond guy isn't my type, but only because I like guys with darker hair better. Looking back at Tom's comment, we can now see why Kate isn't his type, but just the fact that she isn't doesn't insinuate he's gay. Lindsaynickel 02:11, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Except it was the manner in which he said it, IMO. I said he was gay after the scene in AToTC, and I'm sure it was confirmed in this episode. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 04:16, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• I agree that the manner is the defining wink to the camera. Tom not only states that Kate's not his type, but also chuckles to imply that she is as far from his type as possible. This was pretty telegraphed.--MonsterEatsThePilot 05:17, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• The podcast that is due is bound to clear this up... I think it was made pretty clear in the episode that Tom is homosexual, personally!  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  06:51, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• But did you see how the guy throws a football? That was the real giveaway User:Mr Paik/sig 8:05, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Tom's earlier comment was definitely a hint that he was gay. "You're not my type" is practically a gay cliché as a way of telling a woman you're not interested without officially outing yourself. I suppose it's possible for a straight man to say that to a pretty woman, but I've never actually heard it. Reading some of the old discussion about this on Talk:Tom was almost funny (except that it was actually insulting) how hard people were trying to "defend" the character from the "insinuation" that he was gay. - Tvb 09:29, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Give me a break Tvb. I'd tell a woman she's not my type if I wasn't interested, and I'm not gay whatsoever. --Xbenlinusx 13:58, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

On the latest podcast, they confirm that the character is gay, and that the earlier episode with Kate "alluded to" that. I added it back to the article now that it is confirmed and not just speculation. --Minderbinder 12:14, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Not that it matters one bit, I think from the standpoint of the writers/producers it was an insinuation that he was gay. It is revealed now and Kate accused him of wanting to watch her get naked. Thus, "You're not my type" in this situation, even if not in all, was an insinuation. We all suspected it, even if some of us didn't want it to be true for whatever reason, homophobic or not. Whether it should be in the article; hell I don't care. --macosx 02:43, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

Post-island depression

We learn that Michael's exodus from the island leaves him depressed and suicidal. Although Michael (and Walt) are the first to leave the island, we see similar depression and suicidal thoughts in some of the Oceanic 6 following their escapes from the Island (especially Jack, e.g. his suicide attempt in "Through the Looking Glass"). I want to note this pattern in the article but I'm not sure where. Resurgens 22:10, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

Episode references. perhaps? Michael and Jack both uttered the same phrase before their suicide attempts. Robert K S (talk) 22:13, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

I agree that this may be an important theme. I would just caution that in Jack's case his depression did not seem to develop until some time after he was off the island, and seemed to be driven by the fact that he could not return. --LOSTinDC 09:07, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Although there are similarities, Michael's is explicitly stated in the episode to be because of Walt not speaking to him after he told him he killed Ana-Lucia and Libby. That doesn't mean the Island's magical depression-causing power wasn't a factor, though. This does all support the theory that Michael is the man in the coffin as well. The teenage son, the unfamiliar name (remember the producers said that the original clipping was made by the prop department and will be reworded in the future), and the fact that Michael had tried to kill himself before. Not to mention his response to "Why are you here?": "To die." Or something like that. It's clear that he never fully recovered from depression and perhaps there were more events amplifying it after he returned, and once he finished his business the Island (Ben, actually? Remember the comments that he gets what he wants and he clearly wanted Karl and Danielle dead) allowed him to die. --macosx 02:51, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

Danielle -- no wound?

I've watched the last few minutes over and over a few times now on my Tivo, and I can't see any blood, bullet hole, or wound of any type on Danielle after she is shot. We get a pretty good angle on her back after she falls and her front as she is falling, and they look just fine. Can someone confirm? Is this a blooper or is it of importance? Danhm 22:38, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• I thought it hit her in the head, near the front. I do want to watch it again, though. Lindsaynickel 02:06, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• There's a wound... not in the head --CharlieReborn 03:52, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• There is a clear entry wound under her right breast when she is shot. There is no exit wound however, which doesn't bode well for her being alive after the mini-break  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  06:53, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Several people have survived bullet wounds, or similar injuries. Perhaps Daniele is someone that the island will heal. Perhaps this healing has helped kept her alive, living alone in the woods for however many years. Merick 08:07, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
  • Wow, you need a new Tivo! The wound and blood are VERY clear, both when watching at normal speed or when paused, although my impression was that it was an exit wound rather than an entry wound, as the blast causes her to fall forward, not backward.--Cunningmunki 07:56, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
    • Having just watched the episode again, I think it is clear that all the shots were coming from behind.--Baker1000 04:00, 24 March 2008 (PDT)

"your mother will protect you"

• In a related vein, I am thinking that when Ben says "your mother will protect you" he was not referring to Danielle, but rather to someone else whom he thinks is Alex's mother.--Ememem 23:25, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• In the way that is phrased he may be referring to the Island, maybe in the persona of Annie --Hunter61 02:11, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Unanswered question re: death

After the debate last week over the "Is Jin dead" question, I almost hate to bring this up, but... There's an unanswered question saying "Are Danielle and Karl dead?"... Given that everyone's argument for keeping the "Is Jin dead" question was that we didn't see his death, now that we've seen Danielle and Karl shot and laying motionless on the ground, shouldn't we just accept that they are until we see otherwise? Just my $0.02. Jimbo the tubby 23:17, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• I believe the exact opposite - this is not the first time we've seen people been shot, left for - and presumed - dead (John Locke, anyone?). It would be absolutely irresponsible for us to report Karl and Danielle's statuses (alive vs. dead) as anything other than uncertain.--Overworkedirish 23:27, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

Certainly, I'm not saying that we should claim they *are* dead, but is it really an unanswered question (ie: an intended mystery) as to whether they are or not? Jimbo the tubby 23:35, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

Valid question for a cliffhanger episode from the standpoint of the audience. Likely this question can be removed down the road in future eps when it's resolved one way or the other.--Spiral 23:45, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

'Kay. Jimbo the tubby 00:21, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Danielle can't be dead, the producers said she'd get a flashback sometimes, but probably not this season. I know Naomi is dead and got a flashback, but it seems unlikely for Danielle cause her story is most likely really important.

Report them as "shot". Don't report them as dead until confirmed by producers or another episode. Karl is almost certainly dead (he's an unimportant character at the periphery of the show), but I thought Mikhail was dead at the sonic barrier. Personally, I think the "unanswered questions" sections have become a bit silly -- I don't think there can be objective standards for what constitutes a worthy "unanswered question". --Eyeful Tower 07:31, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• I would agree that Danielle is more likely to be alive than poor Karl, as Karl was shot twice, and apparently once through the heart, whereas Danielle was only shot once at the side of her belly (mind you, so was Libby, and through padding!). However, the fact that she is due a flashback is no reason to presume she can't die beforehand, since our expectations are being continually, and deliberately challenged, especially this season. And haven't they said Libby will eventually get her own flashback too? Giving Danielle a status of "Uncertain" is fitting enough. --Cunningmunki 08:06, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• Besides, have they said that Danielle herself will receive a flashback, or that some of her story would be told through flashback. I imagine that a Ben flashback could involve some interaction with Danielle's expedition; Alex; etc. --LOSTinDC 09:10, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Why would you assume a character has to be alive to be the subject of a flashback? It's not as if these are being presented as the characters' memories; a flashback is just a narrative device in which the audience is shown something that happened in the past. - Tvb 09:15, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• I recall Damon and/or Carlton saying that they were going to adhere to a narrative rule that characters who are "dead" won't get their own flashbacks ... but may show up in other character's flashbacks, though I can't recall when/where they said that, could have been a podcast, could have been an intervew, could have been a DVD commentary, or it might have just been a dream I had.Frankie Viturello 15:56, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• I think that the deliberate way they showed Karl's bullet wound implies that he is in fact dead, whereas Danielle was not shown to have a potentially fatal wound, therefore she's much more likely to survive.Frankie Viturello 15:56, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Enter 77?

The code Michael entered was "7716", right? Does this warrant a reference to "Enter 77"? Danhm 23:58, 20 March 2008 (PDT)

• The code Michael entered was 71776. This is most likely a reference to July, 1776 rather than the "Enter 77" code.--MonsterEatsThePilot 05:26, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Removed Malcolm David Kelley's credit

That's not Malcolm playing Walt... they have some totally different kid in the window who's a lookalike of Malcolm around Seasons 1 and 2. Makes you wonder what scenario/timeline contains "Taller Ghost Walt" ... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joshspazjosh (talk • contribs) 2008-03-21T02:34:55.

• Good point, it certainly doesn't look like Malcolm. --Lostie247 01:26, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

It definitely isn't Malcolm David Kelley. It is Walt though!  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  05:16, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Are you guys sure? Looked like him to me. --Minderbinder 09:24, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Looks like they reused the shot of Malcolm from the "My Name Is Earl" episode he was in.--Frankov 13:51, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

No, since you can see Michael and Walt in the same frame after Michael leaves, which is not from MNIE. Roger 15:11, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

If they used footage shot earlier, either for this show or borrowed from somewhere else, it would be very easy to composite into new footage. --Minderbinder 15:13, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Yeah it looks like a composite, much like when they photoshop an actor's face over a stuntperson. --JoeyBags1138 11:41, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Do we have the official press release? That should solve the question. --Minderbinder 16:33, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

It's here, and it doesn't. If they did a composite job on the face, it's a really seamless, expert job. The light changes on his face as he moves, his eyes move, and his face turns slightly revealing his features from a slightly different aspect (meaning a simple 2D cut-and-paste wouldn't suffice). That said, there does seem to be a stripe of unmotivated light on his face, so I wouldn't rule it out entirely. It seems more likely they're using footage of MDK they shot years ago, or they found a really good look-alike. Does anybody think the distant shot of Michael and the close-up appear to be slightly different? I can't convince myself one way or another. I guess we'll have to wait for the Season 4 DVD to know for sure... Robert K S (talk) 22:11, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Seeing as how My Name is Earl is an NBC show, and Lost is on ABC, it's very unlikely that they used footage from MNE...it's just a different actor.Thelordnyax 11:52, 26 March 2008 (PDT)

I was completely sure the first time I watched this episode that it wasn't Malcolm. I then saw it a second time and clicked on pause to see the boy by the window and I'm sure it wasn't him. But could anyone post a picture of that scene?--Salvora 09:15, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Here you go. Robert K S (talk) 09:35, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Many thanks Robert K S!--Salvora 10:10, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

• I think Malcolm will stop appearing in the show, because Malcolm has grown up a lot during these years: yet, on the island it has been only about 3 months? The interesting related-issue is that the producers could have used Malcolm's growth as part of the story: for it has been suggested that the speed of time on the island is different to the speed of time off the island. So if Malcolm has been growing fast during the last years, then the producers could have used this as part of Walt's character: for instance, saying that since Walt has left the island, then he has been growing faster because of that, even though it has only been 3 months on the island. The fact that they don't do this, and that they use a different actor, suggests to me that they are not going to pursue this story line. Shame, that would have been clever and useful! I'm afraid we won't be seeing Walt an awful lot from now on because of Malcolm's growth!--Salvora 09:15, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

I'm not sure where I read about it, but I'm pretty sure the producer's said they had planned for Malcolm's growth since the very start of the series, knowing full well he'll be shooting up in height, etc.. Mikay 16:48, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

EDIT: Source] (Contains Spoilers) Mikay 17:12, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

It is Malcolm in the window: [[1]]. Jimbo the tubby 12:43, 8 April 2008 (PDT)

The Conversation between Michael and his Mother

One thing I noticed that seems to be left out... Michaels mother said, and I'm paraphrasing, "You were gone for two months.. you left him for two months. Now you will tell me where you were and what you were doing or you will not get to see him" which suggests... Walt was with her the whole time he was on the island? In that 2 month period, WALT WAS WITH HER?! If I'm mistaken, please please tell me because this is an extremely strange occurence.

"I thought you were dead. They said your plane crashed in the middle of the Ocean, but you show up here fine and dandy. Only I can't tell anybody about you or Walt, can't call you by your real names. He barely talks to me, but he does wake up screaming in the middle of the night and I'm the one thats got to tell him its gonna be OK. So until you can explain to me where you were for over 2 months, and what happened, you gave up your rights."

I think that the line "I can't tell anybody about you or Walt..." and the established timelines (Walt being on the plane because Michael went to get him from Sydney) suggests to me that he was on the plane, and wasn't with her all the time. Sure, the wording is awkward, but I think he was on the plane and Island as we've already seen!  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  07:00, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• You've misunderstood her meaning. She is asking Michael for an explanation of where he AND Walt have been and what happened to them both. And until he can supply answers about the crash and island, she doesn't want him seeing Walt. No mystery here.--MonsterEatsThePilot 16:07, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

No, the two months that Michael was "away" are the two months he is recovering from the car crash/attempted suicide. He left Walt with her, tried to kill himself, and spent two months in the hospital. After he was released, he comes to see them, which is this scene. It has nothing to do with Walt and Michael's time on the island. --Litany42 18:05, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

• No no no... She says that she thought they died in the crash but they showed up there "fine and dandy". The "two months" refers to that period of time. She wants to know where they had been (not just Michael) and what happened there, because she didn't know what made Walt so angry with Michael. --     c      blacxthornE      t     14:32, 4 April 2008 (PDT)

Is anyone else wondering what name Michael went by when he first arrived back to the mainland? Assuming that the flashback is in chronological order his mother says that she can't call them by their real names and as Michael has not taken on the identity of Kevin Johnson yet what name is he using? Just wondering if this could end up being relevant in the future? --Vanessa 06:01, 25 March 2008 (PDT)

Good point. Perhaps the "Johnathan Lantham" or whatever people think was in the newspaper clipping will be his other fake name he went by, since he doesn't need "Kevin Johnson" anymore. --macosx 14:56, 25 March 2008 (PDT)

I thought you were on to something there! The newspaper clipping says that the guy was living in LA, but was from NY originally, which is where Michael is in this episode. However, apparently the producers have said that the clipping is not meant to be a clue, and that they will be rewriting it. So I guess we can't trust anything from the clipping... ([2]) --Litany42 05:58, 26 March 2008 (PDT)

In the hospital the nurse asks Michael what his name is, pointing out that he didn't have any ID on him. --Jackdavinci 11:14, 26 March 2008 (PDT)

Maybe h was never using a fake name before that...no reason why anybody would need ID for anything...he probably was usign Credit Cards or anything...Thelordnyax 11:54, 26 March 2008 (PDT)

I'd be surprised if anyone could get by in life without having to provide a name for things. He had a small flat that he was maybe renting so he would have to give a name for that and I would have thought ID (that's how it works in the UK anyway) If he gave his real name then it would eventually be noticed that he is supposed to be dead or missing at the time he took the lease out on the flat. The only other solution would be that the flat is in somebody elses name. --Vanessa 05:25, 28 March 2008 (PDT)

Crew member

Could anyone else hear what Michael called the crew member he asked to go to the Supply Room? I heard "Jack".--Phil (talk) 03:57, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• "Jack, man, you know what? We need a pressure valve." -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 04:13, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
  • I actually heard "Jeff" and that's what came up on my Closed Captioning as well. - Kaiser 05:07, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
    • If you heard Jeff, and it appeared on the CC, maybe a rename is in order--Phil (talk) 05:08, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
      • It was "Err... Jeff man, you know what? We need a pressure valve, you mind grabbing one from the supply room?"  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  07:06, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
      • All moved!  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  07:18, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
        • Thanks. I didn't have CCs and just related what I thought I heard. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 16:21, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Revolvers don't jam

Just wanted to explain an edit I made in the synopsis. A firearm is said to jam when a round does not get properly loaded into the chamber, usually because an empty shell casing is stuck. It's impossible for a revolver to jam since all the rounds are loaded into separate chambers before firing (the cylinder just rotates from chamber to chamber as you shoot). What happened in the episode (despite Tom asking whether the gun "jammed") was simply that it failed to discharge. So, I've edited the synopsis to reflect this. Tabula 05:11, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Although that's a fair technical observation in most scenarios, we are dealing with the creepy magical Island. If the Island can keep Michael alive after a car crash and send him visions of Libby, then I think the island can manage to jam even a revolver. That's the beauty of being an all-powerful island.--MonsterEatsThePilot 05:29, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• I feel like this information regarding jamming vs. failure to discharge may support my "Tom-switched-it-out-for-a-dud" theory. See the Bullets thread on this page.--Overworkedirish 06:06, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• No they can't "jam" but thats the point!!!! The island made it not work! Stop thinking so hard people... Your hairlines must be back 6 inches since this show started!! :D  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  07:01, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
• Oh, I certainly agree that the island made it not work. I'm just saying that "jam" is the wrong term for how it failed to work. What happened -- for whatever reason -- was that the gunpowder in the ammunition didn't ignite, which isn't the same thing as jamming. Tabula 15:12, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
  • And in case I'm being unclear, neither am I saying that what happened in the episode should have been "impossible", island or no island. It's entirely possible, although rare, for a round of ammunition not to go off when the trigger is pulled. Tabula 15:16, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

No Jack?

Is this the first episode ever in which Jack does not appear? I also think it is cool that Jack has not gotten an episode this season. I love Jack episodes, but I think it is good that the show is using the other characters more.--Playsbad 07:10, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

You know what? I think you might be right! This could be the first episode ever that doesn't have Jack in it at all! I think Jack will probably get at least one of the finales as a centric episode personally.  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  07:20, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

He wasn't in "The Other 48 Days", "Flashes Before Your Eyes", "Tricia Tanaka Is Dead" and "Enter 77" to my recollection (and according to Character appearances).  >: 4 8 15 16 23 42  07:27, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Oh fine... He's still been in far too many!  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  07:34, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

I hope that sometime this season we get to find out what happened to Jack between getting off the island to his suicidal state. Marko 18:46, 24 March 2008 (PDT)

But Jack does appear briefly in a flashback - kneeling, bound and gagged on the island jetty while Michael is leaving the island. Or doesn't this count?Zin92 08:12, 29 March 2008 (PDT)

Deleted Cultural References

• The Godfather: Miles Straume is eating, and offers Michael, an orange before getting on the freighter. Oranges are seen in each instalment of the Godfather trilogy before deaths or assassinations. (Movies and TV)
• Cars: In the flashback, Michael drives a green Dodge Aspen

These seem to be quite a stretch to me. I'd be willing to give in to the Godfather reference (especially with the Star Wars reference above it), except that this case didn't precede a death or assassination. I was more thinking a reference to Locke eating the orange in Episode 1.

But a 'Cars' reference, just because he was driving a car that looked like a car from that movie... that's way too far. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Clamshell (talk • contribs) .

• First, the reference wasn't about Cars, the movie, but cars in general on Lost (cf the link where it leads). Second, the context of the "orange scene" was clearly a reference to the Godfather, and obviously put in to underline the irony of Michael's situation. - TheAma1 08:14, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Come on. Is every appearance of an apple a reference to Eden? Is every appearance of an orange an homage to "The Godfather"? Please, sometimes an orange is just an orange.--Eyeful Tower 08:36, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Okay, I guess I was just assuming the link was to the Movie, I guess I should have followed it. However, it's still not really a cultural reference... unless you're willing to say that Miles Straume eating an orange is also a cultural reference to oranges in general, or Michael's use of a gun being a cultural reference to guns, etc.

As for the Godfather reference, I have to agree with Eyeful. It's just an orange. I've already stated that it did not precede a death. Clamshell 08:42, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

I agree the Godfather reference is too much of a stretch. The Star Wars and Star Trek references have little value as well. Aren't there a 1000 movies with the line "I've got a bad feeling about this"? And the Red Alert-sound isn't even in the episode. It might go under Trivia, but it is not an cultural reference in my opinion. --FrankdelaCoste 11:36, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

No, the "bad feeling about this" line was popularized by Star Wars quoters. Robert K S (talk) 11:44, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Yeah, "bad feeling about this" is a line used in ALL 6 Star Wars movies, and just about all prominent peripheral stories. It's a Star Wars thing.--Ex-Pope Cardinal Richard Corey 14:05, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

As Star Wars is a major influence to many of the Lost creators and writers, I don't think this is a stretch at all. Godfather might be a different story though.--JoeyBags1138 11:36, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Funny about the Godfather reference. I swear when Miles offered him the orange I thought of the Godfather, and remembered when Locke smiled at Walt with the orange peel in his mouth in S1, just like Brando did before he died in The Godfather. I doubt either instance was planned specifically, but one of the great things about Lost is how much it suggests, how the smallest things send us off on new avenues of investigation, the images are so rich with meaning, echoes of archetypes. So while it did make me think of the Godfather, it's not really enough to call it an intentional reference, not like Charlotte's name or Daniel's first words to Jack and Kate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Emissary23 (talk • contribs) 2008-03-22T02:16:30.

Are we sure it was a Dodge Aspen? I don't remember them having a Special Edition or white vinyl top -- it was more the "utility" car of that line. Could be a Plymouth Volare with "fine, Corinthian leather"...? --Litany42 18:20, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

Libby and Production Notes

This was on the main page:

• Libby is the first non-original main cast member to reappear after leaving the show.

Libby already came back when she gave Desmond the boat. We have also seen many of the others come back after dying. Libby only came back as a vision, she didn't actually come back from the dead. I am not sure what this note was intended to mean. --Chuck 08:45, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• • When she was in desmonds flashback, she was still credited as a regular until the end of that season, so she hadn't "left" the show yet. this note is saying she is the first member of the main cast (but not the original from season 1), to be seen in the show after she has left being a regular.--Mattfarley1008 11:55, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
    • Now I understand. It is one of those silly inconsequential facts that do nothing but clutter the main article.--Chuck 09:39, 21 March 2008 (PDT)
      • Actually ... doesn't Kiele Sanchez's cameo in Ji Yeon count as a comeback ? --LeoChris 10:03, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

I'm removing it. Brett Cullen came back as Goodwin in Season 3.--Eyeful Tower 10:08, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Not that I'm against removing it, but its not the same as goodwin, as goodwin was never a regular--Mattfarley1008 11:55, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Guess I don't see Libby as a main character. Tail section survivor, never had her own flashback, lasted less than one season. That's my three strikes.--Eyeful Tower 12:44, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

She was credited with the main characters at the start of the episode, so officially she was a main character. --Minderbinder 12:53, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

if she's credited before the "guest-starring" section of the credits, and she appears in all the promotional photography for that particular season, she's a regular. --JoeyBags1138 11:34, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Deleted Production Error

- *I don't post often on this wiki, but just after 11pm last night, I added a blooper to the effect that Michael's "Kevin Johnson" passport picture would not be valid because it shows him smiling rather than straight-faced. Can anyone tell me whether this is true or not? And if it is true, why is it not still on the page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gsm (talk • contribs) 2008-03-21T10:47:30.

I'm smiling on my passport picture, and it's valid. This may be a restriction added sometime after September 2001. Mine was taken in 2000, I believe it's good for about 10 years after that, certainly easier to fake one of those older passports before modern restrictions. Clamshell 09:45, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• • Okay, thanks - I am a resident of the UK and I was not allowed to smile on mine - but mine is a recent passport and maybe US legislation is different.g-s-m 16:11, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

How Tom left the island?

This is under unanswered questions, but isn't it most likely he just used the sub like everyone else? According to the timeline on this site, it was blown up on December 11. The flashback he appears in could happen any time after about Thanksgiving due to all the christmas decorations. He simply used the sub, then Locke blew it up after he got back to the island. Isn't that question pretty much answered? --Minderbinder 09:08, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

I agree. Unanswered questions can't be a parking lot for everything that we absolutely don't know for certain.--Eyeful Tower 09:43, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

I agree it's something of an odd unanswered question... tho' there does seem to be some validity there. The Swan imploded in the S2 finale which was the last time we saw Michael. Peripherally it's been mentioned that the anomaly (aka sky turning purple) also wiped out the Others communications -- I believe that the underwater beacon to guide the sub back was knocked out to boot (it appears to be offline in Enter 77). Later when John is about to destroy the submarine, Ben tells him that Jack & Juliet are leaving and once gone the sub will be unable to return -- tho' granted Ben lies about things frequently. Tom was frequently seen on the Hydra and at the Barracks throughout S3 so the timeline seems a bit odd. Possibly there are other ways to leave the Island that have not been revealed yet -- aka the polar bear showing up in Tunesia. It's a long way from the South Pacific to New York City.--Spiral 09:48, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

There's plenty of discussion about the sub's capability and possible role in transport to and from the Island in the Galaga entry. Because of it's lack of speed, the sub was probably a way to safely navigate the "time bubble" surrounding the Island. We know that Dharma used the sub, and that the Others continued to use it after the purge. The complete details of how the Others travel to and from the Island are an unanswered question, as is the exact role the sub has in it. But to pose the question specifically about this trip for Tom in this episode is unnecessary and repetetive.--Eyeful Tower 10:44, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Because they do not use the Sub to travel off the Island.Mapper 10:13, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

What do you mean? We have seen them use the sub to get to the island in multiple episodes. While this is the first time we've seen an Other off the island since the swan blew up, the sub seems to be the obvious answer to this question. --Minderbinder 11:27, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Removed the question for above reasons. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 16:31, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

• Whoa, so we're saying Tom did his whole trip in less than a week, in a sub?? Michael left the island on day 69, and the sub blew up on day 82... factoring in that Tom was present from the point Michael left till Episode 9 of Season 3 Stranger In A Strange Land... we're leaving 6 days for a submarine to get from the Eastern Pacific Ocean to New York, and then back?? Seriously guys, subs aren't that fast. The Galaga's model of ship moves at 16km/h when submerged or 10mph. so that means a maximum range in 6 days of 1440 miles... The fastest sub in the world submerged can only do 50mph, making its maximum 6 day range 7200 miles. As the crow flies its a 5000 mile round trip from LA to New York... Accounting for the journey having to be via the Panama canal or the Drake Passage, It can't be the sub.  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  19:38, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

I don't want to theorize on the talk page, but perhaps the sub takes a sho