Talk:Season 3/spoilers

From Lostpedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Spoiler alert!


if someone could source actual links to the articles rather than general links to the site for the reference, it would be cool. it's a lot of work though, i will admit. --kaini. 18:26, 27 July 2006 (PDT)

Contents

Under the Swan

I don't know where to put this, and I hope someone with something to add sees this comment. One of the prespoilers the producers mentioned was that the hieroglyphs allude to "the underworld." Additionally, at 31:24 and 31:28 we are show what looks to be a hole in the Swan's wall just as soon as the magnet begins to power up. I believe this is an imporant shot because no shot in this show is unintentional, espicially if the same shot is shown two different times, and the fact that it is shown as soon as the magnet is powering up I believe is important. I am theorizing that this may be a gap in the cement wall between the hall and the magnet opened up by the dynamite. Additionally, the hieroglyphs, are alluding to the magnet underneath the Swan. I think in Season 3 someone, mayhaps Locke and Eko, may go behind this cement wall and underneath the Swan, encountering the magnet or something else. Furthermore, the Blast Door Map some have speculated alludes to some underground passages or tunnels beneath the stations. If someone could get a screenshot from the beforementioned times, or tell me I am watching way too closely, it would be appreciated.--Two Coyotes 06:45, 28 July 2006 (PDT)

British dating?

Since this is an American show, shouldn't the dating here be in the US (MM/DD/YYYY) format? --Piscez 04:43, 29 July 2006 (PDT)

Yeah I got it.--CaptainInsano
Done.--CaptainInsano
Just found this. General rule is, if its in British and you want to correct it, then do it. Both are OK, but never, ever correct anything in the America date format back into British.  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  08:03, 6 December 2006 (PST)

episode flashbacks

  • just curious what the sources are for the first six episodes. I'm not sure those flashback focus characters are correct. -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T14:17, 10 September 2006 (PDT)

Preview clip

if you go to www.lostlinks.net, click, teasor trailer 4, and watch till it says 'they live to escape'. the next clip is saywer walkin into a building then all of a sudden he seems to have super speed(?). he seems to dash of really quikly but it changes to another clip to quikly to see well. what does anyone else think????? - Malachi Dungeon

I think it is either saywer diving outa the way or just because of it getting ready to jump scenes realy fast for that moment--Bassdude 11:57, 18 September 2006 (PDT)

imdb

  • Just a remidner note that IMDB is not considered an official source. In fact, IMDB is known to have errors prior to broadcast, for example francois chau was credited for 2x23-4 Live Together, Die Alone for weeks, until it was changed to 2x22 ? when that episode was broadcast. -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T15:00, 10 September 2006 (PDT)

Michael returning?

Apparantly he's not. In a TV guide in the UK, (we are now getting Live Together, Die Alone) he claims that as far as he knows, he isn't returning. LJB4815162342 14:11, 23 September 2006 (PDT)

Well the producers said that Michael in Season 3 will be like Walt in Season 2.--CaptainInsano 14:13, 23 September 2006 (PDT)

Updating

Seeing as how A Tale of Two Cities (and pretty soon The Glass Ballerina) has aired, should any spoilers that happened in that episode be erased (William Mapother, The captivity of Jack, Sawyer, and Kate will be an issue in the first episode, etc.)? LJB4815162342 13:18, 11 October 2006 (PDT)

I agree--LOST ON CRAPHOLE ISLAND!!!!! 13:53, 1 November 2006 (PST)
Done :P--LOST ON CRAPHOLE ISLAND!!!!! 12:56, 6 November 2006 (PST)
Added an update banner cuz I probably didn't delete enough and a braver person should probably do it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lost On Craphole Island (talk • contribs) .
I did some heavy editing, rearranged the page so spoilers are by episode, makes it more accessible (I think so anyways) and a section for generic season 3 spoilers. >: 4 8 15 16 23 42 10:21, 21 November 2006 (PST)
Dude, awesome. It actually looks presentable now!!! Thank you so much.--LOCI!

Tricia who?

Tricia Takanawa is a character from Family Guy. Seems pretty uncanny. - GoodRom 12:51, 11 December 2006 (PST)

  • The names are similar, but Tricia Tanaka is the LOST character. Not the same name.

Leaked footage of penny W

Here is some leaked footage of season 3 from ThEmIsFiTiShErE.

Video and info moved to Main page for you. user:danielhelen

Should the video be put into the article, a link to the video, or nothing. I need an expert to give me this advice. Thanx. ZEKE?(>

  • It belongs in the main prespoilers article, or here in its talk page, but no where else, as we have a no-spoiler policy in our regular wiki contents. It should not have its own article.-- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 14:18, 20 December 2006 (PST)
-- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 14:18, 20 December 2006 (PST)

Why is this even still on here. People see the title, get all excited, then have to read the whole paragraph about it not being real. It's bogus, it should be removed. Or are we now posting every parody/fan made video? This should be a place to get facts, not stuff like this.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stripes (talk • contribs) .

Removed--Dan 16:59, 28 December 2006 (PST)

Episode 13

I know that two Orange County detectives are supposed to appear, but where does one get the idea it's Locke-Centric? Bettyfizzw 15:38, 30 December 2006 (PST)

Locke lives in Orange County (Tustin, to be precise). Since this is the season we find out what caused his paralysis, many people would naturally expect this to be a Locke-back. It's also a long-enough distance between flashbacks for this season that it would be his (Whereas Jack gets a mere 7 episodes between flashbacks, other characters usually get a longer episode gap). --Aero*Zeppelin 13:52, 31 December 2006 (PST)

Can somebody please source the episode title? --Princess Dharma (banned) 09:31, 4 February 2007 (PST)

Enter 77

Anyone wonder if the fact "Enter 77, and will feature Sami and Farah, an Iraqi couple who own a restaurant in Paris." will be the point of the Shannon flashback? . . . are things getting obvious?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nowism (talk • contribs) .

I think that maybe this couple is Sayids parents?! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Man of Faith (talk • contribs) .

The phrase "Enter 77" makes me suspect that the number 77 is going to have significant importance in this season, perhaps as important as 4 8 15 16 23 42 had last season. DeGroot 09:08, 21 January 2007 (PST)

Nikki/Paulocentric?

Oh Lord, I'm sooo not looking forward to that one. Do we have to force them into every scene then? --PandoraX 13:06, 21 January 2007 (PST)

That's a bit harsh. Lol. I really don't think people are giving Paulo and Nikki a chance. Anyway they'll be dead by the end of the season THE MONSTER .

Par Avion

Is my high school French deceiving me or does Par Avion mean : By Aeroplane? THE MONSTER .

No, your French is great. It means "By airplane" or "Through airplane". Obi-Dan Kenobi 13:26, 21 January 2007 (PST)

Kool. Wonder how this'll tie into a Claire flashback. THE MONSTER .

Don't forget the Plane mobile.. It showed up in her dream and in the nursery in the Staff. In both times it played "Catch a Falling Star". Obi-Dan Kenobi 13:34, 21 January 2007 (PST)
  • Well she reached the Island "by airplane", so maybe it'll be about her in or near the airport --Mr. Crabby (Talk) 13:30, 21 January 2007 (PST)

How many episodes?

Aren't there 22? When "I Do" had aired, the trailers for the second half all said "sixteen weeks of new episodes" - 6 + 16 = 22 (The finale could be two-hour, so its either a feature length episode 22 or episodes 22/23 depending how you look at it). >: 4 8 15 16 23 42 12:41, 23 January 2007 (PST)

  • Who knows? On the main Lostpedia page is an article titled "No breaks for Lost in 2007-08" that says 6 + 17. 23 or 24 would seem more consistant given the lengths of seasons 1 & 2. --Kivipat

Junked Car

  • The "junked car" - lets call it "The Dharma Bus" - appears to be a Volkswagen Type 2 T2 as featured in Lost Moments Clip No.11 and in this spoiler pic--Kivipat

Rewrite

Why does this page need a rewrite? Seems fine as it is. --Princess Dharma (banned) 09:33, 4 February 2007 (PST)

Just an idea, but possibly put secondary headers under each episode for each source? Could be a way to find which one is most accurate? --nowism 22:36, Feb 5, 2007 (est)

I don't think that necessary. --Princess Dharma (banned) 09:02, 7 February 2007 (PST)

Ryanmcgoldrick

This user has made changes to the page but has neglected to source them. Can they be either sourced or delted? --Princess Dharma (banned) 09:51, 4 February 2007 (PST)

"Last Man Standing" and "Economy Class"

  • I've reverted both of these titles. There is no source provided for either of these. Also, there is no source provided for 15 being Charlie-centric, so I changed it back to the previously assumed Sawyer-centricity. ShadowUltra 08:01, 7 February 2007 (PST)

Good job. I reckon we need to make it more obvious that things like that have to be sourced. --Princess Dharma (banned) 08:53, 7 February 2007 (PST)

Unfortunately they're back, with even more unsourced titles. Right now everything from 313 and on is completely made up. And also the "Man from Tallahassee" is confirmed as a title, but we don't know exactly in which order it will air. --Thinker 01:19, 23 February 2007 (PST)

Not in Portland

This episode already aired, so I don't think we really need the spoilers here anymore. Jeremiahsmith 06:42, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Organization?

Is there any way we can organize this page in two groups such as Official spoilers and Leaked information. Maybe it can be like this:

  • Official

ABC (i.e. Lost Moments) Producers (i.e. Carlton said Penny and Desmond's relationship will be addressed in the season finale) Cast (i.e. Yoon Kim said there will be another Jin/Sun episode) Casting Clues (i.e. Ian/Boone is set to appear again, probably 3-14)

  • Leaked

Anything we know from sneaking on set or script stealing, etc. like: Charecter X will die, Object Y will be discovered, Locke can't walk because Z

What do you guys/girls think? -Comedy240 11:10, 8 February 2007 (PST)

  • I reckon it's fine the way it is. --Princess Dharma (banned) 11:25, 8 February 2007 (PST)
  • Can I ask why? I think it would be a fairer policy for those who wish to know who an episode will be about and guest stars, but the story won't be spoiled. -Comedy240 19:01, 9 February 2007 (PST)
  • Because each item is followed by an attribution. It's usually clear from the attribution where it's an official announcement or something that was leaked. --Jackdavinci 23:37, 9 February 2007 (PST)
  • The table organization was a cool idea, but I think it works better to just have sections by episode, then an entry for each new spoiler. The spoilers within section ordered by date, newest at top. Each one labelled with date and attribution with link. --Jackdavinci

Table of Contents

Would it be appropriate to have the episode production number link to the section on the page?


I used the format of:

[[#<Number>:_<Episode title with understrokes between words>_.28<Flashback character>_centric.29|Number]]

So for 310, "Tricia Tanaka is Dead" (Hurley Centric) it would look like:

[[#310:_Tricia_Tanaka_is_Dead_.28Hurley_centric.29|310]]


But for 320-321, the format is differerent because they are grouped only by number, so it looks like:

[[#320-321|320 or 321]]


Here is what the Number column would look like:

Number
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322

Flippy 17:48, 27 February 2007 (PST)

  • I say go for it, I was thinking of doing that, too. And let's split 320-321 to two different entries, sooner or later we'll have to do it. Moreover, dare I say, the central (flashback) character of each episode is just a mess; a result of complete speculation! People have randomly assigned their favorite characters to some episodes, and now it's a mess (for example, Jin was recently swapped with Juliet, and it seems that Juliet might get swapped with Desmond if the rumor for 317 is true).  —Thinker   23:43, 27 February 2007 (PST)
  • Ok, it's done. I'll be sure to keep it updated. Flippy 14:51, 28 February 2007 (PST)
    • Unfortunately this is hard to maintain, as the titles (and the characters) keep changing. May I suggest that we rename the headers to "Episode 3XX" and then have the episode title and character underneath?  —Thinker   19:14, 28 February 2007 (PST)

Generic Season Notes

Someone please clean these up. Princess Dharma (banned)

Format change (proposal)

In order for the episode numbers to be clickable (and take you to the section that describes the spoilers for that episode number) without having to change the links if the title of an episode is changed, we need a separate box for the title.

I suggest this alternative format (permalink: [1]). What do you guys think?  —Thinker   01:54, 1 March 2007 (PST)

  • I think it's a good format. - TheAma1 14:31, 1 March 2007
  • This format is wonderful. It should really be put in use. BETTYFIZZW (Talk) 11:46, 1 March 2007 (PST)
  • That's a brilliant idea, I say go for it. Flippy 15:00, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Is the format change still needed or are we pretty much settled with the current format?  —Thinker   02:21, 5 March 2007 (PST)

Sun's baby

Kristin is saying that "The producers have confirmed that this season we will find out who Sun's baby's father is." However, according to TV Guide, "Producers told Yunjin Kim that we wouldn't know until the series finale who the father of her baby is". Which one should we believe ? - TheAma1 -Thursday March 1 - 2007 - 3:29PM

Maybe they meant to say 'season' finale. --Xmuskrat 07:49, 1 March 2007 (PST)

Episode 16 Title?

I read on Wikipedia and several other sources that Carlton Cuse has confirmed episode 16's title to be The Truth About Lying, but when I started the page (I know the sourcing was wrong, but I was having browser issues and was unable to access the page again) it was later deleted and locked as if it was a false episode title. Is this title true or false? If it is, then I'm very sorry but the source was Carlton, maybe the people made it up? Anyway, that's all. ShadowUltra 18:28, 28 February 2007 (PST)

  • (Although this discussion doesn't belong here) See Season 3/prespoilers for more info. Carlton Cuse was interviewed on "Richard and Judy" (UK show) and said that the episode's name will be "The truth about lying", but this is not considered an official source. Until ABC MediaNet releases episode infos, pages based on unofficial titles aren't created.  —Thinker   19:26, 28 February 2007 (PST)
  • Thinker is correct. We only consider ABC Medianet as an official source and unless it is released on that page is it not canon and considered a spoiler.-Mr.Leaf 19:28, 28 February 2007 (PST)
Alright, sorry. I thought Carlton might be an official source, but thanks for clearing it up for me =D ShadowUltra 20:27, 28 February 2007 (PST)

Expos vs Expose

Lostpedia had, until recently had listed the Nikki and Paulo episode as "Expose," but now it is listed as "Expos." Other spoiler sites have the episode listed still as "Expose." It seems to me that Expose would be correct and that Expos is a typogaphical error, mainly because, well, Expos isn't a word. Expose would fit though considering the episode exposes their history, combined with the fashion magazine spoiler listed here -- the magazine could feature an exposé on someone, perhaps the Zuckerman character. Thoughts?

  • It's Expos. ABCMedianet confirmed it. And haven't you ever heard of the Montreal Expos? Thats a real word. --Marik7772003 14:41, 3 March 2007 (PST)


Only as a plural for the abbreviation for Exposition. :) Did Medianet confirm it? I thought I only saw confirmation through the Locke episode. Apologies all around if I'm mistaken. As a side note, the Montreal Expos don't exist anymore, they're the Washington Nationals now. :)

Source on Ben-Centric Finale

On most of the episodes it says that the Character is "speculated" to have a flashback but on Bens it implies that we know for sure. What source confirmed that? -brianopp 11:38, 5 March 2007 (PST)

Damon Lindelof. --Aero*Zeppelin 22:27, 5 March 2007 (PST)

  • Where and when? -brianopp 13:28, 6 March 2007 (PST)

D.O.C

Whats DOC stand for? Princess Dharma (banned)

Don't know, but acronymfinder.com has possible meanings listed in order of rank (how common it is). Here's the url if you want to check it out. http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?acronym=DOC littlemisssunshine 12:40, 6 March 2007 (PST)

Thanks for the link. Doesn't seem a very Jin-y title does it. Princess Dharma (banned)

Maybe "Data-Over-Cable" ? (cf the under-water cable who's big role not only is revealed to all the castaways but supposedly plays a big part in s3) - TheAma1 15:53, 9 March 2007 (PST)

The title of every other episode has some relevance to the flashbacks as well as on the island though. Princess Dharma (banned)

What's the link between Enter 7-7 and Sayid's Flashback ? - TheAma1 16:27, 9 March 2007 (PST)
Date of Conception? - Comedy240 11:22, 14 March 2007 (PST)

Claire's Father (moved from the Claire talk page)

It's been safely assumed that Christian might be Claire's dad, thus making her and Jack siblings.

We saw a scene of Christian demanding to see his daughter to an australian woman and mentioning he paid the mortage of the house, however she would not let him see her.

We also know Claire father left when her boyfriend Tom refers to her 'Daddy Abandonment Issues'.

Now it seems pretty likely that he could be her father based on the pieces to the puzzle given to us thus far. Though it could be completely different since there are no hard facts connecting them for sure.

I don't knw Claire's exact age, but I am guessing she is old enough to be considered an adult. If she is then why would her 'mother' not allow Christian to see her, wouldn't that be Claire's choice as an adult? Perhaps that wasn't Claire's mother or perhaps Claire wasn't even there and her mother only pretended she was.

We remember from her flashbacks of when she was first pregnant Tom suggested to have the baby. Claire says her mother would 'disown' her if she did, Tom replied that 'she pratically has already'. So if Claire and her mother aren't that close, then maybe she wouldn't let Christian in out of spite pretending that Claire was there when she was really living on our own.

Now in one of the flashbacks where Claire was signing her baby over to the australian couple she asked the wife if she knew the lullaby "Catch a falling star" she mentioned her father used to sing it to her. This implies she remembers her father, and we already know he abandoned her from the conversation with her ex-boyfriend.

So would she remember Christian, if he is her father, and if she saw him on the island? I believe she would recognize her father, so if we find his corpse or he is somehow alive on the island, things might get rather interesting.

It has been confirmed by kristin that Jack and Claire are related, and that we'll know before they do. check it out. Dannyfrankland 09:50, 6 March 2007 (PST)

  • Lame. I say lame, and I sincerely hope Kristen is wrong again. There is just no reason for Claire and Jack to be related. Make it a flashback character instead. You don't happen to have a source for that, do ya? -BearDog 10:57, 6 March 2007 (PST)
  • Err, except Aaron would then be of the same blood line as Jack, wouldn't he? The only male relative to Jack that we're aware of. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  11:40, 6 March 2007 (PST)
  • Not sure what you're getting at with the Blood Line thing, is Jack some kind of royalty? But beyond that, there's been no mention Yay or Nay on whether Jack has any brothers, nephews, cousins, uncles, his grandfather might still be alive for all we know. He might even have a son he doesn't know about- he did leave Phuket in a hurry. What bothers me about it, is that it's too straight of a line to draw. Part of the fun of Lost is the complicated intertwinings of the character's lives. It would really bother me if they delivered the obvious after so many months. -BearDog 11:56, 6 March 2007 (PST)

Making Claire Christains daughter would repulse me to consider abandoning LOST. It is entirely too plausable especially when we have spent months since the airing of Two for the Road guessing who it is. Princess Dharma (banned)


I just want to point out in my original post of 'Claire's Father' that I was right! I know it was obvious, but people who denied it are dumb, and.. I was right! Spheritic 05:26, 15 March 2007 (PDT)

EW Article "'Lost' and Found"

In the second paragraph of this article, it mentions some apparent things about about the 13th episode of this season. I'm not sure what the status of that information is... can someone give me a second opinion? Link for article: http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20011203_1,00.html littlemisssunshine 13:18, 6 March 2007 (PST)

How often are these right?

Does anyone have a rough estimate, like a percent of something? Just wondering, b/c I'm new to reading spoilers and I don't know the what the deal is w/ these sources... some of them seem to be correct a lot of the time. littlemisssunshine 21:27, 8 March 2007 (PST)

December 2004 Tsunami

If this is going to be written into the series, any ideas of which episode. Using the timeline, I figure it could happen in the third season finale but that is taking each episode from now on as taking two days. Thought it could be quite a nice cliffhanger though; Others/Losties captured by Losties/Others then a giant wave and not knowing who survived, who escaped until next season.

Alleged synopsis of 3.13 (HOAX)

Removed because it is pure fiction, even if creative --Ez76 23:22, 21 March 2007 (PDT)

--Hunter61 22:39, 19 March 2007 (PDT)

Walt/Sawyer

The possible spoiler for about Malcom David Kelly, might also fit with the possible Tom episode the next week. I think we've heard that there may be on-island others flashbacks. It would make sense -brianopp 17:09, 16 March 2007 (PDT)

Another spoiler site had a rumor that Harold Perrineau was seen on set during the submarine explosion ... whether that was just as a guest to visit his friends on set or even if it were true wasn't officially confirmed however. Could they be working on a way to kill both characters off so as to not have a dangling plot thread? Or will another character be seeing another Walt vision?

Also, was it ever confirmed if Lindelof/Cuse were being serious or misleading regarding the "Walt's growth" comment? It seemed like in his last appearances, they maneauvered the camera angles to not display his height to obviously and his voiced sounded as if it had been warped (to sound younger). Perhaps he's not growing faster, they'll just use trick photography if he appears again, and the producers have played us with another foiler? :) --Jeff 18:17, 17 March 2007 (PDT)

Tom-centric

Where does this rumor of a Tom-centric episode come from? I know there was a rumor of an "Others-centric" episode last summer, but that could have meant the Juliet and Ben episodes. It seems most likely the flashback will be for a 815 survivor, especially one that has been faced with death rumors, ie Claire, Sayid or Nikki. Or perhaps they'll be getting back to Michael and Walt?--Jeff 18:50, 17 March 2007 (PDT)

Not sure where the rumour came from, but it was reinforced rather strongly as of recent, with an "announcement" from Malcolm David Kelley saing he was in Hawai'i, and his being there most likely coinciding with Episode 320. Walt, of course, would show up in Tom's flashbacks, and personally, I'd love to see Tom's past and how he ended up on The Island and whatnot. --Aero*Zeppelin 11:17, 18 March 2007 (PDT)

Jack-centric

According to the 12th edition of the Lost Initiative podcast, there will be another Jack-centric episode before the season ends. Paul Terry from the official Lost magazine was on the show and said this was true. - Loop

I have no problem with Jack episodes, but it makes sense since we are missing one centric. (Ep. 20 I believe). I'd rather have a Tom-Centric one, but Jack's fine. BETTYFIZZW (Talk) 14:56, 18 March 2007 (PDT)

I'D personally rather have two of Hurley, Sayid, Nikki & Paulo or Claire or three of Kate, Sawyer, Locke, Desmond or Jin & Sun than another Jack flashback. Jack's a good character, but I get it already. The other 815 survivors and Desmond are more interesting to me at this point because Jack's pushing his 10th flashback while someone like Sayid has only had four total. But that's just me. Hopefully the Jack info is wrong. --Jeff 11:29, 20 March 2007 (PDT)

S03E13 Promotional Photos

Is it known why there are no officially released promotional photos for episode 13, even though ones for E14 and 15 are available already?--Stan 11:26, 19 March 2007 (PDT)

Pictures with spoilery content are typically not released until after an episode, so it's possible this particular episode has so much that it's impossible to give a picture without spoilers. At least, that's what I hope is happening. --Sauron18 11:30, 19 March 2007 (PDT)
The Tailsection finally had a few recently, but nothing that gave away anything too major. There's no way they're spoiling the big Locke payoff. :)Jeff 11:04, 20 March 2007 (PDT)

Hippie-centric?

That spoiler that came out today (March 23)... Hippie-centric? Five will get you ten that it's an Anthony Cooper flashback, and he's got some ties to either the DeGroots or the long-awaited Sawyer connection. --Jeff 16:11, 23 March 2007 (PDT)

I can't believe I didn't think of that! I saw that spoiler today too and was trying to think of who it could be, but Cooper never crossed my mind. But if not Cooper, who else could it be? --Fezir 16:17, 23 March 2007 (PDT)
If the finale doesn't end up being Ben's, this episode could be his. The hippies could be the DeGroots, or Ben's parents (or *gasp* BOTH) and possibly give the backstory for how The Others became the way they are. --Aero*Zeppelin 16:27, 23 March 2007 (PDT)
I'm almost positive that any hippies we see before the series ends would be the DeGroots. I just have this nagging feeling that we'll see the difference -- or split or whatever -- between DHARMA and what we call the Others by the end of the season. --Jeff 23:47, 23 March 2007 (PDT)

Maybe in this episode the new character (not an Other, not a survivor and not from the outside world, as said in the Official Podcast) is revealed and she (if she's portrayed by Marsha Thomason) will tell, in a flashback, a lot of things about DHARMA Initiative's origins.. --Andreapasotti 16:29, 26 March 2007

Episode numbering

Spoilerfix seems to think the Ben episode will be episode 23 of the year, not 22 as listed here. I'm inclined to agree with that, because with the 2-hour finale divided in half for syndication, that would be 24 individual hours, the same as last year. That would also mean -- joy! -- one more TBD-centric episode (the rumored Sawyer episode?). Anyone have any idea? Jeff 20:45, 27 March 2007 (PDT)

I think the finale has been confirmed for May 23rd - which, if you work it out, is episode 22. To be 23 episodes, it would have to air May 30th. >: 4 8 15 16 23 42 06:25, 28 March 2007 (PDT)
Ok cool. Thanks.--Jeff 06:32, 28 March 2007 (PDT)

Everything Has a Beginning?

What spoiler source stated this? I'm deleting it because it has no source. ShadowUltra 14:57, 30 March 2007 (PDT)

Van Matthews

Who is Van Matthews, where does his info originally come from? He has proven to be a good source (he was the firts to mention the diamonds from Nikki and paulo) and all his news seems to be "Greys Anatomy"-related --Hunter61 22:35, 30 March 2007 (PDT)

Brig?

What exactly is a "brig"?--Phil 13:22, 3 April 2007 (PDT)

I believe it's a term used in reference to Naval ships. Anyone in the military who can elaborate? --Jeff 14:48, 3 April 2007 (PDT)
  • The brig is the jail/cell/mini-prison/what-have-you on a boat. As in, "Yargh, send those curs to the brig, savvy?" --CastorTroy 16:44, 3 April 2007 (PDT)
    • In sailing, a brigantine or brig is a vessel with two masts at least one of which is square rigged. A popular choice of buccaneers
    • Also: A compartment that serves as a jail aboard a ship, esp. on a warship --Hunter61 10:04, 4 April 2007 (PDT)
  • The Black Rock is a good example of a brig...ShadowUltra 10:45, 4 April 2007 (PDT)
  • However the Black Rock has three masts not two, therefore it is technically a ship not a brig.-Kivipat

Through The Looking Glass ???

what the source to say that the finale's title is 'through the looking glass?? - Malachi

  • And every time I come to the prespoilers page, the episode titles and centrics keep changing, they should be kept as TBD until it is annoucned what they are actually called. - Loop

This is a spoilers page, so this is not were announcements go. Go to Season 3 to see all the confirmed episode titles and the flashback characters as confirmed by ABC. This page is just spoilers, from any of a number of spoiler sites. -Mr.Leaf 10:14, 4 April 2007 (PDT)

The Tail Section

This episode info is from thetailsection.com:

You want it? You got it:

  • 3.16 Juliet
  • 3.17 Desmond
  • 3.18 Jin and Sun
  • 3.19 Jack
  • 3.20 Karen and Gerald DeGroot
  • 3.21 Charlie
  • 3.22 Ben as a young man
  • 3.23 Ben as Ben

That's it, don't shoot the messenger, but there is no more Sawyer flashbacks this season.

I can't decide if I should trust it or not--Phil 14:23, 5 April 2007 (PDT)

  • That seems moire accurate than what's currently listed. the Lost spoilers blog has thatlist as well, as opposed to what's currently listed here. At this point, I only forsee the Jack flashback being last if he's going to die or get off the island. (UNSIGNED)

Hm, well we now know that 3.19 isn't Jack or Sawyer, so that leaves us with... everyone else. And somewhere it was said that there wouldn't even BE a flashback for that episode... :S And I'm guessing that something DHARMA-related is coming for 3.20 (didn't they say they were casting Roger for that??) so that leaves us with...

  • 3.17: Desmond
  • 3.18: Jin/Sun
  • 3.19: ??? No flashback ???
  • 3.20: DHARMA
  • 3.21: Charlie
  • 3.22 Part One: Young Ben
  • 3.22 Part Two: Ben

That's what I think is most likely... (Isolation815 18:48, 12 April 2007 (PDT))

DeGroot "Hippie" FB

How can a DeGroot flashback be introduced ? I mean I can't see anyone having flashback that goes that far.TheAma1 05:09, 5 April 2007 (PDT)

The DeGroots could be on the island for all we know. It's too early to be asking that question. Evil-pineapples 16:01, 6 April 2007 (PDT)

Digital Spy spoilers, foilers or rumors ?

Can the Digital Spy spoilers be trusted ? I mean it sounds more and more crazy with Charlie encountering a dead Libby and Penny on the island. I think it's a bunch of foilers. I'm removing them until proven otherwise. TheAma1 13:19, 5 April 2007 (PDT)

No. Digital Spy claimed that Claire and/or Aaron would die in Par Avion also, which turned out to be completely false. >: 4 8 15 16 23 42 03:32, 6 April 2007 (PDT)

Finale Flashback Character

Right now the finale's centric character is a toss-up between Jack and Ben. Nobody seems to agree on which it will be, so for now let's keep its status as "Jack or Ben centric" instead of bouncing back and forth between the two.Evil-pineapples 23:37, 6 April 2007 (PDT)

  • Isnt it possible that the TWO hour finale may have two flashback characters? Maybe one in each hour.. or maybe they might interwine the flashbacks if it is both of them throughout the whole episode? Just a thought :D --Lewis-Talk-Contribs 10:34, 12 April 2007 (PDT)
    • Exactly what I thought Lewisg ! TheAma1 04:59, 13 April 2007 (PDT)

formatting

I thought having the formatting be date descending with links to the actual spoilers was a more organized and relevant way to format the spoilers, so the newest spoilers for an episode would always be at top, it was clear when a tittle or centric character was confirmed, and the sources were concretely linked so people could confirmed them easily. Any reason wew went back to the old unorganized format? --Jackdavinci 09:04, 7 April 2007 (PDT)

  • I second this notion.--TheWoj 22:17, 7 April 2007 (PDT)
  • Some sections were just a pile of large spoiler text, even repeated spoilers. I think someone reverted to a previous version but missed to correct the format. Could you reformat it please? --Darkmaster 22:40, 7 April 2007 (PDT)
  • I'll reformat it if people agree that the new format is preferred. I don't want to reformat it if it will just get unformatted again :) --Jackdavinci 22:54, 7 April 2007 (PDT)
    • I definitely agree that the new format is better.--Compossible 13:35, 10 April 2007 (PDT)

The Brig - NO FLASHBACKS

Just found this, posting in a hurry. Someone go ahead and review this, find a source, whatever. I would, but I'm just posting this on my way out the door. --Aero*Zeppelin 17:13, 12 April 2007 (PDT)

Summary: Ep. 3.19 will have NO flashbacks. The article mentions that 3.20 will be Ben-Centric and the finale Jack-Centric. Also, the flashbacks will not be missed. I'm still in shock BETTYFIZZW (Talk) 18:08, 12 April 2007 (PDT)

  • I've mentioned this in the Article, and given its original source: Ain't It Cool news--Kivipat
    • It has now been (re)confirmed as John Locke centric by the same source and more (see my edit). TheAma1 15:07, 13 April 2007 (PDT)
    • Excuse me, but would you mind not deleting comments that contradict or contrast to your source? Everything here is pre-spoilers, nothing on this page is, as you say, confirmed. Revert to old version please??? (Isolation815 16:28, 13 April 2007 (PDT))
      • If by half the section you mean one quote from AICN, then yes I deleted that. But appart from that quote (replaced by the updated one), I touched nothing else on the John-centric episode. - TheAma1 16:31, 13 April 2007 (PDT)

Charlie: Death in 3.21

  • Dominic Monaghan mentioned doing an underwater sequence where Charlie has to dive the bottom to the sea to connect underwater wires.
  • He also mentioned that revealing Charlie's fate would reveal what happens in the finale.
  • Charlie will have a lot of tough choices [to make], because it would be easiest and safest to just stay in his tent, but on this island, you know, that's difficult.
  • There are some very emotional things going on for Claire.
  • The Jack/Juliet and Claire/Charlie relationships will intensify during the final batch of episodes.
  • Domonic Monaghan stated in an interview with Media Guardian, that his flashback episode would be one of the last in the season, however, not the finale but that his character would play an important role in the finale without him physically being there.
  • Charlie's fate will be decided in the final two episodes of the season.
  • There are at least two more deaths.
  • Kristin: I'm hearing that Charlie will die.
  • Life & Style magazine is reporting that Dominic Monaghan (Charlie) has been told he won't be back for next season.

So, yeah... Charlie's death. Discuss. (Isolation815 18:58, 12 April 2007 (PDT))

RIP Charlie. --Blueeagleislander 19:03, 12 April 2007 (PDT)

  • After some recent comments, like the one that the whole Charlie's death thing may be -- for now -- misdirection, I'm starting to get worried about some of my other favorite characters. In particular Hurley. Especially Hurley because of the lest few "Catch-22" previews. Even though Claire and Sayid have appeared less lately, certain spoilers -- a darker Claire and Sayid called to action -- make me believe they're safe, but does anyone else think that someone other than Charlie's gonna bite it? --Jeff 17:09, 17 April 2007 (PDT)
  • I also feel that Hurley's last flashback kind of wrapped things up for him. It disproved a lot of existing theories and didn't present us with any new questions, so I definitely think that he's in danger. It may be foreshadowed by the lack of Stephen King references in the last portion of this season. King loves Hurley, so maybe they're leading us on subtly in that way. I'd love to see a surprise Juliet death though that further polarizes Jack and Sawyer. --MightyRearranger 12:09, 23 April 2007 (PDT)

HUH?

WHAT is up with this set photo??? Ben flashback? (Isolation815 00:40, 13 April 2007 (PDT))

  • Hey, guys, remember Locke's vision from "Further Instructions"? That explains it all. Not a shop, not a fake, not a flashback. Genuine set photo. --Aero*Zeppelin 01:40, 13 April 2007 (PDT)

This is a photo from Locke's vision with Boone at the airport in "Further Instructions"

The Man Behind the Curtain

Season Finale

Am I the only one who DOESN'T want a Jack-cantric finale? After Stranger in a Strange Land, I never want to see another Jack flashback again, especially not a season finale. --Jenius 07:54, 14 April 2007 (PDT)

I no ! I really want a ben-centric finale but the way they are talking about the jack flashback it's going to blow us away. Apparently. DrGiggles 08:07, 14 April 2007 (PDT)

Ditto. I HATE Jack flashbacks. Ben-centric finale plz. (Isolation815 12:25, 14 April 2007 (PDT))

It has been rumoured that Jack will die in this episode (hopefully)--Phil 12:26, 14 April 2007 (PDT)

This has been rumoured since the beginning of the show ! Maybe it is even rumoured that a nuke is going to explode, killing everyone on the island... TheAma1 12:37, 14 April 2007 (PDT)

Yeah, but the rumor may be true, especially considering real life events....--Sauron18 12:41, 14 April 2007 (PDT)
*:rolls eyes.**--Dorritjo 21:26, 23 April 2007 (PDT)

Honestly Jack is a great character, but I'm getting really sick of his flashbacks. He's got sooo, sooo many of them, while characters like Sawyer and Sayid (both favorites of mine) apparantly are stuck with just ONE measly flashback this season. One. Especially in Sawyer's case that is just shocking. Hopefully Jack's finale flashback will be worth it. I trust the writers on this one, but I'm really hoping that Jack won't get this many flashbacks in the future. And as to the rumors of Jack's death, I don't think it's going to happen. He's the star of the show. It would be like The X-Files without Mulder, just plain stupid. Although I have to admit, the writers have been downplaying Jack's character this season... intriguing. Evil-pineapples 13:50, 17 April 2007 (PDT)

Christian Shephard flashback?

Could the finale possibly be a Christian flashback? This is totally baseless rampant speculation, but that would be very shocking indeed, and Jack would obviously feature in them.

Interesting, I think hes alive for sure --Presariocompaq 14:56, 17 April 2007 (PDT)

Why Prespoilers? / Rename

Why does lostpedia refer to spoilers as prespoilers? What distinguishes a regular spoiler from a prespoiler? Seems kinda redundant to me.- DeGroot 06:48, 21 April 2007 (PDT)

I am not 100% sure but i suppose that prespoilers are before an episode actually airs whereas spoilers are information about an episode that has aired yet others may not have viewed.DrGiggles 10:22, 21 April 2007 (PDT)

  • Rename - All lost-centered web-pages refer to it as spoilers, I think Lostpedia should too. -- Jakovexc0
  • Rename - Does pre-spoilers even make sense? BETTYFIZZW (Talk) 12:54, 21 April 2007 (PDT)
  • Rename - Pre-spoilers seems redundant. steve 13:39, 21 April 2007 (PDT)
  • Rename- spoilers is better(!)--Phil (talk) 13:49, 21 April 2007 (PDT)
  • Rename - to spoilers, although I also present "Super Fun Time Hurley Spoilers of Wonder." --CastorTroy 15:01, 21 April 2007 (PDT)
    • Great success! DeGroot 11:36, 26 April 2007 (PDT)

ABC Medianet

I just have a quick question regarding ABC Medianet. How often do the press releases they make come out? Thanks. Evil-pineapples 07:25, 22 April 2007 (PDT)

I believe that they are usually released each week, e.g. on Mondays.--Stan 08:10, 22 April 2007 (PDT)

What to do with old information

Instead of deleting old spoilers, why not move them to a separate page? This can be done so that the credibility of the various sources can be tracked, based on whether or no the spoiler information turned out to be accurate. Then we can see which sources are the most trustworthy. steve 09:13, 24 April 2007 (PDT)

This is a good idea. I agree with Evilwombat/steve..--Phil (talk) 09:16, 24 April 2007 (PDT)

I think that's the best idea I've ever heard. Evaluating and raiting the validity of spoliers is a great way to let people determine for themselves what to believe and what not to believe. I have an idea for a way to do it, but because I am new to the community am going to wait a little while to see if someone else has a better idea. --MUW Fan 09:51, 24 April 2007 (PDT)

Do you mean moving spoilers to an old page and saying "correct" and incorrect"? --Blueeagleislander 18:32, 24 April 2007 (PDT)

Yes, that would work. Maybe that page could also keep the count of correct and incorrect spoilers for each source. steve 18:39, 24 April 2007 (PDT)

I like that idea as well. Good way to keep track of "foilers" from the producers as well.

I actually was thinking about a point allocation system based on five basic criteria: precision, urgency, clarity, relevance, and validity. (Ten points available per spoiler--up to two points for each criterion.) The points could then be used to rate the sources. However just tracking correct/incorrect spoilers works too, as long as it somehow references the source so that sources that are frequently false or vague to let people know how much stock to put in the spoiler. --MUW Fan 21:07, 24 April 2007 (PDT)
Either way works for me - Nice idea! ElMayor 12:49, 1 May 2007 (PDT)
  • I completely agree with steve and MUW Fan. Great ideas. - TheAma1 06:24, 25 April 2007 (PDT)
  • Archiving old spoilers is fine, but they shouldn't be archived until the episode airs. I like the old layout we had, where each spoiler had a column for date posted and a column for source, and a column for the spoiler itself - and it was in date order, with newest at top. There was no need to delete old spoilers, because you could just see what the newest spoiler was easily which was usually the most accurate info. --Jackdavinci 13:51, 1 May 2007 (PDT)

Writers error or a plot hint

When Naomi parachutes onto the island she is wearing a pilot's helmet BUT The helmet has an oxygen mask Now, Oxygen masks come with combat pilot's helmets, not helicopter pilots. Helicopter pilots have a helmet with a small microphone attached on the side. So Either we have a writer's error, overlooking this fact in a desire to obscure Naomi's face till the last minute, or was this some sort of plot hint? You tell me…

  • Writer's error to obscure her face. They're TV writers, not experts on the details of helicopter uniforms. Jeremiahsmith 07:57, 11 May 2007 (PDT)

If Dark UFO's Spoiler Was Right...

  • Why do the previews show Desmond in a stand off with Mikhail in The Looking Glass instead of Charlie?--MightyRearranger 12:40, 17 May 2007 (PDT)
    • Any number of possibilities there. Um, Desmond gets there, has a tiny showoff, but leaves before the spoilers you're talking about happen. BETTYFIZZW (Talk) 18:31, 17 May 2007 (PDT)

What happened here?

This page seemed to fall into disrepair gradually over the last week - the "Generic Season Notes" were placed in between the season finale title and the season finale spoilers, and there's discussion about the major game-changing spoiler on the page itself. Did someone just decide to flip the page around at some point? --CastorTroy 14:24, 18 May 2007 (PDT)

Finale discussion

The twist is bound to cause huge discussion among Lost fans. I felt it was a bit of a cheat, but maybe others will like it more... --TiZon 07:42, 18 May 2007 (PDT)

Who wrote this? I'd love to know why it's "cold blood" when Sawyer shoots Tom -- who actually shot him at the end of season one -- but not "cold blood" when Locke throws a knife into Naomi's back. --Amberjet11 08:32, 18 May 2007 (PDT) It was written by lostfan108 (an insider), he wrote this 'spoiler' together with a spoiler just like this for ep21 witch was correct 100% --TiZon 08:39, 18 May 2007 (PDT)

It's "cold blood" because Tom was no longer a threat, Sawyer killed him in revenge for the raft incident, as he promised to do months earlier. It's not "cold blood" when Locke killed Naomi - he was trying to stop her from making the call, and speed was of the essence. Dharmabum 23:22, 24 May 2007 (PDT)

WHO DELETED THE ARTICLE FROM THE SPOILER PAGE AND WHY ?--TiZon 02:38, 20 May 2007 (PDT)

Deletion

Agree: The season has ended which means that there is no season 3 spoilers anymore!
Disagree: I like reading spoilers after an episode has aired to see how accurate or inaccurate they are, and to gain insight to the show via how producers phrase their little hints. I also think it will be interesting in the future to look back and say "oh yeah, I can't believe we thought that". Merick 05:06, 24 May 2007 (PDT)

disagree I also think archived spoilers are valuable and I would like to see this article restored to its full form Elpepe 09:09, 24 May 2007 (PDT)

Disagree Archied spoilers are fun to look back upon (either to laugh at absurdidy of what we might have believed or at the accuracy). There is value in keeping them. Throw up a paragraph at the top about why they are there. --Turniphead Danny 17:25, 24 May 2007 (PDT)

Delete: BUT, possibly add this as an archive somewhere, e.g. under Talk:Season 3, or maybe even Spoilers disambig --Nickb123 (Talk) 15:32, 24 May 2007 (PDT)

    • Delete : Same thought. - TheAma1 14:29, 31 May 2007 (PDT)

Keep to save as an archive. If it is archived somewhere, then delete. It is very fun to see how accurate some sources were, whereas some were way off. David 18:54, 24 May 2007 (PDT)

Keep It's not a huge deal, but it's just fun to look back through old spoiler pages. Where better a place to archive it than at the original article? Dharmabum 23:17, 24 May 2007 (PDT)

Delete: I have no doubt this will be deleted in the next few days. --Mr. Crabby (Talk) 13:08, 25 May 2007 (PDT)

Keep:Although I am going to dig through the history and re-add all the spoilers from this year, then we can protect this page and leave it as a log of all the spoilers and see which ones were right and wrong. -Mr.Leaf 13:34, 25 May 2007 (PDT)

I do like the idea of an article about spoilers and foilers, maybe we could move this to someone's sandbox and edit it there. --Mr. Crabby (Talk) 13:39, 25 May 2007 (PDT)

  • I'm working on a spoiler/foiler evaluation page. Hopefully it'll be done soon; I'll put it on my userpage for viewing soon. --MUW Fan|talk|contributions 16:52, 25 May 2007 (PDT)

Weak Keep --MUW Fan|talk|contributions 16:52, 25 May 2007 (PDT)

Delete Season 3's all done. No need for the article anymore. --random2502 11:42, 3 September 2007 (PDT)

Delete

Let's delete this mother!

Delete?

What about the UK? They need the spoilers still!

The page won't be deleted. Deletion also deletes the page history which others may find useful.    Jabberwock    talk    contribs    email   - 22:25, 14 June 2007 (PDT)

Season 3 spoiler theories

What is to be done with the theories based on these now-deleted spoilers? Most of them are now obsolete.--Stan 05:40, 27 May 2007 (PDT)

Finale spoilers

There were some spoilers about the finale which turned out to be completely false. (for example, that we will understand Walt's abilities or that Richard Malkin's visions will be revisited or that we'll learn new things about the listening station) Does anyone rememeber who said these? I think that the producers, but I'm not sure. Andris22 07:11, 5 June 2007 (PDT)

Retrieved from "http://www.lostpedia.com/wiki/Talk:Season_3/spoilers"