Talk: Some Like It Hoth

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Some Like It Hoth article. General discussion about the article's subject is permitted as a way to aid improvement of the article. Theories about the article subject should not be discussed here. (Instead, post your theory to this article's theory page or discuss it on this article's theory talk page.)
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Be polite, don't bite, have fun! Admins are here to help More discussion at the Forum	Article policies Canonicity Spoiler policy Theory policy

VHS tapes?

Are those VHS video tapes in the security room that miles was about to wipe? If so those werent introduced until around 1980, which is about 3 years after this episode was set.-- Nzoomed  talk  contributions  10:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• I need to look closer, but they struck me as U-Matic cartridges, which would be valid. I'll edit this later if I can confirm (and no one else checks first). --Dave b 14:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
• I was watching the episode with my husband who works in broadcasting. He said the tapes are 3/4" (that's what they're called) which was a broadcast standard. Iburnedthemuffins 17:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Correct. U-Matic and 3/4" are the same thing. --Dave b 19:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
    • The tape decks are Sony VO 9850 U-Matic's --HangedMan 05:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, if there are nine monitors, why are there only eight recorders? --HangedMan 05:58, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

• I feel the extra monitor may just be for viewing or switching between channels, and yes after a closer look, they are not VHS tapes. It just looked alot like one at a glance.-- Nzoomed  talk  contributions  22:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Episode title posting and spoiler policy

why did it take so long for the title of this episode to be posted? aren't all of the titles for the remaing S05 episodes posted on imdb? --Pags 02:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC)Pags

Due to spoiler policy, only the immediately upcoming episode's title is posted on LP. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  02:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hoth?

More than likely not a typo, so what is "Hoth" supposed to mean? --  SacValleyDweller    talk    contribs   05:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

• Other than the obvious Star Wars reference? --Emissary23 05:28, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Not so obvious, had to look it up, but yeah other than that. --  SacValleyDweller    talk    contribs   05:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Generally pretty obvious Star Wars reference. Hoth is the frozen planet the Rebels inhabit in The Emperor Strikes Back. Which makes it pretty ironic sense it's referencing the Marilyn Monroe movie as well.
  • Maybe Norse god. ∇ϕ 08:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
    • There is indeed a Norse god called Hoth. His Wikipedia article says his name is "Höðr (often anglicized as Hod)" but "Hoth" is the name I've seen most often. He was blind, and was the god of darkness and night. His brother Baldur was the god of light and daytime. Loki tricked Hoth into killing his brother with an arrow made from magic mistletoe. Google those three names and you'll get a lot of references. -- Wildass theory time! Baldur actually existed. That big white statue is of him. It has four toes because Baldur was from the future where everybody has four toes. (Some contributors have already suggested that the statue was from the future, arguing that shoe wearing will cause people to lose their small toes; that's bad science, but hey, this is TV.) He brought back with him all kinds of superadvanced technology that looks to us like magic. The remnants of that technology is what's behind all the weird things that happen on the island. Isaac32767 23:33, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
      • From the Wikipedia page: "According to the Prose Edda and the Poetic Edda the goddess Frigg made everything in existence swear never to harm Baldr... Loki, upon finding out about Baldr's one weakness, made a missile from mistletoe, and helped Höðr shoot it at Baldr." Perhaps this story mirrors the events of the island: Ben (Hoth) has been told not to harm Locke (Baldr), but will try to anyway... although, the previews show this episode is to do with events in the past. So perhaps it's more to do with past-Ben and what he gets up to... --Leperous 21:24, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I keep on thinking that it will be "Some Like it Thoth" which will fit with the egyptian theme. Remember in s3 when for a while we thought Expose was going to be Expos?

• • Ha! "Some Like I, Thoth!" --PappyBlueRibs 17:25, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
    • I think that's our first Egypt pun, Hooray!--Roobydo 11:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I looked up Hoth and apparently the only Hoth there is is the planet in Star Wars. Maybe we will see a Star Wars reference? --LOST-The Cartographer 15:49, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, the first (fourth, whatever...) Star Wars movie did come out in 1977, although the planet Hoth wasn't featured until The Empire Strikes Back, in 1980... so while it's possible that it's a Star Wars reference, it would be a bit anachronistic.--BADavid 17:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

• The previews show a lot of interaction between Hurley and Miles. If the tenor of their dialogue remains consistent with prior episodes, it is likely that the line is spoken by one of them. The previous few episodes - Dead is Dead, He's Our You, Whatever Happened, Happened, Namaste, LaFleur, This Place is Death - have all shared their titles with character dialogue. Jack Dutton 06:00, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Since Hoth is a frozen planet in Star Wars, there is an interesting interpretation to be made with the title. I can think of one icy place on the island that jumps to mind ... Criley002 17:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

how bout the fact that Star wars came out in 1977, the same year some of our survivors are lost in. although hoth didnt appear until empire strikes back in 1980. Something else that was odd was the apparent contrast between the original title "some like it hot" and the frigid, icy planet of hoth.

• I think indeed it has to do with the release of the first StarWars movie in the same year as the cast in the Dharma is currently in. Would be fun if the Dharma people would take a night out and go the cinema, haha.

• Hoth - frozen planet, attacked by Polar Bear-like creature -- sounds like we are going to the Orchid Wheel, folks!

HOTH is an anagram for Houses Of The Holy. Take it literally or go for the Led Zeppelin reference -- it's your choice. There's also Help On The Homefront, a Colorado-based program for soldiers and their families. Speaking of soldiers, maybe the title refers to high-ranking WWII German army official Hermann Hoth, who was a special invited guest at the Nuremburg Trials. Just please dear lord don't let it be a crappy Star Wars reference!!!!!!! Middlenamewayne 13:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

• Acronym, not anagram. Chrisyudbs 10:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Podcast confirms it as a Star Wars reference. Also, it's meant to be a lighthearted episode (I'm guessing somewhat in the vein of "Tricia Tanaka Is Dead"), so a lighthearted title is appropriate. jimbo_the_tubby 18:38, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Also rearranges to "Ok, Im the Hostile." You can find the words Miles, Smoke, Lost, Time and Mole in the jumble. But I do believe it is just a lighthearted reference to Star Wars. In the past the star wars references have been mostly lighthearted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrnotwen (talk • contribs) .

The title is a reference to the classic film Some like it hot, and the frozen planet from Star Wars. dposse 03:57, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

There are deeper significances to the title. While the major one is Hurley's attempt to send the plot to George Lucas, the underlying issue is father issues. Miles speaks with the dead. Luke Skywalker spoke to the dead Obi-Won... on Hoth (and Dagobah). Redemption is another theme on LOST... Darth Vader did so in The Return of the Jedi. Lies about the father is also evident... Luke's stepdad said his father was a navigator on a spice freighter... not a Jedi Knight and Darth Vader. Lara Chang lied, but I think she had good reasons. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jclinard (talk • contribs) 2009-04-16T03:19:30.

The article currently says this about Hurley writing ESB:

"he later plans to send this script to George lucas, the writer, uselessly because Lucas had already written it before 1977"

As a Star Wars nerd, I feel I must challenge this. Though Lucas has claimed that he had the entire trilogy in his head from the beginning, this is often doubted, and its definitely certain that he didn't have it all written. For Empire, he didn't even write the screenplay himself, instead getting Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan to do it for him. The first draft was completed by Brackett (sadly, just before she died of cancer), in February of 1978. You can read about this at Wikipedia. The final script was finished in August of 1979, as is mentioned on the final script itself. Incidentally, this script appears to have been finally completed well into the filming, which lasted from March to September of that same year. The movie itself was released in May of 1980. So anyway, unless somebody has better evidence that Lucas had the story already, I'm going to go ahead and change it. ObsidianOps 19:15, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

My understanding is that unsolicited scripts are routinely sent directly to the legal department for return to the sender without being read by anyone involved in production. That would be a much better "...uselessly because..."--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 20:58, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Press Release

The press release [1] is here if anyone wants to see it. I liked it.--Mistertrouble189 05:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

SPOILER REMOVED Pictish 13:08, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Felix

Felix is Widmore's victim? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gaarmyvet (talk • contribs) 2009-04-15T22:22:13.

• No, Tom's, or one of Ben's Others. The papers described are the ones Tom showed Michael. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 05:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
• Yea I liked that - it implied The Others killed this man and stole the papers which they later showed Michael. They tied up a loose end no-one really cared about! --Integrated (User / Talk) 17:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• LOL. Evidently you haven't been to the forum, where two topics of this have gone on for several pages. Some people did care about it, and it's still being hotly debated either way. I thought it was very clear, but others disagree. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:27, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Unanswered Questions

Time for yet another round. I removed the following question:

• "What is the DHARMA Initiative doing in Grid 334? "

I was pretty sure that was the area Miles went to with the body bag, then again with Chang. They were building the Swan. FralfTC 03:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Yes, it was the Swan build site. We saw the hatch later on. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 05:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
• And the fact that Alvarez's death can only be explained by the uniquely powerful magnetism The Swan was built around. Maokun 15:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Dental fillings are not magnetic; they are an amalgam of silver, tin, copper, zinc, and mercury. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dave92127 (talk • contribs) 2009-04-16T15:26:33.

• Desmond once talked about his fillings and the wall. Keep in mind, we don't know where Alvarez was from. Dental fillings vary by country, and his may have contained magnetic material. Still, if it could rip his tooth out with the force of a bullet, larger magnetic objects should have been flying (tools, etc.) well before that. JeffreyLV 05:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• Not necessarily. Remember how Jack and Sayid went under the Swan? The concrete wall doesn't appear to be there yet, as they are just discovering the EM, so perhaps his body was closer to the source than anything else has been. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
• Someone asked what was behind the wall. Desmonds comment went something like this... "I don't know, but everytime I walk past it my fillings hurt". This can't be a coincidence as to why they chose this guy to die this way in Some Like it Hoth. This is to obscure of a way for someone to die to be a coincidence.  NEVERGIVEUP  Contribs  Talk  15:52, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
• I think a better explanation for the fillings is the writers are taking a bit of artistic license. So if they want me to believe fillings are magnetic, I'll play along.Dave92127 06:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

• No, Miles went from the Barracks to the Orchid (picked up body), back to the Barracks (instructions from Horace and joined by Hurley), to the Swan (leave body with Chang), to the Barracks (supposedly done for the day and dropped off Hurley), and to the sub dock (sees Daniel getting out of sub).--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 16:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• No, he didn't go to pick up the body from the Orchid. If he did why would he go back to the Barracks then return to the Orchid to put the body back right near where he got it? He picked up the body at the Swan construction site, took it to the Orchid via the Barracks.--Chocky 16:46, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
• Chang was definitely at the Orchid, it looked identical to how it did in the Season opener "Because You Left". --Integrated (User / Talk) 17:43, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Miles went from Security office at the Barracks to somewhere near the Swan to pick up the body; the Swan has the magnetic properties and that is where they were digging with Radzinsky. Remember Radzinsky and the model? And freaking out over Sayid knowing the name of the Swan? Miles brought back to the Security office, where Horace was on the phone with Chang. Horace then sent Miles and the body (with Hurley along for the ride) to the Orchid, where Hurley was bringing lunch, and the body was left there before Chang got a ride with them back to the Swan dig site. Then Miles and Hurley bring the bus back to sign it back in, and Miles goes to spy on Chang, who then comes out and they go to the sub dock together. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• Why did The DHARMA Initiative choose to build The Swan Station in Hostile territory? - Surely it's because that was where the source of electromagnetism was, same reason they built the Orchid near the source of exotic particles. I think this has been mentioned a lot in podcasts as well as the show, that there exists a well of electromagnetic energy and the Swan harnessed that energy, therefore it couldn't be built anywhere else. Anyone agree? --Integrated (User / Talk) 12:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• Why was Alvarez's death being covered up?

It's being covered up because they can't explain to the workers that a filling was ripped out of his mouth and shot through his brain. The important question here is not why they are covering it up. That is obvious. The question should be "How did Alvarez's filling get pulled out of his mouth with enough force to shoot through his skull?"--Mrmagic522 17:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I would have to disagree to some extent. The death easily could have been written off as a construction accident: stuff the guy in a bodybag, say he got crushed by falling equipment and have done with. They could ship him back to the Barracks and bury him, or send the body home via the sub. Instead they go to enormous lengths to hide what happened and take the body to the Orchid. Spiral77 04:19, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

• Who killed Felix and took the documents he carried, about the faked Oceanic 815 crash? Do we really need this? Is it a pressing issue? We know he was killed, the documents taken, and later Tom had them, do we need to know every detail? --Integrated (User / Talk) 16:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, it's part of the bigger picture.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 17:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

• Why did Pierre send Lara and Miles from the Island?

Because Miles eventually warns him of the impending purge of the Dharma Initiative by The Others thereby creating his own situation of growing up without his father, but also of knowing what happened, completing the circle and filling the hole that Bram said that he wouldn't. Of course he's still not getting the $1.6 million either.--Nerdutory 20:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

• • That clearly is a theory. The question is relevant and has not been answered yet. User:Spoutnik 44

Blackboard

• Can someone grab a screen capture of the blackboard before Jack erases it? It might prove valuable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xocgx (talk • contribs) 2009-04-16T08:24:58.

The school chalkboard

• Here's the requested chalk board. Click to enlarge. Jack erased 1/3 of the board but looking at the other 2/3 of it, you can tell that the kids were learning about...Egypt! Relationship with the giant statue? Hmm..interesting..maybe.--Mistertrouble189 20:48, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• The picture, the transcription, and the translation are all available on the hieroglyphs page.

<hiero>O34:O4-G17-D58-A1</hiero> zholmboe 03:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

That one symbol from Ancient Egyptian looks like an iPod. ESachs 01:33, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Trevor is the landlord

I recognize that actor. ESachs 03:40, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Infobox picture

Can we get a better picture, preferably with Miles face not partially obscured? There are other scenes, like when he is watching himself as a baby with his father, or when he is talking to the dead body in the back of the bus, that would work better, IMO. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 05:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Agree -- when I saw that picture, I thought, that's the best we can do? Marc604 05:36, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
• It's the best we can do with the screencaps available. Trust me, that was never intended to be the final one. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  05:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Okay. Sorry, wasn't whinging. I just thought that was the final choice and there were better options in the episode. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 05:57, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• How about now? -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  06:06, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• I have added Image:5x13 Crying miles.png as LotDI suggested above. I feel it is the best image for the episode.-- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  17:39, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Nice, Sam. Much better. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Removed "bloopers"

1. Chalkboard was erased while Roger is talking.
2. Swan logo is the normal logo used on products, labcoats, etc. The Swan build date doesn't have to effect the logo. IRL, Epcot's logo was on products available at Disney's Magic Kingdom, before Epcot was even built and opened.
3. Plastic-lined eskies were developed in 1957 (http://www.coleman.com/coleman/ColemanCom/tales_072.asp). My family had one in the late 60s and throughout the 70s and 80s (when they built things to last). ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 05:56, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Agree with the chalkboard... a continuity error can only be said to exist when the sequence of images shown on screen preclude the possibility of the time-shortening magic of editing. The chalkboard being erased extra quickly is not a blooper in the same way that the key to Mr. Vonner's apartment appearing in the doorknob instantaneously after young Miles finding the key is not a blooper. Someone added it back, but I rolled back.  Robert K S   tell me  06:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Yes, I agree. The show would be "24" if everything was shown in real time, and even that show takes shortcuts to make it not boring. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:04, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• Not going to remove it myself, but the "in line" vs "on line" thing is extremely tenuous. I don't think it's a widely recognized or consistently followed regional dialect difference.--Jackdavinci 08:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• I agree. The simple explanation is that the actor was merely following the script. Even if it was true, I have friends from Cali who say it both ways. No blooper/error. Lorite 11:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Is the spelling of DHARMA with the words in lowercase (besides "D") considered a blooper? See the poster in the chalkboard image under "Unanswered Questions" a few posts above.--Mistertrouble189 20:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

More non-bloopers:

1. The style of beer tab shown in this episode was invented in 1975.
2. On-line vs In-line, as above, is a regional saying.
3. Numbers WERE on the hatch lid as well, as seen in Exodus 2.
4. One man lift vs two man lift is subjective; man might have been very strong.

Does anyone think this is a blooper, or is it just an unscheduled arrival? JULIET: No. It's [the sub] gone. It won't be back for a couple of months. ("Whatever Happened, Happened") However, the sub arrives that same night (annoyingly!) with Daniel. We know it's the same night because Kate and Sawyer have just returned that day from leaving Benny with Richard. Nay? Yea? ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• I agree, seems even unlikely to be an unscheduled arrival. If it was really coming from Ann Arbor, MI then it couldn't have gone from the island, to Ann Arbor & back to the island in the couple of days since they dropped off the recruits.  NEVERGIVEUP  Contribs  Talk  12:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like something unexplained to me, also it seemed to only arrive at the island with the new recruits a couple days ago. So a very fast sub? or..more than one sub? --Integrated (User / Talk) 12:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• Unexplained, perhaps, but not a blooper. It's possible that Juliet just didn't know about a sub trip coming back from Ann Arbor, that it's a higher level than she is. Obviously Miles didn't know who was on the sub either until Horace said something. The question about two subs though is a good one. --LOSTinDC 13:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Numbers on the hatch in Season 1.

"*A workman is shown stamping the numbers into the hatch lid. Previously, the numbers on the lid were raised and stamped numbers on the curved side of the column" is valid. When an object appears in one form in one scene and anoth in a following scene, it's a continuity error.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 12:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• I would submit that we did not see every inch of the hatch lid in previous episodes in close enough detail to note if there was or was not a stamping of the "serial number" as shown in this episode. The Numbers as shown previously in Exodus Part 2 can exist along with these Numbers stamped in the hatch lid. Namastizzay 15:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I do not believe that it is a blooper that Miles was shown meeting Naomi earlier than he told Sayid he had in The Economist. Miles did not trust Sayid, and certainly wouldn't be obliged to answer his questions truthfully. He was just playing dumb. Just as we can't take Ben at his word, any character's description of off-camera activities may prove to be unreliable. See Unreliable narrator. Namastizzay 16:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with whoever said the above about the ring pull on the beer can not being a blooper. The "new" type of ring pull on beverage cans may not have been in common use in 1977, but it was invented in 1975[2], and as it is DHARMA brand beer, and not a commercial brand, it wouldn't be impossible for them to be using this style of beer can. Eruditionfish 17:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed Grading Trivia

Concerning the grading scale in the Dharma classroom, which was a standard American grading scale. shaneshiner 06:09, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Fair enough. I'm the one who put up the trivia bit about the scale, but I've since realized in the States they use a different scale than the one we use in Canada. elliottthomas|talk|contributions 03:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Russell

• The dead football kid. Wasn't Russell the casting name for Miles? Funny coincidence? --Smullie 08:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Russell was the casting name for Faraday. --Golden Monkey 12:00, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
    • Aah... Ok, my bad.--Smullie 12:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
• Russell Grey = RG = Naomi's bracelet? --Jackdavinci 16:48, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Doubt it :) --Integrated (User / Talk) 17:46, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
  • I thought the R was Regina? ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
  • I think 'Ray Gault' the captain of the ship is the most likely R.G (because they would have known each other and initials fit) but still waiting on confirmation. --Integrated (User / Talk) 12:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Not Widmore who faked the crash

As Felix was going to deliver the documents to him showing the crash site at the bottom of the ocean was a fake. So was it Ben or the Shadow of the statue people?--Zaggs 14:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

How do you know Widmore didn't order these documents as records of his own activities? Tom had the same documents, so one side's possession of them doesn't mean anything. Ultimately, this episode gave us no new information about who faked the crash of 815. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions

• • I'll rewatch, but it seemed Felix actually took the pictures of the open graves. If widmore wanted records of his own activities, why didn't he make the records at the same time he was doing said activities? Also how do you think Tom got the documents? By killing Felix and taking them. I think now its the Shadow of the Statue people who faked it. Why not try to have Widmore and Linus kill each other off, and all the rest of the others, so they can come in and take over.--Zaggs 20:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• This is what Miles says: "Name's Felix...He's on his way to deliver something to, uh, a guy named 'Widmore.' A bunch of papers, photos, pictures...of empty graves, a purchase order for an old airplane." That doesn't really imply that Felix was the one who actually took the pictures. It's very possible that Felix was just delivering the records to Widmore so Widmore could store them in a safe place. Also, it's very possible that Tom or an Other took these pictures and stole the records of acquired copies of the requires of Widmore's purchase of the airplane. Then, Widmore found out about this someway and sent Felix to retrieve these papers and photos. He gets them and is chased/killed by Tom or some other Other. This is much less likely to have happened. Still, it's much much more likely that Widmore was the one who covered up Oceanic 815 because, well, we were directly told and showed that it was him. It's not like those were tiny, implicit hints: they were very direct.--Pags 21:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Pags

• There are two long discussions on the forum about this, but I vote for it being Widmore, based on the documents bearing his name are the ones said to be held by Felix. Until we are shown or told differently, Tom lying is a theory. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Daniel and "Because You Left"

In "Because You Left" we see Daniel working in the Orchid, and Chang's child is very young. In "Some Like It Hoth" little Miles is 3 months old and Daniel arrives on the Island, which means that the scene from 5x01 took place AFTER 5x13. I mean, Dan left the Island under unknown circumstances between 1974-1977 and later he came back in "Some Like It Hoth". --Kemot from Poland 15:40, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Three months old is still "very young". Unless you can come up with some more specific information, that doesn't prove anything. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions

Is it just me or did baby Miles look a lot older than 3 months? Anyhow I think Kemot must be right because we saw the baby in "Because You Left" and Chang now says it's only 3 months old - therefore it is unlikely that the season opening took place before this episode because we've just seen Faraday returning to the island and saying "long time no see".. --Integrated (User / Talk) 17:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Agreed... Unless you can somehow prove that Faraday has only been off the Island for less than 3 months (Baby Miles has to have been born when he left), then Kemot is correct.  NEVERGIVEUP  Contribs  Talk  18:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• No you need to provide the proof your the ones trying to make difinitive statement with no hard evidence. --Czygan84 04:44, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

• Here's your proof. In Some Like It Hoth, Chang states that baby Miles is 3 months old. In Because You Left, we see Chang with the baby & shortly after that(same day) we see Chang & Daniel in the Orchid together. Therefore, Daniel was on the island at that time. In ep.5x13(Hoth), Daniel arrives back on the island from a trip. Therefore, if he has been gone for more than 3 months (this can be assumed by, Mile's expression & Saywer's comment to Jack about Daniel being "gone"), then the Orchid scene with Chang & Daniel couldn't have happened before Daniel left the island..... therefore, it hasn't happened yet, in the 1977 timeline we are seeing. If that's not enough proof, then you'll just have to see for yourself (most likely in The Variable).  NEVERGIVEUP  Contribs  Talk  12:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

• While you may be right i remain unconvinced your "proof" has a lot of assumption. --Czygan84 02:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

• Miles in 5x01 is about 7 or 8 months, when babies normally pull themselves up using furniture. This is not definitive, since Chang picks him up quickly and it might not have been intended for the baby-actor to reveal his/her true age in that manner. However, it lends credence to 5x01 after 5x13, as does Daniel hiding his face from Chang, who wouldn't have recognised a random worker, but might have recognised someone he knew to be a scientist. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• Looks like we will get the answer this coming week. --Czygan84 01:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Episode References

I was just wondering if Chang mentioning he liked country music would count as a reference to 5x01 when hes listening to Willie Nelson InflatableBombshelter 18:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• I would definitely say so :) --Integrated (User / Talk) 08:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

"On the Island" Synopsis is out of order

Not sure if this is a big deal or not when writing the synopsis on the Main Some Like It Hoth page, but the events of Jack telling Sawyer & Juliet about Roger's suspicions of Kate, & then Phil revealing to Sawyer that he know Sawyer was the one who kidnapped Ben....... all of these happened after the events of Miles, Hurley, & P. Chang riding around the island. I realize that it may have simply added to a paragraph where it fit with the other event in the paragraph. I just wanted to make note & ask if that would be considered an error or just to make the flow of the synopsis better? Thanks to the hard work of all who get that on Lostpedia so quickly.  NEVERGIVEUP  Contribs  Talk  19:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I believe it's out of order to enhance the flow of the episode summary. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  04:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Nicknames

"Miles calls Sawyer "Jim" (as does Horace), Naomi "Sweetheart, Hurley "Dimwit" and Daniel "Dan." Hurley calls Pierre Chang "Douche." Sawyer calls Jack "Doc." Phil calls Sawyer "Boss."" Are "Jim" and "Dan" really nicknames? They're pretty common shortened forms of James and Daniel. I think it's a bit of a stretch to call those nicknames. Rawr? 20:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• I'm also not sure that "dimwit" or "douche" are nicknames either. They're not specific to the person, plus they're insults!--Chocky 21:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
• If we're going to list "Jim," surely we have to list "Hurley" and "Kate" for virtually every episode.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 22:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
• I would err on the side of more inclusivity. We can certainly include them on the nicknames page. In the case of simple dimunitives, perhaps just list it if it's the first time it's been used or it's an unusual context. --Jackdavinci 06:33, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
• I'm sure we decided somewhere along the line that those wouldn't be listed as nicknames since they were derivative of actual name. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
• Nicknaming seems to be Sawyer's speciality, although others may participate.
  • Established nicknames for a specific name (Jim for James) don't need to be listed.
  • Inventive nicknames (Kong for Hurley) fit the category
  • Other words (Douche for Chang) are insults; I think, BTW, that Hurley used douche as an adjective rether than a nickname.

--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 14:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Swan worker

Who's this worker? Didn't he speak but wasn't credited?--Mistertrouble189 21:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Porter

When Roger was talkin' about Kate possibly being behind his son's disappearance he made mention that he might report it to Horace or Porter Did I hear that correctly, he did say Porter? Sounds like someone new. The-room 22:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

• Nah, he said Horace definitley. --Mistertrouble189 02:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Got me too, but according to the transcript: " I should go to Horace, report her." ESachs 07:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
    • That would make sense! Thanks for clearing that up. The-room 00:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

$3.2 million

Miles' counter-offer to the guys who threw him into the van was $3.2 million. Am I remembering right, that this was the amount he offered to Ben in exchange for letting Ben go from his holding cell (in one of the episodes in Season 4)? I remember thinking it was an unusual amount to come up with at the time, but now it makes sense. It was to see if Ben recognized the amount, and so that Miles could determine if Ben was the one who had sent the guys out in the van to try to persuade him not to go the island. If anybody looks up the Episode, this might be good to go on the Episode references section.Bird1234 02:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• No I think it just meant since Widmore was offering him 1.6 to capture Ben, he would let Ben go if Ben gave him twice what Widmore was offering

--Mattfarley1008 03:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• • Actually, Bird, you're right! It was 3.2 million, but IIRC (which I may not be), Miles was asking Ben for it instead of offering it. But yeah I recognised it at the time as being strange, and this episode certainly has explained it --IGBBIB LOLROFLXD 06:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Yeh, you're right. That's what I meant to say. Bird1234 08:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
    • The new unanswered question is why Naomi/Widmore offered him $1.6 Million, an unusual number to start with, other than 16 being one of The Numbers. Namastizzay 06:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
    • Why is 1.6 million an unusual number?--Integrated (User / Talk) 12:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
      • I give you 5/10 for that troll attempt Integrated ;P --IGBBIB LOLROFLXD 13:36, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Not round != unusual. They figured this was his price. ESachs 01:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

• • • • Yea that's like.. what I thought.. like not every payment received is in multiples of 1 million .. (we only wish) .. that doesn't really make it an unusual number.. --Integrated (User / Talk) 06:34, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Date of opening scene

On the check, the date is 3/16/85, and the check number is also 316, both matching the time on the microwave. Namastizzay 06:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!  Robert K S   tell me  06:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Also it looks to me like her name is spelled "Laura" on the check!  Robert K S   tell me  07:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I think there are only four characters visible to the left of the pen. I thought it was more interesting that there is no check register.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 20:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

So 316 seems to be more important than just the number 16 in this case. --Makiwolf 17:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Alvarez/Alverez

This page uses two different spellings for Alvarez/Alverez and both link to different, yet similar pages for him.Tfox846 13:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Sam fixed this. Thanks, Sam.  Robert K S   tell me  01:39, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

another cultural reference

Meet the Parents -- when Horace references the "circle of trust". --Mawrtea 13:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

• I think "circle of trust" goes a lot further back than this century.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 14:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Trouble with Literary Techniques

These were in the literary techniques section. Do we know these to be true? And if so, please explain how. They both appear to be theories to me, although interesting. Thanks!

• However, Horace distracts Miles by sending him to retrieve Alverez's body, which allows Phil to capture the tape who'll later try to blackmail Sawyer. (Irony)

• Horace tells Miles that he and Sawyer are in the "circle of trust," while they're trying to destroy the tape of sending Ben away. (Irony)

Spinpapi 17:54, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, neither of those sound right, although it is ironic that Miles swears to Horace that Horace can trust Miles, even while Miles is helping Sawyer's coverup by wiping the tapes.  Robert K S   tell me  00:38, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

The second one sounds right. What's wrong with it? The first one is a bit convoluted, but it's still true; it's convoluted not because of the person who wrote it but because of how the writers wrote the episode. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions

Give Him A Hand

I'm surprised there has been no discussion about Hurley telling Miles about Vader cutting his son Luke's hand off - particularly when the orientation films make it look like Chang (dad of Miles) ends up losing his hand at some point in the future and using a prosthetic. Great foreshadowing and pretty hilarious. --Minderbinder 18:02, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

In part because this isn't a discussion forum. Anyway, Hurley had the order of dismemberment/revelation reversed. Luke only learned Vader was his dad after he'd lost his hand. Not a mistake someone who'd seen Empire "200 times" should make. :-)  Robert K S   tell me  00:43, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Good spot Robert! Something tells me the writers have watched it far less than that number :) --Integrated (User / Talk) 06:36, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Dead guy in the apartment

Hey guys... I was just rewatching the episode last night and it seemed to me like the dead guy Miles finds in the apartment bears a very striking resemblence to Roger Linus... I know we have seen him die in the DHARMA van and this would be very hard to explain if "whatever happened, happened"... but when i froze the scene on my DVR it looks exactly like him... doesn't seem plausible that TPTB would use the same actor... not with the way we pick everything on the show apart... anyway.. just wondering if anyone else noticed this BradA1977 15:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Would be very hard to explain on any account! Rewatched the section, doesn't look anything like Roger Linus to me. --Integrated (User / Talk) 16:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Turkey Art

Could be just a prop re-use, but did anyone else notice that the turkey hanging in the Dharma school was basically exactly the same as the one hanging on Kate's fridge in "Something Nice Back Home" ? -- Crazy Bearded Jack 19:05, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Periodic Table

Is the periodic table in the classroom exactly how it would have appeared in 1977? With respect to the post-actinides row, I mean. Would all those elements have been discovered and named by then? Burnside65 04:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

In the blooper section already : "The periodic table on the wall in the Schoolhouse contains elements not yet discovered in 1977." Good spot though :) --Integrated (User / Talk) 09:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Arrow

I just recalled that in 1974 Horace says something like "Call the arrow, tell them to prepare heavy ordinance" yet the actual orientation film for that station apparently wasn't filmed until 1977. --Integrated (User / Talk) 05:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• Yeah, that's interesting. I guess there was a period of time when the Arrow newbies didn't get fancy orientation films. They probably had to read some thick booklets or something. (Kind of the wrong page for this, btw.) -- Graft   talk   contributions  11:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Submarine

Do we know that the submarine that docks at the end of the episode is the Galaga? The wide shot of the boat features a number on the conning tower that is too fuzzy to read. It seems logical for DHARMA to have more than one submarine.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 17:00, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

This one is the Ms. Pac-Man.  Robert K S   tell me  17:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

They've always referred to "the submarine" in the singular. They've never said "submarines". So yes, it is the Galaga as far as we can tell. The only thing making a "hiccup" as such is how long it took to get to the island from wherever it picked up Daniel so soon after dropping off the last bunch of recruits that the O6 described themselves as... but then again we've never had a timeframe for how long the O6 have been back, and Ray's body washed up on the beach before he'd been killed so that in itself is up in the air. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  17:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, "the submarine" is the post-Purge construction. In DHARMA Days we also hear the indefinite article being used: "There's, um, a sub coming in this afternoon" (Juliet) and "They got nothing but an incoming sub" (Radzinsky). ("Namaste") There's the possibility that the Others only ended up with one DHARMA sub, the one on the Island at the time of the Purge.  Robert K S   tell me  17:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Good point - one could postulate that DHARMA had a few subs but after the Purge the Others managed to get their hands on one of them.--Integrated (User / Talk) 05:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

• It wouldn't be so crazy for DHARMA to have more than one sub, but nothing has been confirmed on the show. --Integrated (User / Talk) 17:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
• Good point about the indefinite articles, Robert. I tried to catch the number on the conning tower from the shot taken from the seaward side of the boat looking at the dock, but they cunningly began the shot with only the trigram showing and panned away from the tower. It would be neat to know -- someday -- where the Island has been on it's "stops." How long does it take to get from the Island to Tahiti by submarine? How about Portland to the Island? Season 6 is going to be very crowded.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 15:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed a possible continuity error about the submarine, too. In a former episode (Namaste?), when Jack, Kate and Hurley were introduced as "new recruits", Sawyer explained to them that they had to do it this way, since the next sub was due to arrive in 6 months only - yet here's a new one already. Did I miss something, or should that be added to the bloopers?--Ghiacciato 15:45, July 30, 2011 (UTC)

I didn't notice that before, but Sawyer did mean "new recruits" and this sub was full of scientists already part of DHARMA from Ann Arbor. I was about to suggest Sawyer didn't know of this sub because of the secrecy of the Swan project, but of course Horace told us he was in the "circle of trust" so he must have known about the Swan project.--Baker1000 20:05, July 30, 2011 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure he said "That's the only sub for six months", to elaborate how important it was for them to play along, but of course it's easy to find an explanation (he didn't know/it was only a scientists sub); it still seemed a bit contradictory to me, and I wanted to mention it. Just decide whether to add it or not, you've been here longer than me. --Ghiacciato 21:46, July 30, 2011 (UTC)

I've just had a little check, and Sawyer says "there ain't another batch of recruits in for six months" so he does refer to recruits. Still, I had never thought about the fact that another sub came in just a few days after this one which presented a (much harder) opportunity to bring them into the Barracks. Oh and you were right about the episode. :)--Baker1000 00:10, July 31, 2011 (UTC)

Continuity error: "That dude from all those movies"

Hurley says to Miles, "How weird is it that your dad is that dude from all those movies!" Although Hurley was never shown watching the Swan orientation film, it's plausible he would've watched it at some point. But other than the Swan film, when did Hurley ever have an opportunity to see any other DHARMA videos, such that he would recognize Dr. Chang from "all those movies"? --Celebok 18:32, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

• It's possible somebody else mentionned that fact to Hurley. For exemple, Desmond saw both the orientation films for the Pearl and the Swan. Plus, didn't Sawyer say that new recruits had to watch a video ? --LeoChris 18:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
• He pushed the button so its probable John showed him the movie at some point. --THE REAL DEAL998 22:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
• We know that he's seen the barracks orientation, and he most likely saw the Swan orientation video as well. Anyone could have told Hurley that simple fact. Not a continuity error, just an unseen conversation. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  E  22:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

First Miles-centric episode

Am i missing something, or is this not the first Miles-centric episode - worth making note of in the main article?--Adklerk 07:20, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

• Well, "Confirmed Dead" is centric to all 5 of the freighter characters, including Miles for the first time. Kaisle 14:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
• It's the first full Miles centric episode but Confirmed Dead was science team centric, which includes Miles. --Golden Monkey 11:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Irony or not?

Miles said that he was never met his father, in 1977 we see baby miles with him and further in the serie in the whole time with him in the same year: 1977.--Station7 14:57, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Image change

Main Image needs to be changed. New pic would better symbolize main episode plot which is Miles/Pierre relationship.

• -- B1G CZYGS  Talk  Contribs  22:42, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
• But only in a quality as high as the other image. --Golden Monkey 22:54, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
• Pierre isn't the centric character... Only Miles is, so the usual closeup would be ideal. --LeoChris 23:39, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
• No, no, no. This picture perfectly epitomizes this episode, showing Miles' reaction to finding out that his father was not, in fact, a douche after all. --Bish-Fiscuit 14:01, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

We have always used a picture of just the centric character/s for each episode and I am strongly opposed to changing this. If you can find a better picture of just Miles that is fine but it needs to be a picture of him and only him. Besides as Bish-Fiscuit says this one does work very well thematically. Mhtmghnd 02:42, April 11, 2010 (UTC)

We should have the centric characters wherever possible. Pierre isn't centric. I'm removing the dispute template as there seems to be a consensus on this. Menot 02:55, April 15, 2010 (UTC)