Talk:Richard Alpert (Lost)

message: Should a reference be included that "Mittelos" is another anagram like "Ethan Rom": for Lost Time? --Erikacornia (talk) 21:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mittelos Bioscience 

message: Please do not remove this just because Richard does not technically have any flashbacks. Jin and Sun, for instance, have no flashbacks in This Place Is Death, and yet it's considered a centric episode for them. This is a Richard-centric episode for the following reasons:
*A. He is the only character in both timelines
*B. Both stories are told primarily through his point of view
*C. There is a large amount of character development the likes of which we haven't before seen for this character
*D. The title refers to him, as he is the "advisor" for the leader and therefore has always "followed the leader"
And, if you want to get technical, why couldn't the 1977 scenes count as flashbacks for him? Pkmntrainerred (talk) 20:02, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find a reliable source that supports calling "Follow the Leader" a Richard-centric episode, then we'll talk. All of the other "ambiguous" episodes have been confirmed by the producers to be centric to those characters. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 20:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

text: So Richard is in both timelines? He's old, it's expected. Both stories aren't told from his point of view. Everything at Dharma, the scenes in Eloise's tent, etc., Richard is a character in the events, not the focus. There's character development for several others, so that doesn't work. The title is never said to refer to him, that's your own interpretation. This is not a Richard-centric episode, just a regular one. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 20:46, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Alright, once and for all: Lostpedia were the ones who invented the "centric" designation in the first place, and they've just decided that Follow the Leader is Richard-centric. Let's please be consistent on this issue, as it's not like we'll ever come to a consensus on here. Pkmntrainerred (talk) 21:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought that the "centricities" were created by Damon Lindelof, et al.  –thedemonhog talk • edits 23:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; the producers do not call it a Richard-centric episode, so neither should we. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 23:20, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Agreed, plus Wikipedia Lost episode pages listed Flashback characters before Lostpedia even existed.  Moreover, why must we be "consistent" with a fansite?  Wikipedia is more reliable- consensus here does not have to depend on what Lostpedia does.  --  Wikipedical (talk) 17:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Agreed as well. The podcast concerning the episode from Lindelof & Cuse did not call it a Richard-centric. Tphi (talk) 23:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Alright, you guys: The 1977 scenes, I can say with almost absolute certainty, were Richard's flashbacks. These are different from the time switching we have seen in the rest of the season because of the transitions between them: In almost every instance, there is a closeup on Richard's face, the "whoosh" sound, and another closeup on Richard's face in another time. That "whoosh" sound is the biggest indicator: that noise is used for flashbacks. Therefore, these are Richard's flashbacks, indicating that the episode is Richard-centric. Gefred7112 (talk) 20:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Where's the source that the noise is used for flashbacks or flashforwards?  I may have missed that one.  And you saying with almost absolute certainty is not really good enough, the producers did not state it was about him. Close-up of his face and such isn't good enough reason to say "oh there's a close-up, it must be him".  --HELLØ    ŦHERE 20:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the fact that the noise is only used for flashbacks (with the exception of transitions in This Place Is Death between Sun and Jin, which is part of the reason that one is considered their episode) is good enough proof. I don't understand why you're asking for a source when it's, you know, obvious. 66.142.171.238 (talk) 23:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I do remember I believe it was in the season 4 clip show that led up to the finale, that the "WOOSH" sound signified flash backs and stated inequivicably that is why in the season 4 episode THE CONSTANT that what Desmond was doing was NOT a flashback, that he was traveling in time.  I think it was Damon Lindlehoff or Carlton Cuse that said that. Whippletheduck (talk) 04:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

text: That logic is pretty flawed. I think that what may or may not "revolve" around a certain character is too open to debate for us to go by that. There needs to be a more concrete way to tell. For instance, one could argue that "Jughead" doesn't "revolve" around Desmond, yet there is little debate of its centricity. Gefred7112 (talk) 09:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Follow the Leader = Richard-centric 

message: Is it clear that the reason Richard said not to listen to Jacob is because he thought it was MIB? Richard might well know Hurley can talk to dead people. I suspected maybe he thought that, but it could also have been because he thought Jacob was wrong and had nothing to say, given that he died. What Richard goes on to say and do makes this all the more likely. This is at least a debatable claim and shouldn't be in the article unless it's counterbalanced with the alternative explanation. Parableman (talk) 05:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Richard telling Hurley not to listen to Jacob 

message: I've reverted two different users stating his name is "Ricardo Alpert." We know he was originally Ricardo and later became Richard Alpert, but we have no proof (as far as I am aware) that he was ever known as "Ricardo Alpert." Since the character is originally Spanish (from the Canary Islands), he would likely have a Spanish surname, but this isn't the place to discuss, just note that his *original* surname has not been revealed (and there's no proof it was Alpert -- only associated with his later adopted name).
I just want to make sure there's no writer's comment, deleted scene, spoiler or something which establishes him as "Ricardo Alpert" (because Ab Aeterno sure doesn't).--Tim Thomason 05:15, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Apologies for any disrespect, but according to the only source I know, "Ricardo" was his original name and we later learn of the name "Richard Alpert." "Ricardo "Richard" Alpert" was never his name on the show and should be removed, replaced with "Ricardo, later Richard Alpert" or "Richard Alpert, born Ricardo" or whatever as long as it doesn't contradict with what we know, like this does. (I can't remove it now, per 3 revert rule).--Tim Thomason 08:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ricardo Alpert 

message: I did not know until very recently, and upon seeing again one of my child-hood favorite Sci-Fi movies, the 1965 film "She" staring Ursala Andres that Haggards novel was so revolutionary in helping to  create the "lost worlds", and "sword and sorscery" sub-genres (along with Jules Verne") what influence he had in literature.  I never read Haggard's work. Had I done so, needless to say, I would have had a much deeper undertanding of the theoronics of science-fiction\fantasy; not only the allegory to the questioning of the permeance of then-mordern (imperial?) civilization, but also with the TV series "Lost" there are even recognizable elements of "She" in the series. Of course I mean the character of Richard Alpert fits perfectly the profile of Aeysha: A haunted soul who voluntarily allowed himself to become immortal, partly over his guilt of losing his loving wife (an eternal love, lost); and the conditions that he later, with the same resolutelness reliquishes this dubious "grace" of immortality with forgiveness.  I do swear, these British fiction classics were more rooted in geo-politics and pyscholgy and than anything else!  Veryverser  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.101.6 (talk) 18:48, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  My Apologies...