# Heroes - "The Second Coming; The Butterfly Effect" - 9/22/08



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

What, no thread yet?  Of course it hasn't started here yet, but still.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

So far, a big ol' cluster***k. And normally I am defending this show.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

It's like the producers said, "You thought last season was too slow. Fine. Take this."


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

I think more happened in these two hours than happened in all of season 2.

Hiro, Mohinder, and Peter are all idiots.

And no more kids? I can live with that.


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

Did anyone note the "insider joke"?

The reporter who Nikki's "twin" accidentally froze to death?

He was played by William Katt, formerly "The Greatest American Hero".


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

Yeah, cluster---- describes it perfectly. This wasn't a good start to making up for the last part.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

gastrof said:


> Did anyone note the "insider joke"?
> 
> The reporter who Nikki's "twin" accidentally froze to death?
> 
> He was played by William Katt, formerly "The Greatest American Hero".


I was more interested in how that happened. That's not something Nikki/Jessica can do.

I thought it was a good two episodes. This is not _The Dark Knight_. It isn't _Iron Man_. It is a 22 episode story. It will have filler. It will be slow at times. But the good times will outweigh the bad ones. I have faith.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Shakhari said:


> And no more kids? I can live with that.


Can you explain this? Are you referring to the Mexitwins? Because wasn't one of them the chick that was banging Mohinder?


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

Sirius Black said:


> I was more interested in how that happened. That's not something Nikki/Jessica can do...


Well, we did hear it said 'That's not Nikki'.


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

serumgard said:


> Can you explain this? Are you referring to the Mexitwins? Because wasn't one of them the chick that was banging Mohinder?


Maybe the absense of Nikki's son and his young cousin was meant.

I haven't finished watching it yet, but so far I haven't seen Claire's flying boyfriend either.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

gastrof said:


> Well, we did hear it said 'That's not Nikki'.


She has had multiple personalities. This one thinks she is a aide to a governor. I'd like to know how that happened in such a short time. Anyway, it is clearly Nikki/Jessica. It _is_ Ali Larter. Right?

Didn't Michah kind of have a cliffhanger ending as well with 'If I see it on TV I can't do it' Girl? Not saying I particularly care about Micah just wondering about the ending of his story from last season.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

AT least they settled the debate over whether Syler is eating the brains.

He is not.

Just like the watch, he cuts open the head to see how the brain works, and he gains an understanding of the brain and the power.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> AT least they settled the debate over whether Syler is eating the brains.


I actually thought that was rather funny. A nod to the fans, I think.


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

gastrof said:


> Maybe the absense of Nikki's son and his young cousin was meant.
> 
> I haven't finished watching it yet, but so far I haven't seen Claire's flying boyfriend either.


He's a little busy trying to prevent Skynet from happening.


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

I felt the same exhilaration watching tonight's premiere as I did watching season 1 episode 1. This was damn fine TV IMHO.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

Ali Larter is not playing Nikki. Something tells me this is the "dead" sister Jessica. And apparently she is special too.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

Shaunnick said:


> Ali Larter is not playing Nikki. Something tells me this is the "dead" sister Jessica. And apparently she is special too.


Huh? You lost me there. Perhaps I have my actresses all mixed up. Who played Nicki? That wasn't Ali Larter?


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Sirius Black said:


> Huh? You lost me there. Perhaps I have my actresses all mixed up. Who played Nicki? That wasn't Ali Larter?


It was. He is saying it wasn't Nikki.


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

The new Ali Larter character is Tracy.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I really enjoyed this. It was an endless series of WtF moments, in a good way that makes me eager for more.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

oh, hell yeah!!

Heroes is BACK!


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

Sirius Black said:


> Huh? You lost me there. Perhaps I have my actresses all mixed up. Who played Nicki? That wasn't Ali Larter?


I think that Nikki's sister Jessica, the one who "died" all those years ago, is this Tracey Strauss character. Somehow, she survived whatever happened with Nikki and Jessica's abusive stepfather and is the woman that we see now.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

Gunnyman said:


> He's a little busy trying to prevent Skynet from happening.


I think Gastof means West, not the kid who was gay but not gay who is now the man to save us from the machines. And I am pretty sure West got thrown out with the kids.


----------



## kjnorman (Jun 21, 2002)

Wow, now that's a way to start a season. Slow it was not. And oh my, so many interweaving plot lines already.

It looks like it is going to be a good season.!!


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

Oh no...

I didn't record the 10-11 part. Didn't know it was a three hour night.

The two actual episodes will be repeated on Saturday between 8 and 10.

Already have the machines set to get it again.


----------



## Slider10 (Aug 5, 2003)

Heroes is back!! Thank the lord! I was *this close* to canceling my Season Pass last year because the show tanked. I think this is going to be the 'apology' season.

I did read in an interview not too long ago that Tim Kring (Heroes creator) didn't like last season when looking back on it. He would have had the whole catastrophic future thing happen in the first episode and also tie in the mexican siblings faster. It seems from tonight's episodes that he took all the feedback to heart and made the show frakking amazing.

I'm psyched for Monday's once again! (when 24 isn't on. LOL)


----------



## EvilMidniteBombr (May 25, 2006)

I liked it! Can't wait to see how this turns out. 

I would like to see Claire get some skills to go with that immortality. Maybe Hiro can teach her how to use a sword? Then maybe she will be able to stop Sylar. There can be only one. 

Yes it was a bit fast as far as plot advances, but they had to make it exciting for the season premiere. I also think they were trying to make up for last season being so weak.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I liked it.
I think it's a good kickoff for the season.

Although, it seems that Mohinder didn't watch the Cronenberg version _The Fly_.
And is Linderman really there and not a product of Nathan's mind?
And Sylar is a Petrellii as well?


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

JYoung said:


> I liked it.
> And Sylar is a Petrellii as well?


Apparently everyone in the Heroes universe is a Petrelli ... Mama certainly seems to get around.

I liked that Peter got his dreaming power from her, but it doesn't really explain her persuasiveness.


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

serumgard said:


> Can you explain this? Are you referring to the Mexitwins? Because wasn't one of them the chick that was banging Mohinder?


I meant Molly, Micah, and the cousin.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Only sawthe first half so far and looks like I'm in the minority as not liking it. Apart from the start where Peter shoots Nathan, the rest was a bad soap opera. So Claire ("Hello, Claire" -- that *had* to be on purpose) locks herself up in a closet with Sylar on the outside, and we don't get back to that for a half hour? Is Parkman really that much of an idiot? He can read people's minds, for Pete's sake. Mohinder getting a little lonely? A little looney? The "speedster" effect was cool, but why didn't Hiro just frisk her and get the paper (I'm sure Ando would have at least done the first part). He's so not a hero right now, what a putz. A lot of the dialog seemed forced, like the actors were bot buying into; neither was I.

So the second hour was better?


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

Shakhari said:


> Apparently everyone in the Heroes universe is a Petrelli ... Mama certainly seems to get around.
> 
> I liked that Peter got his dreaming power from her, but it doesn't really explain her persuasiveness.


I don't think Sylar is a Petrelli, I think we were seeing yet another part of her powers.


----------



## Mavrick22 (Feb 7, 2006)

Man that was a close one I was on the edge of my seat there for awhile thinking you can't kill Elle in the season premier.

It was a really good thing that she went all supernova to get out of that one.


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

Shaunnick said:


> I think Gastof means West, not the kid who was gay but not gay who is now the man to save us from the machines. And I am pretty sure West got thrown out with the kids.


Oops I thought the actor who played West was on Terminator now, not the first guy. I stand corrected.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

JYoung said:


> I liked it.
> I think it's a good kickoff for the season.
> 
> Although, it seems that Mohinder didn't watch the Cronenberg version _The Fly_.
> ...


No, he probably has a different baby daddy.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Maybe Sylar can't die now, but if you put a stick through his brain he can't regenerate until you pull it out. Dead enough at that point, especially if you encase him in a solid block of Lexan or similar. 


And man, I wish someone would put a stick through his brain quickly. I'm so sick of that character.


----------



## Odds Bodkins (Jun 7, 2006)

Slatted doors are now Sylar-proof.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Shakhari said:


> I meant Molly, Micah, and the cousin.


Yeah, I caught up when someone mentioned Micah and the cousin. I didn't mind them nearly as much as others here.


----------



## Mavrick22 (Feb 7, 2006)

So I wonder if this is true and Syler is related to Nathen, Peter and Claire will Claire have to call him Uncle Syler from now on?


----------



## JDHutt25 (Dec 27, 2004)

Why don't they just cut Sylar's head off and keep it well away from his body? That would do the trick, no?


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

Mavrick22 said:


> So I wonder if this is true and Syler is related to Nathen, Peter and Claire will Claire have to call him Uncle Syler from now on?


Probably not. Claire doesn't call Peter "Uncle Peter".


----------



## emandbri (Jul 5, 2004)

I don't get why Peter is staying with the others? Any ideas?


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

Maybe it was because I was tired, but I thought the whole two hours was a mish mashed cluster f***. It was all OVER the place and it was driving me nuts.

As a fan of the show, I actually sat there thinking "Do I really want to watch another season of this?" It's early yet so maybe I can hope it picks up and gets better than this season opener was...if not, I fear it may be dropped from my "must watch" list like it used to be over the last two seasons.

Oh and I found it a bit comical how they tipped their hat to the bedroom closet scene in "Halloween" where Jamie Lee is in a slatted door closet with a big knife waiting on Michael to break through the doors....


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

emandbri said:


> I don't get why Peter is staying with the others? Any ideas?


Well, he's trapped in the body of a super-criminal, and probably pretty confused. He's probably just going along with it until he can come up with something.

Perhaps he also feels some responsibility (in a hero sense) for bringing down the Villains Gang...


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

I thought that was damn fine TV. Very exciting. I am a little confused, which is good, since that means there is so much info to digest.

Thank god for the Heroes wiki to remind me of where we are in the whole story line.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

JYoung said:


> And is Linderman really there and not a product of Nathan's mind?


I was wondering that, too. Will be interesting to see what happens with him.



Mavrick22 said:


> Man that was a close one I was on the edge of my seat there for awhile thinking you can't kill Elle in the season premier.
> 
> It was a really good thing that she went all supernova to get out of that one.


I know! Wasn't "Peter" her biker bud from VM?

I really enjoyed the show. Glad the kids are gone. Wish the other Mexitwin would go, too.


----------



## GDG76 (Oct 2, 2000)

Good lord this was terrible.

The people released from Level 5 do not have interesting abilities. Someone from Germany with magnetic abilities- boy, that's unique. And what's so bad about tying strength to fear when there are people whose ability is to just be strong? Sound manipulation- "you don't want to know"? And a pyrokinetic. Wow, what originality.

Mohinder was completely out of character. All the crap with dead people coming back was annoying. Can't people (other than Isaac) just stay dead? 

Something was just off about the whole show. I can't see myself watching all season if it's like the first two episodes. Ando and Hiro was the only redeeming part...


----------



## kjnorman (Jun 21, 2002)

wprager said:


> The "speedster" effect was cool, but why didn't Hiro just frisk her and get the paper (I'm sure Ando would have at least done the first part). He's so not a hero right now, what a putz.


I think the issue here is that Hiro can not actually stop time, he can just slow it down. The Speedster is so fast that even in Hiro's "stopped" time she can still move. What appears to happen is that Hiro slow time down to the point that the Speedster is effectively "stopped" so Hiro can catch up with her, then when he finds her, he stopping effect weakens as he gets interested in the girl. The weakening allows the speedster to begin to move surprising Hiro. This surprise causes the time slowing to weaken further, as Hiro loses concentration, to the point that the speedster can move a what seams like normal speed - further surprising Hiro. Finally she kicks Hiro and the time hold is totally broken as Hiro's concentration is broken.

Of course this happens so fast that Hiro never grabs the formula..

Just my take on things.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

There were a lot of things I enjoyed in the show, and quite a few things I didn't enjoy.

I loved the idea that those villains are loose and just having a grand ol' time with their powers. There were some nice surprises and twists to make things interesting, and some of the plotlines are pretty interesting and look to be fun.

Now for what I didn't like.....

1) Time Travel? Again? Yet _another_ end-of-the-world scenario in the near future that must be prevented? This is what, the third in three seasons? The writers are simply not good enough to pull off time-travel stories without gaping holes or contradictions. It's wearing thin.

2) Peter being incapacitated yet again! He's easily the most powerful of the characters, so they keep using different means to keep him out of the action until the end. The first season, he didn't know how to control his powers. The 2nd season, he had amnesia. And now he's in someone else's body. This is purely deus ex machina writing. Which leads to....

3) Nikki's new ability and personality. It was a great special effect, but displaying an ability she's never had before? And I thought she was dead, which leads to....

4) The resurrection or return of mostly everyone they led you to believe was dead or killed. Are they really so afraid to try something new that they need to bring back the entire cast of the first season?

There were some really nice things. The pacing is good, there's a lot of action, there's genuinely interesting plotlines going on. I'll be watching it. But there are definitely some lame writing decisions they've made.

---edit---
And let me be one of the first to state that I have a strong feeling the villain in the future that Hiro sees is *not* Ando, but Hiro.


----------



## Magister (Oct 17, 2004)

JDHutt25 said:


> Why don't they just cut Sylar's head off and keep it well away from his body? That would do the trick, no?


I think they may need Sylar to help track down the dozen Villans. Mama Patrelli seemed to be trying to control him.

I wonder if the bad guy that Peter inhabits could have control of the 'Brown Noise' and that could be why they don't want to talk about it...


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

Magister said:


> I think they may need Sylar to help track down the dozen Villans. Mama Patrelli seemed to be trying to control him.
> 
> I wonder if the bad guy that Peter inhabits could have control of the 'Brown Noise' and that could be why they don't want to talk about it...


I LOL'd at this one.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

bobcarn said:


> 1) Time Travel? Again? Yet _another_ end-of-the-world scenario in the near future that must be prevented? This is what, the third in three seasons? The writers are simply not good enough to pull off time-travel stories without gaping holes or contradictions. It's wearing thin.


I think that may be an artifact of the writer's strike. On the Season 2 DVD they had the original ending for "Volume 2," in which the future crisis was not yet averted. Perhaps the original plan for "Volume 3," when it followed immediately on Volume 2 and was much more closely connected to it, involved a lot of future stuff, and when they revamped Volume 3 to separate it from Volume 2 they chose to come up with a new future threat rather than eliminate the time travel altogether...which would make logistical sense if the time travel stuff was very important to Volume 3.

But even if that's the case, I agree that they're going to that well entirely too often, and they would have been better served to do a more radical revamp of Volume 3, especially given the amount of time they had to work on it.


----------



## jpwoof (May 19, 2004)

I kinda like this episode.. but didnt like the ending.

one thing bugged me. I thought Maya died. Wasn't she stabbed?


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

I agree with others who were not that impressed. It seemed a little disjointed to me. And the acting seemed "off" in some way. It almost seemed at times like we were looking at someone's dream, especially the scene where Claire's mother came back into the picture.

I also believe the new Ali Larter character is not Nikki. The freezing ability was their way of letting us know that for sure, IMHO. A twin sister perhaps, and probably the real Jessica.

Linderman has to really be there, and not just a figment of Nathan's imagination. How else can we explain Nathan's recovery?

And this scar of future Peter's really bothers me for some reason. Doesn't he have the ability to heal? Why would he have a scar?


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

LOVED IT!

My thoughts:

Alli Larter did not play Nikki in this episode. She played Tracy. With the new power, I'm 99&#37; sure she's an entirely different person, not just a different personality. And I'm leaning towards Nikki's twin sister Jessica. Maybe Nikki was told Jessica died and blamed daddy for it...but maybe somehow Jessica was rescued. Maybe by their mother...did they ever mention a mother???

Linderman...after first being upset and demanding an explaination on how THAT happened I realized Nathan was the only one that had talked to him so far...then I realized, I don't think he's real. Then I had the realization that maybe Linderman is the god that Nathan saw when he died???

Syler...did he lose all the other powers he had before??? He obviously seemed to have telekensis but all the other powers he gained in season 1 seemed to be missing. I also think it would be great this season to see Sylar make a switch to the "good" side thanks to Momma Petrelli. And now that we've had some kind of hint of our S1 heroes going bad, I don't think that's too much of a stretch to think Sylar can switch sides.

Also, I miss the Hatian.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

I wish Maya wasn't in this anymore. The radical cahnge in Mohinder's character is weird. For me, those would be the top two complaints.

With Hiro being in Heroes, I don't think we will ever get away from the time travel thing.

Oh, and I think Ali Larter IS playing Nikki/Tracy/Jessica. If it REALLY wasn't Nikki/Jessica, would she have been so insistent about the reporter running that story? Tracy KNEW that was "her".


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

jsmeeker said:


> Oh, and I think Ali Larter IS playing Nikki/Tracy/Jessica. If it REALLY wasn't Nikki/Jessica, would she have been so insistent about the reporter running that story? Tracy KNEW that was "her".


Or she knew that if that was printed in the newspaper saying it was her that it would STILL destroy her career. I also don't think the timeline allows for it to be her. There was no gapping between S2 and S3. At the end of S2 Nikki/Jessica had a burning warehouse fall on top of her. She was also infected with the virus that was killing her and Mohinder was suppose to be on his way to save her with Claire's blood. But Sylar took the blood from him and Mohinder didn't have any left. So not only did Nikki/Jessica get trapped in a burning building, she was also about to die from a virus. And Tracy is perfectly healthy and not burned at all from the looks of it. And she looks like she's been playing this role for quite some time. Nikki had been with Mohinder for MONTHS being tested and such. And she had only just returned to Micah only to get trapped in that burning building. Not to mention that super strength and freezing are two COMPLETELY different powers and other than Sylar and Peter, you don't see heroes going around with two completely different powers. Even Jessica had Nikki's super strength, suggesting that any subsequent personalities of that character would only have access to the super strength and not an entirely different power.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Who else thought of T2 during the freezing scene?


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

jsmeeker said:


> Oh, and I think Ali Larter IS playing Nikki/Tracy/Jessica. If it REALLY wasn't Nikki/Jessica, would she have been so insistent about the reporter running that story? Tracy KNEW that was "her".


Two things make me think this is not Nikki. Number one, the previously mentioned new freeze power, and two, this season picked up immediately where last season left off... Nathan had just been shot, and Nikki had just been blown up in a building. It seemed pretty obvious this new Ali Larter character had been working for the Senator guy for a while, and Nikki, even if she did get out of the building alive, was working for the Company at the end of last season.

Edit: what unicorngoddess said.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

But with time travel, anyone could be anywhere at any time.....


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

jlb said:


> But with time travel, anyone could be anywhere at any time.....


But we have never seen time travel change someone's powers completely.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

On another subject completely, when it looked like Parkman was reading the turtle's mind, I thought for sure this show had jumped the shark.


----------



## sean67854 (Jul 11, 2001)

Did I miss an explanation somewhere, or is everyone just buying into the fact that furture Peter hid present Peter _in someone else's body?_ How the heck did he do that?


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo (Sep 2, 2003)

Alfer2003 said:


> Maybe it was because I was tired, but I thought the whole two hours was a mish mashed cluster f***. It was all OVER the place and it was driving me nuts.
> 
> As a fan of the show, I actually sat there thinking "Do I really want to watch another season of this?" It's early yet so maybe I can hope it picks up and gets better than this season opener was...if not, I fear it may be dropped from my "must watch" list like it used to be over the last two seasons.


:up: on that whole assessment. I felt the same way, and I'm coming off of having watched everything from scratch in the last four months. Tired like you, we bailed at 90 minutes to finish it up tonight. I find the deus ex machina content to be fatiguing.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

sean67854 said:


> Did I miss an explanation somewhere, or is everyone just buying into the fact that furture Peter hid present Peter _in someone else's body?_ How the heck did he do that?


Future Peter told us (Momma Patrelli) he put "normal" Peter in a "safe place". We didn't see it happen, but that's what happened.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

jsmeeker said:


> Future Peter told us (Momma Patrelli) he put "normal" Peter in a "safe place". We didn't see it happen, but that's what happened.


And then he later told Momma Petrelli that he put Peter in Jesse's body. And she told Future Peter to go get her son back.


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

Overall I hated it. 

Hate the lets bring back every character who died. Makes the show goign forward pointless to me. Who cares if someone dies from now on. They can and probably find some stupid excuse/way to bring them back. HATED THIS approach.

Very choppy and cut up from start to finish.

It also felt so unoriginal. BrundleFly Mohinder? Stupid Claire/Sylar scene. 
Just felt like all these stuff has been done before. 

I am 1-2 more epiosdes like this from just giving up. 

Thankfully Dexter is coming back Sunday.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

unicorngoddess said:


> And then he later told Momma Petrelli that he put Peter in Jesse's body. And she told Future Peter to go get her son back.


That's right. He came to level 5 and said he put Peter into the guy "in that cell right there".


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

NatasNJ said:


> Hate the lets bring back every character who died. Makes the show goign forward pointless to me. Who cares if someone dies from now on. They can and probably find some stupid excuse/way to bring them back. HATED THIS approach.


Technically Linderman's not really back from the dead...he's just some kind of hallucination. Nathan was the only other one to come back from the "dead" but part of me thinks Peter used some sort of special bullets that he knew would end up healing Nathan. Or maybe Nathan's trip to the other side put him in some kind of "Heroes Limbo" where he could have access to any previously vanquished Hero.


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

jking said:


> I agree with others who were not that impressed. It seemed a little disjointed to me. And the acting seemed "off" in some way. It almost seemed at times like we were looking at someone's dream, especially the scene where Claire's mother came back into the picture.
> 
> I also believe the new Ali Larter character is not Nikki. The freezing ability was their way of letting us know that for sure, IMHO. A twin sister perhaps, and probably the real Jessica.
> 
> ...


He has the scar so every now and then the "stupid people" watching the show can say "Oh this is FUTURE Peter" 

I love it when TV writers treat us like idiots.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

sean67854 said:


> Did I miss an explanation somewhere, or is everyone just buying into the fact that furture Peter hid present Peter _in someone else's body?_ How the heck did he do that?





jsmeeker said:


> Future Peter told us (Momma Patrelli) he put "normal" Peter in a "safe place". We didn't see it happen, but that's what happened.





unicorngoddess said:


> And then he later told Momma Petrelli that he put Peter in Jesse's body. And she told Future Peter to go get her son back.


I think what sean is asking is, "But how...?"

I was just as confused about that as you, sean. I spent half of part 2 asking myself if I'd missed something. It seemed as if the whole "putting someone in someone else's body" thing was something we should have been aware of previously, like it wasn't that big of a deal.


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo (Sep 2, 2003)

NatasNJ said:


> It also felt so unoriginal. BrundleFly Mohinder? Stupid Claire/Sylar scene. Just felt like all these stuff has been done before.
> 
> I am 1-2 more epiosdes like this from just giving up.


No kidding! Tune in next week when BrundleHinder vomits on a box of glazed donuts prior to eating them.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

unicorngoddess said:


> Technically Linderman's not really back from the dead...he's just some kind of hallucination.


Are we sure? We have seen invisible characters before.

Of course, the most logical explanation is they took a page from "Sixth Sense".


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

jking said:


> I think what sean is asking is, "But how...?"
> 
> .


It doesn't matter. He just did (i.e. he has the power to do so).

How did Parkman get to Africa? We didn't see it actually happen. But there he is.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

Future Peter's scar looks like it might be from a sword-strike?


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

jsmeeker said:


> It doesn't matter. He just did (i.e. he has the power to do so).
> 
> How did Parkman get to Africa? We didn't see it actually happen. But there he is.


Future Peter dropped Parkman in Africa when Parkman was questioning him about the gun.

I agree it's probably something we'll find out about in the future, but it was played off as a power we should previously have been aware of, which was the confusing part.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

jsmeeker said:


> Are we sure? We have seen invisible characters before.
> 
> Of course, the most logical explanation is they took a page from "Sixth Sense".


Linderman has NO BRAIN! 

I do, however, think that Nathan's trip to the other side has tapped him into a sort of new power. Not like a super power that's the result of evolution as the other ones are. But the Dead Zone kind that has linked him to Linderman from the other side. Kind of like Sam and Al from Quatum Leap maybe. I'm not sure yet...but I'm definately looking forward to finding out.

As for how FPeter got PPeter into someone else's body...could it be DL's power? He just used it to put PPeter in someone else's body and maybe he can't figure out that he has to use that power to step out of that body.


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo (Sep 2, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> Technically Linderman's not really back from the dead...he's just some kind of hallucination.


Was it supposed to be significant that Tracy didn't seem to notice Linderman standing by the door as she walked out of the room after approaching Nathan about returning to political office?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jsmeeker said:


> It doesn't matter. He just did (i.e. he has the power to do so).


...a power which he will no doubt acquire from somebody we haven't met yet. But probably will, sooner rather than later.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

ToddNeedsTiVo said:


> Was it supposed to be significant that Tracy didn't seem to notice Linderman standing by the door as she walked out of the room after approaching Nathan about returning to political office?


Neither did Momma Petrelli when she came to visit...which is what made me stop and go hmmmm because you would think she would have a lot to say to Linderman.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

jking said:


> Future Peter dropped Parkman in Africa when Parkman was questioning him about the gun.


But we didn't SEE it happen, did we? We saw Peter and Parkman in the closet, trying to do a mind read thing. Cut away.. Next time we see Parkman, he in a dessert.

If you insist on seeing when future Peter put current day Peter into that guy, when during the show do you reveal it? At the very start of the first episode , just after Peter chases Peter D)? Would that have been a good place? If not then, you would have to do it later on as a flash back sort of thing,


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

ToddNeedsTiVo said:


> Was it supposed to be significant that Tracy didn't seem to notice Linderman standing by the door as she walked out of the room after approaching Nathan about returning to political office?


Of course it was. That's the moment I was positive Linderman was either invisible or only a figment of Nathan's "imagination"


----------



## NatasNJ (Jan 7, 2002)

unicorngoddess said:


> Technically Linderman's not really back from the dead...he's just some kind of hallucination. Nathan was the only other one to come back from the "dead" but part of me thinks Peter used some sort of special bullets that he knew would end up healing Nathan. Or maybe Nathan's trip to the other side put him in some kind of "Heroes Limbo" where he could have access to any previously vanquished Hero.


Didn't Nikki die in that fire last year? She is back.
Liderman could be invisible and not a hallucination.
Nathan.


----------



## Magister (Oct 17, 2004)

jsmeeker said:


> But we didn't SEE it happen, did we? We saw Peter and Parkman in the closet, trying to do a mind read thing. Cut away.. Next time we see Parkman, he in a dessert.
> 
> If you insist on seeing when future Peter put current day Peter into that guy, when during the show do you reveal it? At the very start of the first episode , just after Peter chases Peter D)? Would that have been a good place? If not then, you would have to do it later on as a flash back sort of thing,


No, we did see Peter 'banish' him. He did something with his hands, a pushing motion, and sent him on his way.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

FPeter seemed to teleport Parkman to Africa but without teleporting himself. He grabbed (or pushed) Parkman to the desert. I'm thinking that's an advancement of the teleporting power. PPeter chased FPeter into the bathroom apparently and from there is where it's inferred that FPeter grabbed PPeter, stuck him in Jesse's body, then came back to the bathroom, took off the coat and hat and morphed into looking like PPeter and then told Parkman the bad guy got away.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

NatasNJ said:


> Didn't Nikki die in that fire last year? She is back.
> Liderman could be invisible and not a hallucination.
> Nathan.


Nikki wasn't in this episode and it is not yet clear if Nikki died in the fire or not. Also, as I said before, Linderman has no brain. I don't think he's taking any form of physical presence this season. And, invisibility wasn't his power.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

jsmeeker said:


> If you insist on seeing when future Peter put current day Peter into that guy, when during the show do you reveal it? At the very start of the first episode , just after Peter chases Peter D)? Would that have been a good place? If not then, you would have to do it later on as a flash back sort of thing,


I didn't say I needed to SEE it happen. I was simply making the point that as I was viewing the episode, that plot point confused me because it was not a power that we had previously seen.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Parkman and the turtle was kinda funny. The rest of the episodes... probably could've done without.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

I keep getting lost on the overall story line, who's good, who's bad, and what it means to be good and bad. 

But that's ok, I can just go along for the ride.....

I went to the Heroes wiki and did some re-reading. any other summayr sites you can recommend.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

jlb said:


> I keep getting lost on the overall story line, who's good, who's bad, and what it means to be good and bad.


I think it's suppose to be because it's not set in stone who is good vs evil. We're suppose to waiver back and forth about that.


----------



## sean67854 (Jul 11, 2001)

jsmeeker said:


> But we didn't SEE it happen, did we? We saw Peter and Parkman in the closet, trying to do a mind read thing. Cut away.. Next time we see Parkman, he in a dessert.
> 
> If you insist on seeing when future Peter put current day Peter into that guy, when during the show do you reveal it? At the very start of the first episode , just after Peter chases Peter D)? Would that have been a good place? If not then, you would have to do it later on as a flash back sort of thing,


Like someone else said, there was a moment in the closet where FP says something like, "now you know, so you have to go" then he closes his eyes and pushes and Parkman is gone.

Concerning FP dumping PP in someone else's body, I don't necessarily need a 10 minute exposition on it, but at least _some_ acknowledgment would have made it a little less confusing. Even something as simple as his mom asking how he did it and him telling her it wasn't important, or she'd find out later, or something.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

So we're thinking future Peter has absorbed some other hero's ability to suck souls into other's bodies. So maybe some of the future "villains" we are seeing are the same actors portraying an evil person in a good person's body.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

jlb said:


> I keep getting lost on the overall story line, who's good, who's bad, and what it means to be good and bad.


It seems at this point, that's their intention. Whoever's good now, might be bad in the future, and vice versa, and if you can change the future, whoever is good now might stay good, or might be bad anyway, or...


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

sean67854 said:


> Concerning FP dumping PP in someone else's body


We might need to avoid calling Present Peter "PP". I just nearly spit out my drink all over the monitor because of this sentence


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Well, you put it so simply that I actually feel at ease now.........Thanks!


----------



## nirisahn (Nov 19, 2005)

I wasn't confused by FP's abilities. He did come from 4 years in the future. Who knows who encountered and what abilities he's picked up along the way? As for PP not walking out of the body? He may not have realized yet that it could be a possibility. Or, he may not be able to pick up powers from his future self. Half the fun of a show like this is all the speculating.

On the whole, I really enjoyed these episodes. Maya can go away, and so can speed girl. Boring. The jury's still out on Tracy. I was never fond of Ali's other characters, so maybe my ambivilence is a holdover of not liking Niki/Jessica. Unlike last season, I'm really looking forward to what happens next.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

It's interesting to see the loved it / hated it reactions in the thread. I thought it was good. For one thing, I never thought this show was perfect. This episode seemed more like season one quality than season two, which is a good thing.

Most of the characters that I hate were nowhere to be seen, except Maya. Can we kill her soon please? I didn't mind Darth Peter. Mohinder, my least favorite character on the show since he first appeared, is finally interesting, though I don't know why they found it necessary to copy _The Fly_ so directly. Speaking of copying...



jsmeeker said:


> Are we sure? We have seen invisible characters before.
> 
> Of course, the most logical explanation is they took a page from "Sixth Sense".


Or maybe Farscape (Crichton and Harvey), or Battlestar Galactica (Baltar and Six). I guess if it worked for two recent sci-fi shows, might as well recycle it for Heroes.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Oh yeah...I forgot to mention. The whole injecting yourself with something so you can get powers...no wonder I knew Mohinder was going to have a bad side effect as this exact same thing happened in The 4400 in the last season. Peeling skin and all. Hopefully that's not an insight to what's going to happen to Heroes.


----------



## Barryrod (Mar 17, 2006)

unicorngoddess said:


> Oh yeah...I forgot to mention. The whole injecting yourself with something so you can get powers...no wonder I knew Mohinder was going to have a bad side effect as this exact same thing happened in The 4400 in the last season. Peeling skin and all. Hopefully that's not an insight to what's going to happen to Heroes.


I think this how it all started. All the "Parents" with powers had developed a formula many years ago and used it to give themselves powers without side effects, in turn their offspring developed powers as well. They decided the formula was too dangerous, but of course they are human and their "greed" forced them to save it, so they simply split it up.

This seems plausible, however it directly contradicts the storyline of the online graphic novel.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

I've been mulling over the Nathan revival. My only thought is that he had enough of Adam's blood in him to pull off a full recovery, albeit slowly. Linderman is his bad conscious, just a figment of his imagination. Now where is his good one?


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

Barryrod said:


> I think this how it all started. All the "Parents" with powers had developed a formula many years ago and used it to give themselves powers without side effects, in turn their offspring developed powers as well. They decided the formula was too dangerous, but of course they are human and their "greed" forced them to save it, so they simply split it up.
> 
> This seems plausible, however it directly contradicts the storyline of the online graphic novel.


Perhaps, but it can't be how it all started, because Adam had his power many, many, many years ago. Maybe he was the first, and all powers since have derived from his adrenal glands or spinal fluid or whatever it is. That would be plausible, but I would be very disappointed if that turns out to be the case. It seems to me that Heroes from the start has been about evolution, and that wouldn't be natural evolution, but forced evolution.

I don't read the graphic novels, as may or may not be evidenced in this post.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

dswallow said:


> Maybe Sylar can't die now, but if you put a stick through his brain he can't regenerate until you pull it out. Dead enough at that point, especially if you encase him in a solid block of Lexan or similar.
> 
> And man, I wish someone would put a stick through his brain quickly. I'm so sick of that character.


I was waiting for Noah just to shoot him in the head but he was too slow.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

NatasNJ said:


> It also felt so unoriginal. BrundleFly Mohinder? Stupid Claire/Sylar scene.
> Just felt like all these stuff has been done before.


When he climbed up the wall, I thought of that. When he was looking in the mirror, I thought, "well, he wouldn't start peeling off bits of his skin, that would be too obvious." Silly me.

When Claire was in the closet with the knife hiding from Sylar, I thought I was watching a shot for shot re-enactment of Halloween where Laurie is in the closet while Michael Myers is looking for her.

In general, I thought it was ok, but I guess the novelty has worn off a bit. It may start getting really repetitive.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Barryrod said:


> This seems plausible, however it directly contradicts the storyline of the online graphic novel.


Bear in mind that the comics are supervised (and often written) by the show's writing staff, and are canonical.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

unicorngoddess said:


> We might need to avoid calling Present Peter "PP". I just nearly spit out my drink all over the monitor because of this sentence


Could be worse. I started laughing so hard I had to, um, never mind. 

Overall, I enjoyed it. I had a thought. Maybe Ando becomes a villian because he gets PO'd about Hiro treating him like a villain.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

jsmeeker said:


> Are we sure? We have seen invisible characters before.
> 
> Of course, the most logical explanation is they took a page from "Sixth Sense".


Bingo! That's the first thought that popped into my mind. When Linderman appeared the 2nd time, I thought something was off about it. I made up my mind he was a spirit or something and Nathan was the only one seeing him shortly before it was announced. My take on it is that Linderman is a spirit/ghost now, and Nathan, since he had died, can see him.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

allan said:


> Could be worse. I started laughing so hard I had to, um, never mind.
> 
> Overall, I enjoyed it. I had a thought. Maybe Ando becomes a villian because he gets PO'd about Hiro treating him like a villain.


Or Hiro misread the situation and he was the villian!


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

Shaunnick said:


> Or Hiro misread the situation and he was the villian!


I got dibs on this first.  I really think it's more in line with the "surprises" they keep zinging at you that Hiro finds out _he_ is the bad guy in the future.

Amazing how whenever he jumps into the future, he manages to place himself seconds before everything is destroyed.

I've said it many many times in these forums..... 99.99% of time travel stories suck. The writers are NOT good enough to pull them off without gaping holes, and they're inherently bad. Either nothing changes, which means there's no point, or everything changes, which means all that stuff you've seen is meaningless. I think they're in the same camp as dream sequences and holodeck episodes.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Why the hell did he open the safe!??!?!? Dumbass. 

What happened to Ali Larter's mouth/teeth. She had a Joker-like grin in one of her closeups that was kinda creepy.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Another thing I just realized...I wonder if Peter will ever catch back up with that chick he left in the future???


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

unicorngoddess said:


> Another thing I just realized...I wonder if Peter will ever catch back up with that chick he left in the future???


Maybe that could be a fun story at some point. She appears later, with superpowers, going "You son of a b****! You leave me to rot in the future!" and starts whooping his butt.

Hmmmmm, I guess Peter really is the son of a b****.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

How many different futures have we seen?

1) The future where the bomb goes off
2) The future where the disease is unleashed
3) The future where this Peter came from.
4) The future where Ando has powers and kills Hiro.

These obviously aren't all the same futures, but how many of them are?


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

And what would happen if Hiro teleported to the future right before FPeter went back to shoot Nathan. Then you get a BTTF effect with scewed timelines. So when Hiro would try to come back to the present he'd come back to a different present and then the future that he saw was just useless because FPeter just changed something...

Uh-oh...headache.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

busyba said:


> Why the hell did he open the safe!??!?!? Dumbass.


You answered your own question, he opened it BECAUSE he's a dumbass. 

I loved his father's tape: "I told you not to open the safe".


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

Turtleboy said:


> How many different futures have we seen?
> 
> 1) The future where the bomb goes off
> 2) The future where the disease is unleashed
> ...


I'm sure there are multiple timelines where my head hurts.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

bobcarn said:


> Maybe that could be a fun story at some point. She appears later, with superpowers, going "You son of a b****! You leave me to rot in the future!" and starts whooping his butt.


Heh. I had a friend in high school, who once did something stupid and when his mom found out, she stormed in and yelled, "You stupid son of a b****!" Then wondered why I burst out laughing (hint: he wasn't the stupid one in the family!)...


----------



## MrGreg (May 2, 2003)

At the very beginning, when Claire was going to shoot future Peter, exactly what good was that going to do? Can't Peter heal himself?


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

Whew, I am glad to see that I am not the only one who did not find this premiere their "cup of tea." For me it was just a big mess with a lot of ideas that were either recycled by the show itself (prevent something happening based on future knowledge..again) or other projects (The Fly/Spiderman, The Sixth Sense).

I am really starting to dislike Mama Petrelli.

I definitely hate Sylar. SO much that I hope it doesn't cloud my impression of "Star Trek" next year. 

There were moments when Ali Larter's performance reminded me of Sharon Stone.

I could not take my eyes of the bump/mole on the speedster lady's nose.

The "eating brains that's disgusting" line was quite funny and a nice nod to the fans.

I thought it was obvious that Linderman was not alive when Ali left Nathan's room and she ignored him, but maybe it was intended to be at that point though.

The cool CGI trail that the speedster lady left was a nice nod to "The Abyss" water creature trail. 

I love that everyone ignored the guy yelling "I'm Peter Petrelli!!!!" When did it change from a prison to an insane asylum that they would just rather ignore someone starting to yell that out of the blue?

I was certain that Veronica Mars was a goner. I'm glad she'll be staying.

Hello to Capt. John Sheridan!

I don't know...sometimes I wonder what the show would be like if they had kept to their original "Terrorist" plot as seen in the unaired pilot.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

MrGreg said:


> At the very beginning, when Claire was going to shoot future Peter, exactly what good was that going to do? Can't Peter heal himself?


Perhaps the bullet was made of the same material that made the scar on his face. He obviously can't heal from whatever that was.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

atrac said:


> I thought it was obvious that Linderman was not alive when Ali left Nathan's room and she ignored him, but maybe it was intended to be at that point though.


Yeah, I think that Baltar-Six moment was when we were supposed to realize it. Do the writers have so little shame that they would rip this so blatantly off of a popular sci-fi show still on the air? Not saying it was original when Battlestar Galactica did it, but it's a huge part of that show.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

I was kind of surprised to see the William Katt reporter character killed so quickly. I figured he was going to have a minor storyline in which he was the intrepid reporter who finally figured out about the Heroes and would eventually have to be killed or silenced in some way before revealing the secret to the world.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

bobcarn said:


> I got dibs on this first.  I really think it's more in line with the "surprises" they keep zinging at you that Hiro finds out _he_ is the bad guy in the future.
> 
> Amazing how whenever he jumps into the future, he manages to place himself seconds before everything is destroyed.
> 
> I've said it many many times in these forums..... 99.99% of time travel stories suck. The writers are NOT good enough to pull them off without gaping holes, and they're inherently bad. Either nothing changes, which means there's no point, or everything changes, which means all that stuff you've seen is meaningless. I think they're in the same camp as dream sequences and holodeck episodes.





unicorngoddess said:


> And what would happen if Hiro teleported to the future right before FPeter went back to shoot Nathan. Then you get a BTTF effect with scewed timelines. So when Hiro would try to come back to the present he'd come back to a different present and then the future that he saw was just useless because FPeter just changed something...
> 
> Uh-oh...headache.





allan said:


> I'm sure there are multiple timelines where my head hurts.


This is heavy!


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

jlb said:


> This is heavy!


Is there some problem with the Earth's gravitational pull in the future?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

allan said:


> You answered your own question, he opened it BECAUSE he's a dumbass.
> 
> I loved his father's tape: "I told you not to open the safe".




Which, of course raises the question, why even keep the forumla half in the safe in the first place? Why not destroy it if it's so dangerous?


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

Gunnyman said:


> He has the scar so every now and then the "stupid people" watching the show can say "Oh this is FUTURE Peter"
> 
> I love it when TV writers treat us like idiots.


I'm one of those stupid people then, cause I wouldn't have been able to follow which was FP and PP w/out the scar.



unicorngoddess said:


> We might need to avoid calling Present Peter "PP". I just nearly spit out my drink all over the monitor because of this sentence


:up:

I'm torn between who is the biggest idiot on the show, Parkman or Mohinder? I wish they had sent both off with Molly, taking Maya Mexitwin with them.


----------



## EvilMidniteBombr (May 25, 2006)

gastrof said:


> Did anyone note the "insider joke"?
> 
> The reporter who Nikki's "twin" accidentally froze to death?
> 
> He was played by William Katt, formerly "The Greatest American Hero".


Believe it or not, I'm walking on air!

I was hoping that he had the ability to fly.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> And what would happen if Hiro teleported to the future right before FPeter went back to shoot Nathan.


FPeter wouldn't be about to go back to shoot Nathan, since he already did shoot him "four years ago".

As for the girl Peter left in the post-viral-release future, he can't bring her back, since that future no longer exists as far as he is concerned - unless the evacuation was because of a _different_ virus (they never did say exactly what caused it, now did they?). Like Mama Petrelli said, when you go back into the past, you can change your future. Of course, that doesn't prevent him from going back in time to some point before he took her into the future, grabbing her, and taking her into the current version of the present...

-- Don


----------



## ZooCaretaker (May 22, 2007)

I think we can conclude from Sylar's probing of Claire's brain that the powers come from the brain...

So how does that work with Mohinder injecting himself with Maya's serum/cels? I thought he said something about powers coming from the adrenal gland and being excited? Does that cause the brain to change? And if being excited causes powers to manifest, was he excited when he woke up and looked in the mirror?


BTW (IMHO) -- The need for Maya should be done -- hopefully she was just there to provide Mohinder with the serum to give him powes?


----------



## EvilMidniteBombr (May 25, 2006)

ZooCaretaker said:


> I think we can conclude from Sylar's probing of Claire's brain that the powers come from the brain...
> 
> So how does that work with Mohinder injecting himself with Maya's serum/cels? I thought he said something about powers coming from the adrenal gland and being excited? Does that cause the brain to change? And if being excited causes powers to manifest, was he excited when he woke up and looked in the mirror?
> 
> BTW (IMHO) -- The need for Maya should be done -- hopefully she was just there to provide Mohinder with the serum to give him powes?


I think she gave him a little more than "powers".


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

ZooCaretaker said:


> I think we can conclude from Sylar's probing of Claire's brain that the powers come from the brain...


What's also interesting is that he didn't kill Claire. Which means either A) despite prior experience he doesn't actually kill because he enjoys killing, but rather it's a side effect of "learning" the powers; or B) because the writers need Claire, and fudged it to keep her alive.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

The two best lines in the whole show were delivered by the African...

"Why are you talking to a turtle?"

and

"No service, shoulda got Sprint"!!!


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

I'm glad they killed off The Greatest American Goatee!


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

EvilMidniteBombr said:


> I think she gave him a little more than "powers".


Hmmmmm... maybe the leisons on his back aren't actually from the serum but from some nasty STD he got from Maya.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

TonyTheTiger said:


> The two best lines in the whole show were delivered by the African...
> 
> [...]
> 
> "No service, shoulda got Sprint"!!!


After which, Parkman should have looked into the camera and said, "can we get our money now?"


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> What's also interesting is that he didn't kill Claire. Which means either A) despite prior experience he doesn't actually kill because he enjoys killing, but rather it's a side effect of "learning" the powers; or B) because the writers need Claire, and fudged it to keep her alive.


She _can't_ be killed, so whether or not he enjoys killing is still in play.

Of course, he _did_ say, "I couldn't kill you *even if I wanted to*", which would seem to imply that he didn't want to, so that could support option A. But that could have just been sour grapes, "oh, I didn't even want to kill you anyway...."


----------



## sean67854 (Jul 11, 2001)

jking said:


> Perhaps the bullet was made of the same material that made the scar on his face. He obviously can't heal from whatever that was.


In the first season before the bomb, Peter told Claire that she might have to shoot him, and she knew where. I'm guessing it's like when she had the stick in her head. If they get a bullet in the right spot in the brain, they can't self heal.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

busyba said:


> Of course, he _did_ say, "I couldn't kill you *even if I wanted to*", which would seem to imply that he didn't want to, so that could support option A. But that could have just been sour grapes, "oh, I didn't even want to kill you anyway...."


Which of course is a violation of several rules of the Evil Overlord Handbook. Letting the hero go because it appears they are invincible.

In the first half of season 1, the goal was to save the cheerleader. Presumably from Sylar. They did that. Sylar didn't get her power but ultimately it didn't matter because Sylar didn't end up as the "big bad" by the end of the season.

Here we have Sylar again going after Claire, no one was there to save her, apparently she didn't need saving, and Sylar has her power. Does this mean that she didn't really need saving in the first season either?


----------



## hapdrastic (Mar 31, 2006)

busyba said:


> She _can't_ be killed, so whether or not he enjoys killing is still in play.
> 
> Of course, he _did_ say, "I couldn't kill you *even if I wanted to*", which would seem to imply that he didn't want to, so that could support option A. But that could have just been sour grapes, "oh, I didn't even want to kill you anyway...."


Actually, that kind of bugged me - in the first season it was strongly implied that she could die - otherwise they wouldn't have had to "save" the cheerleader. Also, in mama Petrelli's vision Claire was decapitated...which seemed to kill her....


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

GDG76 said:


> All the crap with dead people coming back was annoying. Can't people (other than Isaac) just stay dead?
> 
> 
> > I agree. That was what bugged me the most was that everybody gets a horrible death scene in one season, but most of them get to return.
> ...


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

Sirius Black said:


> Which of course is a violation of several rules of the Evil Overlord Handbook. Letting the hero go because it appears they are invincible.
> 
> In the first half of season 1, the goal was to save the cheerleader. Presumably from Sylar. They did that. Sylar didn't get her power but ultimately it didn't matter because Sylar didn't end up as the "big bad" by the end of the season.
> 
> Here we have Sylar again going after Claire, no one was there to save her, apparently she didn't need saving, and Sylar has her power. Does this mean that she didn't really need saving in the first season either?


I remember trying to work out the logic of the "save the cheerleader, save the world" tagline at the end of season 1, and I ended up looking at it two different ways:

1) Future Hiro was the one who said it, and it's entirely possible that he was simply mistaken. He had gone through a lot of "string theories" and the save the cheerleader thing was just his latest attempt at changing the future.

2) The most obvious product of saving Claire was so that Sylar wouldn't get her power, but less obvious is that if she weren't alive, she wouldn't have been there to convince her father (Nathan) to take responsibility and use his gift to fly Peter away so that he wouldn't blow up New York.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

I never believed Sylar's goal was to _kill_ people because he doesn't go around doing it to random people. The killing is a result of his one goal, to dissect their brains. He's portrayed as being very sociopathic, unable to empathize with others and having no regard for them at all. He just couldn't care less if someone else lived or died. So he doesn't go into his assaults with the intention of killing, just getting what he wants. Those criminals that were released? Now _there's_ people who enjoy killing.


----------



## alpacaboy (Oct 29, 2004)

jking said:


> I remember trying to work out the logic of the "save the cheerleader, save the world" tagline at the end of season 1, and I ended up looking at it two different ways:


I just thought the world needs more cheerleaders.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

alpacaboy said:


> I just thought the world needs more cheerleaders.


Yes. The world also needs more copy editors. Where is the "Heroes" equivalent of "The Electric Company's" Letterman?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

trainman said:


> Yes. The world also needs more copy editors. Where is the "Heroes" equivalent of "The Electric Company's" Letterman?


Maybe Hiro actually _*was*_ saying that the detectives were "apart or detached from others, seperate or distinct".


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

^^^ Regardless of whether they spelled discreet correctly, I thought it was funny he said they were "very discreet" when they were completely trashing the office looking for fingerprints, etc. Didn't appear to be very "discrete" to me.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> What's also interesting is that he didn't kill Claire. Which means either A) despite prior experience he doesn't actually kill because he enjoys killing, but rather it's a side effect of "learning" the powers; or B) because the writers need Claire, and fudged it to keep her alive.


Clearly Sylar doesn't know that Claire can be killed. He thinks her power is immortality, and doesn't realize that imbedding something in the brain will prevent her from healing. Therefore, I think A is correct. He has to take their scalp off to examine their brain. This would kill any normal person, but because of Claire's power, she lived right through it.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

bobcarn said:


> I got dibs on this first.  I really think it's more in line with the "surprises" they keep zinging at you that Hiro finds out _he_ is the bad guy in the future.
> 
> Amazing how whenever he jumps into the future, he manages to place himself seconds before everything is destroyed.
> 
> I've said it many many times in these forums..... 99.99% of time travel stories suck. The writers are NOT good enough to pull them off without gaping holes, and they're inherently bad. Either nothing changes, which means there's no point, or everything changes, which means all that stuff you've seen is meaningless. I think they're in the same camp as dream sequences and holodeck episodes.


ME hands back dibs with a grumble.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> ^^^ Regardless of whether they spelled discreet correctly, I thought it was funny he said they were "very discreet" when they were completely trashing the office looking for fingerprints, etc. Didn't appear to be very "discrete" to me.


Which kinda supports my theory. 



> Clearly Sylar doesn't know that Claire can be killed. He thinks her power is immortality, and doesn't realize that imbedding something in the brain will prevent her from healing.


But as soon as you take the object out of the brain, she will heal, so yeah, that's immortality. There's no method (that we've seen so far) that will make her irretrievably dead. All we have is a method to keep her dead indefinitely, but not in a way that can't be undone.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Speaking of immortality... I don't think anyone has mentioned that in Mama P's dream of the future with the gang of Villans, Adam was there!


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

Oh yeah...Adams stuck in a coffin somewhere. Forgot about that.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

Claire may not be easily killable, but it did seem that without her body being whole she was unable to function. 

When her skullcap was off, but once Sylar placed it she quickly healed and was able to function.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

busyba said:


> Speaking of immortality... I don't think anyone has mentioned that in Mama P's dream of the future with the gang of Villans, Adam was there!


Standing right next to Niki/Jessica/Tracy.


----------



## DLiquid (Sep 17, 2001)

Langree said:


> Claire may not be easily killable, but it did seem that without her body being whole she was unable to function.


Right, couldn't you just bury half her brain in Davey Jones' locker and be done with it? For a more permanent solution, Tracy could freeze/shatter her and send the shards to 100 different locations.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

DLiquid said:


> Right, couldn't you just bury half her brain in Davey Jones' locker and be done with it? For a more permanent solution, Tracy could freeze/shatter her and send the shards to 100 different locations.


She would come back together like the T2


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Alfer2003 said:


> Maybe it was because I was tired, but I thought the whole two hours was a mish mashed cluster f***. It was all OVER the place and it was driving me nuts.
> 
> As a fan of the show, I actually sat there thinking "Do I really want to watch another season of this?" It's early yet so maybe I can hope it picks up and gets better than this season opener was...if not, I fear it may be dropped from my "must watch" list like it used to be over the last two seasons.


+1. Exactly. I was actually getting bored watching this, and stopped a couple times to do other things. Never used to happen during Heroes. I fear it may have run its course with me. I'll give it a couple more eps, then decide.



bobcarn said:


> Now for what I didn't like.....
> 
> 1) Time Travel? Again? Yet _another_ end-of-the-world scenario in the near future that must be prevented? This is what, the third in three seasons? The writers are simply not good enough to pull off time-travel stories without gaping holes or contradictions. It's wearing thin.


I've had it with TT story lines. It just causes paradox brain pain. And it always seems like a cheap out. No matter what corner they paint themselves into, they can use TT to get out. Here comes FP to the rescue. Or not. It's not too dissimilar to the Freak of the Week device--need a special ability, let's intro a new character who has it.

And stop bringing old, dead characters back!:down:

Really disappointed, especially since Tim Kring had said he understood where S2 went wrong, and S3 was gonna start with a bang to make amends.


----------



## mrpantstm (Jan 25, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I really enjoyed this. It was an endless series of WtF moments, in a good way that makes me eager for more.


To put my own spin on Rob's comment.

I really disliked this. It was an endless series of WtF moments, in a way that had me rolling my eyes and checking my watch. Seriously.

Also, the whole future Peter shooting Nathan smacks of the classic X-Men "Days of Future Past" storyline.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Alfer2003 said:


> Maybe it was because I was tired, but I thought the whole two hours was a mish mashed cluster f***. It was all OVER the place and it was driving me nuts.
> 
> As a fan of the show, I actually sat there thinking "Do I really want to watch another season of this?"


Same here. This was a dreadful rehash of Season 1. AGAIN.



GDG76 said:


> Someone from Germany with magnetic abilities- boy, that's unique.


I was wondering if they did that deliberately. I sure hope it was an intentional nod to X-Men.


GDG76 said:


> Something was just off about the whole show. I can't see myself watching all season if it's like the first two episodes. Ando and Hiro was the only redeeming part...


Yup, I agree.



bobcarn said:


> 1) Time Travel? Again? Yet _another_ end-of-the-world scenario in the near future that must be prevented? This is what, the third in three seasons? The writers are simply not good enough to pull off time-travel stories without gaping holes or contradictions. It's wearing thin.
> 
> 4) The resurrection or return of mostly everyone they led you to believe was dead or killed. Are they really so afraid to try something new that they need to bring back the entire cast of the first season?


No kidding. This is ridiculous. I thought Kring & Co said they were aware of what went wrong with S2 and were doing something different this time around. Obviously they must not have received the same complaints as the vast majority of complaints I've read online, because they're doing the exact same thing again.



hummingbird_206 said:


> I'm torn between who is the biggest idiot on the show, Parkman or Mohinder? I wish they had sent both off with Molly, taking Maya Mexitwin with them.


At least Mohinder's storyline hasn't been done before on the show. EVERY SINGLE STORYLINE for the other characters is now done for the second or third time. It really is ridiculous.

Plus don't get rid of Maya, she's hot. 



TonyTheTiger said:


> "No service, shoulda got Sprint"!!!


That was the worst product placement I've ever seen. Not only was it completely out of place and distracting, but at least if it had been for AT&T or something it would have made more sense - I think you can actually USE their phones in Africa. Sprint, I kinda doubt it.



bobcarn said:


> I never believed Sylar's goal was to _kill_ people because he doesn't go around doing it to random people. The killing is a result of his one goal, to dissect their brains.


Yeah, and I think they clarified that here at least.



astrohip said:


> +1. Exactly. I was actually getting bored watching this, and stopped a couple times to do other things.


This is Season 2 all over again I think. I guess Season 1 was just a fluke. But they're damned determined to try and repeat it. Really, Claire alone filming herself getting hurt AGAIN?


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

Claire is so concerned now (drama queen) that she doesn't feel any pain. It seemed to happen after Sylar took her power, so why wouldn't she consider that his probing of her brain had something to do with it?


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

My favorite line: Sylar: "Eat your brain? Claire... that is _disgusting_!"


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

EvilMidniteBombr said:


> Believe it or not, I'm walking on air!
> 
> I was hoping that he had the ability to fly *badly*.


FYP!


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

I realized one thing while watching this: I don't LIKE these characters. I can't stand them. They're whiny, boring jerks. They have these amazing powers and all they do is complain.

That's why Hiro is at least somewhat likable, he at least kinda takes some pleasure in doing what he does. That's also why I enjoyed Micah and his cousin a bit last season, they too took advantage and enjoyed their powers.

They're gone, and all we're left with is a bunch of ungrateful whiners.


----------



## EvilMidniteBombr (May 25, 2006)

madscientist said:


> FYP!


But, if he could fly and do it well, it would be hilarious if he made a comment like "you have no idea how long it took me to get the hang of this." Then show that he still hasn't figured out how to land.



MickeS said:


> That was the worst product placement I've ever seen. Not only was it completely out of place and distracting, but at least if it had been for AT&T or something it would have made more sense - I think you can actually USE their phones in Africa. Sprint, I kinda doubt it.


I take it that you don't watch Eureka?


----------



## barbeedoll (Sep 26, 2005)

Hmmm. I came away thinking he said, "Oh, here it is" and perhaps removed one tiny part of Claire's brain. Did anyone else think that?

Barbeedoll


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

MickeS said:


> That's why Hiro is at least somewhat likable, he at least kinda takes some pleasure in doing what he does. That's also why I enjoyed Micah and his cousin a bit last season, they too took advantage and enjoyed their powers.


Funny, different perceptions... I find Hiro and Ando to be one of the more annoying set of characters and would be very happy to see them die off and disappear from the show. Hiro's a moron.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

dswallow said:


> Funny, different perceptions... I find Hiro and Ando to be one of the more annoying set of characters and would be very happy to see them die off and disappear from the show. Hiro's a moron.


At least they're not "brooding". I like Hiro when he doesn't go overboard with the cutesy stuff.


----------



## Joules1111 (Jul 21, 2005)

busyba said:


> After which, Parkman should have looked into the camera and said, "can we get our money now?"


At least there was no mention of the desert heat and Degree deodorant (a la Eureka).


----------



## WinBear (Aug 24, 2000)

jking said:


> I was kind of surprised to see the William Katt reporter character killed so quickly. I figured he was going to have a minor storyline in which he was the intrepid reporter who finally figured out about the Heroes and would eventually have to be killed or silenced in some way before revealing the secret to the world.


I really don't think we've seen the last of him. They deliberately showed his melting remains heading for a drainage grate. I'm betting he has some kind of power where he can turn his body to water or otherwise reintegrate it later.


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> Standing right next to Niki/Jessica/Tracy.


Wasn't Maury Parkman there as well?


----------



## EvilMidniteBombr (May 25, 2006)

Shakhari said:


> Wasn't Maury Parkman there as well?


I believe you are correct.


----------



## tony touch (Jul 16, 2004)

Wow ratings not so good per imdb.com:

"Signs that NBC's Heroes may have suffered a devastating blow after being forced to take a nine-month hiatus due to the writers' strike were apparent Monday as ratings for the season premiere were down 25 percent versus last year's opener. In fact, the heavily hyped two-hour episode matched the series' lowest original episode rating ever."


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

I don't who stopped watching, everyone i know plus a few more watched this. Oh well.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

I wonder if they count people who TiVo'd as part of the ratings? I, and all of the people I know who watch, TiVo'd and watched it over a couple of nights.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

hummingbird_206 said:


> I wonder if they count people who TiVo'd as part of the ratings? I, and all of the people I know who watch, TiVo'd and watched it over a couple of nights.


Good question. Now that you mention it, everyone I know now has a DVR of some sort or another.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

barbeedoll said:


> Hmmm. I came away thinking he said, "Oh, here it is" and perhaps removed one tiny part of Claire's brain. Did anyone else think that?
> 
> Barbeedoll


He did say that, or something like it, but I took it that whatever he found helped him "figure out" her power and how it worked, not that he actually took something out of her brain.

I began wondering when Mohinder was describing his theory on how the powers were created, with the whole diatribe on the adrenal glands and all that crap, if that's not what Sylar can do... he can actually "see" that reaction in others and has the power to control his own body chemistry to the point where he can make the same reaction happen in his own body on command. But I don't know enough to know if he would be able to figure that all out from looking at someone's brain, so it's probably a stupid theory.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

tony touch said:


> Wow ratings not so good per imdb.com:
> 
> "the heavily hyped two-hour episode matched the series' lowest original episode rating ever."


Ouch. That's bad.

Truth be told, I'm not sure I'll watch it from now on. There was nothing in it that compelled me to find out more.

I'll keep the SP and record them and follow the "buzz". If it's any good I'll catch up.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

hummingbird_206 said:


> I wonder if they count people who TiVo'd as part of the ratings? I, and all of the people I know who watch, TiVo'd and watched it over a couple of nights.


Heroes was the most DVRd show last season, IIRC, with about 25% or so of the 18-49 demographic viewers of the show timeshifting it.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

MickeS said:


> Heroes was the most DVRd show last season, IIRC, with about 25% or so of the 18-49 demographic viewers of the show timeshifting it.


Heh...

Heroes timeshifted.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

barbeedoll said:


> Hmmm. I came away thinking he said, "Oh, here it is" and perhaps removed one tiny part of Claire's brain. Did anyone else think that?


So I wonder why they made sure in the past two seasons to show people with brain completely missing? He didn't seem to be in a rush with the painter guy to grab the brain and run away. Sylar coulda' just picked out the piece he needed and left the rest behind.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

getreal said:


> So I wonder why they made sure in the past two seasons to show people with brain completely missing?


They hadn't figured out yet what Sylar did with the brains.


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

GDG76 said:


> ...
> Something was just off about the whole show. I can't see myself watching all season if it's like the first two episodes. Ando and Hiro was the only redeeming part...


But, isn't this why we have DVRs? Record everything and watch the good parts!


----------



## JustAllie (Jan 5, 2002)

(not reading any posts in this thread so far; watching at the 40 minute mark)

Apparently, you can have your Claire, and eat it, too.* 

*Well, the relevant part of Claire's brain, anyway.


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

The show just keeps going in circles.. getting tired of it not heading to a end. The only bright part of the show was the guy in africa. At least we will get some info.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

I wonder if the African guy who paints the future does so in the same way that Isaac did or if it is slightly different.

I noticed that symbol that he painted at least twice in the episode. This season's Adam mark?

In the last season, did they ever reveal who "White Beard" was? Is it relevant?


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

JustAllie said:


> (not reading any posts in this thread so far; watching at the 40 minute mark)
> 
> Apparently, you can have your Claire, and eat it, too.*
> 
> *Well, the relevant part of Claire's brain, anyway.


No, he DOESN'T eat the brains.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> No, he DOESN'T eat the brains.


I would say he no longer eats the brains.

Or more precisely, they've ret-conned eating the brains out of the show.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I would say he no longer eats the brains.
> 
> Or more precisely, they've ret-conned eating the brains out of the show.


And I would say he never ate the brains, but people mistakenly thought he did.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> And I would say he never ate the brains, but people mistakenly thought he did.


He certainly consumed the brains in some fashion--i.e., they were gone when he was done.

What obviously happened is that the writers changed his methodology from whatever it was (that resulted in no brain left) to what it is, almost certainly because they decided they wanted him to acquire Claire's power without killing her. And I don't really have a problem with that, as long as they eventually come up with a vaguely plausible in-story excuse for why his method changed. His original method was unclear enough that they have the leeway to ret-con it the way they did without doing any real damage to continuity.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

Previously Sylar took the brains with him to study so he wouldn't get caught at the scene of the crime. Anyway, that's my guess. Who knows what, if anything, the writers will come up with as an explanation.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

hummingbird_206 said:


> Previously Sylar took the brains with him to study so he wouldn't get caught at the scene of the crime. Anyway, that's my guess. Who knows what, if anything, the writers will come up with as an explanation.


Good enough explanation for me. I was never on board with the whole "eating brains" thing anyway, not sure where that theory came from.

But I kinda doubt it will ever be brought up again - they settled it, there's no continuity issues, why elaborate on it?


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

I liked the episode well enough. I understand and agree with some of the complaints, but I also think that the show is still more interesting than most shows on TV.

Andre Royo was in the credits but I didn't see him anywhere. I did notice Jamie Hector. It seems that a lot of alumns from The Wire are finding work. Lance Reddick and Tristan Wilds, now Jamie Hector and Andre Royo. I hope they make regular appearances. Also some Veronica Mars alumns in this show. Maybe the Heroes people are watching shows that are better than Heroes in order to learn how to make Heroes better? Eh, probably not - it's not working, at least.

I don't get where they are going with the villains thing. The powers as described are not even close to as dangerous as Sylar or others we have already seen. I also found it funny when he said "you don't want to know" but it was clearly visible on the screen that Frank Capra's powers involve sound manipulation. What makes them "worse than Sylar?" Is it that they will unleash wanton destruction into the world, whereas Sylar just wants more powers, or what?

Also, how do we know that Hiro died in the future? I don't get why everyone is assuming that. Did I miss some clear indication he was dead instead of knocked unconscious? I thought he misunderstood what Ando did, and that was to be a major point of contention in the story.

I was convinced Nikki was the ice queen and each "personality" has a different power. Posts here convinced me maybe this was not correct. Still, it seems like the "original" heroes are accumulating more powers. Nathan can heal himself via an imaginary friend. Or is that some other power at work?



DevdogAZ said:


> ^^^ Regardless of whether they spelled discreet correctly, I thought it was funny he said they were "very discreet" when they were completely trashing the office looking for fingerprints, etc. Didn't appear to be very "discrete" to me.


The place was trashed by the running girl.



> Clearly Sylar doesn't know that Claire can be killed.


 She can?



jking said:


> He did say that, or something like it, but I took it that whatever he found helped him "figure out" her power and how it worked, not that he actually took something out of her brain.
> 
> I began wondering when Mohinder was describing his theory on how the powers were created, with the whole diatribe on the adrenal glands and all that crap, if that's not what Sylar can do... he can actually "see" that reaction in others and has the power to control his own body chemistry to the point where he can make the same reaction happen in his own body on command. But I don't know enough to know if he would be able to figure that all out from looking at someone's brain, so it's probably a stupid theory.


Mohinder's theory was based on her being able to control her powers. It doesn't mean that the source of powers was in the adrenal gland, just that it was relevant or a missing piece of the puzzle.

Sylar figures things out, that's his power. He can look at a brain and understand how it works. Of course, no one mentioned the fallacy he stated about 10 to 20% of our brains. But hey, maybe Sylar "really" knows how brains work, unlike modern doctors.



MickeS said:


> They hadn't figured out yet what Sylar did with the brains.


Didn't he eat them in the online comics? And anyway, why was king midas' brain seemingly missing?



Sirius Black said:


> I wonder if the African guy who paints the future does so in the same way that Isaac did or if it is slightly different.


He implied it was different. He implied that he controlled the future by painting it.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

I enjoyed it. Yes, it was all over the place. Yes, there are some boring/annoying story lines, (Hiro, again,) but overall, I enjoyed the fast-paced action. It was entertaining, and that's all I'm looking for from Heroes. After the fun of season 1, it became all too apparent last season that this show is not the best written show on TV. There will be plenty of "Why didn't or why DID he do that? That makes no sense," moments, but these 2 episodes got it back to being a fun watch. (Hey, they even found a way to make Maya watchable. Very watchable.)

Also, I was pleasantly surprised to see Marlo from The Wire return to the small screen.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TAsunder said:


> She can?


Provided there is something stuck in her brain that can't be removed, yes. There was also the premonition/dream of Mama Petrelli where Claire had her head lopped off. I imagine that would do the trick as well.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Provided there is something stuck in her brain that can't be removed, yes. There was also the premonition/dream of Mama Petrelli where Claire had her head lopped off. I imagine that would do the trick as well.


That's not death or being killed. That is being disabled. What evidence does anyone have that there is any way to actually "kill" her in a way that prevents her from ever existing in the future when parts are reassembled?


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> Provided there is something stuck in her brain that can't be removed, yes. There was also the premonition/dream of Mama Petrelli where Claire had her head lopped off. I imagine that would do the trick as well.


I think the point is that something has changed with Claire. What we thought we knew about Claire might not be pertinent anymore. But yes, Mama's dream sure made Claire look very dead.

Edit: Well maybe that wasn't the point of his post, but still, I took Claire no longer being able to feel pain to mean that Claire's power is definitely different from where it was last year, and possibly, (though not directly the pain part) the reason for Sylar to state "you can't die."


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

I bet if you took her brain out and burned it, that would do the trick.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

I also think part of Sylar's reasoning for "you can't die" was more like him acknowledging that Claire is the key to the survival of everyone else with powers. Her blood is what cured him and if there's another virus outbreak, her blood would be needed again.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

My guess is that Claire can still be killed. If that sharp stick had stayed in Claire's brain long enough, she probably would have died. If the brain was totally destroyed, she'd probably die. If her head was blown off with a shotgun, she'd probably die (Adam told Peter "There's no coming back from that").


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Those are all grand theories but they don't seem to be very logical. Sylar said in no uncertain terms that she could not die, he couldn't kill her if he wanted to, and now HE cannot die. Adam has yet to be killed despite numerous attempts. It seems reasonable enough that she can't die according to the writers of Heroes. You can all come up with strange ideas on how to actually kill her all you want, but it seems fairly obvious to me that the writers intend for her to be unable to die; or, less likely but I guess still possible, that Sylar was simply lying through his teeth.


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

Sirius Black said:


> I wonder if the African guy who paints the future does so in the same way that Isaac did or if it is slightly different.


No two powers have ever been exactly the same so it's probably similar without being exactly the same.



Sirius Black said:


> I noticed that symbol that he painted at least twice in the episode. This season's Adam mark?


My impression of the paintings is that the crack in the Earth has the same shape as the mark from the first two seasons.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> Those are all grand theories but they don't seem to be very logical. Sylar said in no uncertain terms that she could not die, he couldn't kill her if he wanted to, and now HE cannot die. Adam has yet to be killed despite numerous attempts. It seems reasonable enough that she can't die according to the writers of Heroes. You can all come up with strange ideas on how to actually kill her all you want, but it seems fairly obvious to me that the writers intend for her to be unable to die; or, less likely but I guess still possible, that Sylar was simply lying through his teeth.


I'm sure Sylar thinks that she (and now he) is unkillable, but that doesn't make it true. Admittedly, until she, Adam, Sylar, or Peter actually GET killed, the theories on how to kill them are unproven, but that doesn't mean they are wrong. 

Edit: *goes off to think up more ways to kill Claire*


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

allan said:


> I'm sure Sylar thinks that she (and now he) is unkillable, but that doesn't make it true. Admittedly, until she, Adam, Sylar, or Peter actually GET killed, the theories on how to kill them are unproven, but that doesn't mean they are wrong.
> 
> Edit: *goes off to think up more ways to kill Claire*


Sylar has better understanding of Claire's powers than anyone else. His power is to understand how powers work and mimic them. I don't think there's going to be a better expert on what is and isn't possible with Claire's power than Sylar. Maybe Mohinder if he can prevent his eventual Metamorphosis.


----------



## sean67854 (Jul 11, 2001)

Shakhari said:


> No two powers have ever been exactly the same so it's probably similar without being exactly the same.


What was the difference between Claire's boyfriend's flight and Nathan's flight?


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

unicorngoddess said:


> I bet if you took her brain out and burned it, that would do the trick.


I think The Island would prevent that from happening.

Wait, wrong show?


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

sean67854 said:


> What was the difference between Claire's boyfriend's flight and Nathan's flight?


Nathan can heal himself by hallucinating?


----------



## hapdrastic (Mar 31, 2006)

sean67854 said:


> What was the difference between Claire's boyfriend's flight and Nathan's flight?


Nathan flies at super-sonic speeds...Claire's boyfriend floats.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> Nathan can heal himself by hallucinating?


Hmm...I thought I was having a thought there for a minute but it went away. I had this weird thought that if Peter's power was to absorb powers from LIVING Heroes maybe Nathan's power is absorbing powers from DEAD Heroes. I thought they could be activated in near death experiences, like the car wreck that paralyized his wife...but I forgo that we saw that the wreck happened because he unexplainably flew. So...what if that was his dad's power and Nathan somehow tapped into it after their dad died? Maybe any dead Hero can loan their power to Nathan??? Hmmm....


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> Hmm...I thought I was having a thought there for a minute but it went away. I had this weird thought that if Peter's power was to absorb powers from LIVING Heroes maybe Nathan's power is absorbing powers from DEAD Heroes. I thought they could be activated in near death experiences, like the car wreck that paralyized his wife...but I forgo that we saw that the wreck happened because he unexplainably flew. So...what if that was his dad's power and Nathan somehow tapped into it after their dad died? Maybe any dead Hero can loan their power to Nathan??? Hmmm....


I thought he flew because of the wreck? It's been a while, maybe you are right.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> Sylar has better understanding of Claire's powers than anyone else. His power is to understand how powers work and mimic them. I don't think there's going to be a better expert on what is and isn't possible with Claire's power than Sylar. Maybe Mohinder if he can prevent his eventual Metamorphosis.


I can't help but feel like you are just trying to be counter to the general consensus. Adam, Peter, Claire and Sylar have the ability to regenerate. That is not the same as invulnerability. I promise if you drop a tactical nuke on their heads and they vaporize, they are dead. If a stick stays in their head long enough, their power is deactivated, and their body decomposes, they're dead. Sylar has grandiose visions of himself, so it is not out of character for him to have a grandiose view of a power that he thinks he fully understands.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

unicorngoddess said:


> Hmm...I thought I was having a thought there for a minute but it went away. I had this weird thought that if Peter's power was to absorb powers from LIVING Heroes maybe Nathan's power is absorbing powers from DEAD Heroes. I thought they could be activated in near death experiences, like the car wreck that paralyized his wife...but I forgo that we saw that the wreck happened because he unexplainably flew. So...what if that was his dad's power and Nathan somehow tapped into it after their dad died? Maybe any dead Hero can loan their power to Nathan??? Hmmm....


Although I don't think you're entirely right, I like the idea.  You should develop it more and report back when you have something.:up:


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Shaunnick said:


> I can't help but feel like you are just trying to be counter to the general consensus. Adam, Peter, Claire and Sylar have the ability to regenerate. That is not the same as invulnerability. I promise if you drop a tactical nuke on their heads and they vaporize, they are dead. If a stick stays in their head long enough, their power is deactivated, and their body decomposes, they're dead. Sylar has grandiose visions of himself, so it is not out of character for him to have a grandiose view of a power that he thinks he fully understands.


Peter survived a nuclear explosion already. No go. Where is your evidence that the body decomposes exactly?

I'm not trying to be anything. I'm suggesting that people should perhaps actually believe the writers when they more or less directly state something. Considering all of the obvious hints they have given us that claire is something beyond anyone else in the series, the fact that none of the people who can "regenerate" have died, and so forth, all this talk of how to kill claire and assuming she can die is patently absurd.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

Shaunnick said:


> I can't help but feel like you are just trying to be counter to the general consensus. Adam, Peter, Claire and Sylar have the ability to regenerate. That is not the same as invulnerability. I promise if you drop a tactical nuke on their heads and they vaporize, they are dead. If a stick stays in their head long enough, their power is deactivated, and their body decomposes, they're dead. Sylar has grandiose visions of himself, so it is not out of character for him to have a grandiose view of a power that he thinks he fully understands.


I agree with Tasunder. We can all come up with every gory way possible to kill/dismember/disintegrate Claire and say "That'll kill her for sure! YEAH!" it won't change the fact that Sylar, an actual character in the show, specifically stated "You CAN'T die." IMO, it seems blatantly obvious that we, the viewer, are supposed to believe him.


----------



## EvilMidniteBombr (May 25, 2006)

Shaunnick said:


> I can't help but feel like you are just trying to be counter to the general consensus. Adam, Peter, Claire and Sylar have the ability to regenerate. That is not the same as invulnerability. I promise if you drop a tactical nuke on their heads and they vaporize, they are dead. If a stick stays in their head long enough, their power is deactivated, and their body decomposes, they're dead. Sylar has grandiose visions of himself, so it is not out of character for him to have a grandiose view of a power that he thinks he fully understands.


This almost happened when Nuke Guy slow burned in season 1 but Claire regenerated from that very quickly. Granted it wasn't a full blown explosion but I thought it was worth mentioning.

Maybe Sylar didn't mean it literally. Maybe he has some sort of attachment to her that he has developed. I'd have to go back and see what he actually said to be sure.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> Peter survived a nuclear explosion already. No go. Where is your evidence that the body decomposes exactly?
> 
> I'm not trying to be anything. I'm suggesting that people should perhaps actually believe the writers when they more or less directly state something. Considering all of the obvious hints they have given us that claire is something beyond anyone else in the series, the fact that none of the people who can "regenerate" have died, and so forth, all this talk of how to kill claire and assuming she can die is patently absurd.


Writers can and sometimes do mislead the viewer for their own neferious purposes.  Certainly, Claire & Sylar are very hard to kill, but not impossible (IMO). Adam thinks that a shotgun blast to the head would be fatal, though obviously that hasn't been proven.

Also, I'd hate to think that all the time I've been thinking of ways to kill Claire was a waste of time.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> Peter survived a nuclear explosion already. No go. Where is your evidence that the body decomposes exactly?
> 
> I'm not trying to be anything. I'm suggesting that people should perhaps actually believe the writers when they more or less directly state something. Considering all of the obvious hints they have given us that claire is something beyond anyone else in the series, the fact that none of the people who can "regenerate" have died, and so forth, all this talk of how to kill claire and assuming she can die is patently absurd.





jradford said:


> I agree with Tasunder. We can all come up with every gory way possible to kill/dismember/disintegrate Claire and say "That'll kill her for sure! YEAH!" it won't change the fact that Sylar, an actual character in the show, specifically stated "You CAN'T die." IMO, it seems blatantly obvious that we, the viewer, are supposed to believe him.


Adam himself has already stated if you lose your head, you're dead. The writers more or less stated this, right? I'll agree, until we officially see one of these four die, the debate will remain entirely open, but where as you feel there is sufficient evidence that they can't die, I feel the exact opposite. I have seen nothing to convince me they can't. None of these people have been put in a circumstance where they have been tested to the limits I described. Tough they may be, but once again not indestructible.
Show somebody get there head blown off and it grows back and I'll say you told me so.



EvilMidniteBombr said:


> This almost happened when Nuke Guy slow burned in season 1 but Claire regenerated from that very quickly. Granted it wasn't a full blown explosion but I thought it was worth mentioning.
> 
> Maybe Sylar didn't mean it literally. Maybe he has some sort of attachment to her that he has developed. I'd have to go back and see what he actually said to be sure.


When Ted went berserk the house was still standing and intact. In my opinion, no, that would not have been sufficeint to kill Claire, since her body too was still intact, thereby allowing her time to regenarate.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Shaunnick said:


> Adam himself has already stated if you lose your head, you're dead.


When?



> When Ted went berserk the house was still standing and intact. In my opinion, no, that would not have been sufficeint to kill Claire, since her body too was still intact, thereby allowing her time to regenarate.


Peter survived a nuke. I think the case is closed on the nuke theory.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

Claire lost a toe. It grew back. The removed toe did not grow into another cheerleader. I contend that if her head were removed from her body, that would be the end of Claire.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Sirius Black said:


> Claire lost a toe. It grew back. The removed toe did not grow into another cheerleader. I contend that if her head were removed from her body, that would be the end of Claire.


The first part seems to disprove the last part. If she lost her head, why wouldn't she grow a new body?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Turtleboy said:


> No, he DOESN'T eat the brains.


And he's not unreasonable, so neither does he eat the eyes.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> When?


Last season, when Victoria Pratt was aiming at Adam's head with a BF shotgun.



> Peter survived a nuke. I think the case is closed on the nuke theory.


True, but it's not clear how big a nuke it was. It probably didn't actually take his head off, just cooked it a bit.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> When?


Last season, in the third to last episode, when Peter got shot by the woman that had made the virus, she went to shoot Adam in the head. Peter saved him at the last second, and, paraphrasing here, Adam said thanks mate, there is no coming back from that one.



TAsunder said:


> Peter survived a nuke. I think the case is closed on the nuke theory.


Peter did not survive a nuclear blast, he was the source of it, just like Ted didn't survive radiation poisoning he was the source of it. Peter blowing up was the result of the ability he picked up from Ted. Ted never needed Claire's ability to survive. Likewise, Nathan too survived that blast, as he was only a few hundred yards away when Peter blew. If he could survive it, then certainly Peter would. Still not convinced.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

allan said:


> True, but it's not clear how big a nuke it was. It probably didn't actually take his head off, just cooked it a bit.


Uhhhhhhh... exactly how "small" can nukes get?


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

busyba said:


> Uhhhhhhh... exactly how "small" can nukes get?


Small enough that it didn't decapitate Peter?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Shaunnick said:


> Show somebody get there head blown off and it grows back and I'll say you told me so.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

TAsunder said:


> The first part seems to disprove the last part. If she lost her head, why wouldn't she grow a new body?


I'm not sure how it works. The power seems to come from her brain. I just can't imagine there is no possible way at all to permanently kill Claire or any of the other characters. Not that I want to see that happen. Nor do I want to see her brains eaten, played with, poked, prodded, molested, studied, or in any other way harmed whether by Sylar or anyone else.

Unless somewhere there is like an Incorporeal Man or something like that but even then, every hero must have a weakness that would eventually kill them. Even Superman has a fatal weakness and he is about as indestructible a you can get.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Shaunnick said:


> Last season, in the third to last episode, when Peter got shot by the woman that had made the virus, she went to shoot Adam in the head. Peter saved him at the last second, and, paraphrasing here, Adam said thanks mate, there is no coming back from that one.


Would this be the same Adam that was deceiving Peter constantly? And how do you suppose Adam would know even if that were true? He wouldn't. It's a logical fallacy at best, but equally probably just a simple lie.



> Peter did not survive a nuclear blast, he was the source of it, just like Ted didn't survive radiation poisoning he was the source of it. Peter blowing up was the result of the ability he picked up from Ted. Ted never needed Claire's ability to survive. Likewise, Nathan too survived that blast, as he was only a few hundred yards away when Peter blew. If he could survive it, then certainly Peter would. Still not convinced.


So your theory is that peter would die in any nuclear explosion he didn't create? That makes sense. 

Sylar knows more about powers than anyone. He said he can't die and claire can't die. No one who has this power has died yet. Claire was "dead" for a long time with a stick in her head and still came back. Sounds to me like you are the one who is being a contrarian.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

busyba said:


>


I am saying you told me so. And well played, sir!


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Shaunnick said:


> I am saying you told me so. And well played, sir!


Thank you.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

TAsunder said:


> Would this be the same Adam that was deceiving Peter constantly? And how do you suppose Adam would know even if that were true? He wouldn't. It's a logical fallacy at best, but equally probably just a simple lie.
> 
> So your theory is that peter would die in any nuclear explosion he didn't create? That makes sense.
> 
> Sylar knows more about powers than anyone. He said he can't die and claire can't die. No one who has this power has died yet. Claire was dead for a long time with a stick in her head and still came back. Sounds to me like you are the one who is being a contrarian.


Ok, so your psychopath makes a statement and it must be true, my psychopath makes a statement counter to it and it's a lie? Why would Adam lie about something like that? There is no gain in adding that kind of information to the situation they were in. And the fact that none of these four have died yet is not defacto proof that they can't. It just means that the method of death for them has not been attempted yet. And yes, since a part of Ted's ability, which once again is the same that caused Peter to explode, was that he himself was not affected by what he put off, I do believe a nuclear blast not originating from Peter could destroy him.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> Would this be the same Adam that was deceiving Peter constantly? And how do you suppose Adam would know even if that were true? He wouldn't. It's a logical fallacy at best, but equally probably just a simple lie.
> 
> So your theory is that peter would die in any nuclear explosion he didn't create? That makes sense.
> 
> Sylar knows more about powers than anyone. He said he can't die and claire can't die. No one who has this power has died yet. Claire was "dead" for a long time with a stick in her head and still came back. Sounds to me like you are the one who is being a contrarian.


To answer, in no particular order:

1. Claire was "dead" for a few hours with a stick in her head. That doesn't mean she'd survive long-term like that.

2. I'm no x-purt on nuclear explosions, but I assume that they don't usually take people's heads off. My current theory is that as long as enough of Peter's head is intact, he will indeed survive nukes.

3. My guess is that Adam discovered, when working at The Company, that the power was in the brain, and came to the logical conclusion. Unless there was another regenerator to experiment on, it's unproven one way or the other.

4. I don't know about Shaunnick, but I'm a "contrarian" partly because I don't believe in total invulnerability, and partly because I fantasize about Claire's death everytime she whines.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Shaunnick said:


> Ok, so your psychopath makes a statement and it must be true, my psychopath makes a statement counter to it and it's a lie?


There are other people who have indicated Claire has special significance too. And Sylar's power is to understand powers. Adam's is not. Further, Adam would have no way of knowing that he would die from a bullet to the head given the fact that he's not dead yet.



> Why would Adam lie about something like that? There is no gain in adding that kind of information to the situation they were in. And the fact that none of these four have died yet is not defacto proof that they can't.


No, it's just supporting evidence.



> It just means that the method of death for them has not been attempted yet. And yes, since a part of Ted's ability, which once again is the same that caused Peter to explode, was that he himself was not affected by what he put off, I do believe a nuclear blast not originating from Peter could destroy him.


That makes no sense at all. Radiation is radiation. If Peter emanates it and doesn't get ill from it, he's most likely immune to it.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

allan said:


> 2. I'm no x-purt on nuclear explosions, but I assume that they don't usually take people's heads off.


I suppose that you're correct, but only in so far as nuclear explosions usually just vaporise people instantly, so the head and body don't really exist long enough to be considered to be two seperate objects for the purposes of saying that one's head was "taken off".


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

What about Linderman? What did DL do to kill him? Grab his brain and pull it out? I don't remember. Then we can debate whether he's really dead or not.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

busyba said:


> I suppose that you're correct, but only in so far as nuclear explosions usually just vaporise people instantly, so the head and body don't really exist long enough to be considered to be two seperate objects for the purposes of saying that one's head was "taken off".


Well, we know that the "Peter nuke" didn't vaporize Nathan, so it's reasonable to assume that Peter's head was more or less intact.

Maybe if Peter was in a nuke that vaporized him, that would finish him.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

Shaunnick said:


> Ok, so your psychopath makes a statement and it must be true, my psychopath makes a statement counter to it and it's a lie? Why would Adam lie about something like that? There is no gain in adding that kind of information to the situation they were in. And the fact that none of these four have died yet is not defacto proof that they can't. It just means that the method of death for them has not been attempted yet. And yes, since a part of Ted's ability, which once again is the same that caused Peter to explode, was that he himself was not affected by what he put off, I do believe a nuclear blast not originating from Peter could destroy him.


As pointed out, our psychopath studied Claire's brain in the episode, something he has proven to be quite gifted at. Your psychopath has never met Claire.

Thus, I don't think it's absurd to think our psychopath may have a bit of "insider" information on the topic at hand.

Edit to add: We are talking specifically about Claire's power of regeneration and possible immortality, not Adam's or Peter's or whoever else ends up having some form of regeneration.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

stellie93 said:


> What about Linderman? What did DL do to kill him? Grab his brain and pull it out? I don't remember. Then we can debate whether he's really dead or not.


I'm pretty sure Linderman has the power to heal others, not regenerate. That's how I remember it, at least.


----------



## hapdrastic (Mar 31, 2006)

stellie93 said:


> What about Linderman? What did DL do to kill him? Grab his brain and pull it out? I don't remember. Then we can debate whether he's really dead or not.


He intangibly put his head into Linderman's head, and then made it tangible again, decimating the brain.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

jradford said:


> Edit to add: We are talking specifically about Claire's power of regeneration and possible immortality, not Adam's or Peter's or whoever else ends up having some form of regeneration.


AFAICT, there's no difference between Claire's power and Adam's.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

allan said:


> AFAICT, there's no difference between Claire's power and Adam's.


I disagree. I think the whole point of the Claire storyline in the opening episodes was to establish her as "different" from the Claire we came to know in the 1st two episodes. For example, suddenly she can't feel pain. Something has changed and Sylar saw it. That's my take.


----------



## EMoMoney (Oct 30, 2001)

Is anybody else just bored to tears with Mohinder? I never liked his character from the beginning.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

jradford said:


> I disagree. I think the whole point of the Claire storyline in the opening episodes was to establish her as "different" from the Claire we came to know in the 1st two episodes. For example, suddenly she can't feel pain. Something has changed and Sylar saw it. That's my take.


I didn't think that at all. I simply assumed that when Sylar was poking around in there, he disconnected a nerve ending or something so that she no longer feels pain. I don't think it has anything to do with her or her power changing in some fundamental way.


----------



## Shaunnick (Jul 2, 2005)

I have no doubt that Claire's ability may be evolving. I would even go so far as to say that Adam has already passed that "stage" by how well he absorbed that lighting strike Peter shot at him when they met last season. Just because they're ability can evolve doesn't mean absolute immortality is assured. Adam can still be damaged, even after all this time. He would be a good point of reference for where Claire is heading. And there is no significant difference between what he does and what Claire does. Both regenerate, and seemingly in the same amount of time. I will give in on this though, Adam did survive being blown up by Hiro. But without seeing how much damage was done I still don't believe he is entirely indestructible. 

The point keeps being brought up about Sylar and his ability to understand the various powers. Sure, he can figure them out and utilize them for himself, but he still puts his own point of view as an added spin to his own innate ability to understand the other abilities. If he sees Claire's ability as a set piece that makes him near perfect, then he probably thinks there is a certain beauty to her power. I took his comment about not being able to kill her even if he wanted to, to mean that her power and she by extension were to be respected above all others, that like him, she and her power were the height of evolution. How many of his other victims could he have felt that about but not be able to tell them because his very method killed them. I don't know. I assumed it was obvious to everyone that they could die. Maybe I am the contrarian. Maybe we'll get lucky and the writers will see all this discussion and throw us a bone.


----------



## johnperkins21 (Aug 29, 2005)

Why is there an argument on whether or not you can kill Claire? Remove her heart and lungs, then drain all the blood out of her system. Her brain can't work if there's no blood or oxygen to support it. She'll have no means of regenerating herself and will be dead.

Although I'd just cut off her head and put it in an air-tight box barely larger than her head. Her body would have no room to regenerate even if it could.

Even if she can't "die," she's incredibly easy to "kill."


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

johnperkins21 said:


> Why is there an argument on whether or not you can kill Claire?


Because it was stated in the show on Monday that she couldn't be killed.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

hummingbird_206 said:


> ... I wish they had sent both off with Molly, taking Maya Mexitwin with them.


Nah, she's hot.



MickeS said:


> ...Plus don't get rid of Maya, she's hot. ...


Ah, crap...smeek...hadn't read through the entire thread


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

jradford said:


> Because it was stated in the show on Monday that she couldn't be killed.


And then people here kept talking about Sylar not killing her.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

jradford said:


> I enjoyed it. Yes, it was all over the place. Yes, there are some boring/annoying story lines, (Hiro, again,) but overall, I enjoyed the fast-paced action. It was entertaining, and that's all I'm looking for from Heroes. After the fun of season 1, it became all too apparent last season that this show is not the best written show on TV. There will be plenty of "Why didn't or why DID he do that? That makes no sense," moments, but these 2 episodes got it back to being a fun watch. (Hey, they even found a way to make Maya watchable. Very watchable.)...


My take exactly. I don't get the hate here....just sit back and enjoy the ride, people


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

EMoMoney said:


> Is anybody else just bored to tears with Mohinder? I never liked his character from the beginning.


Not me....I find him to be something of an enigma and complex...


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

This is way too many comments for a really so-so episode, especially given the drop in viewership (supposedly, according to Neilsen).


----------



## johnperkins21 (Aug 29, 2005)

jradford said:


> Because it was stated in the show on Monday that she couldn't be killed.


Yes, by Sylar. A known liar and villain.

I can think of multiple ways to kill Claire. I don't care what powers she has, as long as she's human, she can be killed. And as we've seen before, if her brain is incapacitated, her ability to regenerate is hindered. Destroy her brain, and she's toast, regardless of what Sylar says about her.


----------



## hummingbird_206 (Aug 23, 2007)

EMoMoney said:


> Is anybody else just bored to tears with Mohinder? I never liked his character from the beginning.


Yes, I am very sick of him. He started out being a scientist. He did some dumb stuff with Nikki, but still, always trying to learn as an objective scientist. Injecting himself with the stuff from Maya was totally out of character. No way would a scientist use himself as a test subject. I like the actor, now he's HOT, but the character is annoying...vote him off the island!



Bierboy said:


> Nah, she's hot.
> 
> Ah, crap...smeek...hadn't read through the entire thread


Yeah, I get that she's hot, but just like Mohinder, she's annoying! If they'd just showed Mohinder and Maya without giving them any dialogue, then that would work for me.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

wprager said:


> This is way too many comments for a really so-so episode, especially given the drop in viewership (supposedly, according to Neilsen).


This forum tends to skew geeky.


----------



## jradford (Dec 28, 2004)

johnperkins21 said:


> Yes, by Sylar. A known liar and villain.
> 
> I can think of multiple ways to kill Claire. I don't care what powers she has, as long as she's human, she can be killed. And as we've seen before, if her brain is incapacitated, her ability to regenerate is hindered. Destroy her brain, and she's toast, regardless of what Sylar says about her.


You are speaking factually about a fictional character. You have no idea how Claire's powers work. No one knows. That was the fun of the 1st season, finding out about the powers along with the person.

"...As long as she's human"? What do you mean? As long as she's 'human' like you understand 'human' to be? In this show, we're dealing with flying humans, invisible humans, and humans that shoot fire from their hands. The writers can pretty much take the biology of their heroes and do anything they want. In the episode, Claire specifically stated, "It's what made me feel HUMAN," when talking about how she can no longer feel pain. Does this not seem like a giant clue that maybe we've taken a left turn in regards to the Claire we know?

I have no problem if you guys turn out to be right. The whole "can she die" seems pretty open-ended and perfect for speculation, but using "Well, I KNOW this would kill her", when you absolutely DON'T and CAN'T know it, is not a great argument.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I liked it. Still doesn't have the magic of season 1, but I think that feeling is lost forever. I had no incling that Mohinder wanted his own powers. I thought his end game is to find out how it was done and then stop it. Power corrupts I guess. I think to make this show better they need to stick with one basic plotline and connect them fairly quickly like they did the first year. The problem with last year is it was all over the place, and it took until the end to connect things. Hiro still cracks me up, but it still seems he needs a laxitive every time he time travels. BTW, I really hated the "pre-game" for Heros. Too much Hollywood hype.


----------



## jking (Mar 23, 2005)

I've seen more evidence point to the fact that they can't be killed than that they can be killed. At this point I have to go with the assumption that they can't be killed, but the bottom line is, if Hayden or any of the others decide at some point that they want to go off and do movies full time, I bet at that point they will be killable. 



jradford said:


> I'm pretty sure Linderman has the power to heal others, not regenerate. That's how I remember it, at least.


Probably not the case, but it could be that Linderman's power to heal other living things is an evolved state of being able to regenerate. We've seen that Claire and Adam's blood can heal others, and Parkman is just now learning that his power extends beyond simple mind reading, so it's entirely possible that Linderman could originally only heal himself and has learned over the years to also heal others.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jking said:


> Probably not the case, but it could be that Linderman's power to heal other living things is an evolved state of being able to regenerate. We've seen that Claire and Adam's blood can heal others, and Parkman is just now learning that his power extends beyond simple mind reading, so it's entirely possible that Linderman could originally only heal himself and has learned over the years to also heal others.


But if he had regenerative powers, logically he wouldn't be an old man.

Of course, logic doesn't always apply to these abilities (cough)...


----------



## barbeedoll (Sep 26, 2005)

Now I'll have to look at the shape of the crack. That would make sense if it was the familiar symbol.

Barbeedoll


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

barbeedoll said:


> Now I'll have to look at the shape of the crack.


I had a bunch of tabs open, so I didn't know what thread I was in when I read that.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

barbeedoll said:


> Now I'll have to look at the shape of the crack...





busyba said:


> I had a bunch of tabs open, so I didn't know what thread I was in when I read that.


omigosh....me too. If I'd had a swig of pop in my mouth at the time, it would have streamed out my nose


----------



## jwjody (Dec 7, 2002)

So did they completely ignore S2? What about the girl that Peter took into the future then accidentally left there?

That has always bugged me.

J


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

On the subject of Clair losing the ability to feel pain, I got the impression that Sylar's "probing" was the cause.

The discussion of whether Clair can be killed or not is amusing. 

Here's my take: 
Sylar believes that clair can't be killed therefore thinks that he himself can't be killed, but just like any other villian who thinks their "scheme" can't be foiled, they are often proven wrong.

What I think we as viewers are supposed to believe is that the heroes CAN be killed, as evidenced in mama Petrelli's dream.


----------



## Fassade (Apr 8, 2004)

busyba said:


> And he's not unreasonable, so neither does he eat the eyes.


Now I have to clean Diet Coke off my keyboard. Superb reference, sir.


----------



## atrac (Feb 27, 2002)

Someone in the Heroes sound department uses an iPhone with the "pay as you go" plan, because the sound effect of the Yamagato logo on the video will of Hiro's father is the same sound you hear when you finish a call or text on the iPhone on that plan.

Yes, completely useless info, I know.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

unicorngoddess said:


> I bet if you took her brain out and burned it, that would do the trick.


That would be a very tiny fire!



jradford said:


> I agree with Tasunder. We can all come up with every gory way possible to kill/dismember/disintegrate Claire and say "That'll kill her for sure! YEAH!" it won't change the fact that Sylar, an actual character in the show, specifically stated "You CAN'T die." IMO, it seems blatantly obvious that we, the viewer, are supposed to believe him.


Because Spock can't lie!

ANNNNND since one Englishman came back to the show, will The Doctor return also???


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

5thcrewman said:


> Because Spock can't lie!


But he can be wrong...


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But he can be wrong...


Or exaggerate.


----------



## unicorngoddess (Nov 20, 2005)

atrac said:


> Someone in the Heroes sound department uses an iPhone with the "pay as you go" plan, because the sound effect of the Yamagato logo on the video will of Hiro's father is the same sound you hear when you finish a call or text on the iPhone on that plan.
> 
> Yes, completely useless info, I know.


It's not specific to the iPhone though.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

I've mentioned this to my wife many times, but don't think I've said it in any of the Heroes threads (I may have, I don't know)...

Mohinder's monologues opening and closing the episodes have ALWAYS reminded me of some of the ones Andreas Katsulas gave on Babylon 5 as G'Kar. So what happens? In this episode, Mohinder reads "The Second Coming" in its entirety, part of which was quoted by G'Kar in a B5 episode.

I can't be the only one noticing this.  Very, very cool.

Greg


----------



## lordargent (Nov 12, 2002)

jradford said:


> Also, I was pleasantly surprised to see Marlo from The Wire return to the small screen.


Maybe Omar will show up, though the ability to fall off of buildings and limp away isn't that great.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

atrac said:


> Claire is so concerned now (drama queen) that she doesn't feel any pain. It seemed to happen after Sylar took her power, so why wouldn't she consider that his probing of her brain had something to do with it?


Speaking of feeling no pain, why did it take so long for Claire to heal away the glass cut? Sylar's stab wound healed almost immediately after he figured out how to mimic her power.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

hummingbird_206 said:


> Injecting himself with the stuff from Maya was totally out of character. No way would a scientist use himself as a test subject.


There are some interesting historical stories to contradict the last part, but generally, I agree with you: those stories are exceptions. We have to assume Mohinder has other motives beyond just science here.

Can't believe no one else asked this question, though: Why was Mohinder's bright idea for when and where to do that test was "all alone on a dock in the bad part of New York City"?



Shaunnick said:


> Or Hiro misread the situation and he was the villian!


More likely, given Ando's rather exaggerated wink, the whole thing was a setup or a trap for someone (the speeder, most likely) which Hiro misinterpreted.



EvilMidniteBombr said:


> Believe it or not, I'm walking on air!
> I was hoping that he had the ability to fly.


They should have found some reason for him to encounter Nathan, or for Hiro to call him "Flying Man!".



trainman said:


> Yes. The world also needs more copy editors.


Well, you have to admit, the detectives were discrete. You could clearly see where one ends and the other begins. Do they charge extra for that?



TAsunder said:


> What evidence does anyone have that there is any way to actually "kill" her in a way that prevents her from ever existing in the future when parts are reassembled?


I wonder what would happen if someone shot her while she was standing next to the Haitian.



jwjody said:


> What about the girl that Peter took into the future then accidentally left there?


Normally I would assume she's out of the story because they don't want to get the actress back, so we are expected (annoyingly enough) to just forget her. But that kind of reasoning keeps misleading us. I was sure that Parkman's wife and D.L. and Nathan's wife were written out in S2 so they wouldn't have to get the actors, and then they came back. This year, it feels like Molly's written out in a hurry to avoid the actress, but I'm not making any bets. We've already seen Adam and Maury briefly, and even Hiro's dad came back to the studio once. Not to mention Linderman.

I guess I'm the only person in the world who hopes we haven't seen the last of Monica (St. Joan).  Though I admit if we do I hope it's so that she gets something interesting to do; the whole New Orleans storyline seemed like something that wanted to go somewhere but never quite got to, but I had and still have hope.


----------

