heroes!
Why the hell weren't you watching Heroes tonight? Yes, you. How many times have I told you that it's the best damn show on TV? Many times. Now you are missing out. You are missing out big time. GO DOWNLOAD THE EPISODES FOR GOODNESS SAKE! Although at this point you might as well just wait the four more weeks until the season's over and
( Read more... )
Actually, she's not a shapeshifter. She distorts reality. When she first shows up to "save" Issac, she makes it so that Simone's body disappears from the bed.
Goddammit why do Peter and Claire have to be related?!!!
I'd like to second that. OMG.
There's obviously a connection between Hiro's dad and Lindermann, if Bennet took orders from Hiro's dad and, as we found out for sure from Parkman tonight, Lindermann runs the paper company.
I think Mama Petrelli is part of it, too. Basically, I'm going to suspect the parents of every adult character we see. Maybe even Nikki's dad?!
But as Hiro has shown us, with his sweet waitress's death, the future can't be changed.
Hiro hasn't shown us that yet.
One of the things about time travel is that by changing a single event in the past, you can actually muck up your own development. So, for example, if he killed Sylar some of those heroes might not have discovered their powers when they did and then wouldn't be there to help Hiro and . . .
You can't (or rather shouldn't) change the past. But you can change the future. You can always change the future. Just because it's shown as a possible future (or written in a prophecy) doesn't mean it has to happen-haven't you been watching Buffy? ;)
Also, in the world of comics, viewing the possible future is practically a cliche. But it is just a possible future.
Reply
Do you disagree that she should die?
I think Mama Petrelli is part of it, too. Basically, I'm going to suspect the parents of every adult character we see. Maybe even Nikki's dad?!
I like how they've been all gradual with the revelations. Like, very gradually, we figured out that Hero-ness could be hereditary, and the child of adult heroes is likely to be one too, like Micah. But it's only recently dawned on me that the *adult* heroes are somebody's children too, and that if they are heroes, then their parents could be. I was like, OMG!
RE time travel:
Okay, I think it's splitting hairs to say that something that occurred right now is in the present and then it's the past and it can't be changed if I time travel backwards, yet if I time travel forwards and see and inhabit a possible future, I can go back to my own present and change that. If I am the time traveler, then what I am experiencing is always the present, no matter where I *should* be in time. I'm not talking about paintings of the future, or prophecies--they are mere shadows of what could be, not what must be, to paraphrase Ebenezer--but Hiro is actually *in the future* right now, experiencing it. Yet he's going to come back and try to change that, and I don't see that as any different than going back and trying to save the waitress or save Isaac. I realize I'm not well versed in the comics world here, but that's just what makes sense to me.
Reply
I think it's the Plaid Skirt of Evil that bothers me most about her. I kind of hate her the same way I hated Lilah. I just wish she had more depth. (Lilah did get that, but there was a time when she was waaaaay too one-note.)
If I am the time traveler, then what I am experiencing is always the present, no matter where I *should* be in time.
Yes, it should be, but that's not the way most people think. It's this whole, "I have to get back to my time" mentality.
but Hiro is actually *in the future* right now, experiencing it.
But it's still just a possibility of the future.
It has to do with the Multiple Universe Theory, if you really want to know. Every possible decision splits off into a new universe, thus creating a different possible future. Time traveling to the future is more like glimpsing what will happen if events continue on their current path. If Hiro went back to the "present" (to his natural timeline), then he could attempt to change events, but unless he knows what event will change things, then that future he saw will come to pass . . . probably come to pass.
Yet he's going to come back and try to change that, and I don't see that as any different than going back and trying to save the waitress or save Isaac.
Well, a more recent event like Charlie or Isaac is less dangerous to change because there are fewer permutations to affect. But, like, killing Sylar at birth would do all sorts of things to screwing up his timeline including preventing Papa Surresh from meeting Sylar and basing a lot of his research on Slyar's genetic make up. But if Hiro were to do something more subtle, like, remove Isaac from his apartment before Sylar arrived, then he could probably save Isaac. Of course Sylar's kind of committeed, so it's likely he would just kill him later.
And Charlie was dying from a tumor anyway. That's kind of like the girl from "Help" in Buffy. Buffy kept trying to save her, but she was going to die anyway from a completely different reason.
It's possible that I watch too much sci-fi.
Reply
I'm totally stretching here. I *liked* Charlie.
Who wears little plaid skirts these days anyway??
Knowing what he had painted, why didn't Isaac hop a plane to Bermuda? Although that's more a characterization choice and less of a knowing-the-future choice.
I am still all mixed up over this time travel stuff. I feel like, in the mythology that the show has established--removed from the realm of comic books, just based on what the show itself has established, because the show has a much wider audience than comic books do and can't assume that everyone will be familiar with comic book universe time travel theory--based on what's been established in the show, it would not be possible to change something that's in the future. What Isaac paints can't be changed, what Hiro sees when he time travels can't be changed, so how are they going to change the future that Hiro's seeing in 5 years? Something big is going to have to happen to make that happen. And I just don't want that to be one of those "oh, we changed time so none of the past six months ever happened" lame plot twists. I want the plot twist to be cool. That's all I'm saying.
Reply
Ultimately, I think Isaac was too scared of doing much of anything.
feel like, in the mythology that the show has established--removed from the realm of comic books, just based on what the show itself has established, because the show has a much wider audience than comic books do and can't assume that everyone will be familiar with comic book universe time travel theory--based on what's been established in the show, it would not be possible to change something that's in the future.
The Multiverse Theory isn't restricted to comic books, it's actual theoretical physics, which is why it's so often used in comics/sci-fi to explain time travel. Hell, Back to the Future uses the Multiverse Theory.
And I just don't want that to be one of those "oh, we changed time so none of the past six months ever happened" lame plot twists. I want the plot twist to be cool.
I don't think it's going to be stupid. And I don't think it has to be big. I do think it will be something like: Getting Peter out of New York, or Killing Sprague. Actually, maybe they do destroy the city but save the people. Just because there's massive destruction 5 years in the future, doesn't mean that there will be massive a kill-count.
Also I stand by the Multiverse Theory. Nothing in the show canon has yet contradicted it. We really haven't been shown that things can't change, just that they haven't changed.
Plus, Linderman pointed out that the others working with him started using their powers for personal gain and that's a no-no, apparently. Perhaps that's why Hiro couldn't save Charlie (in the cosic scheme, I mean, maybe there's "rules" beyond in a TPB way), because saving Charlie would have been for personal gain because he liked her, not because it was his mission.
*shrug*
Theories. *hand waves* It's all just theories.
Reply
I don't want Sprague to die. His character is starting to get less crazy and more interesting.
I kind of think that saving someone's life isn't really for personal gain, unless it's your own life. But if you prevent someone else's death, no matter why you're doing it, whether you're a complete altruist or just in love or they owe you money or whatever, you're still saving the life of another human being. So I don't think the self-interest theory works here.
Reply
I don't want Sprague to die either, but I could see something like that as being a catalyst to preventing the explosion.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment