Chapter 23 - "How To Stop An Exploding Man" - Discussion Thread 5/21/07

[IAmHe9]

Also, I didn't like that Isaac's NYC-exploding painting didn't come true. I loved the idea that whatever was painted of the future ALWAYS came to pass, just not always in the way we assumed it would be.

But this is the FIRST time the painting has not come true, and that disappoints me. I think it would've been MUCH more interesting had the producers actually allowed NYC to blow up in the end.

One of the biggest themes of the entire show (yes, there's themes: they don't just do things because it's bad ass) is that history isn't set in stone and that we can defy fate. The way they made their point is by showing fate (Isaac's paintings) winning the battle against free will repeatedly throughout the series, but having the will of men (Peter's, Hiro's, Nathan's) defeat determinism.

 

[Manic]

Case in point: Hiro suddenly appearing in Charley's birthday picture in the diner.

 

[Katsuro]

I've read several posts here where people dismiss the possibility of certain characters having certain powers because it's too close to another characters powers, but aren't there thousands, possibly millions of people with abilities out there? Didn't Claude speak about 'empaths' as if he had met them before?

It is curious that there seem to be powers shared amongst multiple people, yet we never met two with the same power. Claude mentioned "empaths", and Linderman made it seem like Isaac wasn't the only one who's paintings he was collecting.

 

[Avalanche]

I'm sure this would of made an excellent end to Nathan's story arc... oh wait you didn't include him...

There were ways to end Nathan's arc without being quite so contrived as the episode was. I appreciate shooting Peter with a tranquilisor might not have quite the same effect as a double sacrifice in the sky, but it was a much more common sense approach to take, particularly since they knew for a fact it worked, having done it already to Ted.

I'm all for the completion of storylines so long as they come about in a fashion which makes sense within the universe.

 

[Mysterio]

There were ways to end Nathan's arc without being quite so contrived as the episode was. I appreciate shooting Peter with a tranquilisor might not have quite the same effect as a double sacrifice in the sky, but it was a much more common sense approach to take, particularly since they knew for a fact it worked, having done it already to Ted.

I'm all for the completion of storylines so long as they come about in a fashion which makes sense within the universe.

since there had been a number of instances of foreshadowing (including Nathan telling Peter that he wasn't going to leave him in Peter's dream/vision), Nathan's arc wasn't contrived.

i still don't know why you'd think Ted, Bennet, and Parkman would be running around with tranquilizers (or anyone else for that matter). they weren't in NY to stop the bomb anyway; they were there to take out the tracking system. the show is rife with spiritual and biblical themes, and you'd rather the writers toss one of the biggest - sacrifice - aside?

 

[Mattchew]

nathan will be back so im pretty sure there's not any real sacrifice, ultimately.

 

[The Question]

It is curious that there seem to be powers shared amongst multiple people, yet we never met two with the same power. Claude mentioned "empaths", and Linderman made it seem like Isaac wasn't the only one who's paintings he was collecting.

That's probably because having powers is so rare to begin with that meeting two people with the same powers is very unlikely.

 

[Duende Verde]

Case in point: Hiro suddenly appearing in Charley's birthday picture in the diner.

But Hiro was always in Charley's birthday picture, how else could you explain that she got an english to japanese dictionary as a gift if Hiro wasn't already part of her past?

 

[Mattchew]

^ nice point

 

[Mysterio]

But Hiro was always in Charley's birthday picture, how else could you explain that she got an english to japanese dictionary as a gift if Hiro wasn't already part of her past?

not always

 

[Duende Verde]

not always

Charley was really nice to Hiro because she already knew him.

 

[Abaddon]

no, she was nice to him because she's nice person.

 

[Mattchew]

she's not nice... on 'ugly betty' she's a crazy b-word.

 

[Mysterio]

Charley was really nice to Hiro because she already knew him.

not really, but regardless...Hiro wasn't in the birthday photo when Ando and Hiro arrived at the diner.

 

[Duende Verde]

not really, but regardless...Hiro wasn't in the birthday photo when Ando and Hiro arrived at the diner.

Then the how did she get the book on her birthday?
That's a big continuity error.

 

[Abaddon]

Then the how did she get the book on her birthday?
That's a big continuity error.

how she got it originally we don't know, but in the new timeline Hiro gave it to her. However, that doesn't explain why Ando was doing in the diner since the woman Charlie worked with said Hiro was someone who'd disappeared from Charlie's life months ago. That's a bigger continuity error.

 

[Mysterio]

Then the how did she get the book on her birthday?
That's a big continuity error.

what does that have to do with the photo?

 

[Sebastos]

We still don't even who Claude was protecting.

Yeah, I wonder when we'll see Claude again?

 

[Manic]

The answer is clear:

Hiro's power creates paradoxes. Paradoxes without consequence.

 

[Abaddon]

he can move unilaterally through time

 

[Sebastos]

The answer is clear:

Hiro's power creates paradoxes. Paradoxes without consequence.

 

[Abaddon]

On Pete not flying away:

You've been wondering, we've been wondering, and you have to figure that Niki, Claire, HRG/Noah, Matt, et al, were wondering, too. At the conclusion of the Kirby Plaza skirmish on Heroes' first-season finale, why didn't Peter just fly his explosive self up, up and away, instead of making Nathan take one for the team, as well? Presented by TV Guide with that burning question, series creator Tim Kring pauses before saying, "You know, theoretically you're not supposed to be thinking about that."

When assured that viewers are, Kring confirms that — as many have theorized — radioactive Peter's other powers were "incapacitated" at that pivotal moment, and "somewhere in there is the explanation" for having Nathan grab his bro and do the "flying man!" thing. "But the real explanation is that we wanted Nathan to show up and [save the day]!"

"Yes, I will admit that there’s a very tiny window of logic there," Kring continues with a laugh. "But what can I say? It's requires the proverbial suspension of disbelief." Which, when airing opposite 24, a season finale is certainly allowed. — Matt Webb Mitovich, with additional reporting by Michael Logan
http://community.tvguide.com/blog-e...Tv-Guide-News/Heroes-Creator-Solves/800015727

 

[Katsuro]

I really dont get why Peter not flying away was ever an issue. His powers are going whack, he's obviously not in control. If he had control over his powers, he'd just not explode.

 

[Neptune]

Yeah, it wasn't that hard to figure out was it? I think it would have been more interesting if Nathan didn't really have a change of heart but just didn't want his brother to die. You know instead of him wanting save half of New York.

 

[Mattchew]

peopel would be *****ing way less about the 'not flying away' issue had there been a great epic fight scene between peter and sylar... that void got people complaining and then they just continued on to nitpick about the 'flying' thing when we all know they can explain that away next season with 2 lines of dialog.