I know why season two didnt live up to the first....

Sawyer

Definitely Not 40
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
109,373
Reaction score
19,747
Points
203
No Malcolm McDowell.
Simple as that.
 
Season two failed because they tried to tell a larger, grander story that didn't need to be told.

Season two failed because the writing was mediocre and too much was occuring during every episode, therefore taking away from the development of one character for three episodes at a time.

Season three may not fail because they all realize what a mistake they made with the previous season.
 
Season two failed because they tried to tell a larger, grander story that didn't need to be told.

Season two failed because the writing was mediocre and too much was occuring during every episode, therefore taking away from the development of one character for three episodes at a time.

Season three may not fail because they all realize what a mistake they made with the previous season.

So true. Although i wouldn't say that season 2 failed but it was clear that is wasn't as good as season 1.
 
Season two failed because they tried to tell a larger, grander story that didn't need to be told.

Season two failed because the writing was mediocre and too much was occuring during every episode, therefore taking away from the development of one character for three episodes at a time.

AAAANNNNDDDD no Malcolm McDowell.
 
Season 2 "failed" because you guys are picky b*st*rds. :yay:
 
Season 2 "failed" because you guys are picky b*st*rds. :yay:

No one's saying it failed. At least I'm not. I'm just saying it didnt live up to the sucess of the first, which is true. The ratings dropped significantly. And the reason for that is that there was no Malcolm freaking McDowell!!!

I actually kinda liked season two. It had Kristen Bell. :)
 
It also didn't live up to the first cause Kring tried things that he wasn't good at and the show suffered for it.
 
season 2 failed because of the lack of character interaction. Hiro and Peter two of people's favourites were isolated with secondary cast in plots that we didn't care about
 
season 2 failed because of the lack of character interaction. Hiro and Peter two of people's favourites were isolated with secondary cast in plots that we didn't care about

that's pretty much the answer right there. It's like watching star wars, without Han Solo or Luke Skywalker. No one really wants to see a C3P0 show.

and it's precisely what they did in season 2, and totally wrong. You can't deliver star wars, and expect the fan base to be happy with 'Droids' as a followup.
 
No Malcolm McDowell.
Simple as that.

Linderman died in the finale of Season 1. He wasn't going to come back for Season 2. I could see McDowell coming back as Linderman's twin brother or a close relative to avenge Linderman's death, but.......that would been a horrible storyline than anything that happened in Season 2.

Plus, I think they tried to make Adam/Kensei to be similar to Linderman in being some villainous mastermind, but he didn't seemed to match or be a greater nemesis to the heroes. I wonder if that had anything to do with the writer's strike or if there's bigger plans for Adam in Season 3.
 
you have no good taste then. Sylar and Peter had like 50 powers and they were fighting like normal people. Lame. And Hiro "killing" Sylar in the way he did? ******ed.

on the other hand, second season finale was quite good.
 
Season two failed because there wasn't enough of Mr Muggles, imo.
 
you have no good taste then. Sylar and Peter had like 50 powers and they were fighting like normal people. Lame. And Hiro "killing" Sylar in the way he did? ******ed.

on the other hand, second season finale was quite good.

Well, I agree with you on that. The fight scene was far too short and not big enough. But, overall I thought it was a good finale.
 
I wouldn't say it failed, but it certainly wasn't as good as the first.

I wasn't a big fan of Peter's amnesia saga.
 
That's the problem with Peter. They have to do stuff like that to prevent him from being an overpowerd god. In season 1 he couldn't handle his abilities, in season 2 he didn't know he had those abilities.

I actually enjoyed Hiro's arc :o I just wished they made Adam more of a threath. Also he should have been more arrogant and more angry at the world. This is a guy who has lived for 300 years, he has seen everything and all kinds of abilities.
 
Season 2 sucked horridly for me because it became character-driven instead of plot-driven. They thought since it's the characters that we care about we don't need a vehicle to get them around in, and that was brainless.

Focusing on making a gripping plot would have fixed all of the problems in Season 2.

And on top of that there was no Malcolm McDowell... not even a Young Linderman. Foolishness.
 
I agree with most of points you guys brought up, but I think Season 2 also failed because it introduced new characters like the twins, who hijacked most of the season with their trip from Mexico to NY, which could have been resolved in a couple of episodes. On top of that, neither of the twins are interesting, and they took away screentime that could've been used for other character development. I hope Kring will learn his lessons and make Season 3 an improvement over Season 2.
 
The Twins wouldn't have been a problem if the season had been Plot Centered, the Twins would have been forced into roles that served the plot instead of being able to hijack anything.

Because S2 was more character centered, new ill defined characters were allowed to take precedence over the plot. If the plot comes first, nothing can hijack it.

It all goes back to plot-centered. It's not mandatory for every show, but for an ensemble cast leading up to a major event (virus/explosion/whatever) Your choices are to go plot-centric or suck.

On other concerns... if the plot had been held up as a priority, then Adam, the villain, would have had to been more of a threat in order to make the plot work. As a character-centric season, 2 focused on certain characters at the cost of a plot-crucial character, Adam, and it obviously hurt the season.

Even the Malcolm Macdowell complaint. If Heroes had stuck with the plot-centricness, they could have retained the golden-child favor they had the first season and gotten someone truly awesome as, say, Maury Parkman.

For Peter's horrid storyline, that was born out of a need to keep Peter front and center. If the plot had been first, Peter would have been inserted in a well crafted plot where he best fit, making for an enjoyable storyline.

As for Season 1... if your complaint is a lack of special effects in the Finale... well... it doesn't sound like much of a failure... it sounds like 99% perfect.

Also, if you think it was the worst season final ever, then you need to go watch Smallville and compare. Then you need to watch the season finale to Season 2, where Peter has even more powers and MORE control and refuses to just walk through the wall and spends ten minutes ripping a big metal door off of its hinges, wasting time and energy, adding more holes to a character-serving ill conceived plot. If someone who likes the S1 finale has bad taste, then someone who likes the S2 finale has a bad memory.

As for character interaction... being isolated in plots no one cares about is only a problem if no one cares about the plots. Make a good story, and people will be interested. And I honestly think giving them their own plots that way was a way of trying to focus on the characters individually, instead of the plot and the relationships that energize it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"