Heroes Season 4 should start on either Sept 14th or 21st. Apparently NBC is looking into moving the show into the 8PM slot, but it is planning to keep it on Monday nights. ( for everyone who emailed me )
Heroes is looking to cast a new female “twenty something” character that is hearing impaired and perhaps a potential love interest for one of the male characters on the show. The character will be introduced in the third episode of the new volume. Character’s name is Emma.
Hiro’s storyline for Volume 5 Redemption will indeed deal with time travel and that we should not worry because it will be “worth it”.
Matt Parkman will get a new partner/”mentor”.
A good LA cop someone that Matt Parkman can lean on for advice. Experienced and capable. Open to all races and ethnicities…
Claire will get a roomate.
Female. College roommate, outsider, edgy, off beat but pretty. Complex think Ellen Page. Open to all elasticities and nationalities.
Heroes is on the hunt for a middle-aged Eddie Izzard type to play the Carnival Barker, a smooth operator with a wicked wit. This character will start small and grow. (Not grow as in grow-into-World’s-Tallest-Man grow, but grow nonetheless.)
Young Ando and Kimiko will be featured.
{ 60 comments… read them below or add one }
That’s amazing
ELLEN PAGE SHOULD DO IT! lol.
I like this
Just don’t let the roommate and the “mentor” both be evolved humans.
Sounds GREAT!:-)
I wonder if Matt was chosn to be a “painter”, did someone else like the african painter come to Isaac? Or was it his born ability and Isaac, like matt, had another ability? They can always go back and explain this in the future
Isaac used to talk to Uluru, right? I remember him having flashes of Uluru during the GN “Isaac’s First Time.” It’s possible, though unlikely, Isaac had a similar experience.
“Open to all elasticities”
This could be the GLBT character hinted a couple months ago. This would be the first time anyone would be looking forward for Claire’s storyline.
chicken..!
the african was one of my favo. Really cool guy
how about Peter? would he gets his power back?
I’ve been a bit disapointed with Peters character, I can think of so many ways they could have given peters powers back. Ando could have super charged him, baby on and off could have turned his ability to absorb powers and hold them back on, they could have had him touch sylar and absorb ALL his abilities since he’s the only hero with multiple abilities at this point. They chose to keep Peter underpowered, that disapoints me. The show needs an ultimate good guy to offset the Ultimate bad guy.
If they make Peter multipowered again it will be wise to give him a power that allows him to control the absorption, otherwise he is too powerful.
want to see young Ando and Kimiko.Maybe Kimiko will have a power,since her father and brother do/did.Also,it’s a long shot,but maybe Ando ALWAYS had a power,before he injected himself,he just never realised it!Kimiko should have a power that will gradually become the key to defeating the big main villain.And I want to see Hiro,Ando and Kimiko become like a superpowered hero team(I just think it will be cool).What do you think?
I agree with F.D.! I’ll bet ANYONE, ANYTHING, that the previous spoiler of the “gay character” is most likely the new roommate.
I mean, it figures! The writers have been trying to get a lesbian in Claire’s story arc since season two, with the evil cheerleader.
Heroes totally blows. It only appeals to fanboys.
eh, oh well.
the reason they have done it kran is becuase if peter got his EM back he would be like a god and then all the other characters would be pointless
I would have accepted them turning Sylar into Nathan far better if they’d tried Claire’s blood first on Nathan and (like loads of other characters) her powers have evolved and it doesn’t save people anymore. If then using the method they did as a final resort I would have accepted it better. I hope they explain their reasoning on the DVD commentary (can anyone please tell me if the DVD commentaries are the same as the ones on NBC.com?) as it was just sloppy otherwise. We know they don’t want to keep saving everyone with Claire’s blood but they need to explain why the characters can’t/won’t think of this as an option anymore (HRG having been saved that very way but then telling Matt that the mind altering/shape shifting was the only way to save Nathan was pretty lame).
I think its reasonable that Noah didn’t suggest Claire’s blood. Do you really think he’d want to use her like that? But then again, maybe claire’s blood isnt completely off the table…
I seriously don’t think Claire would view saving her biological father’s life (and bear in mind they were on relationship-mending terms when he was killed, it wasn’t as though she hated him anymore) as being ‘used’ (can she even feel pain anymore? If she can’t they how is that being ‘used’?!). And HRG isn’t that stupid. I think he’d be more concerned with the fact that when Claire finds out (and she WILL find out eventually) that her father could have been saved if only she’d been told she is going to be seriously POed (maybe become bad-ass future Claire) and Peter is hardly going to be thrilled either.
I’m not saying her blood SHOULD have worked and I’m not saying Claire should know that Sylar isn’t really her father but from a writers’ point of view it would make more sense for continuity and satisfaction of their audience (which they’re supposed to care about) for it to make sense. We know they don’t want to rely on Claire’s blood everytime someone dies cos it makes the fear factor of people dying seem stupid as we know they can always come back, but if they evolved her blood (as everyone else’s powers seems to be evolving) they could have kept the same story of Sylar posing as Nathan without Claire and Peter (or anyone but HRG, Matt and Angela) knowing but also kept the continuity. They could have told her and peter that Nathan was killed and that Claire’s blood could be used (honestly believing it to be true) but then when they tried it didn’t work so they got desperate and turned to Matt, but told Peter and Claire her blood was successful. The drama would still be there, the terrible decision they had to make would still exist and the potential for awful times ahead with Sylthan would still be a possibility, the difference is the audience would know they actually cared enough to have the story make sense. Whether HRG would view using Claire’s blood as ‘using her’ or not, surely Angela would rather have her son back than risk Sylar posing as him if she knew they was another option (and she DOES know). All three should know better, especially HRG cos Claire has actually saved his life when he was shot. It makes HRG, Matt and Angela seem incredibly stupid and cold for not even considering it. I’ve lost respect for the characters, and not because I think their actions were terrible or they’re bad people but because the writers’ have turned them into morons.
It also could have helped explain why people forgot about Niki and no-one tried to save her with blood (incidently did anyone else think she looked remarkably good in her coffin for someone who was blown up and burnt to death, as I recall she only had a couple of bruises? *lol* She should have looked like Claire in company man after Ted made the house explode, and there certainly shouldn’t have been an open casket).
If they want to modify powers and make people less powerful then fine, but make it make sense and if you want death to be final then explain WHY it is final (and the question of Claire’s blood being used will always pop up unless they rule her out which so far they have refused to). I think the writers’ on the show are pretty great, but this is a huge flaw in their work and they need to rectify it or the show will become a joke (and I’d HATE that to happen).
Firstly, Matt doesn’t know about Claire’s blood. He wasn’t involved with that plotline in Season 2. So he, at least, can be let off your hook.
Secondly, having to explain why they can’t use Claire’s blood everytime somebody dies would get repetitive very very quickly. It’s kind of hard for someone’s ability to evolve backwards, rather then forwards, so you can’t axe the blood that way. It was a terrible idea to even create it in the first place. The only way it could work is if it doesn’t work on the dead, and if we say Noah wasn’t dead, only very very near it. Long shot? Sure. But it’s a hell of a lot more consistent then what we’ve got at the moment, where apparantly you can stick a needle of blood into someone who doesn’t even have a heartbeat and magically expect it to bring them back to life.
As for why they did it the way they did, it has some internal logic to it. If they had used Claire’s blood on Nathan, Sylar would still be alive. Claire’s blood can regenerate eyes, surely it could heal a slit throat (this is why I don’t think your idea works, as then you’d need to explain why it didn’t work on Nathan when it has worked on the dead before).
Now, Sylar is practically invincible at the moment. We all know this. With the Hatian missing in action, there is no other way they could have neutralised Sylar in the time and situation they had. By turning Sylar into Nathan, Nathan is revived, and Sylar is (in theory) gone forever. No other circumstance could have done that. Plus, Angela had said that Matt would save Nathan, not Claire or her blood. She never goes against her dreams (and believes she can’t), so there was no way she’d have let Claire do that.
I do agree that this should be addressed (somehow, god knows how), eventually, especially if the writers want to move away from Volume 2/3 and back towards Season 1. It shouldn’t be simply forgotten about. However, I disagree with the idea that Season 3’s ending had no logic to it. It did, but it’s scuppered by the awful omnipotent blood they created way back when.
Fine, even if we leave out Matt not knowing about it all that still leaves Angela and HRG and for me personally the ‘HRG wasn’t properly dead’ does not wash with me at all.
What is wrong with evolving backwards? Peter’s powers have evolved backwards, as have Hiro’s. Is it inconcievable that that could have twisted Claire’s powers, that something could have occured that meant her blood wasn’t as potent? I don’t think so, they’ve written far more ridiculous things int he past.
I NEVER said they should have saved Nathan (I don’t mind the twist of Sylar posing as him as I think it could lead to some juicy stuff), I said they should have made a point about ruling out Claire’s blood before turning to Matt otherwise it makes the other characters (HRG and Angela) seem incredibly stupid and evil for not considering saving Nathan’s life (especially HRG as he’s been in exactly the same situation as Nathan, only Claire’s blood WAS used and he was brought back to life).
Whether they used Claire’s blood on Nathan or not Sylar will always be alive, he’s clearly still there under the pretence of Nathan, otherwise there’d be no drama and suspense (plus I NEVER said he shouldn’t have been turned into Nathan), so that arguement holds no water with me.
Angela sticking firm and fast to what she dreamt can still be true with them trying Claire first. As I keep saying I never wanted Claire’s blood to work, I just think they should have TRIED it and had it fail so Matt’s way made sense.
You’re not going to change my mind on this. I’m unsatisfied with their explaination for using Matt in this way and there was a way they could have written it to have had the same outcome but been consistant with previous plotlines and to have been believable. The way they’ve done it it’s as though a writer who’s never watched the show before wrote it. I think it’s sad and sloppy (and considering Tim Kring himself is credited as the writer for this episode I think it’s a great shame).
There is no logic to the ending, it was inconsistant and stupid (and I still went away loving the show!), but then season 2 ended a similar way (let’s kill Niki, knowing full well Claire’s blood can save anyone but not explaining why no-one’s thought of it).
I hope the new writers for the show do better next season.
“What is wrong with evolving backwards? Peter’s powers have evolved backwards, as have Hiro’s. Is it inconcievable that that could have twisted Claire’s powers, that something could have occured that meant her blood wasn’t as potent? I don’t think so, they’ve written far more ridiculous things int he past.”
No, they didn’t. They were taken away and then replaced. Abilties never evolve backwards on their own, only forwards. Unless you have some wacky plot device where somebody messes with Claire’s blood, rather then her ability, how could you weaken her and make it make sense? The ridiculous argument doesn’t work because your entire point was that the show needs NOT to be ridiculous, right?
“Whether they used Claire’s blood on Nathan or not Sylar will always be alive, he’s clearly still there under the pretence of Nathan, otherwise there’d be no drama and suspense (plus I NEVER said he shouldn’t have been turned into Nathan), so that arguement holds no water with me.”
You missed the “in theory” part of that post. I mean from Angela’s perspective, not our perspective, doing it that way means both Sylar is gone and Nathan is back. She honestly thought it would suppress Sylar forever- she’s shocked in the start of Volume 5 when he displays IA. Angela and HRG did the best they could, under the circumstances they were in, to both neutralise Sylar and save Nathan. It was the best option they had.
“Angela sticking firm and fast to what she dreamt can still be true with them trying Claire first.”
No, really, it can’t. Let’s say Angela tries out Claire’s blood. Nathan wakes up, perfectly fine (as he would have done). Angela’s gone completely against her dream, something we know beyond of a shadow of a doubt she will never, ever do. She wouldn’t risk it.
Also, why wouldn’t it have worked? Claire’s blood works on the dead, Noah has proven this. To intentionally make Claire’s blood fail to heal him (as you suggest) would require some kind of ad hoc explanation to explain why it can heal eyes, gunshot wounds, and brain damage but not a slit throat. Can you provide such a explanation based on the events of the show, without adding anything?
“You’re not going to change my mind on this. I’m unsatisfied with their explaination for using Matt in this way and there was a way they could have written it to have had the same outcome but been consistant with previous plotlines and to have been believable. ”
It’s not consistent with the past for Angela to directly attempt to change what she sees in her dreams, is it? That’s what you are proposing by even attempting to use Claire’s blood on Nathan. And I do not consider a one-off reason why Claire’s blood can’t heal somebody as any better then what we actually had.
While I understand the point of view of people furious about the far fetched finale’s outcome, I think a plot that would’ve made more sense (e.g.: Matt brainwashes Sylar into a nobody before he actually kills Nathan “You are Gabriel Gray, no more Sylar”) would also had been less intriguing. Hell, Matt could also had forced Sylar to shortcut his own abilities and/or reveal his new “sweet spot” to allow them to kill him for good. But then people would’ve bitched because Sylar is a quite important figure in the series.
That said, I really hope Claire eventually confront HRG and/or Angela after learning about Nathan’s demise. And for God’s sake don’t give us the “because Angela’s dream said so” line if that occurs. HRG seemed rather convinced that it was the ONLY way to “save” Nathan and protect specials. No “Oh wait… Claire could inject her blood into Nathan to bring him back to life!” made no sense whatsoever from a guy who got resurrected by his daughter’s blood.
I mean, besides tanking bullets and explosions, saving people from certain death with an injection is the only damn thing her unexciting power can do. They can’t simply “forget about it” just because it would make an uninteresting plot. I think we should eventually learn why this option was entirely ignored. Peter will eventually learn what Angela and Co. did. They’ll be pissed, and want answers.
It’s been a while since I have watched this season, so there may be some flaws in my logic, but I will try and throw a couple explanations out there that may give some insight into this issue. The first idea I have is, if you remember, when Sylar acquired the shapeshifter’s ability he was able to shift everything about his DNA, including the weakspot he inherited from Claire. I don’t remember exactly where they were but Nathan died in a very public place. So, being pressed for time, instead of trying to find the place where Sylar had moved that spot to in an attempt to kill him, they decided to do it Angela’s way, and use Matt to change his identity. Another idea could be that with Nathan dead and, according to Angela’s dream, Matt was supposed to “save” Nathan. I hate to go Sigmund Frued but there’s multiple ways that people can interpret dreams. Perhaps Angela viewed this dream as a way to stop Sylar AND keep her son, instead of just one or the other. So between the two they decided that for the greater good, because if i remember correctly that was a huge deal for “the company” so this was the way that she saw best to A. stop Sylar and B. “save” Nathan. Not perfect by any means but it’s a shot as to what the writer’s may have been thinking
Has anybody thought that the writers didn’t use the ‘Claire’s Blood’ option… on purpose? just imagine, WHEN Claire finds out, she WILL be mad at Noah and Angela (but especially Noah). Perfect opportunity for her to say “You KNOW my blood could have brought him back!”, or words to that effect. Noah will know that she is right, and that she will never forgive him… cue Dark Claire?
But this type of scene is only something that can happen next season. In other words… wait and see what happens! Everything in life doesn’t happen all at once – whether a series of events… or the events of a series!
(By the way, Mr Kring, I want my name in the credits for the plot ideas lol!)
Just thought of something…
In Angela’s defence at least:
1) She was probably distraught/ disturbed at what she had seen in her dream, so she either wasn’t thinking too clearly or she knew that it was the only way. Time is a big factor here. Remember first she was with Claire, then she had to find Matt. So she was kinda busy from one place to the next, all the while trying to make sense of whatever she did dream. I was trying to imply that maybe she simply didn’t think of such an obvious choice (Claire’s Blood), but it depends on what she dreamt: if she saw Nathan dead (which seems unlikely) she might have had cause to think of the Blood as an option, yet had to reject it coz of Matt’s significance. If she merely knew that Nate was ‘in trouble’ she’d have no reason to think that Claire would need to be around (in a protective grandmotherly way?)
2) Once Angela had seen Nathan dead in the chair, she was obviously distraught and overwhelmed with grief at the loss of her son. Not to mention in shock. All she could remember in her confused state was that Matt was supposed to save him. Two things can be deduced from this: Firstly, she was certain that MATT was supposed to save Nathan – because of her dream. Claire was the furthest thing from her mind (and as someone said above, Matt doesn’t know about Claire’s Blood). In that state, I wouldn’t have expected her to think rationally and say “Matt, you didn’t save him, let’s find Claire!”
Secondly, she is clearly confused also because it seemed that the events in her dream didn’t make sense… i.e. she is cradling her dead son when she had a vision that he would not be dead, as long as she helped those events to happen… find Matt, the one that she ’saw’ would save him. Not Claire. The fact that she seems confused and actually says “I don’t understand…” when she DOES follow her dream only for it to go wrong, implies that she is unlikely to NOT follow her dreams, coz there might be serious consequences. Which leads me neatly to my next point…
3) The Butterfly Effect. Angela’s little lecture to Future Peter about changing the past can also be applied as a warning about going against the way that things are meant to be, in a way. Precogs have the advantage of knowing what is about to happen, but it is a gift that must be used especially wisely. Some things can be avoided or altered but some things have to occur and can’t or shouldn’t be changed. When Nathan was found dead, Angela COULD have thought of the Blood, but what size Butterfly would eventually be caused by her not following her vision of the Future?
4) Time is always a factor. How long was Nathan dead for? I’m sure Claire’s Blood won’t regenerate a corpse that has been dead for more than a certain amount of time. Plus, they would have had to find her and get her back which would take more time. Plus, like I’ve said above, that’s not what was seen in Angela’s glimpse of the way forward. Her dream obviously didn’t show Matt saving Nathan from getting killed (since they didn’t arrive in time for that), but it did show Matt saving Nathan (albeit through Sylar).
Claire’s blood being used to resurrect in Season 2 was a major plotline that the writers regretted using, effectively meaning no one on the show had to die if given a little shot of the blood. The writers were therefore just staying clear of this horrible plot with Nathan in An Invisible Thread, as it would again be continuing the notion that everyone on this show was basically invincible.
meant to say ‘major MISTAKE in the plotline’
Just a theory,guys.What if Claire’s blood lost its power to heal when Sylar took her power,or maybe when Hiro changed facts by giving the Catalyst to himself?Not the best,I know,but what do you think?
Noah wasn’t dead after being shot. He was on life support and a veggie but blood still pumping and lungs still breathing. Claire’s blood doesn’t bring back the dead; just repairs damaged flesh and bone only if the blood can be pumped thru the body.
“Just a theory,guys.What if Claire’s blood lost its power to heal when Sylar took her power,or maybe when Hiro changed facts by giving the Catalyst to himself?Not the best,I know,but what do you think?”
I mess with your brain and suddenly your blood changes properties? I’d find that one hard to believe.
“Noah wasn’t dead after being shot. He was on life support and a veggie but blood still pumping and lungs still breathing. Claire’s blood doesn’t bring back the dead; just repairs damaged flesh and bone only if the blood can be pumped thru the body.”
If this is true, then it goes a long way towards making the blood less annoying. Nathan was obviously still alive when it healed his burns, and Maya could be argued not to be dead at the time as well.
Please can we stop talking about the Claire’s blood issue?!Yes,they should have put in at least a line of dialogue explaining why they couldn’t use it,but they used a better storyline,so now we can see Sythan’s split personality seeping through,which(No Doubt)will last throughout Series 4.I would like to see Sylar realising who he is,but staying in Nathan’s body.Then,he could pretend to be Nathan and slice open Angela’s and Peter’s heads.Then,he wil go on a mega rampage and his Dad is called in to kill him(Which I hope he fails to do):-)
i think they shold had used claire’s blood cause we all see that what her blood can do
and i dont why the writer hadnt used this option and i had a question where is the hatian?
The Haitian was last seen going after Sylar after Sylar killed Arthur.Maybe it will be revealed that Sylar killed him or maybe he was caught by Nathan’s men.Here’s hoping NOT.I like the Haitian.Bring back him,Monica,Claude and West.
Ooh,and Luke Campbell
Whatever the reason it made Angela and HRG seem incredibly thick and/or evil. If this will come into play later to get Claire POed and become ‘dark Claire’ and also make Peter made is one thing but for character development of HRG and Angela it makes no sense. At the very least they should have added a line as to why they wouldn’t even entertain the idea.
Angela’s dream said Matt would save Nathan, it did not say Claire wouldn’t try first (or at least she never said she’d dreamt absolutely everything leading up to Matt saving Nathan and Claire wasn’t involved) so yes actually Claire could have tried and failed in theory.
Angela was thinking very straight, she thought about sending both Peter and Claire away and coming up with her plan, which obviously she hadn’t prior to discovering Nathan. Whatever reason behind it the writers could have done better.
If the writers don’t want to use Claire’s blood again then they need to stop it working otherwise it makes them seem totally incompetant and like they’ve not watched season 2. If they are going to use it again they need to explain why certain people aren’t being saved by it.
There is no evidence to say HRG and Maya were alive when given Claire’s blood. Noah had been shot through the eye at close range, I’d say it’s more likely he was dead. If he wasn’t dead then that’s another point they need to make. How much easier would this whole situation have been if they’d made that clear? They didn’t though.
This whole thing has been idiotic from the get go. The series is fantasy sci-fi so writing some reason for Claire’s blood to stop working on others isn’t impossible it just requires imagination, something the writers must be lacking if they’ve decided they never want to use it again but want to deny it ever happened in season 2.
I’ve just accepted that soemtimes the writing is below par on this show, like Monica’s inane comment about Clark Kent wearing glasses (when she’d otherwsie seemed an intelligent person), Niki having an open casket after exploding in a fire ball (how many other people would have come away from that dead but with only a little scratch on the face?!) etc.
No-one’s arguements are even close to changing my mind, but I didn’t expect them to. I expected more from the writers, clearly I shouldn’t have done and should have just been happy that MOST of the time they do get it right.
Last point I forgot, if Angela saw Matt ’save’ Nathan, surely she saw something see how he did it. Would she not then have seen Sylar or at least had some idea of how Matt would do it. The question is exactly what she saw, did she see Nathan/Sylar having been saved and merely have been told it was Matt who was responsible (not knowing what happened to Nathan or how he was saved), or did she see Nathan dead and Matt transforming Sylar? Clearly whatever she saw she was missing vital information about either the events leading up to it or following it so how is it so inconceivable to people that she wouldn’t have entertained the idea of her life-saving granddaughter (how people think this could have skipped her mind merely because of grief is beyond me, of all the things to have stuck in her mind this would be it when her beloved son has just been killed) intervening and at least trying. To say she wouldn’t be thinking straight is one thing but to say HRG wouldn’t have thought of it instead (or along WITH her) is just daft.
Last point/idea if they wanted to alter Claire’s ability they could have used the eclipse in volume 3 as an excuse for her power changing (they could have made up any old rubbish to support it if they’d wanted) and blood not being potent.
My only hope is that she and Peter find out soon and confront both Angela and HRG and ask them what idiocy was behind their decision for doing something so stupid and risky (and I’m with F.D. on this that it merely being in Angela’s dream won’t cut it, she never said she dreamt absolutely everything leading up to and after the event).
hey geniuses quit arguing!
i have a solution to your idiotic problem
nathan was sliced across the throat n if i remember correctly Claire shouldn’t be able to come back from that one cuz Angela had a dream where Claire’s head was ripped from her body
so when your heart n brain r seperated i don’t think u would come back
I’m hoping they settle on a date soon so I can take the night off work.
Sezza: “Angela was thinking very straight, she thought about sending both Peter and Claire away and coming up with her plan, which obviously she hadn’t prior to discovering Nathan.”
I thought that was Noah, actually. He seemed to be far more in control of himself then Angela during that sequence- Angela is basically reduced to begging Matt to help.
“Last point I forgot, if Angela saw Matt ’save’ Nathan, surely she saw something see how he did it. Would she not then have seen Sylar or at least had some idea of how Matt would do it. The question is exactly what she saw, did she see Nathan/Sylar having been saved and merely have been told it was Matt who was responsible (not knowing what happened to Nathan or how he was saved), or did she see Nathan dead and Matt transforming Sylar? Clearly whatever she saw she was missing vital information about either the events leading up to it or following it so how is it so inconceivable to people that she wouldn’t have entertained the idea of her life-saving granddaughter ”
Since we didn’t see Angela’s dream, we don’t know what she saw. It seems reasonable to assume that she did not know Nathan would be killed. If she didn’t, then she couldn’t know how Matt would save Nathan, only that he would. Yes, she would have been missing key information. But, our argument is not that she didn’t think about using Claire’s blood- it’s that even if she did, she would not do it.
“Last point/idea if they wanted to alter Claire’s ability they could have used the eclipse in volume 3 as an excuse for her power changing (they could have made up any old rubbish to support it if they’d wanted) and blood not being potent.”
Indeed they could have, but they didn’t. Claire’s ability and blood are no different now then they were before the eclipse (the ability not to feel pain notwithstanding). Given, then, that they are no different, and since Claire’s blood works on the dead (as you yourself say), it would have revived Nathan had it been used on him.
The only way to avoid this would be to come up with a new explanation then and there, which would have felt unbelievably ad hoc (at least to me). Angela won’t go against her dreams, so she wouldn’t use the blood- and even if she were to go against her dream, the way this actually turned out was, in my opinion, better then using the blood as it theoretically would have destroyed Sylar AND brought Nathan back.
Everything happens for a reason.
Angela has precognitive dreams for a reason.
If she dreams that Matt saves Nathan – somehow – then why would she try another option and risk messing up everything (including the future to come)? She is aware of Butterfly Effects and such matters, so why would she go AGAINST her dreams?
Angela’s dreams serve her as either a warning (get out of the car NOW) or a guide (find Matt coz HE saves Nathan). I don’t think, with her son’s life in danger, that she would have wasted time using Claire AND risking the greater repercussions. For example… let’s say they did use Claire’s blood and it did revive Nathan. And let’s say that Sylar somehow ends up escaping again (we all know how resourceful he is). For a start, the President would have to be kept under CONSTANT surveillance, coz if Sylar gets to him without anyone knowing… Or what if he comes back and disintegrates Nathan (Claire’s blood can’t save him from that one, can it?!?) and takes his form anyway?
Angela might not be able to always interpret her dreams, but she has had decades of experience in trusting them. Why would she go against the grain now?
And that’s my final thought on the matter, thank you.
Ok so dont we remember how last season EVERYONE was SOOOO pissed off about the Claires Go-Go-Gadget Blood…? It was used for Noah, Mya, Nathan’s burns… and it had turned to a situation where anyone that died, had the possiblity of being “re born”. That sucked, everyone hated it, everyone was bitching because no one knew if someone was for real dead, or just awaiting a transfusion of the Wonder Blood..?!! SO now I’m hearing that everyone is pissed because they didnt use the blood. We have to look ahead at next season and look at all the possibilities that this gives the writers. This will possibly set up for Claire to go bad… this sets up for the 5YG future where Nathan/Sylar is president, and has everyone hating & hunting the specials. I am still waiting to see what happens to turn SYlar to the good guy with the son we saw in the future…and it’s STILL driving me crazy wondering who the BABY MAMA is..!????? When does S3 come out on DVD???
I agree with Mihajlo, we have enough characters with abilities at the moment. I really hope that the majority of these new characters *don’t* have abilities. I don’t think it matters if one or two of them did, but we need a good deal of “normal” characters to make the “special” characters just that much more “special”.
hmmm… this is looking intriguing…I wanna know what they mean by “worth it” for the time travel…
Peter’s storyline needs to pick up this next season. He doesn’t even need to get his all powerfull power back he just needs to become the Peter from season one who we all loved. I mean when he went to save Claire from Sylar durring Homecoming he pretty much didn’t know how to do anything. Back than though he would do anything, even sacrafice himself to save the world or others. He needs to continue to be the selfless hero. Even if Peter got all his powers back the show isn’t about powers and would go on even if one hero is stronger than another.
angela has said that her dreams are open for interpretation, we don’t KNOW what exactly she dreamed and whether or not her interpretation of nathan being ’saved’ my matt actually meant him doing what he done or some other thing, it, like many other things in heroes at the moment, remains ambiguous.
Also, the fact that we haven’t yet seen the sylar-nathan-peter scrap and now we get news of hiro’s storyline involving time travel, maybe we’ll see the scrap played out next season and we’ll find out that a past/current/future hiro or future peter interjected
@ lucabrazzisleepswiththefishes (can I just call you “luc” for short? lol!)
“Also, the fact that we haven’t yet seen the sylar-nathan-peter scrap and now we get news of hiro’s storyline involving time travel, maybe we’ll see the scrap played out next season and we’ll find out that a past/current/future hiro or future peter interjected”
Good point, and I like that idea! If we ever DO get to see what happened in that fight, that would be the perfect way to incorporate it (rather than a mere flashback). Having a time traveller present to witness the fight could bring up some interesting scenarios (like when Hiro and Claire went back to the Devaux rooftop).
To add to my last comment… I’m picturing a scene where Hiro – complete with full powers – suspects that Nathan is Sylar and jumps back in time to the fight, where he hides and witnesses everything, including the aftermath where Sylar slits Nathan’s throat. However, he has learnt about the consequences of changing the past, so he can’t intervene to save Nathan, but he would know the truth about what has happened.
I think this is the point people should be focusing on, instead of the why’s and sloppy writing regarding nathans death, the fans should be looking at this more closely as a story progressing. I’m not defending the writers (I think it’s just a lazy way of allowing zachary quinto to pursue a movie career, I don’t blame him, he deserves it, just how the writers handled it was absolute dog do-do), but, as other people are speculating about what we did see (did peter heal himself? Did he pull more than one power from sylar? There are also people adding to this with reference to a novelisation/comic, I don’t follow these), we should be trying to understand what we weren’t shown, the fight, the time (even though this is loose due to the nature of a show involving time travellers) between the close of volume 4 and the opening of volume 5. Time enough for nathan/sylar to have already found out his true identity???
I am an actor/writer myslef, also a fan of the medium of the screen, whether tv or cinema, and I wouldve loved to have seen the fight behind closed doors, but it makes sense to engage a dwindling audience to visit the new material next season and address the issue in a creative and suspensful way, like I suggested earlier. That’s how I would do it.
Hiro needs his powers back, as does peter. I want to see that tag team re-up to the way we saw them in the future ’shall we stop time?’ ‘no, I haven’t had a good fight in years’
As fans on a whole though, I think we are demanding a Hollywood action movie from a tv series.
@lucabrazzisleepswiththefishes
I completely agree with you. There are a lot of fans that expect a lot from this show, and much of what is expected is near impossible to uphold on a regular basis. There’s just no way the show can provide constant “epic” fight scenes to keep people satisfied, without having to decrease spending elsewhere.
I’m personally of the opinion that fights should happen about as often in seasons 1 and 2 – not very often, and usually without extensive use of powers (ie. just punching someone out) Otherwise, we end up with effects, that, sorry to say, look like crap. And less screentime for characters (special effects can be expensive, and actors don’t exactly work for free
)
As for the lack of final fight scene, I don’t mind not seeing it. Same with what happened to Nathan (okay, I do really mind, but it all depends on how the writers spin it in season 4.) And the “plot-hole” of Claire being able to heal Nathan may not be a “plot-hole” at all. For all we know, Angela or Noah may have an alterier motive for having Sylar become Nathan. The writers haven’t explored this, yet.
And if you look back, Angela does have a smirk on her face when she watches Sylar impersonating Nathan on the television in the diner
And she was willing to sacrifice Peter to blow up New York and “fix” the world. We never really know with this show or these two characters.
@ Peter P.
You’re right, the show isn’t about powers at all. I, too, REALLY want to see Peter from season 1 return. He needs that empathetic quality to him, otherwise he’s BORING. Let’s face it, people have complained that Peter’s too trusting, but when he’s become as cold as he is in season 3, he just isn’t interesting (I think, at least) anymore, and the audience loses that bit of innocence that kept season 1 so full of wonder.
However, his powers do define him, regardless. It’s an offshoot of his personality – he wants to be special, but finds he can only achieve this through his empathizing with other characters. Not to mention, it feels cheap, I think, because it was something he was *born* with. It was part of his inherit DNA, and to strip it away and *change* it, it feels like changing everything about the character (which in essence, is what they did) – which feels like an affront to the character himself.
One thing, I think many people mis-interpret Angela at times…she was going to let Peter blow up, but she clearly tells Nathan in the beginning of Season 2, if you listened to me Peter would still be alive so she figured Peter wouldn’t die just like she told Future Peter he was messing things up being there….Angela is very schemish, but she does love her children very much, to the point that she poisoned her own husband who planned to have Nathan killed…she has the mindset pretty much ALL of the founding members have! When I hear her, sounds exactly like Bob to me, or Noah or Linderman…they all have a similar ideology and the fact Arthur said “tell Angela I’ve won” still resonates in my mind as a silent feud between the two..almost like similar, but two separate agenda’s…also, the Graphic Novel seeing Claude really gives me a strong hope he will be a big part of next season. Also, I believe his relevance will comeback once again to teach Peter how to use his abilities…remember, Peter in SEason 1 thought his abilities are exactly what they are now, that he could only use them around another person with abilities…when he got in danger like Claude trying to hit him with the stick, TK came out…I believe he has the same ability, just the empathic part has changed and he gain them by touch. They also said there would be a new villian (not Tracy) so there’s someone else none of us have scene that they will introduce…(Please be young Samson!!!)