Heroes Forums

NBC (ended 2010)

Where Did Heroes Fail?

  • Avatar of MalcolmCox

    MalcolmCox

    [1]Jun 9, 2010
    • member since: 07/25/09
    • level: 2
    • rank: Sweat Hog
    • posts: 12

    Where did the series ultimately fail?

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of MalcolmCox

    MalcolmCox

    [2]Jun 9, 2010
    • member since: 07/25/09
    • level: 2
    • rank: Sweat Hog
    • posts: 12

    Where did the series fail and what could have been done with the cast/characters.writing/plotlines/direction/etc. to have prevented the show's cancellation? My thoughts? Reboot the series from the beginning of the second season and let Nathan die. Why? Because Nathan's sacrifice was meaningless, the start of the Heroes's dowfall. Complete nonsense.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of CharmedOneP391

    CharmedOneP391

    [3]Jun 9, 2010
    • member since: 06/10/05
    • level: 19
    • rank: Fall Guy
    • posts: 1,104

    Honestly, the downfall of the series to me began when they resurrected HRG with Claire's blood. It just spelled cancellation. Erased total risk factor of death. damn writers strike

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of fnlheroes

    fnlheroes

    [4]Jun 9, 2010
    • member since: 04/05/07
    • level: 6
    • rank: Small Wonder
    • posts: 146

    For me it was the last scene of season 1 where we saw Hiro was going back to Feudal Japan. That's when I realized this show would stop making sense.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of m-o-o-n

    m-o-o-n

    [5]Jun 10, 2010
    • member since: 04/27/09
    • level: 2
    • rank: Sweat Hog
    • posts: 5

    Somewhere in the middle ofseason 3. It seemed to me that they tried opening too many windows, too many options that they ended up "shooting themselves in the foot", so to speak. They did try to fix it by the end of season 3 but it didn't quite come to fruition. Season 4 looked very promising but ended to early. The big finish I was waiting fornever came.



    Please give this show a proper ending. Make a movie like Joss Whedon did for "Firefly"

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of a_noob_is_rokz

    a_noob_is_rokz

    [6]Jun 11, 2010
    • member since: 04/27/08
    • level: 9
    • rank: Door Number 2
    • posts: 605
    I think pretty much everyone will agree that mid-Volume 2 was when things went downhill. But for me the point of no return was the beginning of Volume 3. That was the point at which the writers decided to disregard the characters' lives outside of their powers and it really took away from the show. While Volume 3 had a plethora of other problems (plot holes galore, poor characterization, choice that can best be described as retarded, everything related to Peter, the overemphasis of Sylar, etc.) that problem was the biggest for me.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of AndaisDarkfey

    AndaisDarkfey

    [7]Jun 16, 2010
    • member since: 12/18/08
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 13
    Heroes failed after the first season. It was a big failure to let Sylar return.

    Another well done villian might had been the better decision.

    Maybe it they should'nt return after season one. The story was done.

    A new group of heroes somewhere else in the world with no relation to the old one could have been another good idea.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of CrazyBarry

    CrazyBarry

    [8]Jun 17, 2010
    • member since: 04/22/09
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 462
    AndaisDarkfey wrote:
    Heroes failed after the first season. It was a big failure to let Sylar return.

    Another well done villian might had been the better decision.

    Maybe it they should'nt return after season one. The story was done.

    A new group of heroes somewhere else in the world with no relation to the old one could have been another good idea.


    Agreed.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Janieiscool1

    Janieiscool1

    [9]Jun 18, 2010
    • member since: 06/01/07
    • level: 3
    • rank: Soup Nazi
    • posts: 24
    Initially, they were actually going to change the whole cast for season 2, but when they realized how popular the original cast was, they decided not to.

    I think it's good that the kept (most of) the original cast. If they changed it, the show might've still gone downhill anyway, and then everyone would've been like "If they kept the characters from the first season, it would've been fine".

    For me, the show went downhill as of the season 3 premiere. It was a terrible episode, and I do see why they made the episode like that, due to the criticism they got from season 2, but The Second Coming was a lot worse than any episode of season 2. They were trying too hard to give the viewers adrenaline, whilst in reality, episodes like Cautionary Tales were much better on the adrenaline front, even though there was less going on in the episodes.

    I think the show improved after volume 3, which was all terrible (apart from Our Father, which was better than most season 1 episodes in my opinion). However, volumes 4 and 5 still weren't good enough, even though they were better.

    If they'd carried on at season 2's standard, the show would've been fine, I think.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of PiperPrueLover4

    PiperPrueLover4

    [10]Jun 22, 2010
    • member since: 05/20/06
    • level: 18
    • rank: Land Shark
    • posts: 1,996
    I've maintained the whole time that the series would have remained fresher and more exciting if they'd completely changed the cast every season. That way they wouldn't be struggling for new things for the characters to do when they are so obviously out of steam.

    Ali Larter could have stayed on for at least three seasons though, playing a different triplet each time.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of JohnnyDrama8

    JohnnyDrama8

    [11]Jun 24, 2010
    • member since: 07/17/07
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 475

    I think Heroes had to many characters they should have trimed the story fat a little by getting rid of Mohinder and I also think people never liked Ali Larter on the show they should have tried one more triplet out.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of The_Void_682

    The_Void_682

    [12]Jun 28, 2010
    • member since: 06/28/10
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 9

    I think probably S3, though S2 did set the groundwork, it could've been rescued after S2 if it were not for S3.

    S2 was criticised mainly for the slow pace, lack of significant events or plots, and annoying characters. Volume 3 sought to remedy this - but did it in the worst way possible.

    Instead of the slow-moving, simplistic plot of S2, we went completely to the other extreme and had a rushed, nonsensical, Random Events Plot. Plotlines were introduced, but never given time to develop, adequate explanation or a decent pay-off. Sylar working with HRG could've powered a whole seasons - hell a whole show - but it was over within two episodes. Same with Peter getting Sylar's power (only to lose it two episodes later, a huge anticlimax). Linderman appearing as "God" to Nathan was also quickly dropped and not satisfyingly resolved. The thing with the 5 villains also never came to pass, and the Level 5 escapees plot just sort of fizzled out. Predicted events like Ando killing Hiro, Tokyo exploding, the world splitting in two - were in the end proven to be entirely irrelevant, never came to pass and never explained. Some events that came to pass were just inexplicable - Mohinder turning into evil Spiderman for some reason, Sylar and Elle's "romance" (the dude killed her father!), the Eclipse taking away their powers. The whole of "Villains" just went and threw continuity out the window. Overall, the plotting of Volume Three was shoddy at best, inexplicable at worst.


    Then there was the characters. The writers noticed that a lot of the characters introduced in S2 were annoying and unpopular. So they killed some of them off. Makes sense, right? Except, they killed the wrong ones. Bob was a good villain, and Elle and Adam were perhaps the best characters Heroes ever created - the first gets Sylar-ed off-screen after one scene, the second is absent for a while, then dates a serial killer for no reason, and gets her head sawed open. The last gets awful characterisation for one episode and then is killed. Meanwhile, Maya is left to roam around for half the season and we are denied the opportunity to see West die painfully at the hands of Sylar. Biggest letdown ever.


    Volume Four was a slight improvement, but still consisted of various unrelated, unexplained and unresolved plotlines - Angela's random sister, Matt inexplicably seeing Usutu and painting the future, the White House blowing up, Sylar's fanboy. It also retread many storylines that had already been done, and the whole thing felt very stale and turgid. Then we have the irredemably moronic decision to mindwipe Sylar at the end of the season, a cherry of stupidity atop the cake of nonsense.


    Volume Five I think was an improvement. The return of the characters to their everyday lives was much needed, and although the plot was slow-paced, at least it made sense. It was still retreading old ground though, and in the end it was all too little too late.


    S2 had some problems, but the show could've easily been rescued if S3 hadn't been so extreme in its attempts to avoid the failures of S3. It derailed several characters and overloaded the plot. Therefore, I blame Volume Three for the decline and eventual cancellation of Heroes.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Avinator5712

    Avinator5712

    [13]Jun 30, 2010
    • member since: 11/24/09
    • level: 2
    • rank: Sweat Hog
    • posts: 11
    i started watching the show half way through. i think it was the end of season 2, the one with with Pinehearst, right? i liked it up into the part were nathan died. i knew the story would need to be changed a lot to bring him back. but the last straw was the love story between claire and her roommate. jacked up!!! but the series was overallpretty good in my opinion.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of TVfan28

    TVfan28

    [14]Jul 1, 2010
    • member since: 08/24/09
    • level: 4
    • rank: Thighmaster
    • posts: 14
    What I always thought was that season 2 was undermined because of the writers strike and 3rd season tried to compensate what Season 2 couldn't deliver...but then as they lost track of plot lines, arcs and some character exploration. The show started getting back in season 4 when the budget was cut, but by then the viewers loss and critics had already given the show the axe....before NBC finally cut it.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of 16ds

    16ds

    [15]Jul 3, 2010
    • member since: 11/21/06
    • level: 7
    • rank: Talk Show Host
    • posts: 38
    I really liked heroes, but after a while the seasons was starting not to make sense anymore.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Ether101

    Ether101

    [16]Jul 22, 2010
    • member since: 09/26/06
    • level: 1
    • rank: Weatherman
    • posts: 27

    PiperPrueLover4 wrote:
    I've maintained the whole time that the series would have remained fresher and more exciting if they'd completely changed the cast every season. That way they wouldn't be struggling for new things for the characters to do when they are so obviously out of steam. Ali Larter could have stayed on for at least three seasons though, playing a different triplet each time.


    But series that actually switch the cast out every season suffer from the same thing.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Kevnay777

    Kevnay777

    [17]Jul 25, 2010
    • member since: 05/05/10
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 310

    Simply because the writers didn't know how to use the characters. Let me break it down


    Peter- Constantly powered him down by having his memory erased, taking his powers away, and giving him a new limited power. Peter had potential to be the best hero out of all of them, but the writers screwed that up. Also making him go through serious emotional changes during the volume 5 wasn't a good move too. I only say that because by that time his character should have been well developed.


    Nathan- Too caught up in politics. Nathan was one of my favorite characters but his character was made pretty useless because he was constantly caught up in politics that provide almost no point to the plot. Except in "Fugitives" when he actually did something. But the writers screwed up with that by making the other characters forgive him too quickly. And just when his character was going to change, they killed him off.


    Hiro- This one is a no brainer. His character was cool, but the writers made him useless. Constantly sending him off on mini missions that have a zero percent contribution to the story. Constantly ignoring his usefulness of his powers. Powering him down only to have him come back in the finale of every season. Just when he comes back you think he is going to do something important, but he never does. Then for the next volume they send him away on another mini mission. It is such a repetitive process.


    Claire- One word, annoying. We can all agree that Claire was the most annoying character. Simply because every season she is always whining and complaining about something. She causes her own problems and drags others with her. She doesn't solve her own caused problems and instead relies on others to do it for her. She is a brat who constantly fails to understand what Noah has done for her even though in every season and volume Noah explains it. The writers tried to develop her character but they failed. After five volumes she is still the same Claire.


    Sylar- I like Sylar especially during the earlier volumes but they pretty much did the same thing to him as Peter. The writers powered him down too much. They kept getting rid of Sylar and his powers, only to have him come back. Three times they did this. First the virus, next Angela manipulated him to work for her and Arthur. Finally he lost his memories and his powers once again. The writers wasted Sylar's character countless amount of times. I was disappointed that the show had to end though because Sylar looked like he was going somewhere in the end of volume 5


    Nikki/Tracey/Whoever the hell she would be- I liked her as Nikki because it was simple. But then when they had the guts to kill her off, they brought her back just to keep the actress. I do not like it when they do that unless their is a proper story to it like the Sylar to Nathan one actually made sense and was pretty well done.



    That is pretty much about it. The only two main characters I believed they used right were Matt and Noah.

    Edited on 07/25/2010 9:50pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of CrazyBarry

    CrazyBarry

    [18]Jul 26, 2010
    • member since: 04/22/09
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 462
    Personally, i think as slow and dull as season 2 was, it wasn't the point where the show couldn't be saved. I think the episode 'Villains' in Volume 3 created such as vast plot hole that that canon of the entire show was utterly obliterated into nonsense.

    The plot hole was that HRG was monitering Sylar before he killed Chandra Suresh in this episode, so this episode was set before episode 1.

    Yet HRG couldn't recognise Sylar, and said to Isaac in episode 8 'You have to paint a picture of Sylar, no-one knows what he looks like'

    Heroes: Storyline Fail!
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Kevnay777

    Kevnay777

    [19]Jul 26, 2010
    • member since: 05/05/10
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 310

    CrazyBarry wrote:
    Personally, i think as slow and dull as season 2 was, it wasn't the point where the show couldn't be saved. I think the episode 'Villains' in Volume 3 created such as vast plot hole that that canon of the entire show was utterly obliterated into nonsense. The plot hole was that HRG was monitering Sylar before he killed Chandra Suresh in this episode, so this episode was set before episode 1. Yet HRG couldn't recognise Sylar, and said to Isaac in episode 8 'You have to paint a picture of Sylar, no-one knows what he looks like' Heroes: Storyline Fail!



    No I think Noah only knew him as Gabriel which is his real name. Not Sylar

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of CrazyBarry

    CrazyBarry

    [20]Jul 28, 2010
    • member since: 04/22/09
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 462
    Kevnay777 wrote:

    CrazyBarry wrote:
    Personally, i think as slow and dull as season 2 was, it wasn't the point where the show couldn't be saved. I think the episode 'Villains' in Volume 3 created such as vast plot hole that that canon of the entire show was utterly obliterated into nonsense. The plot hole was that HRG was monitering Sylar before he killed Chandra Suresh in this episode, so this episode was set before episode 1. Yet HRG couldn't recognise Sylar, and said to Isaac in episode 8 'You have to paint a picture of Sylar, no-one knows what he looks like' Heroes: Storyline Fail!



    No I think Noah only knew him as Gabriel which is his real name. Not Sylar



    Regardless, they were monitering him for his unique ability to understand things. They would have seen the same characteristics in Sylar.

    Plus: Eden went with Mohinder to Sylars apartment. She would have told Noah this. Noah must have known that was Gabriel Grays apartment.

    Agreed?
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.