Believe it or not, I actually WANT to like Heroes‏

I actually thought that I was going to make it through the day without sending out an email about Heroes. (Cuz I actually kinda liked last night's episode.) But then I started reading some reaction articles to last night's ep, and I couldn't help myself. While I think that last night's episode was certainly the best of the season - not surprisingly both Peter and Mohinder were nowhere to be seen and the episode focused on the most intriguing cast member (No First Name Bennet) - the reaction that I have been reading online was that it was somehow transcendental TV. I still don't get it. I feel like I am missing something. I have been trying so hard to love this show (I struggle to even like it some weeks), and I just can't. And I really don't know why it bothers me so much, but it really does. It probably has to do with NBC's marketing, which I have always hated for pretty much every NBC show ever. It also probably has to do with the fact that I feel like the butt of a hysterical joke that I don't get. Everyone else is rolling on the floor laughing and I'm just sitting there confused. Every time I think about the show, my first reaction is to shake my head. I was hoping that emailing all of this to you guys would be cathartic, but it's not. And you probably are just shaking your head at me. Anyway, I've always been a fan of Mr. Bennet, so it was nice to see him front and center and get some clues about who he really is. I loved seeing Claude in his flashbacks, because Claude is also one of my favorite characters. And seeing Sulu again (which could have been an unexpected twist, except George Takei's name was in the opening credits) was definitely interesting. And one of the Heroes (Claire) actually being heroic is a nice change of pace. And Parkman being interesting was also a nice change of pace (especially since I've thought all season that the show was wasting Greg Grunberg's talents). But why can no one who works at that damn paper company have a name? It would be one thing if we were supposed to think that Eric Roberts is Linderman, but then the promos show us that it's not him, but apparently Santa Claus who runs everything. (Speaking of the promos, I hope that ZombieSimone is just a hallucination or something, because I'm already set to complain if they somehow bring her back.) And why if Bennet is a good guy, did he allow Ted to live? What possible good could he do? He wants to die and he's obviously unstable (in more ways than one). And while I neglected to mention the cheesy "Murder" line that Matt pointed out last week (that one actually made me bury my head in my hands), I shall not neglect the cheesiest line of this week which went something like: "You didn't grow inside your mother, you grew inside our hearts." What nonsense that whole scene was.

It's not really disappointing, cuz I didn't expect that much

Which of the following was the most distracting in last night's Lost?
a. Bai Ling's hair
b. Bai Ling's boobs
c. Bai Ling's acting

(It's a rhetorical question)

Now that it what we call a filler episode. Stupid ABC promos promising BIG answers.

Let me tell you how shocked I am behind the meaning(s) of Jack's tattoos. Wow, that was deep!

I really don't have a problem with the show doing filler episodes, but if they are going to do it, use it as character development for a character we don't know everything about already. And do it with good actors. Matthew Fox is fine enough as an actor, but Bai Ling – yikes!

I was pleased with Sawyer attitude toward Kate, I actually wish he would have gone a bit further, maybe smack her around for being such a pain in the ass. This is why romance and triangles could doom the show: too much focus on that can really become a dead weight (if it isn't already). But as to Jess' contention that she really loves Jack: maybe she does, maybe she doesn't, but if I were her, regardless of my romantic feelings for the person, I would want to go back and save them because they are my friend. She would be the same way if Sawyer was still on the island. She really would.

The scene with the stewardess and the children would have been so much better if it wasn't ruined in the promos. (And what do they watch? Jack? The video in room 23?) And the sheriff lady (an actress who I have seen in a couple of other things and usually like) played it too creepy, I think, like she knew she was a weirdo. Too deadpan and sardonic for my tastes.

My favorite part of the episode was the scene between Benry and Jack. Interesting that Ethan was a surgeon (I had assumed he was some kind of doctor, but because of Claire, I thought he was a gynecologist), but if that's true, why would they have sent someone so valuable to the Losties camp? That seems a little silly to me. The reason I liked the Benry scene so much was because he didn't come across as creepy, but weak, yet still in control. Michael Emerson is fantastic at exuding power, regardless of the other emotions he is trying to convey. Even without the ability to walk on his own and the possibility of his death/paralysis he still conveys such power and strength that they burliest dude on the beach holds an umbrella over his body. A character who by all means should be weaker than before comes off as 10 times stronger.

It wasn't a bad episode, but after two weeks of thought provoking, intense Lost, it was very dull and obvious.

If Sylar ate Mohinder's brain, do you think he'd become an idiot?‏

Because I am bored at work and I'm still annoyed about last night's Heroes, I though I'd share my annoyance with you. (By the way, if these emails that I have been sending are unwelcome, please let me know - I don't want to annoy.) So, I just really wish that Heroes was as cool and smart as it thinks it is. I get that it's a comic book masquerading as a TV show, I get that. But not all comic books are full of clichés and bad dialogue. A lot of them are, sure, but it's easier to get away with that in comic form than it is on a TV show. And taking poor acting out of the equation - how frickin stupid is Mohinder? If I didn't hate him already…good lord. How many brain eaten bodies do you think it will take before he realizes he is with Sylar? He's supposed to be a brilliant scientist! Speaking of poor acting though, with pointless Simone (possibly) no longer among the living - a twist that was obvious miles away - that's one bad actor down, only a few more to go. However, I didn't think that the gun Isaac was using was intended to kill, so I'm guessing Stupid Simone will stick around to swoon sadly some more. (And how stupidly melodramatic was the close-up on that key?) However, there were some things that I liked: - The end of the Hiro-Ando saga. While I like Ando, I wasn't enjoying the Hiro stuff the past few weeks and he used to be my favorite. He needs to find his mojo on his own.- While I cannot stand Peter as a character and Milo Ventimiglia fluctuates from ok to terrible as an actor, Peter definitely has the best superpower and I'm glad he's finally beginning to be able to control it. It is interesting how similar Sylar and Peter are though. (At least in their abilities; to me it's like good Rogue vs. bad Rogue.)- It's always fun to see Stan Lee show up, but how much is too much? I've grown a little tired of him. (Though I think he might be a robot or a hologram.)- I was very impressed by Hayden Pannetierre this week (as I usually am). She comes across as very real and not just a flat comic book character. Back to nitpicking: - Was it just me or was that comment by Sylar to Mohinder about Karma and Indian people bordering on an offensive stereotype?- They really have to choose a name for Claire's father. It is so awkward and irritating that they go out of their way to avoid using his first name. (Did you see last week or the week before when they showed his driver's license and it just said "Bennet"?) It was cute at first that no one knew his name, but now they're playing games with it and it's stupid. Unless his first name is Linderman, there is no reason for it.

Oh 24, You Got Me Again!‏

Tonight's episode was easily the most satisfying of this year's, with the two standout moments being (obviously) the unexpected ending and the attack by flashlight, which actually caused me to spill my glass of water. The episode itself was not quite as painfully predictable as nearly every other episode this season has been and it had a nice pacing and balance between all of the plots and characters. I could still do without all of the CTU shit, especially Milo, who like Sister-in-law Bauer, is one of the more wooden actors to appear every week on 24. I was hoping he would die this week. But anyway, it felt a little like the 24 of old this week and I was actually pleased after watching the episode, not annoyed as I have been in weeks past. I just hope that this is what they were leading the season to, and it just gets better from here.

That was one mind-boggling episode, Brotha!

For a second I thought they were pulling a Sixth Sense on us last night and Charlie was actually dead. But the twist that Desmond was protecting Charlie, and not Claire, was pretty cool in itself.

Anyway, so that's two pretty meaningful episodes back-to-back. And two episodes that seem to point to something funny with time. And two episodes that give us different ways of looking at the show and the island.

So like Des, when we see other flashbacks, so you think they have the ability to change their actions, but they just are not aware of it? Maybe the flashbacks aren't really flashbacks and the people are experiencing important segments of their past, given a second (or one billionth, in Jack's case) chance to change a decision that they made that brought them to the island. Whenever any major character on the island dies (except for Libby, I suppose) we are treated to a flashback where they receive some amount of closure. What if originally, that never actually happened? We are seeing them change the course of their history and somewhere in the world, Ana Lucia and Mr. Eko have woken up from a really weird dream in which they died.

Maybe Dharma/Hanso was doing experiments with time travel in an attempt to change the course of the world's history. Maybe that 26 year old with a 70 year old's body actually is 70 years old (in real-world time). One of Hanso/Dharma's research projects were about life extension. In conjunction with that, perhaps they have found a way to partially increase one's life span. And maybe they cannot reproduce because for whatever reason, their reproductive organs age at a real-world rate. They have created this ‘utopia,' where they can live for exponentially longer than the rest of the world, but they cannot reproduce, so when they eventually die, their utopia will die too.

So that's my updated theory on Lost. Forgive me if it's confusing or incoherent, my head is a bit foggy today.

On to other things I liked about last night ep:

- The reminders in Desmond's "flashbacks" that he was on the island. From the microwave beeping, to the 815 reference, to the clock showing 1:08, to the music in the bar - I love those things.
- Charlie singing ‘Wonderwall' on the street. That just made me laugh.
- The idea that Charlie might die (though I seriously doubt that that will come to pass anytime soon). Last night reminded me why since his almost death in season one, I haven't really liked Charlie. For my money, the most unattractive trait in any person, real or fictional, is jealousy. I don't know what color eyes Charlie has, but they should be green. I do still like Dominic Monaghan though.
- No Jack, Kate or Sawyer. I have always really liked Sawyer, but it was nice to have an episode without all three of them.
- The creepy white haired lady. I thought she looked familiar, so I looked her up on IMDb, and guess what movie she's in? The Others! That's gotta be a coincidence, right?
- Henry Ian Cusick being able to act and not just brood or run around wide eyed.
- Sonya Walger (the actress who played Penny) was as welcome as she was last time I saw her. I would happily sit through a season of Juliet, Desmond and Benry flashbacks.
- And as much as I don't really care for Charlie as a character, I applaud him for actually questioning stuff. Not like Locke and his "The Island killed Mr. Eko. Bwahahahaha!" (Though if my theory is right and Eko found closure because of the island, then I guess Locke is right.)
- Funny bit on continuity I just came across in regard to the Sawyer porn (the quote is from the very beginning of season one): Jack: "What's in the bag?" Sawyer: "Booze, smokes, couple of Playboys. What's in yours?" Jack: "Medicine." Sawyer: "Well, that about sums it up, don't it?"

_______________

Ok, let me be a little clearer: I don't have a problem with postulating that
aliens exist (because whether they are green-skinned or not, they probably
do and it's very self-centered of humans to think that they don't). I just
don't want the explanation of why the island exists to be The Aliens Did It!
That's all.

And while I don't think time travel is possible, there are scientific
theories out there that postulate that it is, so if time travel would be
involved, so long as there is a thought-out explanation, I'm cool with that.
The way I think of it is straight out of Donnie Darko, and if you analyze
that movie, I think it is a pretty plausible argument for time travel in
that world. But I don't think that world has to be our world, and neither
does the world of Lost. It can be strikingly similar, but I also think it's
clearly different and I have never expected a "real world" explanation of
the series. I mean, if you are willing to believe that a plane that split in
half allowed for ANY survivors at all, let alone the number that are on the
island, I don't really think that alternate realities are that much of a
stretch, especially when based in some theory.

And while I don't aim to change your opinion of the episode as a whole, I
heartily disagree that it was just a filler ep. I think that it was intended
to be one of the more, if not most, important episodes of the season. (And I
have a read a number of interviews with the producers that hint to that.)
Yeah, next week we find out why Jack got his tattoos and maybe some other
stuff (though I don't know if I believe them when they promise 3 big answers
– Jack's tattoos aren't a BIG answer anyway), but what is that going to tell
us about the show as a whole? Unless reading his arm is the secret to
getting off the island, I don't think it's gonna help anyone that much.

And I am certainly curious as to why Locke was in his wheelchair, but is
that really going to tell us anything about the island? We'll be lucky if it
gives us some insight into Locke's character.

I would argue that while some fans of the show would say that the origin of
Jack's tattoos and Locke's reason for paralysis are more important than last
night's episode, in the end, last night will be much more important to
understanding the series as a whole.

I'll Take the Others Over the Tailies Any Day of the Week

I don't know if it's really fair to say this after she's only been in seven
episodes, but I do believe that Juliet is my favorite character on Lost. I
used to love Sayid and Jin and Sun (and I do still like them), but I never
liked them as much as I love Juliet. And Elizabeth Mitchell is easily the
best actress ever to appear on the show. Although, I have to say, last
night's episode even got me liking Kate again. Kick ass Kate is way better
than overly conflicted Kate.

But then I just flipped over last night's episode.

I saw the bus thing coming miles away, but I still jumped a little when it
happened. I didn't see the shooting coming, I thought she was gonna talk him
down. And that was due, I think, to how well the episode was put together.
One sequence especially comes to mind, where in flashbacks Juliet is walking
down a hall looking broken and (excuse the pun) lost, then we cut to
'present' time and you can see this look of steely resolve in her eyes.

A few other interesting things I noticed:

Have you seen and/or read 'A Clockwork Orange'? The scene with Carl in Room
23 was very reminiscent of both and adds credence to the behavioral
psychology/conditioning angle of the Others/Dharma/Hanso. Are we to assume
that all of the Others (at least the more free thinking ones) went through
such an ordeal? (And I have to watch that video again in slo-mo on the DVR)

I had read that there would be a clue embedded in an anagram somewhere on
the show. Mittelos (the foundation that strong-armed Juliet in to coming to
'Portland') is an anagram for 'lost time.' Perhaps that is a reference to
the 26 year old pregnant woman with a 70 year old's body? Does time move
differently on these islands?

Also, from 'The Lost Experience' online thing over the summer, Mittelos may
be a reference to Dr. Thomas Mittlewerk, who was/is a higher-up in the Hanso
Foundation. In that case, is Mittelos still the anagram or is something
else?

However, now that I'm writing this, if time is different, then has Juliet
actually been on the island since September 11th (or thereabout)? Or has she
been there longer and she thinks it's only 3 years? Obviously Jack has other
things on his mind, but I wonder if he will ever come to the conclusion that
Juliet arrived around September 11th? Though you would think that she either
doesn't know the significance of that date (in relation to the rest of the
world) or is just trying to fuck with Jack's mind (again).

Why do you suppose the Others cannot procreate? Especially when coming to
the (original) island seemed to have cured Sun and Jin's pregnancy issues. I
wonder if it has to do with Other Island. Meaning, would Locke collapse and
Sun miscarry and Rose relapse if they all traveled over to Other Island? I'm
assuming that the Others cannot procreate and that's why they wanted Juliet.
That's also why they wanted Claire's baby and all the other kids. I'm also
assuming that she hasn't been able to help and that's why she is still
around.

Do you think that Alex thinks that Benry is actually her (biological) Dad?

Speaking of Benry, Michael Emerson is freaking awesome, too. That he can be
menacing while lying face down on an operating table is quite something. And
do you think that the similarities between Benry and Juliet's ex-husband
were intentional? And if she does have a romantic past with Benry, why does
she keep falling for authoritarians who are not nearly as good looking as
she is? Is she just attracted to smirky weasely men with power?

I feel like episodes like this are the show at its best. Tight storytelling,
an illuminating backstory, fantastic acting. They don't have to throw big
answers at the audience for the show to be satisfying. They can just give
you nuggets; smaller pieces of the puzzle. And how the audience puts them
together is up to the audience. I hate handheld storytelling; I would rather
come to my own conclusions, write them down and email them to you guys. Then
you get to read over my nonsense and shake your head at my obsessiveness.

That is why I would love the producers to come up with an endpoint - they
already know where they are headed, and if they know when they have to get
there, I think there would be less of the filler episodes that tend to drag
the story along and frustrate fans. I know there's another Jack episode
coming up and while I am curious as to why he got his tattoos, if it is
another story about how he has to fix EVERYTHING, I may yell at my TV. At
some point in the next few episodes, I hope Jack (at he very least) asks Tom
what he was going to say about the sky turning purple.

Anyway, sorry for the diatribe; it's easier to make people listen to me if
they can't respond right away.

_____________________

As far as Rose and Bernard go, honestly, I don't really care. I mean,
they're nice peripheral characters, but I hardly think of them as important.
And L. Scott Caldwell and Sam Anderson are working actors, so I'm sure they
aren't going to drop whatever they are doing for a couple of lines and
background shots.

As to Michael and Walt, I'm curious as to what happened to them, but it
doesn't bother me that they haven't been mentioned - it's not like the
castaways have any means of going after them, so what's the point of
bringing them up? To upset Hurley? And Harold Perrineau just signed on for a
pilot for CBS, so if that gets picked up, it'll probably be a while before
he's actually available to come back.

If Ethan is eliciting that response from you every time he's on the screen,
then the producers are right to keep him around. That's the idea. Same idea
with Juliet - I don't necessarily like Juliet as a fictional human being; I
like her as a character because she is complex and interesting and always
has me guessing. There's definitely stuff about her that I don't like and
that's exactly why I love her and Elizabeth Mitchell portrayal of her.

And I really don't think it is speculation as to the date on the island.
Maybe the specific date, but it is clear to me that Juliet came over on or
around September 11, 2001. That doesn't necessarily have to mean anything,
but at this point I think that that is fact.

I just read this theory by someone more intelligent that I that basically
speculated that the electromagnetic pulse exerted by not pushing the hatch
button could theoretically make time kinda wonky and slow things down. I
thought that was interesting.

My problem with the love triangle is my same problem with the quadrangle on
The Office - if they focus on it too much, I think it distracts from the
greatness of the show. I mean, I understand the need for island hookups, but
Jack and Kate and Sawyer have bigger problems that who Kate's gonna choose.
It is easily the least compelling part of the show to me. Why does she even
have to choose? It's not like they're gonna build a hut and start a family
together. Or even go out to dinner every weekend.

Re: Vindication!

the two shows shouldn't be compared. And Heroes is definitely more of a twinkie, but I can't help but analyze even the simplest of confections. And as frustrating as Heroes is for me as a show, I do like to analyze and over think it. It just seems like to me (disregarding any online chatter at all) that Heroes wants to be compared to Lost, and that's where I think the mistake is. If you are going to go to the lengths of creating an overarching mythology and history, actually do it. Think this stuff out - it doesn't have to be perfect. Lost is by no means a perfect show and the writers and producers to contradict themselves and make mistakes, but in the realm of mythology and plot development (and writing, and acting…) Lost hits closer to the mark for me. From what I am seeing, Heroes wants to be a show that people discuss online and overanalyze and research, but if they want that, I think the show's writers really have to clean it up. I can deal with bad acting, but I think that thoughtless storytelling and gaping plot holes are just a huge problem for a show that is aiming to get obsessive fans. This is a problem that I think is plaguing 24 this year as well. I mean, won't any of the trained agents notice the empty syringe that Papa Bauer injected into Rocket Romano? And I know that 24 has always pushed the limits of credibility, but that seems a pretty big hole to me. Maybe it's just that, more than any other year, all I want to see is Jack and his stuff because everything else (Sister Palmer especially) is so insufferable. You are right though, if James Cromwell doesn't pop out a "That'll do..." at some point this season, I will be sorely disappointed.