July 31, 200717 yr Author I did see the Lost series three finale, I did think it was really good, nice twist ending... I did enjoy the last series of "Lost", I just got a bit irritated by some of the stuff that seemed to have no clear answers and seemed just chucked in for no good reason other than it seemed a "bit odd" - "Joshua" the invisible guy and "The Magic Box" that somehow managed to teleport Locke's dad onto the island??? - come on Ash, that's just getting a bit silly and just ruining the otherwise good effect and build up of tension that was going on between the survivors and the others... I dunno, I loved it all to be honest :P (This isn't spoiler but some might not want to read this) The thing with Heroes, people say it's better because it poses questions and then answers them immediately, unlike Lost which keeps you guessing the whole time. About three quarters through the series of Heroes, it has nowhere left to go really and just completely runs out of steam. It was building to a big climax which actually turns out to be the biggest disapointment ever. Also, there's lots of plot holes and the story becomes wafer thin, like they're trying to save something for season 2, but the way it was building up, meant the answers should've come in season 1. So, when I read these reviews of Heroes saying "unlike Lost, it knows where it's going", it makes me mad, because they probably haven't watched the whole series because if they had, they'd have realised it's the other way round. Every season of Lost has a clear narrative arc, but the narrative in Heroes seems to hit a brick wall somewhere. Edited July 31, 200717 yr by Ashley
August 1, 200717 yr I dunno, I loved it all to be honest :P (This isn't spoiler but some might not want to read this) The thing with Heroes, people say it's better because it poses questions and then answers them immediately, unlike Lost which keeps you guessing the whole time. About three quarters through the series of Heroes, it has nowhere left to go really and just completely runs out of steam. It was building to a big climax which actually turns out to be the biggest disapointment ever. Also, there's lots of plot holes and the story becomes wafer thin, like they're trying to save something for season 2, but the way it was building up, meant the answers should've come in season 1. So, when I read these reviews of Heroes saying "unlike Lost, it knows where it's going", it makes me mad, because they probably haven't watched the whole series because if they had, they'd have realised it's the other way round. Every season of Lost has a clear narrative arc, but the narrative in Heroes seems to hit a brick wall somewhere. Hmm, well, I've watched the first eight episodes of "Heroes" so far, so I'll bear that in mind.. So far so very, very good though....
August 1, 200717 yr I dunno, I loved it all to be honest :P (This isn't spoiler but some might not want to read this) The thing with Heroes, people say it's better because it poses questions and then answers them immediately, unlike Lost which keeps you guessing the whole time. About three quarters through the series of Heroes, it has nowhere left to go really and just completely runs out of steam. It was building to a big climax which actually turns out to be the biggest disapointment ever. Also, there's lots of plot holes and the story becomes wafer thin, like they're trying to save something for season 2, but the way it was building up, meant the answers should've come in season 1. So, when I read these reviews of Heroes saying "unlike Lost, it knows where it's going", it makes me mad, because they probably haven't watched the whole series because if they had, they'd have realised it's the other way round. Every season of Lost has a clear narrative arc, but the narrative in Heroes seems to hit a brick wall somewhere. I completley agree with it, and i'll even hold my hand up and say I thought Heroes was better than Lost, but it's not. Lost went WAY downhill in series 2 but in series 3 it pulled all the stops out of the bag and the finale of series 3 is probably the best episode of Lost bar the first 2 episodes. It's hard to put into words what I mean about Heroes, I mean don't get we wrong Heroes is an EXCELLENT show but my the time you'll know what Ashley means about it once you've seen the full first series.
August 1, 200717 yr I completley agree with it, and i'll even hold my hand up and say I thought Heroes was better than Lost, but it's not. Lost went WAY downhill in series 2 but in series 3 it pulled all the stops out of the bag and the finale of series 3 is probably the best episode of Lost bar the first 2 episodes. It's hard to put into words what I mean about Heroes, I mean don't get we wrong Heroes is an EXCELLENT show but my the time you'll know what Ashley means about it once you've seen the full first series. Well, happen that you're right mate... There are just a few minor things I found a bit irritating and silly about "Lost", the two already mentioned and that bloody "Mikael" bloke apparently being able to come back from the dead, TWICE, for no apparent earthly reason... At least with Claire the Indestructible Cheerleader, there is an actual, established reason for her being able to come back from the dead.... Although, it seems equally apparent that there are established limits even to her "immortal" capabilities.... Doesn't seem that she can survive having her brain scooped out by Syler, according to Isaac and Peter's paintings.... "Heroes" is following an established comic book logic, although it is adding a few twists of its own here and there.. I was an avid reader of stuff like "The Avengers", "Justice League", "X-Men", "The New Mutants", "Excalibur", etc, so I'm finding this series quite fascinating tbh...
August 1, 200717 yr I have to say that I prefer Heroes to Lost - and I've seen the whole series of Heroes now. Maybe I'm simple-minded but Lost just got to confusing for me and we seemed to just get bombarded with questions which were seemingly never answered. I have to say though that the two series' shouldn't really be compared - the only things they have in common are that they are American and they are based around a group of people. That's about it. I think the series finale could have been better but then I also think that the series up to that point had led you to believe that something different would happen which was good because it leaves you shocked when the story unfolds.
August 1, 200717 yr Wow, how great was it tonight :o Niki (the single mother) is definitely my favourite character, I like the MP's brother and Clare the cheerleader too. The behind the scenes show was really interesting too ^_^
August 1, 200717 yr I dunno, I loved it all to be honest :P (This isn't spoiler but some might not want to read this) The thing with Heroes, people say it's better because it poses questions and then answers them immediately, unlike Lost which keeps you guessing the whole time. About three quarters through the series of Heroes, it has nowhere left to go really and just completely runs out of steam. It was building to a big climax which actually turns out to be the biggest disapointment ever. Also, there's lots of plot holes and the story becomes wafer thin, like they're trying to save something for season 2, but the way it was building up, meant the answers should've come in season 1. So, when I read these reviews of Heroes saying "unlike Lost, it knows where it's going", it makes me mad, because they probably haven't watched the whole series because if they had, they'd have realised it's the other way round. Every season of Lost has a clear narrative arc, but the narrative in Heroes seems to hit a brick wall somewhere. I found the last episode pretty dull, I was expecting more to happen, but overall, the series was watchable. I'm just watching them again now on BBC2, without the ad breaks, and I must say you can follow it better without losing the plot for 3 to 4 minutes every 15 minutes..
August 2, 200717 yr i like this....alot its so much better than lost, lost really messed with the viewers i was one of them that gave up on it. but heroes is more dynamic, its much better great cast and script, loved the part when time stopped and the girl was saved. another good thing about it is no ad breaks
August 3, 200717 yr Heroes star Adrian Pasdar has promised that the new season of the show will surpass the first in terms of excitement and drama. The actor, who plays Nathan Petrelli on the hit NBC show, admitted that cast members were sworn to secrecy by producers when they heard about the new plots. "Last year we were looking to talk to anybody who wanted to talk to us," Pasdar told WENN. "This year the degree of secrecy is a lot higher in what we can say. "No matter who your favourite character is, the things that are going to happen in this season will be exciting to the point of being numbing for fans. This season is not about defining them by their own behaviour… there's a lot more at stake."
August 3, 200717 yr I don't wanna say too much Joao but you've kinda posted a bit of a spoiler there. :lol: But even Series 2 of Heroes does look very good. ^_^ I've seen the 1 minute preview of it and it looks very good.
August 3, 200717 yr btw for those who have seen it please answer the question below, what episode does Sylar want to kill Claire?
August 3, 200717 yr btw for those who have seen it please answer the question below, what episode does Sylar want to kill Claire? Episode 9 I think.
August 3, 200717 yr O damn, now I know Nathan comes back, thanks for the spoiler Joao I know right <_< Though it makes you wonder if a time travelling episode later on in the series plays a part at all... :unsure:
Create an account or sign in to comment