Lois & Clark Forums Forums General Discussion Fun with Polls Which Heroes Character Would You Lose? (possible spoilers)

I was reading about the Heroes: Origins show that they'll be showing later in the year, where they'll focus on a character each week and then the viewers will vote on who to dump for S2. I thought it would be fun to have an advance vote.

(I'm assuming that Nathan/Peter are already dead. Although with Peter's regenerative powers, I guess the question is open. <g> Kind of won't be sorry if that turns out to be the case. I liked Peter.)

My vote has to go to Parkman. I like everyone else and will miss them if they're not in S2. I started off finding Parkman a sympathetic character, but then he just started to irritate me somehow. So I really wouldn't be sorry to see him go. He's the only one though.


LabRat

Kinda wishes you'd had a "no one" option. *lol*

I liked all these characters. I don't know that I'd want to lose any of 'em.. *shrugs*

I chose 'Candace' because she's really the only one I don't really recall at the moment...

Personally I adore Parkman, but this could very well be because he played Weiss on Alias, and I just absolutley adore his character on there! And so I think my Weiss Lurv has clouded my judgement where he's concerned...

To be clear, Origins will be introducing new characters. The vote will determine which ones will become part of the regular cast for next season.

It's already been determined which of this season's characters will make it to next year. I know of four for sure (though I don't know how long or how often they'll be around).

Personally, I'd love to see Mohinder go. He annoys the heck out of me. Don't think it'll happen, though. He's too useful as an expository tool, even if most of what he spouts is utter nonsense.

Matt, Nikki, DL, and Micah I could take or leave. If Matt comes back, though, I hope they manage to make him more interesting.

Candace is the illusion-casting woman who works for the Company. Her origin was explained in the most recent graphic novels on the official site.

Seconded.

Thanks for the correction, Paul. Think I'd misread Wiki on the subject. Frankly, new characters makes much more sense. I didn't quite understand the premise of choosing the existing ones in the first place!

I think what set me against Parkman was the episode in the future when he was one of the bad guys. Which is grossly unfair of me, I know. But up till that point I'd found him fairly inoffensive.


LabRat

I'm probably in the minority on this, but I actually like that guy, Of course, its purely for selfish eyecandy reasons. (What? I think the guy's hot! ) And I admit, I don't usually pay attention to what he says, just the accent.

Yes, I'm a total girl

To quote Dave: Seconded! I have to confess, though, that the guy's naivety irritated me at times to the point where I wanted to slap him for being so thick. But, dang, he is cute. And he did learn, in the end, not to trust people so blindly. So he can be forgiven.

LabRat

Well, I think he's hot too...

And as for his naivety and the urge to want to slap him - I get that too, btw - it's odd how it reminds me of another really very hot guy. You might have heard of him... Clark Kent? The guy who believes there's good in everyone and so desperately wants to keep his girlfriend safe that he breaks up with her - for which hundreds of girls would happily kick him in the shin... Yeah, I'd say they've got some obvious similarities going, there. *giggles*

Well, obviously his looks don't do much for me.

His naivety is something of a problem for me, since he should know better. It often seems like the writers make him be stupid for their own convenience.

But it's more than that. Clark's naivety was charming, fitting. And his occasional bouts of stupidity were generally forgivable. He's got enough character to make up for it. And, given all his power, it's understandable that the writers would sometimes have to fudge things.

Mohinder... Well, the voiceovers rub me the wrong way. I used to celebrate when we didn't get one... only to be slapped with it at the end of the ep instead of the beginning.

I also haven't really found much in the character to redeem him for his naivety. It almost seems like his primary characteristic.

What gets me the most, though, is how the writers use him. He's often nothing more than an expository mouthpiece. And the explanations they put in his mouth make no sense. His "explanation" of Peter's powers really ticked me off. Something to the effect of:

"His DNA is unstable. Constantly unraveling and rewriting itself based on the people around him..."

I won't get into the science, but that is just plain wrong. In every possible way.

I don't mind a bit of technobabble. You need some kind of explanation for stuff, and it's not easy when you're trying to explain things that don't exist in our world. But when you try to use real terms, you have to be careful. You have to leave things vague. When you start just throwing buzzwords (like "DNA") around, blatantly misusing them...

Mohinder, as a geneticist, should know better. But he doesn't because he's just a mouthpiece for the writers. And that is what really annoys me.

Paul

Another vote here for Mohinder getting the chop. I wince every time he goes into technobabble mode or does anything "scientific," such as determining things about Syler's genetics by looking at his blood through a microscope, which would accomplish nothing - you know that the science is REALLY bad when you watch it and find yourself thinking how much better CSI would do it!

I could certainly do without Mohinder -- yeah, he's eye candy, but the annoyance factor cancels that out for me.

I'm still holding out hope that Nathan & Peter are both alive -- I figure Nathan could have flown Peter way up in the sky & then tossed him further up, so Nathan had time to get away. And in the 5-yrs-in-the-future ep, Sylar taunts Peter about him being the one to explode, so obviously it's not necessarily fatal. And that's without Claire's powers -- in the original timeline he didn't save the cheerleader. Besides, Ted did one hell of an explosion in the Bennett's house and emerged unscathed.

Whether the writers will bring him back is an entirely separate matter, of course He's almost in that "too powerful to write for" category by now; if he was in control of all his abilities, and practiced, he could do almost anything.

But this is TV land, where anything is possible, whether it makes any sense or not so who knows?

PJ

I was just browsing through the week ahead on TV and wanted to remind any Brits who haven't already seen it that the first season of Heroes starts on BBC2 on Wednesday at 9pm (but check for regional variations etc.), the first showing on UK terrestrial TV.

And since it's BBC there's no adverts to interrupt it. Yay!

Yes, I already have Virgin+ primed to record. Not only no ads, but none of the irritating problem I seem to have recording Sci-Fi, where when I play it back the sound cuts out at intermittent intervals throughout. Usually on the most important dialogue!

Can't wait!

Oh, btw, don't be caught out if you're recording - they're showing the first two episodes back to back on Thursday. (Followed by a behind the scenes look at the characters, if you're interested in that kind of thing).

LabRat

I didn't vote because I'm not sure that I want to lose anybody since I don't know where they'll be going with any of the characters in Season 2.

I did hear about the Origins show that they'll be showing during the hiatus where we get to vote on new characters. That's a pretty cool deal instead of having such a long hiatus with no new episodes.

I agree with you, Pam. I think Nathan and Peter will both still be alive. At least I'm hoping so.

I did hear Hayden Panettierre say that the show will begin 4 months in the future, so I guess they'll do a quick explanation of what everyone's been up to like they did when Desperate Housewives started 6 months in the future.