Heroes 1:19 0.07%

[hazelk]

Belatedly but Happy Birthday beer_good_foamy!


Sometimes when people aren’t sleeping we have to watch Heroes with the sound down but it’s such a visual show you scarcely miss the dialogue. This episode had the Sylar /Peter deathmatch and future!Hiro’s string history but the most noticeable sight was the expensive garishness of the Petrelli apartment, surely nobody lives in a room with such mustard yellow walls? Although, it probably looks good decorating a magazine feature.

Mr Bennet is the man who won’t be fooled again rejecting fake Claire. He knows his weaknesses now, the location of every rusty pipe and it’s use them or lose them. Mr Bennet wins freedom and an opportunity to cover Claire’s tracks but I think Noah gives up something in the exchange.

Bennet left his contempt for schlubs showing in his interactions with Matt (very middle management, a true contender like Nathan Petrelli wouldn’t care). Nathan also differs in knowing that his emotions make him stronger and uses his affection for Peter to deflect Linderderman’s so-tempting argument of percentage points. Though it’s tempting because he has to believe he could make a difference worth such a sacrifice.

Angela tempting Claire with their likenesses. So she used to be part of the Company but split of from them? Or would like Claire to believe it. She’s very good, I still wonder how she came to recruit the Haitian. S2 rumour has it that (highlight to read potential spoilers) her power is persuasion but it would be neater if it worked as a reverse of his, the ability to highlight selected memories rather than suppress them. It is a big part of what political campaigners aim for, to get people to selectively remember the good when they’re the incumbent, the bad when they’re opposition.

Issac died well, which I’m relieved by because I like being able to like everyone on a show and the thing with Simone had me rooting for his comeuppance (not a good place to be left in). RIP Issac, the future did you no favours but you passed on it with grace.

Comments

[beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com]

Thanks a lot! :-D

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Bennet left his contempt for schlubs showing in his interactions with Matt (very middle management, a true contender like Nathan Petrelli wouldn’t care).

That's what I was thinking of when commenting to your "Company Man" post, I think, about future eps going more into hierarchies. (The middle management comment was a hilarious moment, and Bennet's reaction made the scene.) He's definitely treating Matt and Ted as his subordinates here. Mind you, Matt does respond well to orders, up to a certain point. This kind of approach by Noah B. works very well in the short term - they get out of the building thanks to Bennet and his precise orders - but long term wise treating people who actually DON'T work for you but think they work WITH you as subordinates could spell disaster. The comparison to Nathan is interesting and insightful, but I can't say why without spoilers.

Nathan also differs in knowing that his emotions make him stronger and uses his affection for Peter to deflect Linderderman’s so-tempting argument of percentage points.

Wellllll, yes and no. The thing is, Nathan is not even tempted for as long as he thinks those .07% dying would include Peter. His temptation starts the moment Peter says he could survive the explosion, because that means he could have the shiny future in the White House AND Peter. So the question for the rest of the season isn't "does Nathan love Peter?" but "how does he love Peter?" i.e. is it a possessive love that cares about having the object of your affection but not about that person's state of mind and heart, or does he love Peter in the sense of caring more about what being the cause of all those deaths would do to Peter than about his own welfare?

Then, of course, there is the extraordinary "I don't know who I'd be without you". Would you have thought you'd hear Nathan say that in the show's pilot? And the thing is, he means it. If you want to draw a parallel to Bennet, you could say Bennet goes from defining himself as a Company Man to defining himself through the protecting-Claire-mission, and both postulate that you don't see good in yourself, you see it in the other beloved person.

Angela tempting Claire with their likenesses. So she used to be part of the Company but split of from them? Or would like Claire to believe it. She’s very good, I still wonder how she came to recruit the Haitian.

The Haitian FINALLY says something about himself and Angela in the episode most recently broadcast. It's not much, but it's something definite.

The Angela-Claire scene is one of my favourite scenes in this much loved episode. As a minor detail that shows that Angela can never, for a moment, stop manipulating, observe her statement when Claire looks at the photo of Nathan and Peter: "My two boys, getting along for a change." Thus implying they usually don't, and positioning herself as the only reliable source of affection and information.

(And then, of course, there is the spectacular dysfuntionality of the mourning for Peter scenes. Because each of them does it alone. Angela's grief is genuine, but she can only show it when she's alone with Peter's body, not in front of Mohinder OR Nathan and Claire. When Nathan has his turn of being shattered by grief and holding Peter, Angela can't share this, she appeals to his inner politician instead, as if this is the only language they could share, and of course it fails because Nathan really doesn't care without Peter. And of course "let the girl have her moment" again implies Claire's grief isn't something to be shared, either. That family is screwed up beyond belief.)

RIP Issac, the future did you no favours but you passed on it with grace.

He faced his death with strength, courage and without self-pity, making sure that whatever help he could provide was given first via the messenger fanboy and his sketches. It definitely was redemption for Simone. (And infuriated Sylar. Speaking of whom, did you notice what he painted in the last scene?)