Heroes Rewatch: Episode 1.10, Six Months Ago

[selenak]

There are best episodes, and then there are favourite episodes. These are not necessarily the same. The best episode of Heroes, season 1, is probably Company Man, followed by Five Years Gone. And I do admire these two, a lot. But my best beloved episode of the first season is neither of those. Depending on my mood, it’s either .07% or Six Months Ago, but most of the time Six Months Ago wins out. I just adore it, can endlessly rewatch it, and it captures such a lot of the best this show has to offer.



In terms of the overall first season narrative, Six Months Ago is a transitional episode, coming after the first mini arc – “Save the cheerleader” – has ended in the previous episode, Homecoming, and before the middle period of the season, which I’d call “Revelations” (Claire finds out about her adopted father’s true profession and her biological parents, Peter finds out he will turn into a human bomb and starts to look for a way to control his powers, Nathan starts to accept the superpowers world is the real deal, looks for a way to help Peter and finds out about Claire, Hiro has to rediscover his confidence and mission, etc.; this middle period ends with Parasite, with the last mini arc being “Save New York the world"). It also deepens all the characters, provides the audience with background knowledge for several of them and manages to destroy some theories while creating new ones. Oh, and it also manages that rare thing, a genuinenly affecting one-episode-romance that we know is doomed before it even begins.

Up until this episode, most people must have assumed that the solar eclipse in the pilot was what triggered the powers in our various characters to activate. (As we hadn’t met characters like Claude, Linderman or for that matter Meredith yet, all of whom clearly had access to their powers for years, long before the eclipse.) Now the eclipse clearly has some kind of significance in connection with superpowers – see also: the very last image of this season – but not exactly that one. In Six Months Ago, we see at least three characters manifest for the first time (Nathan, Claire and Niki), and three more arguably (Matt, Charlie and Peter; Charlie says “lately I’ve been able to remember everything”, and “lately” is a vague term in terms of time, and we don’t know for sure Peter’s dream of Nathan and Heidi is the first time he displays precog/visionary dreaming, but it’s a reasonable assumption; Matt very briefly catches a thought, and again, it’s reasonable to guess this didn’t happen before). Then there’s Eden, who clearly had had access to her power for years, and it’s obvious that the Haitian must have had it, too. Gabriel Gray/Sylar is a special case; I’ll get to him. Anyway, from this point onwards, we know that superpowers do not activate all with the same trigger, and that some of them have been around for a while.

The most obvious red thread, or perhaps “string” is the better word, considering, connecting this episode’s events to the previous ones and leading into the rest of the season is Hiro carrying out his attempt to save Charlie from her death-by-Sylar, which we saw starting in Seven Minutes to Midnight. It’s open to debate whether this causes the first timeline split on the show, as obviously Charlie and co-workers in Seven Minutes to Midnight did not recognize Hiro (until after Hiro goes back to the past and shows up in the photo with Charlie). (Though you could speculate Charlie might have done but, given that he told her about going back to the past etc., did not show it so all happened as it was supposed to.) Ironically given that Hiro jumps back six months instead of a day by accident, he demonstrates the most versatility with his powers we see from Hiro during the entire first season here in his various attempts to convince – and court – Charlie. It’s also the first time we’re not in Hiro’s pov when he uses his powers; we’re in Charlie’s, and we see how it looks from the outside, as he stops time to bring her flowers and serve her customers, and of course in one of the most beautiful images of the show to surround her with 1000 origami cranes. (Which means Hiro must have stopped time for a day at least and be the best crane folder ever.)

Charlie appears only here and in Seven Minutes to Midnight, but manages to be endearing, charming and cute without getting over the top in sweetness. Which is important as it allows the audience to feel her loss, just as Hiro does, to want him to save her, and to not regard her as a simple plot device to give Hiro some angst. What’s more, given that this is also the episode which presents us with Sylar’s background story, the switch from Sylar going from faceless bogeyman to character within the ensemble, her humanity serves to give Sylar’s victims a face. Most of the people we see Sylar kill within the first season come across as sympathetic, but Charlie is the one with the most screen time (except, of course, for Claire in the 5YG verse, and the shot of her getting killed there is almost identical to the one of Charlie getting killed in Seven Minutes to Midnight, down to their hairstyles). If you have a semi-regular character who is a serial killer and given some screentime and character development himself, as opposed to the majority of his victims, there is always the danger of a part of the audience going, ohhhh, cool, and relegate the people said serial killer destroys to mere cyphers. (Or to go, ooohhh, woobie, he must be redeemed!, but that’s another matter.) Your mileage may vary, but I think Heroes successfully avoids this trap by making Sylar’s victims real to the audience, most of all Charlie.

The revelation that caps the Charlie/Hiro storyline – that she is doomed to die in any case because of a blood clot in her brain – reminds me of an old show of mine, Highlander, and the Methos/Alexa storyline there. To the audience, it’s poignant; to Hiro, it’s a devastating blow. It also poses some interesting questions about the inevitability of fate in the Heroes verse that become central later on, in the last third of the season. Certain events – Charlie dying, someone exploding in New York – seem to be inevitable. However, the circumstances surrounding these events are not, and that in turn changes and influences other events. Charlie always dies, but through Hiro jumping back in time, her last months became different to her: “ Before you got here, I'd decided to give up. But you have made me feel more alive, and more full of joy than I could have ever imagined.” Similarly, the explosion happens in all the timelines we see in this show, but in the last one, because Nathan made a different decision than in the other ones, it does not happen on ground and thus doesn’t result in thousands of deaths and ensuing dystopia.

Six Months Ago is the first episode to present us with two characters we only got brief glimpses of before, the late Chandra Suresh and Gabriel Gray, aka Sylar. Their subplot is a dark mirror of the calling-of-the-hero archetype: Luke Skywalker and Obi-Wan Kenobi, if you like. Young man in modest circumstances with a longing for better things meets older man (thought to be crazy by his peers) who calls him to a new, exciting world with special powers and heroic destiny, early set back, then success? All check. But oh, in what a twisted way. There is the even more obvious mirroring between Peter Petrelli and Gabriel Gray, both with comics-typical alliterative names, both so eager to hop on the special destiny/superpowers train, both reacting with frustration and fury when it appears to be out of reach and when the first superpowered person they’re in contact with (Nathan and the unfortunate Brian Davis, respectively) does not value what they have at all, both with dead fathers whom they didn’t get along with too well, taking to older mentor types offering to teach them access to their powers like ducks to water. Note that Gabriel/Sylar, after committing his first murder and having his first power, returns to Chandra Suresh (and won’t kill him for some months more); because Chandra has the map and the list, sure, but he also appears to want to show off in front of Suresh the Elder, wants Chandra to approve of him again, and with the whole season in mind, you get the sense that the Sylar/Mohinder road trip of doom was a pretty faithful recreation of what the dynamic with Chandra must have been like. As villains go, Linderman has a thing for Petrellis; Sylar has a thing for Sureshs.

In another mirroring and contrast, Chandra/Gabriel are contrasted with another mentor/protegé pair, to wit, Noah Bennet and Eden. And a fun contrast it is. Gabriel, when meeting Chandra, is harmless (though I think he’d have become a serial killer anyway, just with another trigger, but I concede that’s open to debate); Chandra is a harmless researcher on a quest, too. Meanwhile, Eden is a messed up and amoral menace, as evidenced by her scene with Matt, and our Mr. Bennet, of course, is a dedicated Company Man doing his usual job of abducting, tagging and blackmailing people. But Bennet gets through to Eden with his crisp “you need a purpose, or you’ll end up dead”, and she becomes someone who will kill herself rather than allow Sylar to damage more people by taking her gift; and Chandra, shall we say, blows it with Gabriel, not through malevolence but through the apparantly Suresh-inherent gift of misreading signals and losing patience early on. (Mohinder in Hiros, anyone?) Gabriel, of course, becomes Sylar and embarks on a career of serial killing.

So, what is his inherent gift, the one he didn’t have to steal? To know how things work, apparantly, which is why he is aware Chandra’s watch is a bit late and how to fix it, and how he can use every gift he steals so quickly and effortlessly, as opposed to Peter who has a hell of a time mastering them. Which means that the stealing of powers is not part of said inherent talent; Chandra speculating in front of Gabriel that the brain is the seat of everything apparantly gave him the idea that the eating of same will enable him to access those powers, too.

Speaking of mirroring and contrasts: Six Months Ago was also the episode that explained a lot about Niki. Starting with the revelation that there once was a real Jessica, her twin sister, who died at age 11 ( according to the gravestone). Parents in the Heroes verse usually are of the shady variety, especially the older generation, but Hal Sanders takes the price for most obviously evil, though not in an over the top was; no moustache twirling here – the fact he shows up to ease his conscience with some money rings pathetically real. Indeed, the one problem I have with the way the Hal and Niki/Jessica scenes play out is that Hal showing some irritated anger when seeing Micah has taken his expensive computer apart doesn’t actually warrant Niki’s and DL’s reaction (I’d have been irritated, too!), but I can fanwank that by declaring any anger displayed by Hal would have triggered the repressed memories in Niki, and that DL knew Hal was bad news to begin with. Given that Niki claims not to remember – as opposed to Jessica – DL’s awareness of this is interesting; note that in .07%, the one remark of his that really hits home with Jessica and makes her reconsider is when he says “hurting people for the fun of it – you didn’t turn into Jessica, you turned to your old man”.

So, what do we know of Hal and his daughters? He killed Jessica; he must have been physically abusive to both of them, because though Niki-as-Jessica claims she took every blow for Niki, Hal specifically speaks of “what I did to you” (i.e. Niki) in the earlier scenes. Was there also sexual abuse? The one thing you can interpret as a hint to this is the way Jessica shoves him on a bed and stuffs his cheque into his mouth, but alternatively, it doesn’t have to mean there was; physical violence strong enough to kill one of the girls is trauma enough for the multiple personality disorder in Niki to develop. Be it as it may, given that Hal has money – and Niki and DL don’t – I doubt it ever came to court; there must have been some hush up, though presumably Linderman found out. Speaking of Linderman, Niki initially deciding to invite Hal over because he could pay for Micah’s school is resonant of Linderman saying about Jessica that as “all women who have been abused by men, all she wants is money and security”; but both Hal and Linderman get their money rejected in a bloody way when it comes down to it.

Poor Matt is stuck with the least interesting storyline, again; indeed, the first of his scenes is more about Eden than it is about him. The second and third one do offer some character stuff for Matt – the fact that the reason he can’t pass his exams is because he doesn’t want to admit to his dylexia – but given with the meaty scenes everyone else gets, it’s not much. Still, it emphasizes both his desperate desire to make something of himself, the resentment of his postion in life and the vulnerability he has to other people’s regard; if you like, another seed for 5YG Parkman.

Of course, ambition to become a someone is something nearly all of these characters share in various degrees. Claire, in her scenes, might be aware that Jackie is something of a bitch about the unfortunate Lori Trammel, and dislike this in her (at this stage) friend. (Nice bit of continuity: this is the girl Brody badmouthed after date-raping her, as we found out earlier this season.) But she still wants that cheerleader position, she wants to be popular, she worked hard for it and at this point, she’s not above disregarding the outsiders in high school life – Lori and Zach, whom she hasn’t spoken with for years after being friends in their younger days. If this reminds you of a certain other character she turns out to be related to, you’re not wrong. Other Claire and Nathan parallels would be their initial attitude towards their powers – hide and repress.

“Hide and repress” takes on another meaning once you’ve seen just how Nathan manifested in Six Months Ago, of course. The Petrelli scenes in this episode are character and backstory gold, starting with the party at Peter’s apartment to celebrate his graduation from nursing school. (BTW, given Peter’s age, this means he probably studied something else first and then changed his mind.) There is an obvious contrast between Peter and Nathan as we meet them here and as we see them in the pilot of the show. For one thing, Peter is in high spirits; no one could accuse him of emo-ness here. He takes the shoes Nathan gives him as a joke between siblings, not an insult, he takes his mother’s excuse for his father’s absence in stride. It’s Nathan who is brooding about something, and the way Heidi and Peter respectively react says something about these relationships pre-accident, pre-guilt and pre-superpowers. Heidi goes for the good natured laughing him out of it approach, which he responds to, it works on the surfaces, but it also keeps the situation from being solved; Peter gets Nathan to tell him what is actually troubling him.

Then there are the implications about the family dynamics before Petrelli Senior dies we get from this same scene and the ensuing ones with the Petrellis. Angela makes an excuse for her husband not showing up at Peter’s party (he’s in Atlantic City with Linderman – incidentally, if true, this might mean he still was there by the time the “accident” happened and could have heard about it this way, which in turn could have been one reason for his death) but doesn’t deny he didn’t really try to come, simultanously demonstrating her own claim on Peter (“I always wanted a nurse in the family”). After Nathan confesses to Peter what is up with him – that the DA wants him to prosecute Linderman – Peter reacts with “you do that, Dad goes down, too”, but does not object to this course of action for that reason. His big objection is something else altogether: “You go after him, you're never going to forgive yourself. Ever.”

The fascinating thing is that speaking in terms of expectation and cliché, this isn’t what you think Peter will say; he’s the “good one” in this family, after all, and should encourage Nathan to do his duty as an ADA, put the greater good ahead of personal feelings, go after the mobster. In fact, given Nathan’s talk with Heidi later, I think this is what Nathan expected Peter to say, which is another indication that Nathan treats Peter as his external conscience. But instead, Peter discourages him, not so much because of what this will do to their father, but because of what he thinks this will do to Nathan.

(Incidentally, I think he’s right with his prediction here, because Nathan’s attitude towards his father once the man is dead – things like saying “Pa would have me committed for even considering this insanity” to Linderman (this would be the same father who was in cahoots with Linderman for years) – speak of a rosy-coloured view fed by guilt.)

Nathan’s response to what Peter does there – the kiss and the long, lingering look once he’s dancing with Heidi – is one of those Petrelli body language things open to endless interpretion fun. (No, not that way.) (Well, that way, too, if you’re so inclined.) (But I actually mean something else right now.) As I said, I think he expected Peter to tell him in no uncertain terms that going after Linderman and Dad was the right thing to do, and Peter doesn’t because he cares about Nathan too much. For which Nathan is simultanously grateful and resentful. Which leads us to the “accident” scene, and the conversation preceeding it. This is where it really pays off to watch the entire episode, instead of fast forwarding through one’s favourite scenes, as I confess I occasionally am prone to as much as anyone, because if you watch it entirely, the daytime scenes with Niki at Jessica’s grave and Hiro at the Burnt Toast Diner make it clear that at least a day passes between Peter’s party and Heidi and Nathan driving in nightly New York; they’re not returning from the party. (As wee_warrior pointed out to me, they are wearing different clothing, too.) Still, even given the day between, at first glance Nathan’s remarks about Peter do not seem to compute with the conversation he and Peter actually had.

HEIDI: He's selfless and empathic ...

NATHAN: He's self-centered and righteous. Self-righteous.

HEIDI: He's a hell of a lot nicer than you.

NATHAN: He can afford to be. He hasn't been under as much scrutiny. My dad did what he had to do to take care of this family and that's something that Peter is never gonna understand.

What Heidi doesn’t know – but we, the viewers, do – is that Peter actually hadn’t been either righteous or self righteous regarding his father and his mobster client. It had been Nathan who had said prosecuting Linderman – and thus going after their father, too – would “take the stink of the family name”, not Peter. Which brings me back to my earlier stated suspicion that Nathan’s reaction is based on the fact Peter was supposed to encourage him to do the right thing and be his external conscience, in other words, be righteous. There is a lot of projection going on here, both because Nathan is left with the sole responsibility for his conscience and the decision he knows he’ll have to make – going after their father –, and because of the way he sees himself as his father’s son. (So condemming his father is also condemming himself.)

Then, of course, the “accident” happens. Given that Linderman is later shown to have some investment in keeping Nathan alive, I doubt it was meant as more as a strong, though risky intimidation routine. (Alternatively, it could be that this was before Isaac painted Nathan-as-President, and for all we know the plan could have been for Petrelli Senior to go to the White House instead.) What it turns into, though, is Nathan’s power to fly manifesting for the first time and leading directly to the car crash that cripples his wife. In Nothing to Hide there were strong hints Nathan feels responsible for the accident, but at that point, the more obvious guess was the one the reporter makes – that he does because he was driving. What actually happens goes a long way to explaining the, to put it mildly, hostile reaction Nathan has throughout the pilot any time Peter brings up the word “flying”. I don’t think Nathan completely acknowledged to himself that was what happened later on; he probably spent the next six months telling himself he was misremembering because of the trauma of the accident, but wasn’t quite able to believe that, and in any event, that rationalization broke down when he watched Peter fall.

Again, symmetry and contrast: the first time Nathan flies, he’s flying away from someone he loves and thus inadvertendly contributes to her doom; the second time, he’s flying towards someone he loves and able to save him. The same gesture – the outstretched arm and hand – highlighted in both cases. And of course we see Peter echoing the same gesture directly when waking up from his dream.

(Sidenote about Peter dreaming: this opens up the vexed question as to from whom Peter absorbed this power from, with Charles Deveaux and Angela Petrelli as the two most popular guesses. Charles has the dream of ep.7 going for him, but against him that Peter doesn’t know him yet at this point in his life – the scene in How to stop an exploding man is clearly set shortly after Peter met both Deveaux for the first time; and we simply don’t know yet whether or not Angela has a power because she was so enigmatic when Claire asked her.)

The ensuing hospital scene between Nathan and Peter is another case of complicated Petrelli co-dependency. It’s one of the very few times on this show we see Nathan’s self control and restrained almost gone – almost, but not completely. He’s not able to tell Peter about the flying, obviously; he does tell him about the other car when Peter brings it up, point blank, but note this transition:

PETER: Nathan. (Peter puts his hands on Nathan’s shoulders.) Wasn't there?

NATHAN: Yeah. It was Linderman's guys. Must've found out about the DA's plans. It's my fault for even considering it, --

PETER: Hey! Look at me.

NATHAN: --taking them on.

PETER: This is—this is not your fault. This is Dad's fault, okay? And you know, you know that this is not gonna end.

NATHAN: If ... If I agree to take the DA's case, will you give a deposition?

(Peter puts his arms on Nathan’s shoulders.)

PETER: Yeah.

NATHAN: Against your father?

At which point the surgeon interrupts them, pulls Nathan aside to give him news about Heidi, presumably that the surgery saved her life but leaves her crippled, Nathan knocks the surgeon’s arm away when the man attempts a gesture and keeps looking at Peter through the glass separating them. So, what went on there earlier? First you have Peter changing his position on the prosecuting Linderman matter. Not necessarily because It Is The Right Thing To Do, but because of what just happened, which as far as they both know was an assassination attempt. Second, you have Nathan responding to this not just by declaring he’ll do it, but by asking Peter to be part of this. Leaving aside something I still have no idea of – why Peter giving a deposition would be of use in a case against Linderman and/or their father, unless Peter witnessed far more of the shady goings-on chez Petrelli than I think he could have done – the psychology of it makes sense for Nathan. If he’s about to break one loyalty (the one to his father), he wants confirmation of the other (between him and Peter). Given that the phrase “stab him in the back” is later used, allow me the Shakespearean excursion and let me point to the scene where Brutus after Caesar is dead in Julius Caesar makes everyone dip their hands in Caesar’s blood. Something like that. I don’t think Peter sees it that way, but imo Nathan sees what they are doing as metaphorical patricide, especially given that when Mr. Petrelli dies a short time later, he knows, but Peter does not until six months later, that it was suicide, not a heart attack.

In a way, it’s this which causes a shift to the state the relationship of the brothers is in at the point we meet them in Genesis. Flying and the true cause of Petrelli Senior’s death are just two of the secrets Nathan keeps from Peter from this point onwards; he also, as we later find out, went to the FBI, offering to take Linderman down, and didn’t tell this to Peter, either, which means he must have told Peter something else about going from intending to prosecute Linderman to accepting campaign contributions from him. Their father as an authority is gone; they’re no longer allies, they’re older brother and younger brother, divided by secrets and a lot of unresolved guilt. While the co-dependency continues and eventually pulls them back together; Peter can’t not push for Nathan sharing again, and Nathan can’t not respond.


Footnote: Quotes from the episode courtesy of this site.

Comments

[syredronning.livejournal.com]

Very interesting analysis which offers a lot of food for thoughts. THANK YOU for taking the time to share :)))

(Oh, and I hope you shed a look at the very amusing Heroes Slash Manual at http://fantasticpants.livejournal.com/35297.html . Too good to miss out IMO.)

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Yes, I've seen it, and was v. v. amused.*g* (Especially at Claude/Pigeons as the competition for Claude/Peter!)

people not named petrelli

[cadesama.livejournal.com]

Oh, and it also manages that rare thing, a genuinely affecting one-episode-romance that we know is doomed before it even begins.

I'm such a Hiro/Charlie shipper that I actually managed to convince myself it was possible to save her. If the changes to the timeline rippled through (as in Frequency), instead of being instantaneous, it would have been possible.

and of course in one of the most beautiful images of the show to surround her with 1000 origami cranes. (Which means Hiro must have stopped time for a day at least and be the best crane folder ever.)

Not just of the show. That image is one of the most beautiful I've ever seen on television. And it took way longer than a day for Hiro to fold all of those cranes. My class decorated a a Christmas tree with one thousand cranes when I was in fourth grade. It took many classes, with all of us folding any time our hands weren't busy with something else. It looked cool in the end, though. :)

Your mileage may vary, but I think Heroes successfully avoids this trap by making Sylar’s victims real to the audience, most of all Charlie.

I absolutely agree. In fact, one of my students who I may or may not have recruited to Heroes (okay, I totally did when I asked her to translate "Save the cheerleader, save the world" into Chinese) still gets angry about Sylar killing Charlie. It also helps that they stick very close to the typical profile of a serial killer until the last three episodes, when Sylar gets promoted to super villain. Real serial killers are creepy.

because Chandra has the map and the list, sure, but he also appears to want to show off in front of Suresh the Elder, wants Chandra to approve of him again, and with the whole season in mind, you get the sense that the Sylar/Mohinder road trip of doom was a pretty faithful recreation of what the dynamic with Chandra must have been like.

That's one of the taunts that Sylar uses against Mohinder in Parasite. He had the relationship that Mohinder always wanted with Chandra. I believe that was mutual, not just a game to Sylar. If there's one thing Heroes characterizes well, it's shady characters having meaningful relationships. No one is so calculating that they are completely cut off from everyone else.

Also, didn't Chandra lead Sylar to Molly's parents? Or am I remembering fanfic instead of canon?

(though I think he’d have become a serial killer anyway, just with another trigger, but I concede that’s open to debate)

Or maybe a Presidential assassin? He definitely would have tried to kill someone "special."

Which means that the stealing of powers is not part of said inherent talent;

I go back and forth on this. While the idea that if anyone started eating brains they'd absorb powers is hilarious, I don't really think that's how it works. If Sylar's power is not only knowing how things work, but also fixing things, I could see him "fixing" himself on the genetic level to take on the new powers once he's seen how it works. But that comes with the caveat that I'm 100% on the side that he doesn't have to eat the brains. He just does because it's his ritual.

DL’s awareness of this is interesting; note that in .07%, the one remark of his that really hits home with Jessica and makes her reconsider is when he says “hurting people for the fun of it – you didn’t turn into Jessica, you turned to your old man”.

I think that sounds about right for how much he could know about Hal. He doesn't seem to be aware that Hal was physically abusive, just that Hal was apparently neglectful of Niki and wrapped up in himself and his drinking problem. That's pretty much Jessica at that moment.

(Nice bit of continuity: this is the girl Brody badmouthed after date-raping her, as we found out earlier this season.)

Ohhh, nice catch. I hadn't noticed that. It never occurred to me that the girl Brody date-raped had also been a cheerleader, since she's so withdrawn.

Re: people not named petrelli

[selenak.livejournal.com]

My class decorated a a Christmas tree with one thousand cranes when I was in fourth grade. It took many classes, with all of us folding any time our hands weren't busy with something else. It looked cool in the end, though. :)

Wow. Then he stopped time for a week, working 24 hours a day or nearly?

(Or he cheated by buying them somewhere...)

It also helps that they stick very close to the typical profile of a serial killer until the last three episodes, when Sylar gets promoted to super villain. Real serial killers are creepy.

Quite, and yes, he's very creepy indeed. Though I'd venture the fact he survived the fall in Homecoming already points to supervillaindom.

If there's one thing Heroes characterizes well, it's shady characters having meaningful relationships. No one is so calculating that they are completely cut off from everyone else.

No, and it occurs to me that the phone call from Sylar on Chandra's answering machine Mohinder hears in the early eps is a parallel to Sylar calling Mohinder in The Hard Part. He's made the Sureshs into something between his replacement family and his pets; in any case, the people he wants a relationship with. I do wonder what pushed him over the brink with Chandra and go for the kill instead finally?

Also, didn't Chandra lead Sylar to Molly's parents? Or am I remembering fanfic instead of canon?

Well, Sylar must have gotten all the early names, including the Walkers, from Chandra. He looks the list and the map in their final scene when he tells Chandra all these people are waiting for them. Presumably the first deaths clued Chandra in they wouldn't be waiting alive...

Or maybe a Presidential assassin? He definitely would have tried to kill someone "special."

Now I imagine Sylar singing "everyone's got the right to be happy" from Sondheim's Assassins...

He doesn't seem to be aware that Hal was physically abusive, just that Hal was apparently neglectful of Niki and wrapped up in himself and his drinking problem. That's pretty much Jessica at that moment.

True.

It never occurred to me that the girl Brody date-raped had also been a cheerleader, since she's so withdrawn.

Well, she would be, after getting date-raped and losing all her "friends" and her high school position in the aftermath, becoming an outcast.

Re: people not named petrelli

[12-12-12.livejournal.com]

That's one of the taunts that Sylar uses against Mohinder in Parasite. He had the relationship that Mohinder always wanted with Chandra. I believe that was mutual, not just a game to Sylar.

It's a great way of showing us another side of Sylar's power, of knowing "how things work": he doesn't just know how people's powers work, he knows how *people* work as well--how to get under their skin, how to go for the gut in the way that will best weaken their defenses. Look at the way he taunts HRG with Claire, Mohinder with his insecurity about Chandra, and Peter with being the villain--all of these characters's worst fears.

It's also a nice mirroring of Peter (again) whose empathic power doesn't just manifest in his ability to absorb the abilities of others, but in his ability to connect with them emotionally. I think the writers are trying to show us that these powers are an intrinsic part of Peter and Sylar's personalities, in a way.

Re: people not named petrelli

[wee-warrior.livejournal.com]

I go back and forth on this. While the idea that if anyone started eating brains they'd absorb powers is hilarious, I don't really think that's how it works. If Sylar's power is not only knowing how things work, but also fixing things, I could see him "fixing" himself on the genetic level to take on the new powers once he's seen how it works. But that comes with the caveat that I'm 100% on the side that he doesn't have to eat the brains. He just does because it's his ritual.

You do of course know that you just invented the deus ex machina that can help the writers dig themselves out of the hole they fell in when Sylar became a fan favourite. Now they only have to find a plausible reason to "cure" him from serial killing, and they can let him keep all the powers and even gain new ones without having to resort to icky practices again.

petrellis

[cadesama.livejournal.com]

What Heidi doesn’t know – but we, the viewers, do – is that Peter actually hadn’t been either righteous or self righteous regarding his father and his mobster client. It had been Nathan who had said prosecuting Linderman – and thus going after their father, too – would “take the stink of the family name”, not Peter.

It says a lot about Nathan's level of self-awareness (or complete and utter lack there of) that he would call himself self-centered and self-righteous for wanting to clear the family name. It is self-centered in some ways -- I have no doubt that many of Nathan's achievements are compensatory for the way people scorned their family name and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he grew up dealing with specific scandals Linderman and his father went through in the press. But, at the same time, couldn't redeeming the family name be seen as redeeming their father. Sure, punishing him, but Nathan's Catholic. You have to repent your sins.

Nathan, who doesn't see their father as being as weak as Peter (or Linderman) does, probably thinks that prosecuting their father would make him a hero he could look up to without hesitation. (It seems like Nathan justifies things he does to hurt others to himself on the basis that they are strong enough to handle it.)

Which makes things even more complicated. Not only did he want Peter to tell him what the right thing to do was (not just the right thing for him), but he wanted Peter to give him a legitimate reason for what he wanted anyway. Nathan simply can't see his own reasons as legitimate, it's like he holds them at a distance. Even the uncalculated ones get examined until they seem as artificial as any other political maneuver.

Sidenote about Peter dreaming: this opens up the vexed question as to from whom Peter absorbed this power from, with Charles Deveaux and Angela Petrelli as the two most popular guesses.

And, of course, we don't know Peter's range or when precisely his power manifested or how long the Petrellis were still hosting meetings with superpowered friends in their house. The writers said in the last Behind the Eclipse interview that Peter has Micah, Molly, and DL's powers now, so the range is pretty big. I personally think it's highly possible Peter's powers manifested before Six Months Ago (dreams are probably the easiest of all of them to ignore for years on end if they don't predict anything traumatic, and Peter's personality more than anyone seems shaped by his powers). Combine those things, and if Charles stopped by to talk to Angela when Peter was a teenager, he could be the one with that power. Or it could be anyone.

Their father as an authority is gone; they’re no longer allies, they’re older brother and younger brother, divided by secrets and a lot of unresolved guilt.

Angela must have had a field day abusing that split for those six months. And wow is that scary.

Re: petrellis

[selenak.livejournal.com]

But, at the same time, couldn't redeeming the family name be seen as redeeming their father. Sure, punishing him, but Nathan's Catholic. You have to repent your sins.

Well, yes. Repentance and good works have to come before atonement and grace. But I think Nathan is a post-Tridentinum Catholic in that you can't buy absolution for someone else, so it really depends on Petrelli Senior. I think you're on to something in that he probably thinks prosecuting their father makes the older Petrelli into a hero again; two possible outcomes: either Daddy Petrelli can beat the prosecution, in which case he's a hero via cunning, smarts and fighting toughness, or Nathan wins, in which case Dad becomes a hero through adversity and the purgatory of martyrdom. However, Nathan as opposed to Peter is aware of the at least two earlier suicide attempts. Which means subconsciously at last, he must have been afraid Dad would to the unheroic thing and choose not to go through the trial at all but escape once and for all.

Not only did he want Peter to tell him what the right thing to do was (not just the right thing for him), but he wanted Peter to give him a legitimate reason for what he wanted anyway. Nathan simply can't see his own reasons as legitimate, it's like he holds them at a distance. Even the uncalculated ones get examined until they seem as artificial as any other political maneuver.

A psychiatrist would have a field day with him, but of course he'd never consult one to begin with.

Angela must have had a field day abusing that split for those six months. And wow is that scary.

It is!

Re: petrellis

[mimesh.livejournal.com]

The writers said in the last Behind the Eclipse interview that Peter has Micah, Molly, and DL's powers now, so the range is pretty big

Oh, I haven't heard about that but it's very interesting, especially regarding speculation for season two.


SPOILERS FOR SEASON TWO


I assumed that Peter and Nathan - if they survived the blast (which seems to be confirmed by various sources) - would be separated for at least the first part of season 2. (This seems necessary for Peter's hero journey) But if he has Molly's power he could find Nathan easily and would definitely seek him out.
Therefore either Peter or Nathan has to be the rumored amnesiac. It would make sense for Peter because it would probably cut off his powers and give his character many possibilities story wise (and simultaneously avoid making him too powerful). As for Nathan, if I'm not mistaken Molly can't locate people who are unconscious or I'm confusing canon and fanon here. But it's plausible that a super without knowledge of his own identity can't be tracked that easily. The "Nathan losing his memory theory" seems to be supported by the hints and bits of information we got from Adrian. This way the brothers could be separated, Peter probably believing that Nathan is dead and needing to come into his own all by himself while we get to see a Nathan without baggage and a possible different approach to his powers.

And then a emotional reunion mid-season. ;)

Uh, sorry, for going completely off topic.

Re: petrellis

[wee-warrior.livejournal.com]

It says a lot about Nathan's level of self-awareness (or complete and utter lack there of) that he would call himself self-centered and self-righteous for wanting to clear the family name.[and several paragraphs after that, but too long to quote]

I find your analysis of Nathan's possible motives very fascinating. Can I eat admire your brain? (And this is meant not nearly half as creepy as it doubtlessly sounds.)

Combine those things, and if Charles stopped by to talk to Angela when Peter was a teenager, he could be the one with that power.

From his - er, Past Nursey Peter's - conversation with Simone I did get the feeling that he was surprised Angela knew Charles, though, so unless he was a somewhat inattentive teen, he would have remembered him.

Angela must have had a field day abusing that split for those six months. And wow is that scary.

*nods, wide-eyed*
*ponders briefly about an AU with a one-hundred-year-old Angela who, having long outlived all of her offspring, now manipulates the people in her nursing home to do her bidding, because otherwise she would die of boredom*

[mimesh.livejournal.com]

The Charlie subplot was a very successful episodic romance. This gives me hope that the writers and casting directors aren't completely hopeless when it comes to romances on the show but what we have seen so far speaks against them. *g*

(Or to go, ooohhh, woobie, he must be redeemed!, but that’s another matter.) Your mileage may vary, but I think Heroes successfully avoids this trap by making Sylar’s victims real to the audience, most of all Charlie.

This is a little pet peeve of mine, even if it's probably the most unpopular opinion in Heroes fandom. I do like Sylar as a character and the way Zachary portrays him. But I also think that - especially towards the end of the season - the show is not successful in avoiding this trap and therefore I have to disagree with you a little bit. I still don't think that Sylar's sudden guilty conscience about the prospect of killing "innocent people" makes sense in context of the way his characters has been presented so far. Even though the scenes with his mother were undoubtedly one of the most interesting ones in that episode and the backstory about his family dynamic added a lot layers to his character. But I think that it was mostly a response to Sylar's overwhelming popularity and ended in a flood of "poor woobie is really a good person and can be redeemed" posts everywhere.
I also think that the costume and make up choices with Sylar support this. Every other character has a very consistent wardrobe and make up (except for minor differences like Peter's growing hair) but especially towards the end of the season Sylar's costume and hairstyle are solely supposed to cast him as the sexy, charismatic villain - who he is - and make absolutely no sense in context of his character. I could go on about the way his scenes are filmed but you get the picture.

That was a really long-winded way to say that I don't think the show succeeds in making us feeling sympathetic enough for Sylar's victims - especially towards the later episodes. But I do agree that it works with Charlie.


I love how you pointed out all the parallels between the Sureshs and Sylar or Peter and Sylar. I haven't rewatched the episodes yet except for single scenes and pieces and that was definitely something I missed the first time around. It's almost safe to say that every single character on the show has some kind of father issue: The Petrellis, Gabriel, Niki, Mohinder, to some extent Hiro...

But even with your wonderful analysis of the Petrelli dynamic in this episode, I still don't quite know what to think of Nathan and Heidi's exchange in the car before the crash.

[wee-warrior.livejournal.com]

That was a really long-winded way to say that I don't think the show succeeds in making us feeling sympathetic enough for Sylar's victims - especially towards the later episodes. But I do agree that it works with Charlie.

I respectfully disagree - though I do find your preceeding analysis insightful, and do agree with you that the show has somewhat caved in to Sylar's popularity and is now trying to paint him as "cooler" than they did previously, but I still find myself rather unmoved by finding out that, lo, his mother's demands on him were unrealistic and added to the instability of his psyche. Of course this is very influenced by the fact that I dislike Sylar quite heartily, despite Zachary Quinto doing a good job, but I do think the show right until the last few episodes did well in conveying that he is killing actual people, not props.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Re: Sylar - what wee_warrior said, plus:

I still don't think that Sylar's sudden guilty conscience about the prospect of killing "innocent people" makes sense in context of the way his characters has been presented so far.

Oh, that wasn't the impression I got. I thought what confounded him wasn't "why would I kill these innocent people" but "why would I kill these people when I have nothing whatsoever to gain from it?" Considering all his previous kills gave him something, that was in character, and not a guilty conscience. Then, after his mother's death, his last vision obviously showed him that the President he already painted is himself, as a direct consequence of the nuclear explosion. After which he knew what he had to gain.

Also: bringing Molly back, who lost her parents because of Sylar and would have been dead herself if he had found her, reemphasizes the humanity of his victims again as well.

[cadesama.livejournal.com]

. I still don't think that Sylar's sudden guilty conscience about the prospect of killing "innocent people" makes sense in context of the way his characters has been presented so far.

I refuse to see those scenes as depicting guilt in him. He did feel guilt, at one point, or else we'd never have seen his room with "I've sinned" scribbled all over it. But I don't think that's what was going on in The Hard Part. It seemed to me merely that Sylar, control freak that he is, panicked because he felt out of control. Destroying NYC, killing normal people (and even those he says they are innocent, he said the exact same thing to Mohinder about the people on the list; innocence doesn't matter much to him), doesn't fit his pattern. It's no use to him, so why would he do it?

It's not a crisis on conscience that Sylar faces in that episode -- he, likes Hiro, Claire, and Nathan is having a crisis of destiny. Can they step up and become heroes (or villains)?

I also think that the costume and make up choices with Sylar support this. Every other character has a very consistent wardrobe and make up (except for minor differences like Peter's growing hair) but especially towards the end of the season Sylar's costume and hairstyle are solely supposed to cast him as the sexy, charismatic villain - who he is - and make absolutely no sense in context of his character. I could go on about the way his scenes are filmed but you get the picture

Now that I agree with. I think they've definitely clued in to the fan perception of Sylar and played it up -- plus, he's a supervillain at the end, not a serial killer. Super villains get to look cool. Of course, I think they sort of did that is the second half of the season for everyone. The cast is pretty in the first half, but a lot of the clothing or angles are somewhat unflattering. In the second half, everyone is 50% more gorgeous. I'm convinced it was on purpose. They were trying hard to convince the audience that they were a serious show on NBC, not fluff on the CW, and once that was established they got on with the business of highlighting hot all the actors are.

Part One

[wee-warrior.livejournal.com]

Depending on my mood, it’s either .07% or Six Months Ago, but most of the time Six Months Ago wins out.

[Completely Random Aside]For me, it's between Hiros and Parasite, because I am nothing if not desperately obvious. The latter especially is an episode I bow down to, since it is not only well-directed, well-acted, and basically all about Nathan, it is also the very first filmed script of the writer, who was Kring's assistant before this. So. much. envy. [/Completely Random Aside]

Oh, and it also manages that rare thing, a genuinenly affecting one-episode-romance that we know is doomed before it even begins.

I'm not particularly attune to on-screen romances, but this one was very well done and just sweet enough without ever being sappy. Adding to that Charlie was just a genuinely likable character, without becoming too unrealistic. And while her death was very meaningful for Hiro's development as a character, it never felt gratuitous.

(Though you could speculate Charlie might have done but, given that he told her about going back to the past etc., did not show it so all happened as it was supposed to.)

That still wouldn't explain why the diner's owner didn't recognize him, and after all she would have hired him (and she later told Ando that he had suddenly "disappeared" a while ago when he found the photo). Then again the way the show deals with time travel and Hiro in relation to time travel specifically definitely makes my brain hurt.

Your mileage may vary, but I think Heroes successfully avoids this trap by making Sylar’s victims real to the audience, most of all Charlie.

I think they might do it a little too well, actually. I liked all of his victims, right down to poor Brian Davis and Zane Taylor, and especially Dale - these definitely were the "ordinary people with extraordinary powers" the show usually boasts to be about (and clearly, it's not - it's about drama show characters reacting to the fact that they have superpowers. Not that that is a bad thing by any stretch, on the contrary. :) ) and the fact that Sylar killed them makes him pretty much irredeemable in my eyes, no matter how bad his childhood may have been.

I think a lot of this has to do with authorial intention clearly - I can emphasize with Dexter Morgan to a pretty large degree and I felt comparatively sorry for Brian, as well - without excusing what he did, or not feeling horrible when he attacked Angel, for instance - but I think the Code and the fact that most of Dexter's victims are killers themselves is a very necessary crutch for the show to achieve this. Of course, Dexter is much more ambiguous in its exploration of the characters to begin with, while Sylar is very much a horrorfilm villain of black-and-white colouring.

It also poses some interesting questions about the inevitability of fate in the Heroes verse that become central later on, in the last third of the season. Certain events – Charlie dying, someone exploding in New York – seem to be inevitable.

Makes you wonder what is, and what isn't inevitable, doesn't it? We know for certain that Isaac's paintings don't depict "the future," because he always painted the explosion on ground level - as did Sylar. Does that mean that Sylar will become President either way, or that Nathan will stand in the Oval Office, folding his arms in an uncomfortable position, at some point? Or doesn't that matter either way, because like the explosion on the ground, it was only a possible outcome of Isaac's timeline?
Same goes for deaths: while Charlie's death was inevitable, Ando's wasn't, and apparently, the same goes for Micah. Does that mean Hiro could effectively save Charlie if he got her to a brain surgeon in 2005?

Re: Part One

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Oh, Parasite is fabulous as well. Given that it has Nathan and Peter, Nathan and Hiro and Nathan and Linderman scenes which no other episode can boast of. (Oh, and Nathan and Niki, too.*g*)

And while her death was very meaningful for Hiro's development as a character, it never felt gratuitous.

Yes. In that sense, I thought it worked far better than Simone's death. (Which arguably was redundant regarding Peter, though it was crucial for making Isaac give up on life. In either case, it had nothing to do with Simone herself.)


I think a lot of this has to do with authorial intention clearly - I can emphasize with Dexter Morgan to a pretty large degree and I felt comparatively sorry for Brian, as well - without excusing what he did, or not feeling horrible when he attacked Angel, for instance - but I think the Code and the fact that most of Dexter's victims are killers themselves is a very necessary crutch for the show to achieve this. Of course, Dexter is much more ambiguous in its exploration of the characters to begin with, while Sylar is very much a horrorfilm villain of black-and-white colouring.

True. I think the show - Dexter, that is - is very aware of this; if, for example, Dexter would have killed Paul - who was a threat/rival, but not a murderer - it would have taken that step of making murder the easy way out and disregarding the impact. Also agreed on Brian/Rudy; one feels sorry for the child he was, but given we're far more invested in not only Angel but Deb, and his one surviving and amputated victim Tony is presented as extremely likeable, we never lose sight of what he is, or do not want him stopped in one way or the other.

Same goes for deaths: while Charlie's death was inevitable, Ando's wasn't, and apparently, the same goes for Micah. Does that mean Hiro could effectively save Charlie if he got her to a brain surgeon in 2005?

Possible, and I've seen fanfic playing with that concept, but I'd like to play devil's advocate and say we don't know yet whether the Reaper won't come for Micah and Ando anyway, in another form. (I don't think so, but we don't know yet.)

Part Two: The Rest...

[wee-warrior.livejournal.com]

both with dead fathers whom they didn’t get along with too well

Do we get confirmation that Father Gray is indeed dead? I mean, it's likely, given that Gabriel seems to run the shop... I also didn't have the feeling that he had trouble with his father specifically, more with his family in general (good people, in his words, but didn't understand him).

And Chandra, shall we say, blows it with Gabriel, not through malevolence but through the apparantly Suresh-inherent gift of misreading signals and losing patience early on.

I think a huge part that plays into this is the fact that he is rather obsessed with finding special people - and Gabe doesn't seem special at first. A lot about the way Chandra deals with his environment seems to go back to Shanti and his failure to save her. Of course that doesn't change that he is still excessively blind towards the clearly instable leanings his first patient has, but that's the socially inept scientist for you.

Which means that the stealing of powers is not part of said inherent talent; Chandra speculating in front of Gabriel that the brain is the seat of everything apparantly gave him the idea that the eating of same will enable him to access those powers, too.


I thought that he has to study the brains in order to understand them, but cadesama's idea that he has to see the power in order to understand how it works, and that he only takes the brains as a ritualistic trophy works best for me I think.

Hal specifically speaks of “what I did to you” (i.e. Niki) in the earlier scenes. Was there also sexual abuse?

The whole way this was scripted seemed to lead up to it, so I was reasonably astonished that in the end it was "only" physical abuse. I think both would account for Niki's easy deference to male dominance, but if Hal was primarily physically abusive, I find it very interesting that D.L. most certainly isn't, and that Future Peter likely wasn't, either. (Of course, given how muddled Niki's storyline is, I have no idea if the writers really thought this through, or if all of them think it through the same way in their individual scripts.)
What I found interesting that they led him keep Niki after he had killed Jessica - I suppose that was due to Linderman's influence?

Poor Matt is stuck with the least interesting storyline, again
Poor Matt indeed. What I liked about this was that they at least tried to establish that there was some sort of downward spiral in his relationship to Janice, and that she probably didn't start an affair with his smarmy colleague out of spite. Alas, I doubt anyone noticed or cared much...

Re: Part Two: The Rest...

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Do we get confirmation that Father Gray is indeed dead? I mean, it's likely, given that Gabriel seems to run the shop...

Um, Mrs Gray and Gabriel speak in the past tense of him? ("Your father was..." etc.) But yes, Sylar's disagreement doesn't seem to have been father-specific but parents-in-general. Though his phrase "the watchmaker's son" is spoken with resentment; otoh, he seems to be offended that his mother doesn't value his father's broken watch enough...

A lot about the way Chandra deals with his environment seems to go back to Shanti and his failure to save her. Of course that doesn't change that he is still excessively blind towards the clearly instable leanings his first patient has, but that's the socially inept scientist for you.

True. I stand by my parallel of Mohinder concluding Peter isn't all that in Hiros and going home, though. (If he had done that to Sylar, Sylar/Mohinder would not have become the, err, beautiful hateship it did as Sylar would have killed him right away.*g*)

What I found interesting that they led him keep Niki after he had killed Jessica - I suppose that was due to Linderman's influence?

Clearly, someone bribed the cops, since Hal was never in prison. Otoh, Niki says "you were never there", and even accounting for her repressed memories, I think it's possible that after Jessica's death, and given Hal was an alcoholic then, he pandered her off to some social service or relations, dealt with the alcoholism (as he recites the AA mantra to her, he must at least have tried that route, too) or tried to, somehow earned lots of cash (by being useful to Linderman in some capacity and providing those school records and photos of Niki - and Jessica! - as children she finds later?), and doesn't get back into contact until this episode. Of course, given that he first assumes she remembers very well what he did to Jessica and her, contacting her isn't without risk to him (not because of her superstrength which he doesn't know of, because she could go to the police, still).

she probably didn't start an affair with his smarmy colleague out of spite. Alas, I doubt anyone noticed or cared much...

No. Matt and his marriage beat even Mohinder in India staring at his father's computer for lack of viewer interest....

And Part Three: Petrellis, what else

[wee-warrior.livejournal.com]

There is an obvious contrast between Peter and Nathan as we meet them here and as we see them in the pilot of the show.

This still floors me every time I watch this. They both are so different. Peter actually has confidence! And Nathan is able to convey that he is less than content about something. Not to mention that Angela may be manipulative here, but more on a personal family level than as a political powerbroker. For me, it drove home what a huge gap Pa Petrelli's death has ripped into their relations. Without him, they are completely out of balance, and it probably would have taken them a while to get back on track even without superpowers and The Plan.

(Incidentally, I think he’s right with his prediction here, because Nathan’s attitude towards his father once the man is dead – things like saying “Pa would have me committed for even considering this insanity” to Linderman (this would be the same father who was in cahoots with Linderman for years) – speak of a rosy-coloured view fed by guilt.)

As does the way he defends his father in the car. I mean, "he did what he had to do for the family?" This is someone who had been working with a reputed mobster for almost forty years at that point, and he can't be called innocent by any stretch of the word. Not to mention that he doesn't even seem to consider that his father might know something about the accident in itself, given how closely he worked with Linderman at that point, and given that this would have put him in jeopardy as well.

Of course, Nathan's defense of his father is one of the reasons why I think he'll pretty much turn out to be evil incarnate. Peter thinking that someone isn't bad is one thing - he is after all attuned to emotional matters - but someone like Nathan having such an idealistic view of a person nearly everyone else seems to feel ambivalent about at best (including viewers who've read the comic) quite simply isn't a good sign.

As I said, I think he expected Peter to tell him in no uncertain terms that going after Linderman and Dad was the right thing to do, and Peter doesn’t because he cares about Nathan too much. For which Nathan is simultanously grateful and resentful.

I love your take on their dynamic here, and your subsequent reading of Nathan's conversation with Heidi in the car. It certainly jives well with Nathan's trying to turn people into external representations of emotions and ethics he either doesn't have or, more likely, simply doesn't know how to access.

In hindsight, this situation is somewhat parallel to his dilemma in the finale: he is torn between something that is basically "filial duty" and in Six Months Ago boils down to obeying/not betraying his father and going through with what is "right" in principle, but demands him to defy personal loyality.

Of course, the .07% situation puts a different slant on this, since it is not just about doing what his "parents" want, but also about ambition, and mass murder instead of standing by his father, but still both are conflicts about personal loyality vs loyality to principle at the core. This is especially interesting since one of the major complaints against Nathan both by viewers and characters has always been that he doesn't value personal loyality, while it actually seems to be that he values it rather too high in some cases. (He would have made such a great mobster.)

Re: And Part Three: Petrellis, what else

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Peter actually has confidence! And Nathan is able to convey that he is less than content about something. Not to mention that Angela may be manipulative here, but more on a personal family level than as a political powerbroker.

I know! One wants to say, wow, Petrellis, you are... sort of functional... almost? What happened?

I mean, "he did what he had to do for the family?" This is someone who had been working with a reputed mobster for almost forty years at that point, and he can't be called innocent by any stretch of the word.

No. Unless he wants to imply Linderman would have killed the rest of the Petrelli clan if Dad had ever quit on him, and I really don't think that's what Nathan means. Though the defense sounds as if it's something he told himself quite often and heard from his father first, so it's ingrained.

Not to mention that he doesn't even seem to consider that his father might know something about the accident in itself, given how closely he worked with Linderman at that point, and given that this would have put him in jeopardy as well.

Yes. It's simply unthinkable. For a similar reason, imo, why he doesn't assume Angela knows about The Plan until she says she does: the implication that either parent would be willing to risk their son's life isn't something that he allows himself to consider.

(Meanwhile, Peter doesn't say "this is Linderman's fault" but "This is Dad's fault" afterwards; I'm not sure whether that is because it did occur to Peter, or because Peter has a far lesser opinion of his father in general, or because he just means "this situation is Dad's fault" not "your accident could be Dad's fault".)

In hindsight, this situation is somewhat parallel to his dilemma in the finale:

I agree.

This is especially interesting since one of the major complaints against Nathan both by viewers and characters has always been that he doesn't value personal loyality, while it actually seems to be that he values it rather too high in some cases. (He would have made such a great mobster.)

Nathan Petrelli and Michael Corleone: parallels and differences. Discuss.*g* (Well, obviously Nathan wouldn't have killed Fredo...)

Re: And Part Three: Petrellis, what else

[12-12-12.livejournal.com]

This is especially interesting since one of the major complaints against Nathan both by viewers and characters has always been that he doesn't value personal loyality, while it actually seems to be that he values it rather too high in some cases.

Oh, absolutely. Loyalty to Peter, for example, will probably win out over anything else for Nathan. It's the abstract idea of "right" and "wrong" that he has problems with: which is why he probably always looks to someone else (again, usually Peter) to define them for him in concrete terms for a given situation.

Part Four: Finally finished!

[wee-warrior.livejournal.com]

(Sidenote about Peter dreaming: this opens up the vexed question as to from whom Peter absorbed this power from, with Charles Deveaux and Angela Petrelli as the two most popular guesses. Charles has the dream of ep.7 going for him, but against him that Peter doesn’t know him yet at this point in his life – the scene in How to stop an exploding man is clearly set shortly after Peter met both Deveaux for the first time; and we simply don’t know yet whether or not Angela has a power because she was so enigmatic when Claire asked her.)

Let me vex you some more: given that we don't know how much time has passed between Peter's graduation party and the accident, he could have become Charles' nurse by then. Besides, as hard-as-nails Angela usually is, and as little Peter may have liked his father, none of them behave as if Old Man Petrelli has just kicked the bucket - however, Charles' hothouse is still in good shape, and Claude doesn't seem to be living there yet, so this can't have been one month before the show started, either.

As for Angela not having powers, I'll go with my interpretation of inheritance of the powers on that one and say that she has to have one if both her sons got one (as does Pa Petrelli by this interpretation, btw).

Re: Part Four: Finally finished!

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Besides, as hard-as-nails Angela usually is, and as little Peter may have liked his father, none of them behave as if Old Man Petrelli has just kicked the bucket - however, Charles' hothouse is still in good shape, and Claude doesn't seem to be living there yet, so this can't have been one month before the show started, either.

My guess was more like three months, i.e. half way between this episode and the pilot.

And yes, the fact that both sons (as opposed to just one sibling as with Mohinder and Shanti or as far as we know Kimiko and Hiro) have superpowers argues for both Petrellis having them.

[12-12-12.livejournal.com]

There are best episodes, and then there are favourite episodes. These are not necessarily the same.

So true. "Five Years Gone" is in both categories for me. My other favorites from this season would have to be "Fallout," "Homecoming," "0.07%," and "Six Months Ago."

There is an obvious contrast between Peter and Nathan as we meet them here and as we see them in the pilot of the show.

This episode pre-dated my Petrelli obsession, so I didn't pay that much attention to the family dynamics. Going back and rewatching the entire season, I found the contrast incredibly saddening. Peter and Nathan seemed so playful, so much happier, with nary an emo-moment in sight.

I think that Nathan started pushing Peter away after the accident, for a lot of reasons--guilt over Heidi's paralysis, having to keep his power a secret, wanting to protect Peter from any danger that could result from him going after Linderman...meanwhile, Peter was probably hurt and puzzled by Nathan's coldness.

I was also interested by the dynamic between Peter and Heidi here--it looks like she genuinely likes him, and they get along. I smiled when she told Nathan that Peter's "a hell of a lot nicer than you." Heh. I really like Heidi. We've only seen glimpses of her, but she seems tough, intelligent, and gutsy. I hope we see more of her in Season 2.

As I said, I think he expected Peter to tell him in no uncertain terms that going after Linderman and Dad was the right thing to do, and Peter doesn’t because he cares about Nathan too much. For which Nathan is simultanously grateful and resentful.

I think Nathan had the whole conversation planned out in his head, right down to Peter's exhortations to "do the right thing" and his planned retorts/replies. He'd probably geared himself up for a huge argument, and was completely taken aback. Sort of like when you expect a surface to resist and push *hard*, only to find it giving way so that you fall flat on your face. It can be frustrating when Jiminy Cricket doesn't show up on schedule. *g* He probably expected to do a whole lot of arguing, and in some ways his conversation with Heidi in the car sounds like what Nathan planned to say to justify his own actions *if* Peter had objected. Nathan's talking as if he and Peter *had* had the argument that he'd planned in his head.

But she still wants that cheerleader position, she wants to be popular, she worked hard for it and at this point, she’s not above disregarding the outsiders in high school life – Lori and Zach, whom she hasn’t spoken with for years after being friends in their younger days.

I love, love, love this side of Claire. She has her faults, too--and moments when she'd downright bratty and unlikeable--but at the core she's strong and brave and just all-around awesome.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Going back and rewatching the entire season, I found the contrast incredibly saddening. Peter and Nathan seemed so playful, so much happier, with nary an emo-moment in sight.

They're just comfortable and relaxed with each other in a way the present plot makes impossible.

I was also interested by the dynamic between Peter and Heidi here--it looks like she genuinely likes him, and they get along. I smiled when she told Nathan that Peter's "a hell of a lot nicer than you." Heh. I really like Heidi. We've only seen glimpses of her, but she seems tough, intelligent, and gutsy. I hope we see more of her in Season 2.

Same here, and I agree that Peter and Heidi seem to get along famously. When she says "I think it's noble" and Peter replies "thank you", giving Nathan a "so there" look, you get the impression that's a well-oiled dynamic when the three of them are in the same room, Heidi and Peter ganging up on Nathan in a playful manner when he gets too much into Most Likely To Succeed mode. (Yet another thing, of course, that must have changed in the wreckage of the "accident".)

I think Nathan had the whole conversation planned out in his head, right down to Peter's exhortations to "do the right thing" and his planned retorts/replies. (...) Nathan's talking as if he and Peter *had* had the argument that he'd planned in his head.

That was the impression I head.

Re: Claire - yes, that makes her such a real character, and one who we see grow through the season; if she had been completely enthusiastic about her powers and disregarding all superficial trappings of status in the pilot, she'd have no place to go, and wouldn't have come across half as believable.

[47-trek-47.livejournal.com]

The fascinating thing is that speaking in terms of expectation and cliché, this isn’t what you think Peter will say; he’s the “good one” in this family, after all, and should encourage Nathan to do his duty as an ADA, put the greater good ahead of personal feelings, go after the mobster.

I think I have a slightly different take on the conversation, actually.

So, clearly, Nathan does not want to take down his father, it's clear from the conversation and confirmed by later evidence that in spite of the fact that he recognizes that Pop's relationship with Linderman was a bad, bad thing, he still vastly respected and loved his father. I think what he's doing in that conversation is basically asking Peter's permission to not go after Linderman. He knows he should, but he can't stand it, and Peter is, ultimately, his conscience. So he's looking for an out.

And Peter, though he, in actuality, would be thrilled for someone to take down Linderman, sees how bad it would hurt Nathan, so he lets him off the hook.

Also, I think Nathan's line about Peter saying defending criminals is the same as being one is a hugely important character hint. I think it's very important that Nathan is an ADA rather than a defense attorny, because I think, unlike most other things Nathan's done, that's probably a pretty large break with the family tradition right there. He didn't go so far as to become a nurse, granted, but he refused to go where the big money was, and where the family hertitage was, and instead, went for a job in civil service. And it seems to me, that's probably precisely because of Peter--his conscience's--stance on defense attornies. And of course, that idea is echoed in .07% when Nathan says he doesn't know who he is without Peter.

Peter is his hero, omg, it's so cute!!1111!!eleventy! < / fangirl moment > *composes self* Ahem. Yeah.

[12-12-12.livejournal.com]

Oooh, I like your theory on why Nathan became an ADA instead of a defense lawyer. I never thought about it that way. I always speculated that it was because being an ADA or a DA was a good way to get into politics (like Spitzer). But my knowledge of politics is hazy at best, so what do I know. Besides, I like your spec better. :-)

Peter is his hero, omg, it's so cute!!1111!!eleventy! < / fangirl moment > *composes self* Ahem. Yeah.

Hee. They are each other's heroes, which is very squee-worthy. Peter looks up to Nathan because of his charisma, his authority, his self-assuredness and his sheer competence at everything he does. Nathan looks up to Peter (though Peter doesn't know it for a long time, and probably doesn't fully realize the extent of Nathan's dependence on him even after "0.07%") because he makes Nathan want to be a better person. Co-dependence FTW.

[monanotlisa.livejournal.com]

Oh, wonderful review! I, too, loved this episode so much, for the background as much as Charlie + Hiro = ♥.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Hiro and Charlie are the most successful canon romance this show has yet offered, no question about it, and I adore them, too!

And since I've been so succesful pimping my own stuff to you today, let me mention again:

Family Ways (http://selenak.livejournal.com/293824.html)

Aka the one with Claire and Peter

and Through a glass darkly (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/3606800/1/), aka the one with 5YG Peter, 5YG Niki and Nathan.