This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"She's a tech-head Mag....she's a girl Mag!"
11944 members | you are not logged in | 01 September 2014




Tweet







November 24 2006

(SPOILER) Updated! Heroes Redux: I Spy a New Hero! Recap of Monday's "Heroes" compares the show to "Buffy," and starts out with the words "Dear Joss, Love your show-mind if we borrow it? Cool thanks. Yours, Heroes".

Interesting juxtaposition. Well done. Heroes is certainly an excellent show and well worth watching,but,of course, it's not in the same league as Buffy. Let's face it - Nothing is in the same league as Buffy - except Angel...of course!
I haven't yet seen the most recent episode, but Heroes is boring me and is nowhere near the league of Buffy. It's practically playing a different sport.

My basic problem is I don't care about any of the characters. It's all cool plot twist after cool plot twist - but we aren't getting to know the characters better. With so many superheroes and so many characters to service, it's trying to get by on the wow factor every week.

This is not to say that Buffy is the be all and end all of genre programming. But I don't even really understand the comparison here at all.
I think we will see more character development as the show continues.
Yeah, there have only been nine episodes of Heroes so far, and we haven't even gotten into the origin story stuff yet (that starts in the next episode). I'm sure we'll see more character development in the future, and more episodes that focus mostly on one or two characters instead of a bunch.

I'm kind of tired of every new genre show being compared to Buffy. I love Buffy, of course (it's still my favorite show ever), and I love Heroes, but I don't think they're all that similar.
I love watching Heroes cause itīs all geeky to me. It feels like lots of different old comic books mashed into a new one. But what did Joss say once? Itīs not called stealing, itīs called an homage. ;)
I'm willing to bet more Buffy/Angel/Firefly alumni will be sought after for guest appearances - if not regular spots - in the show. They just cast Christopher Eccleston in a regular role, and George Takei as Hiro's father. They are going after cult favorites, and who else is more favorite than the B/A/F cast members?
Buffy had a wonderful, though short, first season. However, it did not blow my doors off until season two. Give Heroes a chance to develop.
It's about time somebody borrowed one of Joss' shows. You'll get a lot of great uses from it!
They should now borrow some of the actors. Nick Brendon, Amber Benson, Emma Caufield, even James Marsters or Juliet Landau...or Alexis Denisof. Lots of possibilities there.
Well, I'd never watched this show (not aired here as of yet), but I'm curious of this 'Buffy' reference. More talk, please.
One of the main characters is a nearly indestructible blonde cheerleader. Her best friend is gay. Her mom is oblivious to what's going on in her life (though her dad obviously is not). It looks like Peter Petrelli is sort of her Angel, though they only just met in the last episode.

Aside from Leonard Roberts, the only semi-Buffy alumnus is writer Jeph Loeb. The fact that Bryan Fuller (Wonderfalls, Dead Like Me) also writes for the show is also close enough, because he's capable of writing Buffy-quality stuff.

I kind of wish I was a fly on the wall when the writers came up with the tag line "Save the cheerleader, save the world." The first time I heard that, I fell off my couch laughing. You've got to appreciate the warped minds who came up with a tag line like that.

ETA: I'm still jazzed about Christopher Eccleston joining the cast. I haven't called him My Christopher Eccleston by accident for nothing!

[ edited by Nebula1400 on 2006-11-24 06:19 ]
So is it really cleared up that Zach is gay? (Kinda rooting for him and Claire.) Or are you getting that from the, "I don't care what she says about me. I am who I am." talk?

I can see a surface comparison of Heroes and Buffy. But, really, there's a lot of shows with a main female lead and her friends. Just because it stars a girl doesn't mean it has to be compared to Buffy. Although I'll admit that I thought of Buffy a lot in this last episode, it was only surface stuff (blonde, cheerleader), as Buffy wasn't indestructable and Claire isn't a hero, yet.
Actually, the gay friend thing is ambiguous. I'm kind of hoping he's gay for a number of reasons.

The Buffy similarities are only surface things. No other show is going to be Buffy (or Angel or Firefly). Only Joss can do that. Still, that doesn't mean other shows can tug at the heart strings of geekdom.
Well character development might come in time, but it also might not if the show continues along the path it has run so far. It's rating through the roof, so why change the formula now?

It's rare that I watch this much of a show if I don't care for the characters. The plot, so far, has been a lot of fun but it's feeling a bit like treading water at this point.

It's got a great premise and lots of potential, but so far there has been little or no character development. I tend to compare shows to Buffy and Angel here because, well, you know, Whedonesque. Not everything can be like those shows. But it's an easy reference point - the article suggests the shows are similar and I disagree.

By episode 9 of Buffy we'd had "The Pack" and "Angel". By episode 9 of Angel, Doyle was a fully fleshed out character and dead.

Nothing in Heroes comes close.

Buffy and Angel are shows I revisit. Their pilots are both wonderful. I doubt I'll ever watch this first run of Heroes again. But I am sticking with it... let's see what mid-season brings.
I only just started watching this show this week(had them recorded on dvr) and I disagree about no character development. We saw a big change in the Nikki accepting Jessica to save her child. We saw Claire accept who she is and stop trying to fit in with the pop crowd. We saw Issac reject the poisons. And we saw Peter take forward movement in his destiny.
Actually, I think there is character development, and if anything it's too blatant. In this episode, for example, Claire realized that she doesn't need to be ashamed of her identity, which was shown through Claire declaring to Zach, "I don't need to be ashamed of my identity!" The writers could really take a few lessons from Joss in subtly.
I wasn't sold on Buffy until season three. I decide Heroes was my favorite new show this season on the fourth ep. The link above had me laughing out loud. And I think Joss does deserve thanks for Heroes. But isn't the blonde cheerleader enough homage?
But isn't the blonde cheerleader enough homage?

Notice how Joss gets homage all over the place? On Veronica Mars this week, a fellow student referred to her as "Buffy." I expect to see some Buffy shout outs in Heroes at some point. With all the references to Star Trek and Spider-man, it is almost inevitable.
I can't believe it's not butter!
No, wait, that's not what I was gonna say. That was about my hairdo. Try again, Vince. Okay, here we go:
I can't believe nobody has mentioned the similarities between Jessica and a certain Glorificus. The only question is, do we suspect there might be some kind of connection between Niki and Jessica? And where does Ben come into all this?

ETA:
Oh, and I have a feeling there's gonna be plenty of character development. We've only just met the characters. Though the writers should work a bit more on the subtext thing, as has been said. I do agree we're seeing a little bit too much of the ol' iceberg in the dialogue, and it's kind of making the characters seem a bit flat. The story is kind of moving at movie speed. That being said, I'm still totally sucked into the story, and I'm really looking forward to the next episode.

[ edited by Vince on 2006-11-24 09:43 ]
Love this show! Only missed one ep since it began, due to travelling, and NBC has the latest episodes available online for free so I wasn't behind for long.

Personally, aside from the general saving-the-world thingy, I don't think it's like Buffy at all -- but I found the article hilarious with it's comparisons. I don't think she meant the shows were the same, just that particular episode had Buffy flavors.

Vince: Glory and Jessica fought over Ben?
Claire is my favorite character because she reminds me of Buffy, but only in surfacy ways. Hiro, who annoyed me in the pilot, is now becoming my second favorite. His gleeful enthusiasm, which made me cringe before, is now one of the cutest things in the show.

From the start of the show I thought Zak was in love with Claire, and then I read that the network didn't want him to seem too gay. I think he might be, but I kind of want him and Claire to be together. Or, if she were a little bit older, I'd put her with Peter.

As far as the Buffyness of the show goes, it sure is just surfacy. I was disappointed by the pilot because I expected a lot more than the awkward pacing, pretentious voice-overs and lack of subtlety. But I kept watching and found that it's a fun show if you don't expect it to be as smart and good as Buffy. It's the kind of TV I wish there were more of - fun, quirky, superhero-y, a good adventure. And I like it much better than Lost this year.

Btw, if anyone wants to talk more about Heroes, you can join us on the Heroes forum on the .org site.

[ edited by ElectricSpaceGirl on 2006-11-24 10:58 ]
ESG just summed pretty much everything that I think about the show, beside the geekiness that awakens in me.

As far as the Buffyness of the show goes, it sure is just surfacy. I was disappointed by the pilot because I expected a lot more than the awkward pacing, pretentious voice-overs and lack of subtlety. But I kept watching and found that it's a fun show if you don't expect it to be as smart and good as Buffy. It's the kind of TV I wish there were more of - fun, quirky, superhero-y, a good adventure. And I like it much better than Lost this year.

'Heroes' has a large ensemble cast a la 'Lost' so I think character development will naturally feel a bit slower (as others have said we've seen a fair bit but it's maybe just a tad too obvious so far) since, unlike 'Lost' IMO, 'Heroes' moves the plot along fairly quickly as well. I think it'd be easier if they started having more single - or few - character episodes (which they may well do after the Avengers X-Men Heroes have actually assembled for the first time which i'd put at about two thirds through the season, maybe later).

In my view it's very, very not much like Buffy at all though. Comparisons can be drawn, of course, and sometimes it's fun to do so but it's very much a function of the viewer reading what they want into what they're seeing.

It's much more like what it actually is, IMO, i.e. a super-hero team-up origin story since despite some viewers and even one or two creators wanting to distance themselves from the 'nerd' label, 'Heroes' is a comic-book TV show.

(BTW, dunno if this has been linked before but I stumbled onto this blog by one of the directing producers and it's got some great behind the scenes info, photos, storyboards etc.)
IIRC, Clare's friend was supposed to be gay in the pilot, but NBC told the producers to tone it down. Boo NBC! (As opposed to Ugly Betty, where Betty's nephew Justin's gayness has been defended in at least 2 eps so far, and shown positively in most of the others -- yay Ugly Betty!)
Before this week's epidose I had not compared Heroes to Buffy. But it was the plotline and the setting that reminded me of Buffy. The action in the locker room, Claire being grounded on a critical night, the male best friend, and the chemistry between her and Peter. So when Kristen wrote the article I think it was more in reaction to this particular episode then to the show in general. And I agree with others who wrote that the character development seems bare. And if there, not subtle. You sort of grow fond of the characters without knowing too much about them. Sort of like the people at work. You like them because your around them but you really hardly know them.
I'm like the show, and I do see some Buffy in there. BUT, I agree with vampire dan. They could really take some lessons from Joss with the word "subtle". Let the audience think a bit without spelling it out for them.
I watch Heroes, I enjoy it, but I don't think it comes up to the level of Buffy in the slightest.

However, I absolutely loved that article. Very funny. Especially comparing Peter Petrelli to Angel with "different hair issues"
Hah!

The real problem I have with Heroes is the high frequency of coincidence. They are constantly running into each other. Like the car accident that D.L., Micah and Hiro all ran into, the diner a number of them happen to end up at. Either there is no explanation in which its sloppy writing, or they are chalking it up to pre-ordained fate or destiny, a concept I have a problem with.

Also I can't stand the Nikki/Jessica parts, I don't know if its the actress or the character. If its the character maybe I'm supposed to find her irritating. Also the short haired girl irritates me as well. There was never a Buffy character that I found instantly irritating in that way. The Buffy characters I disliked earned it!
I'm not a big fan of the Nikki/Jessica story, either, but I'm willing to wait and see what comes of it. I'm actually more interested in Micah than N/J. Aside from this, I actually don't have any problems with the show. Also, pay attention to the episodes Brian Fuller writes. He's more skilled with dialogue than most of the other writers. Jeph Loeb is pretty good, too. Maybe the other writers will learn from them.
I LOVE this show!
I agree on subtleties and dialogue, although I can forgive them because I love the plot so much. Hiro is awesome, he's definately my favourite character. I also really like that you can download the graphic novels of each episode from the website. That's hella cool!

[ edited by nixygirl on 2006-11-25 00:48 ]
Aside from having a central character who is young female with superpowers, I don't see the connection.
I love Buffy, and I really like Heroes. But they're toally different.

Ok, sure, Heroes is a bit slow. But I don't mind it being slow paced as long as it has an interesting story to tell, which it does.

And also, Hiro is awesome. So is Peter's hair.
I'm not sure where the Buffy comparisons are being drawn...I see somewhat similar aspects, such as the Blonde cheerleader but saying Peter is like Angel is a bit of a stretch. Plus, this article seems half-written. If you want to make a real comparison to Buffy, how about trying to match the other two characters? You've got (if you want to stretch it) Willow/Xander (if you want to confirm he's gay), Angel and Buffy covered. But then you go to Whistler? Seriously? That's not major character comparison, it's picking from hundreds of characters one that fits your need. Cordelia, I really could've had a different comparison for but it's just too easy, I think, to say "hey this looks borrowed" when you're talking about a blonde cheerleader who becomes a social outcast...I mean, that's a lot of shows. Claire tends to run away from the big bads.

I like Heroes, I think it's got so much going for it. Buffy season one hooked me and I watched every week -- until I went to college. After that, I revisted Buffy and realized that I might have grown up a little but the show sort of didn't. There are times in the fourth, fifth and sixth seasons that just made me cringe.

Overall, I love the show and it will be one of my favorite shows. But I'm just not seeing how Heroes could "be as good" when it's not even the same type of show.

Well, I don't want to look like a conversation pooper so I will say this -- Joss Whedon is master of all things pen, pencil and sometimes wood stick on a beach shore. HOWEVER, I think it is a disservice to the talented writers and producers who have worked so hard to get a science fiction (no matter what NBC markets it as) tv show on one of the top four networks, to say "they're just not as good." I don't know -- maybe I'm just iffy on the whole "these writers just aren't as good" bit because obviously what they're doing is working for a heck of a lot of people.

[ edited by Browncoat on 2006-11-25 15:59 ]
In terms of the character development, I think they're doing a pretty swell job. Sure, "Heroes" is no Buffy, but to be honest, that’s kind of the appeal. The series is focusing on a MULTITUDE of people with ALL different abilities, and for the most part I find myself caring about what happens to the majority of them. I hadn't made any comparison between Claire and Buffy until that article came out, and you've got to keep in mind that that the setting of Odessa Texas is a little bit different from Sunnydale CA. I would say to give the show time, and I completely agree that the writers could learn some lessons from the master about subtlety, but overall I haven't been excited about a TV show this much in a long time, so I'm going to lay back and enjoy it while I can.

[ edited by Gwendolyn Post on 2006-11-25 16:38 ]
Nebula1400: "I kind of wish I was a fly on the wall when the writers came up with the tag line "Save the cheerleader, save the world." The first time I heard that, I fell off my couch laughing. You've got to appreciate the warped minds who came up with a tag line like that."

This tag is worth the price of admission or something. I think I would watch this show if it had nothing more to offer than these few precious words.

We've tried to riff on it at home ("Save the bartender, save the beer", "Save the beekeeper..." etc.) but nothing comes up to the sheer beauty of the original phrase.

Seriously, the writer(s) should be very proud and happy...

And Saje, thanks for the link to "Beaming Beeman" - a great blog for Heroes-watchers.
Wait ... Ben is Jessica?

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home