HEROES follow-up

Lackluster.

That's what yesterday's episode was.

There were some interesting developments, like Peter can only have one power at a time . . . instead of having ALL the powers of everyone else. Nice way to dial him back a bit. But the dialogue was awful. The motivations were spotty at best. This episode had one purpose: to spin all the characters around and set them in place for the next plotline.

Unfortunately, it forgot about the characters, well, character to do so.

~ Ben

Heroes . . . save THIS cheerleader, PLEASE!

I've been a cheerleader for Heroes since the beginning. I'd consider myself a fan. I almost schedule my life around it (almost, but now with Hulu and/or NBC.com I don't need to -- it ends up online within 24 hours of broadcast).

While Heroes isn't as engaging as, say, Battlestar Gallactica or Lost, it's a fun diversion. On a more spiritual/storytelling level, I've been enjoying some of the themes of heroes/villains and redemption and good/evil.


And when other people are making fun of it or criticizing it . . . I've been enjoying the ride. The first season? Fun characters, interesting ideas. The second season? Not as strong, but still interesting things happening. And I liked the brother and sister, and would have loved to see season 2 play out as the producers had intended. The writer's strike tripped that up. And that led us to Season 3, the current season. The first half of season three . . . felt . . . okay. Just okay.

How can I cheerlead about something that's just okay? Huh?

How can I go to my "geek" meetings and be taken seriously by my fellow geeks? Don't get me wrong . . . again, interesting things were happening. But the shortened season 2 led into a lackluster season 3.

So the second half of season 3 begins tonight. So, will Heroes be able to Bring it On? Or was season 2's truncated resolution and season 3's meandering end up being the beginning of a tailspin as Heroes crashes and burns.

They already "saved the cheerleader and saved the world" . . . but can they save THIS Heroes cheerleader? Meaning me . . .

~ Ben

Speaking of Time Travel -- new Star Trek movie news

POSSIBLE SPOILERS.

I've just read a news story that implies the new Star Trek movie will involve going back to some elements from many Trek fan's favorite episode, "City on the Edge of Forever".

Seems the Guardian donut guy is going to be the element used to travel through time, so old Spock can meet young Spock.

http://trekmovie.com/2007/11/12/more-rumored-star-trek-plot-details/

And Harlan Ellison, the guy who originally WROTE "City" is none too happy.

Not that he ever IS too happy.

I never did read the book that had his original script for "City". I've heard it's a completely different story than the one we ended up with.

I do like time travel. A lot. There's some really good Trek time travel. "City on the Edge of Forver". "Yesterday's Enterprise". Star Trek IV. Star Trek VII (Generations). Star Trek VIII (First Contact). But the whole time travel element of Enterprise lost me. I only watched about half the episodes, and that was a major plot element.

So I hope this goes well.

Oh, and on a side note, Journeyman, on NBC has become very interesting. The time travel is confusing (it's meant to be, it's part of the mystery), but consistent. And the consequences of bringing things back and forth in time has been cool to watch.

Back to Galileo.

~ Ben