Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
I watch every episode of Heroes and am suitably engaged but also increasingly distanced.
I feel that as the crisis has intensified, the characters' personalities have shriveled up a bit. They're alternatingly hopeful or serious, occasionally relieved, but otherwise more and more drained of color.
It's not that I've stopped caring about the heroes or their mission, but I feel the plot has smothered the characters. They feel more like cogs in a machine - breathing cogs, but cogs nonetheless - than people whose company I truly savor. They're not particularly exciting individuals.
Conversely, on Lost, I feel that no matter how the plot rises and falls, few if any of the characters lose their snap.
Reposting: Btw, I was excited to read in Variety about the new Tintin movie plans - with Spielberg and Jackson! It's hard to picture exactly how they're going to be doing it technically, using real actors and animation, but not like Scooby-Doo or something, more like A Scanner Darkly? Anyway, sounds cool.
(I re-replied to your reposting)
However, the best characters (H.R.G., Hiro and Nathan Petrelli) are wonderfully dark and dangerous. HRG has been humanized, but he would still kill a little girl to protect his family, and Nathan seems genuinely conflicted by his role in the procedings. The worst characters keep getting killed (hopefully D.L. actually dies) and Sylar is becoming one of the most chilling villians on TV. The show isn't nearly as ambitious as "Lost" but while that means it won't ever be as great as "Lost"'s peaks, hopefully it will prevent it from "Lost"'s valleys, too.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117964957.html?categoryid=14
Looks like they need to win their conference tournament for a bid.
It reminds me of a difference in the type of action movies I like. I enjoy "realistic" type action films like the first Die Hard and disengage from those with ridiculous stunt work such as Mission Impossible 2. Similarly, I really enjoyed Casino Royale after not enjoying most all of the recent Bond installments.
I also agree with Benaiah about the characters on Heroes, HRG and Nathan Petrelli are far more complex and believable characters than any on either show, while the rest I agree that the plot has smothered a lot of the other characters, most notably Claire, Peter, and the mind-reader (although his character was pretty boring to begin with so I don't mind so much).
Re: Tintin, I'm sure they'll modernize some of the characterizations while staying true to the main ones as much as they can. I think Herge's work was a product of its time, and you're right in some of the earlier stories in particular there are definitely some racist characterizations (Asian, African and Latin American) but as he went along, and overall, his characters were pretty strong while also remaining comical. I don't know which of the stories they're adapting yet, but it probably won't be The Crab with the Golden Claws or whichever one had both racist Arab and African depictions...? But there were some terrific stories in those comics. I read 'em all many times as a kid. Better than Lost!
I think Arabs are depicted fairly positively in the series. Tintin has some close Arab friends, and even lets a spoiled Arab prince name Abdullah live in Marlinspike. He avoided essentializing the characters (I remember a subplot where a group of African Muslims were being sold into slavery but still wished to go to Mecca on a pilgrimage) but his drawings and dialogue are pretty racist.
9. - If the "future" episode is any indicator, Peter may become the hero that is most reluctant to use his powers, making him a deus ex machina of sorts. It makes me think of the old show Airwolf. It was only at the very end of any given episode that the viewer was treated to a montage of Hawke readying the helicopter and taking off to do away with whatever enemies were causing trouble.
I really hope that is not the direction they go, but that was definitely what happened in the future episode.
I already know what happens. Do not worry, I will not spoil a thing.
Yeah, I pretty much have no other choice but to do that. He did not give away one of the major issues of the episode.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117964967.html?categoryid=14&cs=1
How I Met Your Mother, which had been in some doubt (which I couldn't quite believe) will be back.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117964935.html?categoryid=14&cs=1
And, re: Lost - yikes.
Unfortunately for the people who leave their supposed inside scoops on these spoiler message boards, you can go back and check what supposedly was going to happen, according to some inside source -- a hairdresser on the set, the owner of an ice cream parlor where a scene was filmed, whatever. While there are occasional nuggets of truth, generally these spoilers have turned out to be hilariously wrong. And not just far-out wrong, but wrong in ways that sound like deliberate misinformation, e.g. some of the spoilers referenced a car accident, but with a completely different outcome.
My guess is HBO or David Chase has hired some creative person to inject misleading spoilers into the blogosphere. It's cheaper than filming multiple endings and red-herring scenarios. If you put a plausible-sounding story out there and attribute it to a minimally credible source, it will quickly become gospel.
Which is all a long way of saying that your crazed "Lost" fan friend might be getting played by the very people to whom he is most devoted. Whatever he thinks he knows might be way off, while J.J. Hunsicker or whoever is off having a big laugh. (If you can't tell, I haven't made the leap into "Lost")
They were pretty much totally spot on. It seems that sci-fi shows in general attract a different type of fan, so I suppose it partially depends on whether you lump Lost in with some of the other popular sci-fi shows (Battlestar, Stargate SG-1, the now-in-limbo Star Trek, etc; though none of those had Lost's audience volume). I've seen Heroes get the spoilers treatment with excellent accuracy in the past. Speaking of Heroes -
I think part of the danger is that the show is starting to spread itself a bit too thin. In the early going there were a handful of core characters. That number has been expanded significantly since the show's inception. Not that shows aren't allowed to add new characters, of course. But it can be hard when each character is supposed to bring something relatively unique, and you're talking about superhero powers here.
One thing I really like about Heroes, though, is that characters seem to grow and change. Though plenty might disagree with me, I really don't see that with Lost, or not to the same degree. Also, things seem to happen much more quickly on Heroes, which is a big part of why some of the characters have gotten simplified to a degree. While it's nice to give people lots of backstory, I can do without Hurley episode number 74 featuring 35 flashbacks (warning - hyperbole alert!), to get from point A to point B a little bit more quickly. In its one season so far, Heroes has moved much faster than most other shows. The characters suffer a bit, but I think it gives the show more snap in general, even if you might think the people themselves have a bit less.
Also, 8, remember Peter has already fought Sylar twice. Once in Odessa, and once in New York. If he hasn't picked up those abilities by now, he probably never will (though he may already have them).
I'm assuming it got better, so I'll give it a second shot on repeats. But man, it just didn't do it for me.
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.