Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
62 of 73 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
A late season rally might portend better things to come, April 27, 2009
There is no way around it: the first half of Season Three of HEROES was as bad as Season Two had been. And there was little hope that it was going to get better. But then it did. Much of the improvement might have been the result of one of the greatest tragedies of the 2008-2009 season, ABC's cancellation of one of the best shows in the history of television, PUSHING DAISIES. But one show's tragedy is another's great fortune. Bryan Fuller, who had been a consulting producer for HEROES in its first and promising season (he was given writing credits on what is to this day by far the greatest HEROES episode ever, the brilliant Season One episode "Company Man," was suddenly freed from PUSHING DAISIES, and was made the new show runner for HEROES after several producers and writers were released from the show. The improvement in the show was not instantaneous, but it was close. By the end of the season the show was as interesting as it had been in flashes in Season One.
Whether it was Fuller or not, the show had by the end of Season Three begun to have a direction once again. Both Season Two and the first half of Three had seen the show go down a series of confusing and generally unpleasant directions. One story arc had minimal connection with what had gone before and all indications were that they were just making things up as they went along. And what they were making up simply wasn't very good. Has the show finally turned around? If the difference has indeed been Bryan Fuller's involvement, it is entirely possible. I just know that by the end of Season Three I was actually looking forward to each episode again. For ages it was simply something I watched because I had been watching CHUCK.
There has been a lot of debate about what went wrong with HEROES, about why it failed to fulfill the potential it displayed in its first season. My own opinion is that the show never took its own name seriously. The truth is that despite its title there were very, very few heroic characters. Having superpowers does not make someone a hero. Being heroic does. But most of the characters were not heroic and most of them struggled more with their own pettiness. And the writers kept taking characters down the most outrageous paths. Like the nerfing of Peter Petrelli, leaving him a defanged puppy. Or making a mess of every character that Ali Larter has played.
But I have much higher hopes for Season Four. Almost all the high points of Seasons Two and Three took place in the second half of this season, after the time when Bryan Fuller took over as show runner. The show now seems to be moving in more interesting directions, and there were dramatically fewer "oh, no!" moments. And in the struggle in the season finale, there was some genuine excitement and true heartfelt tragedy. My confidence in the show hasn't recovered entirely, but for the first time since Season One, I find that I care once again about what happens next.
|
|
|
10 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
The Continuation of A Great Show, August 27, 2009
Many people have decided that Heroes is nothing ike the first season, and therefore, is a bad show. Some of the reviews constantly compare the show to the first season stating that the show will never, or has not, reached the potential of that season. While I agree, I would also like to give an unbiased review of Season 3.
Season three had two volumes: Volume 3: Villains and Volume 4: Fugitives. First, let's take a look at Vol. 3. The volume took off from the ill-fated Season 2 (Volume 2) ending and tried to make due with. It started off promising with Angela Petrelli manipulating Sylar into thinking he was her son, watching Arthur Petrelli rise to power, and even additions like Daphne made for some interesting story arcs. I liked the idea of the formula, just not how it was executed. And, I even liked the story arc for Hiro. However, my main gripe with this volume was the ret conning of well developed characters as well as the break in mythology. When they ret conned Elle's sociopathic character to be a good girl turned bad by the Company, I was devastated because Elle was a well developed character by the end of Season 2. I also did not like how they tried to weasel her into Sylar's storyline by messing up the main impetus for Sylar's evilness that was developed in Season 1. Then, the whole idea of the catalyst being Claire but no one taking note of it until Volume 3 was a little farfetched. That being said, I did not feel like the show was just so horrible it couldn't be redeemed.
Thus, Volume 4 starts and gives us loyal fans, who understand that sci-fi shows take a few detours in trying to flesh out its mythology, we given some nice story arcs to love. I liked how the show began to go towards the Five Years Gone S1 episode future that many fans loved. I also was intrigued with the character of Danko and how he fit right in with the show. I like the flashback episode "1961" because it gave us some insight into the previous generation of Heroes, and I enjoyed Sylar's whole arc--from the journey to find his father to finally getting the shape-shifting ability--I thought they set his character up well. My gripes with this volume is that they took away Peter's ability and never gave it back. I am not sure why they did that, but it was a major thorn in my side. Also, they kind of acted like Vol 3 didn't happen. No mention of Arthur or Pinehearst, no mention of the formula or the catalyst, and they kind of didn't know what to do with Mohinder once he got an ability.
Overall, the show was trying to find its footing again after the second season was cut short and they had to scrap together a season. I believe that the show is just as good as it was in S1. The only thing is that the characters need motivation (similar to the NYC explosion in S1). However, I would not say that the show isn't as good as S1 because each season since has had it's own pitfalls, but it's triumphs as well.
Thanks!
|
|
|
28 of 38 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
this season is ok, April 9, 2009
Season 3 started slowly but most of us heroes fans were so desperate after a 9 month vacation(due to the writer's strike), that we took what we could get. the writers have not been able to recapture the magic of season 1. they keep bringing in too many new characters that just takes away from the harmony of the original cast. one of the plueses of this season is that sylar has a bigger role and they finally figured out that angela petrelli could be a major player. i love the show as a whole and will be around for season 4, 5 and 6 hopefully.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
