Could you ever predict "Heroes" would be a one-season wonder?

[Temis the Vorta]

Again, though, no one can rationally call any SF series that has made it to Series 4, with a 5th more likely all the time - thanks, Jay? - a complete failure

Well nobody's saying it's been a commercial failure. And if they're talking about an S5 despite the appalling Nielsens - even by NBC standards, they're now marginal - that means they're raking in the bucks from DVD, foreign sales or something.

If only it had made it to "series" 4. You just reminded me of the unhappy fact that like Star Trek, Heroes had the potential for a spinoff franchise. Those don't come along every day.

I do think that the concept of Heroes was one that I couldn't see stay strong for longer than a season.

Why? It's open-ended. The basic dramatic tension is unresolvable: mutants struggling to control their powers so they can live with the world and live with themselves. Like Star Trek, it's a premise that doesn't depend on certain characters, certain places or the resolution of a problem like "get off the island" or "find Earth." Like Star Trek, it could have gone many seasons and spun off several series. When most series suck, that's too bad but with Heroes, we lost more than just one show.

This is for a different thread, but I bet most people could name a number of series that might have been stronger creatively, and perhaps more successful commercially, if their producers and networks had had the discipline to say 13 episodes, no more or 22 episodes or 2 seasons, and that's it.

I can't, probably because if the producers are stretching a premise beyond the breaking point, I'll bail on it. Even all the squalling about Lost, just didn't see it. I never got anywhere close to bored with all the dithering. It was interesting dithering.

I will however, agree that premises have inherent run-lengths built into them. Chuck, 24, BSG and Dexter are examples of shows that have narrowly defined premises that demand shorter runs; Heroes and Star Trek are at the opposite end of the spectrum (and shows that open-ended are very rare).

BSG was the right length. If Dexter runs for five or six seasons, tops, that will be a good length and as much as we could have hoped to be sucked out of that premise (more than I would have expected, too). Chuck has changed its premise to hang on for another season, which I think has damaged the show but hey, it's still well worth watching so another year or two won't hurt anything. And even if I thought it was too damaged to be worth watching - and the first two episodes really made me wonder - I'll just stop watching and not begrudge other people their right to continue to see the show. 24 is past its expiration date and Jack needs to die this year.

I don't care how the episodes are divvied up per season. The real issue is that the story runs 100 episodes and then stops. Or 50, or 500. Depends entirely on the premise.

Some shows that come to mind for me include both DS9 and Enterprise in the Star Trek arena, the Terminator series, and much as I'd like to see Morena Baccarin's Louise Brooks hair bob for years on end, I'd be just as happy to see the new V planned out for 30 episodes and that's all.

DS9 was the right length. If they'd gone to S8, then I would have started to complain. ENT never even got off the ground, since it was a misfire from the start. They needed to rethink the premise before knowing how long it should run for. A true Birth of the Federation/Romulan War premise could have merited the full seven season run. V has a plain-vanilla approach that suggests it will wear out its welcome quickly and the producers better not plan for grand things - it'll be lucky if the ratings hold up enough to get it an S2. With a different approach, it would have the potential for several seasons.

Only in America, really, is there the culture of "entitlement" that seems to demand that all shows must run for 7 years to be considered successful.

Outside of the Star Trek culture, nothing of the sort exists. Few Americans give a flying fribble how long any show runs for - that's Hollywood's problem! Americans will of course raise holy hell if their favorite show is cancelled, but that's entirely idiosyncratic.

Nobody cares how long shows run in the abstract, only that they keep getting more of the specific shows they like. And they'll lobby against shows they don't watch, I dunno why, because they think it will free up a timeslot to protect their favorite shows or maybe on general principle that "stuff I don't watch shouldn't exist"? On other boards, Chuck fans routinely complain that Heroes hasn't been cancelled, as if that would protect Chuck in some way.

I think having predetermined endings for series would, among other things, eliminate the "cancellation panic" fans continually face regarding their favorite shows.

No it wouldn't. because most viewers do not follow news about shows. They would not realize there's an end date so the end date would not make them more likely to watch. What makes them likely to watch is 1) if the series gets good promotion and a good time slot and 2) if the series gives them what they want to see at any given time. The decision to watch or bail on a show is an episode-by-episode thing. TV is not important enough to most people for them to bother planning future viewing strategies.

Hell, I read somewhere that Lost might not end this season after all.

YAY!

 

[MichaelDornFan]

Has there been any news concerning a potential fifth season? If Heroes isn't renewed, then there are only about five episodes left until the series finale.

 

[Hermiod]

Heroes had signs of its current problems very early on, remember.

Even back in season one, characters would act stupidly or be nerfed to prevent them from resolving the entire season's plot immediately. The most obvious example would be the psychological block Hiro had that stopped him using his powers.

This.
The show had stupid plot lines and actions since the beginning, but in season 1 it had the benefit of the characters still being a mystery, and the audience still not being fed up with the characters acting dumb or being nerfed.

I've lost count of the number of times they've purposefully crippled characters in order to prevent them from resolving the plot earlier.

It's got predictable very fast - someone would be close to solving the big mystery, only to be nerfed in some way (power loss, memory loss, mental blocks, brain scrambling etc) at the last second.

 

[Ryan]

Actually yes I thought it be a one-season wonder because in the beginning of S1 they were talking about how season 2 would have a largely different set of heroes with maybe some of the S1 guys appearing for certain story-lines, but that the main story would involve new characters.

In hindsight a whole new cast is probably the only thing that could have saved the series.

 

[Ryan]

How could they have taken something so amazing as "Company Man" and messed it up SO fast?

Oh man, can you believe HRG used to be scary and Claire used to love him?

Just once I wish Noah would remind Claire when she goes on her bratty tirades that he got shot for her. Twice. Then maybe slap the shit out of her for good measure.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Actually yes I thought it be a one-season wonder because in the beginning of S1 they were talking about how season 2 would have a largely different set of heroes with maybe some of the S1 guys appearing for certain story-lines, but that the main story would involve new characters.

In hindsight a whole new cast is probably the only thing that could have saved the series.

A new cast of Mayas and Alejandros would have sunk the show faster. The writers would have been the same incompetent crew. So maybe a faster demise would have been preferable? I can see the merit of that argument.

 

[LitmusDragon]

No, and in fact during the first half of season 2 I was in denial that it had went downhill at all. I kept thinking "this is leading somewhere!". And then, it didn't.

When future Hiro met himself on the subway, I remember thinking: "This is the best written show on TV!"

 

[Small White Car]

I was convinced that it would be cancelled at the end of its first year.

So the answer is, yes, I thought it would be a one-season wonder.

I'm pleased you started a whole thread just to find me!

 

[3D Master]

No, and in fact during the first half of season 2 I was in denial that it had went downhill at all. I kept thinking "this is leading somewhere!". And then, it didn't.

When future Hiro met himself on the subway, I remember thinking: "This is the best written show on TV!"

Uh, Peter met future Hiro on the subway.

Anyway, I didn't see it coming either. S1 is amazing (gotta rewatch that one of these days.)

I still don't get how they can go from something so good, into something so bad. And I know what the problem is too. They spend their time trying to recreate S1 again and again.

It should have changed drastically. S2 should have been the heroes working together, being a Justice League, or even a Watchmen.

 

[Hermiod]

A new cast of Mayas and Alejandros would have sunk the show faster. The writers would have been the same incompetent crew. So maybe a faster demise would have been preferable? I can see the merit of that argument.

I disagree. If this new cast of Mayas (plural) had continued dressing the way the original did in season three I'm sure the show would have found an audience.

 

[Nowhere Man]

I never though Heroes was going to last I figured 2 or 3 seasons.

 

[payndz201]

What impressed me about the first season of Heroes was that it wasn't quite linear. You'd flit back and forth between the various characters, and their paths would intersect, but not always at the same time (as we saw it). So something would happen to one person, you'd wonder "What the hell was that all about?", then later you'd see the same event from another perspective and all the pieces came together. That's clever writing, and a sign that things were planned out in advance and heading in a specific direction. Once the future storyline came fully into play and people started actively trying either to prevent or cause it, it was a really good payoff.

From the start of season 2, though, the story wasn't nearly as well organised, and quickly became a mess. There was a definite feel of "Oh, shit, we have to do more of these? Er, okay - quick, make something up!" Obviously the writers' strike didn't help, but maybe Kring should have taken a page from JMS's book and planned out his dream show for five years rather than just the one.

 

[FPAlpha]

When i saw the season 1 finale i immediately got a very bad feeling about the future of the show.

I know that everybody was expecting this huge showdown between Peter and Sylar and that they intentionally robbed us of that with the future episode and the showdown behind closed doors a few episodes before and maybe the writers thought they'd be clever going against expectations but when the final result is so underwhelming after the huge build up it doesn't look good for a show.

Sadly i was right.. i've never seen a show unravel so fast after such a stellar first season. Most shows kind of settle down if they had a huge opening season to a more "manageable" level, i.e. varying amounts of awesome episodes in between normal to good episodes but i can't say with certainty that i enjoyed a single episode since.. no episode came even close to the genius of "Company Man" and the others around that landmark episode.

It really does seem that the writing staff burned off all their ammunition in this single season and when it hit gold they were caught with their pants down and couldn't come up with interesting ways to continue the entire setup.

Really sad considering how awesome the premise was.

 

[Mr Light]

I waited the entire first season for that huge final fight with Sylar... with all of them teaming up and using their powers and smack him around. I was *SO* disappointed by the non-fight at the end, and then they didn't even bother to kill him! Not to mention the way they un-did all the 'deaths' there as well (Parkman, Peter, Nathan). Also they extremely anti-climactically killed off Linderman who they spent the entire season building up as the kingpin of super-crime!

 

[Temis the Vorta]

A new cast of Mayas and Alejandros would have sunk the show faster. The writers would have been the same incompetent crew. So maybe a faster demise would have been preferable? I can see the merit of that argument.

I disagree. If this new cast of Mayas (plural) had continued dressing the way the original did in season three I'm sure the show would have found an audience.

Eh, there are plenty of shows that trot out T&A, but you'd be surprised how often it doesn't work. Might be because reality shows can do the same, and for far cheaper than any drama. If T&A is what you want, why hire writers at all?

but maybe Kring should have taken a page from JMS's book and planned out his dream show for five years rather than just the one.

If he could plan one season, why not plan the second season? And then the third? Even season-by-season detailed organization with a generalized master plan linking the years (heroes must save planet from cracking in two) would have been far better than the muddle we got.

 

[Hermiod]

A new cast of Mayas and Alejandros would have sunk the show faster. The writers would have been the same incompetent crew. So maybe a faster demise would have been preferable? I can see the merit of that argument.

I disagree. If this new cast of Mayas (plural) had continued dressing the way the original did in season three I'm sure the show would have found an audience.

Eh, there are plenty of shows that trot out T&A, but you'd be surprised how often it doesn't work. Might be because reality shows can do the same, and for far cheaper than any drama. If T&A is what you want, why hire writers at all?

I was kidding. If anything, TV's attempts at T&A are tame these days plus there's always some bloke with his shirt off in the same scene to ruin it.

 

[ring]

We can't prejudge anything....who cares!!!

 

[HappyDayRiot]

I Not to mention the way they un-did all the 'deaths' there as well (Parkman, Peter, Nathan). Also they extremely anti-climactically killed off Linderman who they spent the entire season building up as the kingpin of super-crime!

Surely the worst undone death was DL? Oh he didn't die from that bullet... but he did die from a different bullet in a pointless storyline a little later!

And whilst Linderman's death was sudden, it was awesome. He got punched in the brain!!

 

[bigdaddy]

I remember before the second season started and everyone was so amazed by the shows first season and the spinoff thing they were going to do.

I knew then the show was a disaster because just look at the season 1 finale, it is horrible! Everyone should have seen what was coming then.

 

[Chess Piece Face]

I remember thinking Heroes was not all it was cracked up to be from day one.