• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

So. Who's watching Heroes just for Quinto?

I tried watching some Heroes clips and just kept saying, "Spock, NO, that's so MEAN!" :(

:lol: If I didn't see the Ellen interview, I might have worried. But he's so good with Mr. Muggles in their scenes together that I knew he has to be a good guy. And a dog person.

Qunito is better looking with stubble and a twitch.

I agree. I took little notice of him (well, physically at least) the first few viewings. Then I saw what he looks like in person and I almost fainted. :D
 
i think he looks pretty good no matter what, but i have to agree with preferring his real self.

altho' i can't say i'm gonna watch season 4 just for zach, if it weren't for him i wouldn't be watching it at all. would never have turned it on in the first place. kept watching because, while being good looking is great, being able to act is what keeps me interested. loved spock and heard that sylar was totally different; wanted to see how he pulled that off. turned out to be fun. :cool:

so yeah, he's a sexy guy. :drool: ....but seriously - if he weren't as good at his job would as many of us be watching?
 
I watched and loved the first season with my wife. We started season 2, Could not get past the first episode it was so bad.
 
I've liked all of it, even the aborted season two. To me it's always been an ensemble cast and not just "Sylar and Friends".
 
Thanks! Found it on an old, much-loved site called elf on a shelf. Worth a visit. You can kiss everyone from Haldir over Elrond, to the Hobbits and Uruk-hai. Hehe. :D
 
I'm very very fond of Elves. ;) And that Karl Urban guy too - Eomir was it? Thought Haldir vastly underrated - thanks for the tip!

But I digress - let the Quinto love recommence!!!
 
He's great elf-material!

And Eomer rocks, almost as much as Boromir.

Anyway, I own the first two seasons of Heroes on dvd. I like the first one better, but the second is cool, too.
 
Heroes storylines are a mess, but the show is still fun... But Zach has always been the main reason I watched the show (though there are a few other cool actors/characters on the show... Angela and Noah among those that are still alive, and Adrian Pasdar is so cool that he's the only person other than Zach I can see playing Sylar successfully).

I knew Zach as Sylar before I saw him as Spock. The reason Istarted watching Heroes is because a bunch of people I know have been telling me about the show, but I mostly got interested because some people whose taste I trust (because we tend to watch the same shows and love the same type of characters) kept going on about how great this Sylar character was. So I had to check him out. And, I quickly realized why they were obsessed with him... but, ironicay, Temis is right, the character is not very well written. However, Zach made Sylar compelling and irresistible even despite poor material.


so yeah, he's a sexy guy. :drool: ....but seriously - if he weren't as good at his job would as many of us be watching?
No, because it's not all about looks - definitely not! Milo Ventimiglia is a good example: he is just as good-looking, but he is such a bland actor, that I don't find him sexy and I don't really care about his character. It has to do with talent, and with charisma and presence. There are lots of pretty faces on TV, but some guys have it, and some don't. Leonard Nimoy has it, and Zachary Quinto has it. :techman:
 
Awww.....Peter Petrelli is so horribly Stu-ish that it's sort of adorable. He's the Megan Fox of show bizz: can't act for the life of him, but looks good.
 
i have never thought peter was especially interesting or good-looking. nathan has the chiseled features of a classically handsome guy. neither of them really does much for me, and to me the ending of last season was kinda like having one really spiffy guy stand in for another, which is funny b/c they are almost opposites on the attractiveness spectrum.
 
I tried watching some Heroes clips and just kept saying, "Spock, NO, that's so MEAN!" :(

I think I'll watch Heroes that way from now on. He's not Sylar, he's MU Spock who lost the goatee when he got caught in a temporal vortex and ended up on 21st C Earth. That explanation makes more sense than anything the writers have come up with!

I'm very very fond of Elves. ;) And that Karl Urban guy too - Eomir was it? Thought Haldir vastly underrated - thanks for the tip!

But I digress - let the Quinto love recommence!!!

Yeah! No elf-kissing in my thread! :rommie:
 
I think I'll watch Heroes that way from now on. He's not Sylar, he's MU Spock who lost the goatee when he got caught in a temporal vortex and ended up on 21st C Earth. That explanation makes more sense than anything the writers have come up with!

aw, c'mon - even MU spock was still logical at heart, not a bundle of emotions gone awry, which is what sylar looks to be. ....or can the writers just really be that bad? nah.... :rolleyes:
 
I think I'll watch Heroes that way from now on. He's not Sylar, he's MU Spock who lost the goatee when he got caught in a temporal vortex and ended up on 21st C Earth. That explanation makes more sense than anything the writers have come up with!

aw, c'mon - even MU spock was still logical at heart, not a bundle of emotions gone awry, which is what sylar looks to be. ....or can the writers just really be that bad? nah.... :rolleyes:

Yeah MU Spock was weirdly moral - if they hewed to the "opposite" logic, he really should be an irrational nutcase like Sylar.

Important Update Directly From Zach!

Quinto also let it slip that there may be a new romantic interest for Sylar. "There are a couple of little percolations, but we'll see if any of them take," he teased.
If they want to squick us out, it should be Claire. :devil: They don't know what to do with Claire anyway...at least squicking us out is a reason for the character to exist.

Quinto wants Sylar to die, not be redeemed (can I get an a-men?)

In the past, Quinto has indicated that he thinks someone like Sylar is really too evil ever to be redeemed. So I wanted to know how he'd like his character ultimately to be taken out. "That's interesting," he said. "Those are longer-term conversations. And Tim Kring, our creator, is an incredibly supportive and creatively open person, so we have those conversations from time to time about where we see the character going. I don't know. Maybe the redemption would be in his eradication somehow. Maybe some kind of ultimate sacrifice. Or maybe just bloody and gory, ... a well-deserved demise for someone who's caused so much pain in the world of Heroes. We'll see."
 
Oh, you know they're going to redeem Sylar. They've been playing with it for ages. They made a point to give the character layers starting with The Hard Part in season 1 and pursued it big time in season 3 (which I thought was EXCELLENT). They've made him almost more of a tragic character now than a villain. That's not poorly written. That's called character growth. It's not bad writing because you just want a 2-dimensional villain who gets offed immediately.

Does Darth Vader ring a bell?

I totally suspect that Micah's "you could save us all" was there for a reason.

Even what Sylar wanted to do with Nathan's persona wasn't to wreak evil on humanity. He actually told Nathan he wanted to be a better him than him (being that Nathan's family and life is everything he's always wanted and everything Virginia Gray wanted for him--he's still acting on trying to prove himself to her).

We first saw these cracks in Sylar not wanting to be the villain when Sylar thought Adam, Linderman and Angela's plan to blow up NYC was too much with nothing in it for him and briefly scared him back into his Gabriel guise hoping for a second chance at being told that being Gabriel was enough and that he didn't have to be special (and was betrayed again, of course). Sylar was delighted when it turned out that Peter was the villain and that if Sylar could kill Peter before he exploded, he'd become the hero.

Sylar does villainous things because he is desperate to prove that he is special, but is conflicted about how his intuitive aptitude works (hence trying to hang himself at first and feeling betrayed by Chandra, Noah and Elle for pushing him to kill). But when he started losing himself and his own identity when he got a power that could make it possible for him to become Nathan, he started trying to hold on to the Sylar image that he had created.

Sylar is only a mask for Gabriel to hide his insecurity with being the watchmaker's son who became a watchmaker, whose only ability that was ever truly his was being able to fix watches. Sylar likes to put on other people's personae (amassing their abilities is all about that) in an attempt to find what makes himself "special", IMO.

One thing about Sylar is that he doesn't believe that characters like Noah and Angela are any better or less evil than him. Hence, the whole point of Dual.

That's the most fascinating part about the character.

IMO, the writing is really underappreciated. I like the continuing plotline a lot and find it all links up together wonderfully.
 
Last edited:
Oh, you know they're going to redeem Sylar. They've been playing with it for ages. They made a point to give the character layers starting with The Hard Part in season 1 and pursued it big time in season 3 (which I thought was EXCELLENT). They've made him almost more of a tragic character now than a villain. That's not poorly written. That's called character growth. It's not bad writing because you just want a 2-dimensional villain who gets offed immediately.

Does Darth Vader ring a bell?

I totally suspect that Micah's "you could save us all" was there for a reason.
Hmmm... let's just say that there have been examples in the past that prove that a villain being presented as more complex, more sympathetic, tragic or even somewhat heroic at times, is no guarantee that there would be a redemption story.

With TV shows in particular, there are many factors that influence storylines, such as - a bunch of writers with different ideas, disagreements among writers, disagreements between writers and actors, attempts to satisfy different factions of fandom which have completely opposite wishes, outside factors (such as an actor leaving, early cancellation, writers/actors strike, network interference, etc.), and a lack of a long-term planning. Heroes has suffered from most of those to a ridiculoous degree, with writers being sacked, leaving, coming back and leaving again. You just have to look at how they've been completely ignoring most of the plotlines they introduced in volumes 2 and 3, or the characters who were introduced with a lot of hype, barely used and then killed off either because the character was unpopular, or because the actor was busy, or for some other mysterious reason... Those guys obviously don't care much about continuity, and I would not bet on them developing any plot in any seemingly logical way. They've proven that they can do pretty much anything (short of killing off Claire, Peter, Sylar or Noah for real). This actually leads to one of the show's main charms, the unpredictability of its storylines - although, ironically, this does not seem to be a result of an artistic intent or even a desire to shock, but simply the fact that the writers team don't seem to have an idea what they're doing.
 
You're confusing behind-the-scenes factors from the story being told on screen. Just because a character like, say, Elle is killed off early because of the actress being busy doesn't mean that the reason given IN THE STORY doesn't make sense or is half-baked in some way.

I'd argue that Sylar's killing of Elle is VERY in character because of her multiple betrayals of him and the fact that it highlighted how much he was like his father. It made a lot of story sense.

And Adam's death ultimately became an exploration of how mortality would be more feared by an immortal than anyone else. Adam also became a lesson on what Claire and Sylar's futures might be.

Bob's death was because the actor broke his neck horse riding and could only manage sitting in a chair completely still for 2 brief scenes. It still made for a wonderful moment where Sylar showed Elle her father's ability by alchemizing a gun.

The deaths weren't just random. They meant something for the story.

Changing writers or actor issues are completely irrelevant to me if what is on screen works in the narrative. Heroes has worked just fine, IMO.

Similarly, I couldn't care less that Charisma Carpenter's pregnancy forced the writers to create the Jasmine plot. It ultimately doesn't frickin' matter. All that matters is the story told on screen. It doesn't matter that the writers didn't go into the entirety of AtS thinking about how Jasmine was going to be responsible for everything. The point is that she was responsible. The in-story explanations trump out-of-story production issues.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top