|
Post by Lola m on Mar 29, 2007 16:43:47 GMT -5
I was just thinking that the scene where Claude flights him with a stick is very very yoda-like. Either yoda actually did it, or it was done wth a ligh saber. Though I think scenes like that with the mentor comming at the mentee and a stick are pretty common in lots of movies- kung fu comes to mind. **nods** I think it was meant to make us think of these types of images to emphasize the relationship.
|
|
|
Post by thelittlestvampire on Apr 10, 2007 0:03:43 GMT -5
I just noticed the scene where Nathan is walking through the kitchen to meet Linderman. I kept wondering what the open shirt and tuft of chest hair was about. Then I realized how that walk through the uber-bright kitchen was a total homage to goodfellas. There was a major gangster-film vibe. Very cool.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on May 10, 2007 19:48:43 GMT -5
Great review, Erin. "A friend once told me that the way they used to figure out if a child had a tapeworm was to put a plate of food in front of the child, tempting the parasite out so it could be squashed."Really? I wonder how that works exactly. "Mohinder does it with a cup of chai. Yet, still he hesitates on the squashing, and again we see the danger of working alone. Mohinder needs another there to balance his over-reliance on his enormous squishy frontal lobes. (Which you really don�t want to emphasize when you�re hanging around with a professional brain eater.)Hee... and
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on May 10, 2007 19:58:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on May 10, 2007 20:01:32 GMT -5
Great review, Erin. "A friend once told me that the way they used to figure out if a child had a tapeworm was to put a plate of food in front of the child, tempting the parasite out so it could be squashed."Really? I wonder how that works exactly. "Mohinder does it with a cup of chai. Yet, still he hesitates on the squashing, and again we see the danger of working alone. Mohinder needs another there to balance his over-reliance on his enormous squishy frontal lobes. (Which you really don�t want to emphasize when you�re hanging around with a professional brain eater.)Hee... and Heh...yeah, the story she told was wicked gross. Not sure if it's an old wives tale or not...but apparently the tapeworm will respond to food if it's starving and come up the throat. And now that I'm going further with that metaphor, it's both the chai and The List that bring Sylar's parasitic nature to the forefront. Damn, now I wish I'd put that in my review...
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on May 11, 2007 21:32:39 GMT -5
Yay, Erin! Another great review!
Just like with Sara's review, I think your quotes are a most excellent summary of main theme. Interdependence in positives (collaborating, communicating, etc.) and negatives (coersion, manipulation, etc.) Comparing the various pairs - Hiro and Ando, Sylar and Mohinder, Mr and Mrs Bennet) to see on which end of the spectrum they lay (including the loner - Candace). We see over and over that choosing the path of isolation is not a good idea!
And then of course, you brought it all back around to Peter - which was the perfect decision, especially leading into your next review. 'Cuz Peter and Sylar are the perfect mirror images. And the key to it all lies in that comparison. As you said:
**nods a lot to this** This is such an important difference between Peter and Sylar (hammered home even more when the solitary Sylar wavers momentarily and has the stunningly disasterous reunion wiht mom)! Loved your use of the words "cooperative path". We see it so clearly in their mirror image powers; same ability but opposite methods to that power (closeness that shares the power as oposed to deadly competition with only one person walking away with the power).
And thus, through your amazing powers of research and logical exposition, you made me understand the most important thing of all. The dangerous warning sign - the loss of emo bangs!!!!! ;D
Again, great job on this, Erin! Really pulled the ep together nicely!
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on May 11, 2007 21:38:27 GMT -5
Very interesting to note the description of "competition" in the parasite word - "neither species benefits". This fits with my thoughts about Sylar. His single-minded competition to be the "most special" of the special people is (I think) ultimately not going to benefit him, it's what will get him dead. Like all the people he killed along the way.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on May 13, 2007 10:05:00 GMT -5
Yay, Erin! Another great review! Just like with Sara's review, I think your quotes are a most excellent summary of main theme. Interdependence in positives (collaborating, communicating, etc.) and negatives (coersion, manipulation, etc.) Comparing the various pairs - Hiro and Ando, Sylar and Mohinder, Mr and Mrs Bennet) to see on which end of the spectrum they lay (including the loner - Candace). We see over and over that choosing the path of isolation is not a good idea! Thanks, Lola! I don't always use quotes, as I can't always find one that just hits it. I was lucky this time, though...and just a bit informed my research for the Heroes chapter of my thesis. There is the whole notion of independence versus interdependence in American society that is really deadly, and it's kind of interesting to see Heroes addressing that...especially in terms of masculinity and notions of power. They seem to be saying that the "cowboy" mentality is problematic. And yay to them for that! Yes! Thank you. Because now I get to talk about the weird biblical and gender stuff going on! (Aren't you lucky!) First, you have Peter and Sylar as being equally powerful (almost godlike), yet Sylar "takes" and Peter "shares." So we have a god as cooperative being, gaining power through sharing and community (Peter) versus a god as competitive being, gaining power through force (Sylar). I mean, it fits in perfectly with the Watchmaker analogy, which has been used as both a "proof" for the existence of God and is the basis for the Intelligent Design theory. I think it's obvious, with Sylar as a watchmaker (ie, intelligent design) versus Peter, whom Claude seemed to think was the perfection of the evolutionary process, and how they are coded as bad and good, respectively, where Kring and Co fall in the argument. 'Cause the biggest challenge to Paley's theory was Darwin's theory. Think I'm just riffing? Check this out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogyHee! Never underestimate the power of the Super Emo Bangs! Sorry about the above tangent! Thanks so much for commenting!
|
|
|
Post by Lola m on May 14, 2007 16:47:17 GMT -5
Yay, Erin! Another great review! Just like with Sara's review, I think your quotes are a most excellent summary of main theme. Interdependence in positives (collaborating, communicating, etc.) and negatives (coersion, manipulation, etc.) Comparing the various pairs - Hiro and Ando, Sylar and Mohinder, Mr and Mrs Bennet) to see on which end of the spectrum they lay (including the loner - Candace). We see over and over that choosing the path of isolation is not a good idea! Thanks, Lola! I don't always use quotes, as I can't always find one that just hits it. I was lucky this time, though...and just a bit informed my research for the Heroes chapter of my thesis. There is the whole notion of independence versus interdependence in American society that is really deadly, and it's kind of interesting to see Heroes addressing that...especially in terms of masculinity and notions of power. They seem to be saying that the "cowboy" mentality is problematic. And yay to them for that! Yes! Thank you. Because now I get to talk about the weird biblical and gender stuff going on! (Aren't you lucky!) First, you have Peter and Sylar as being equally powerful (almost godlike), yet Sylar "takes" and Peter "shares." So we have a god as cooperative being, gaining power through sharing and community (Peter) versus a god as competitive being, gaining power through force (Sylar). I mean, it fits in perfectly with the Watchmaker analogy, which has been used as both a "proof" for the existence of God and is the basis for the Intelligent Design theory. I think it's obvious, with Sylar as a watchmaker (ie, intelligent design) versus Peter, whom Claude seemed to think was the perfection of the evolutionary process, and how they are coded as bad and good, respectively, where Kring and Co fall in the argument. 'Cause the biggest challenge to Paley's theory was Darwin's theory. Think I'm just riffing? Check this out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogyHee! Never underestimate the power of the Super Emo Bangs! Sorry about the above tangent! Thanks so much for commenting! Oooh, I would never have thought to think about the Wachmaker analogy in conjuction with Heroes . . . . but you make a compelling argument! Very cool!
|
|