Kristin says this about Heroes Season 2:
I'm told next season will begin four months into the future and two of the main characters will be in deep despair--one having completely lost his memory (bring on the Bourne Identity storyline!) and the other having developed a major drinking problem. Told ya Sylar wasn't this show's only demon!
I vote for Peter with amnesia, and a chick with the drinking problem--hopefully not Clare.
But if it's Claire...
with Peter not remembering he's Claire's uncle, and Claire too drunk to care that he is...
bad brain!
with Peter not remembering he's Claire's uncle, and Claire too drunk to care that he is...
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Of course, Wrongda's been kinda ... well ... wrong with her spoilers, at least with the finale, so I don't take anything as gospel.
That beign said, a lot of people are banking on Nathan with the amnesia (He survived, but landed somewhere where no one knows him, and he can't remember anything!) But I can't help but recall that there's someone whose power it is to erase memories ...
I'm kind of hoping that Sylar is the one who has amnesia...
That beign said, a lot of people are banking on Nathan with the amnesia (He survived, but landed somewhere where no one knows him, and he can't remember anything!) But I can't help but recall that there's someone whose power it is to erase memories ...
Good point, and he seems to do whatever Mama Petrelli wants him to do.
Ausiello is confirming that Nathan and Peter are not dead:
Question: The Heroes finale was awesome, but I'm a little worried about Peter and Nathan. Please tell me they are coming back next year.— Renee
Ausiello: (Major spoiler alert) They'll both be back next season.
(Not much of a surprise, given the offscreenness of their deaths, but good to know anyway.)
But are they alive, or will just be back as characters?
No idea - he just says they'll be back.
Someone's theory about "Lost" - which may or may not be a spoiler. Since it just turned up on Twop from a poster who "just tuned in", it may be legit. Who knows?
he show last night had me thinking all day about it. I finally think I've figured the whole thing out.
The "Lost" Island is based on the "Many Worlds Interpretation" of quantum physics. This says history is a branching tree such that all possible events happen and unfold--although not in the same world-line. (For readers of science fiction I don't have to explain--it's a staple, hell practically a cliche by now.) But it is an excepted interpretation of quantum events. (The math is fucking scary....I won't even go there.)
For example, this morning instead of going to the diner like I did, I instead went to Starbucks, got a mocha then walked outside and got hit by a bus and killed. Both things happened although not in the same world-line.
The Island exists in a realm where many world-lines co-exist and overlap and do all sorts of strange things. For example Locke, when he gets to the Island, is not paralyzed anymore. He jumped to a world-line where he was never paralyzed. He begins to realize this and how to manipulate it, which makes him special to the Others (of whom Ben and Patchy McPatchpatch have the ability to jump between world-lines.)
When the Losties leave the Island and got back to the world, Jack starts to realize that they've arrived at a different world-line, what with his dead dad doing surgery upstairs. He realizes they have to go back and get to a different world-line.
This explains Patchy McPatchpatch's ability to survive death: in one world he gets fried after going through the fence. He just jumps to another world-line where the fence was turned off and goes on his merry way.
The smoke monster and Jacob are perhaps the blurring of many world-lines into one place: reality gets fuzzy.
This explains many things. Remember in the beginning when the pilot was pulled out of the plane? Perhaps a dinosaur from a world-line where the dinosaurs were never made extinct and still roam the earth materialized onto the Island and perhaps disappeared into another world-line.
This is my theory and I'm sticking to it. (I don't know if anyone has mentioned this before, so apologies if they have.)
[link]