Heroes - Season One - Dark Publications

Location: Home » music » General » Heroes - Season One

Similar Items:

•	Heroes: Season 2
•	Smallville - The Complete Sixth Season
•	Prison Break - Season Two
•	Lost - The Complete Third Season
•	Supernatural - The Complete Second Season

Editorial Reviews:

Product Description
Studio: Uni Dist Corp. (mca) Release Date: 08/28/2007

Amazon.com
Arguably the most talked-about television show of the 2006-2007 season, the Emmy-nominated fantasy Heroes gives viewers blends comic book-style adventure with plotting and characters as rich and layered as any graphic novel or drama series. Creator Tim Kring's premise is deceptively simple - ordinary individuals in locations around the globe discover that they have, for lack of a better term, super powers, and wrestle with this reality while facing challenges both global (the destruction of New York City, for one) and personal (indestructible cheerleader Hayden Panetierre has family issues - serious ones, as the true identity of her adoptive father reveals; Milo Ventimiglia's Peter Petrelli, who absorbs other powers, must overcome his own insecurities). Add to this mix a terrific villain - Zachary Quinto's Sylar, who hunts and kills people with extraordinary powers like our heroes - and viewers have a riveting series that exhibits an almost-perfect balance of cliffhanger thrills (the action and special effects are truly impressive for a network program) and genuine drama that sets the show apart from most speculative fiction (save, perhaps, the revived Battlestar Galactica, which it compares too favorably). The seven-disc set of Heroes: Season One offers a wealth of extras for fans, who may be familiar with some of them through the NBC.com website, especially the cast commentaries, which are featured on half of the episodes. Kring is featured on the 73-minute uncut pilot episode, which for some viewers, may be even better than the network version; the main difference is the degree of character development, including an entire storyline for D.L. Hawkins that isn't featured in the broadcast version. Also on deck are some 50 deleted scenes from the episodes, several by-the-books making-of featurettes, including coverage of the special effects and stunt work, and a profile of artist Tim Sale, whose illustrations are used for Isaac Mendez's prophetic artwork. Prospective buyers should note that while all of these supplemental features are included on the HD-DVD version of this set, the special Web-connectivity elements are not available here. -- Paul Gaita

Customer Reviews: Read 449 more reviews...

5 out of 5 stars

To everything there's a season and a time to every purpose May 19, 2007
353 out of 403 found this review helpful

What if you discovered that you had a superpower -- great strength, flight, teleportation, or amazing healing? And what if you could use it to save the world?

Superheroes are everywhere in entertainment, from comic books to movies. But few manage to be as intelligent, geeky and well-written as "Heroes," a solid comic-book style TV series that explores the repercussions of several "ordinary" people who discover that they have strange -- and sometimes dangerous -- powers.

It opens with Mohinder Suresh (Sendhil Ramamurthy) reflecting on the human quest for knowledge -- even knowledge that we shouldn't have -- right before learning that his father has been killed, possibly murdered. Suresh's dad believed that "special" people were cropping up, much like in X-Men.

And we are introduced to the "heroes": stripper Niki (Ali Larter) harbors a secret dark side, cheerleader Claire (Hayden Panettiere) heals from any injury, Japanese Dilbert Hiro (Masi Oka) can bend time and space, Senatorial candidate Nathan (Adrian Pasdar) is able to fly, his brother Peter (Milo Ventimiglia) can copy others' powers, a cop Matt (Greg Grunberg) can read minds, and junkie artist Isaac (Santiago Cabrera) sees the future. There are plenty of others that show up, but these start the ball rolling.

While Claire and Hiro explore the potential of their new powers, Niki and her son try to elude some hired thugs --and end up overwhelmed by her dark side, and framed. And Suresh searches for the answer to his father's death, only to find that his genetics research is involved with the "special people," and that a superpowered serial killer is targeting them.

Even worse, Hiro takes a trip to New York (five weeks in the future), and sees the city destroyed by a massive blast -- as does Isaac, through his paintings. How to stop it? As a future Hiro tells them, "save the cheerleader, save the world." The Heroes begin slowly coming into contact, in a haze of dreams, visions, murder, swords and death -- and to stop the serial killer and save New York, more sacrifices may be made...

Unlike most shows about people with superpowers, "Heroes" isn't really about the action or flashy battles. It's half epic save-the-world-as-a-team story, and half exploration of how real, ordinary people would react if they suddenly found out that they had superpowers, and how this would change -- or NOT change -- their lives.

The storylines are incredibly intricate and complex, since there are a dozen subplots and a lot of time travel, and plenty of hints at future events. The careful painting of all these storylines even further in two episodes, one of which shows the pre-Heroic lies of the characters (and how Syler became a murderous terror), and another that shows what the future will be like if they don't change it. It's not a pretty picture.

These complex storylines are enhanced by lots of suspense and tightly directed action, and the makers always know how to throw in a shocking twist, such as a sword-carrying future Hiro showing up.. But there is also some poignancy, and very dark humor from time to time (Claire waking up in mid-autopsy, or twisting her broken neck around). Not to mention some great, sometimes geeky dialogue ("Where did you learn all this?" "X-men No. 143 when Kitty Pryde time travels!").

The actors are pretty much all good -- Larter gives a great double performance, Zachary Quinto is a wonderfully twisted villain, and Panettiere gives a good performance as a teen whose adolescence has a lot more than hormones in store. Masi Oka is the standout, though -- his Hiro is sweet, endearing, geeky, heroic, sad, kindly, funny and thoroughly lovable. The scene where he arrives in New York is adorable.

The "Heroes" are only starting their journey, and the first season of this geeky hit is a must-see for fans of intelligent sci-fi drama. And I doubt their journey is over...

5 out of 5 stars

One of the more interesting series of the 2006-2007 television season May 22, 2007
163 out of 231 found this review helpful

Warning! Multiple Spoilers below!

By any standard 2006-2007 was an exceptionally good season for television, with a host of very good new series being introduced. In fact, there was something of a battle for the survival of the fittest taking place, with more new serial dramas than viewers were able to support. Shows with considerable potential like SIX DEGREES and THE NINE simply did not have a chance to develop given the amazing range of competition. FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS, UGLY BETTY, MEN IN TREES, DEXTER, and, of course, HEROES were some of the ones that managed to survive.

HEROES was one of the more hotly debated shows on the Internet this year. Few doubted that it was good; the question was how good. Was it a masterpiece, potentially one of the great series ever, or was somewhat overrated, given more credit for excellence than it deserved? Much of the debate centered on HEROES versus LOST. I'm not quite sure why these two particular shows were paired in the debate, as if the excellence of the one somehow hinged on the excellence, or lack thereof, of the other. Personally, I'm no great prophet, but I'm willing to take a few stabs on the relative merits of HEROES. I loved the show, didn't miss a single episode, and looked forward to seeing it each week. But it never hit me as a truly great affair. If I compare it with the best supernatural/Sci-fi shows of the past decades (the audience to which the show mainly catered), it didn't, in my estimation, come up to the complexity or sophistication of BUFFY, ANGEL, ALIAS, LOST, or BATTLESTAR GALACTICA. For instance, I just read of a call for papers for one-day academic conference in England on BATTLESTAR. The show is so rich and complex that I can imagine dozens and dozens of potential topics for academics to discuss. But I can't imagine this with HEROES. It simply lacks the kind of depth you find in the other shows (though I suspect LOST's depth will be end-of-series depth, if it turns out to possess it--most of LOST's academic interest lies in its narrative techniques). HEROES is enormous fun, but I get the sense that each week any viewer is able to absorb and process all of the information that he or she is given. One may be left with a few questions, but they are not terribly difficult questions. And I never found myself engaged in the kinds of online debates that I have had with BUFFY or BATTLESTAR. Part of the reason is certainly due to the fact that HEROES is focused more on plot than on character. BATTLESTAR, for instance, is always primarily about things that are taking place beneath the surface of the show. With HEROES, it is mainly about what is on the surface. In short, HEROES simply lacks a lot of the depth of the best genre shows.

I read one really good description of HEROES: BUFFY seemed to be a show produced by a great TV writer who loved comic books, while HEROES seems to be a show produced by a great comic book writer who loved TV. I think there is some merit to that. (For the record, I'm primarily a lover of great TV who also enjoys comics and graphic novels, and I have a couple of large bookshelves dedicated to holding various graphic novels.)

The more curious debate that I've seen on the Internet was the First Half of the Season versus the Second Half of the Season. This mystifies me because to me it seems clear that the second half of the season was far superior to the first half. This is an important question because the vast majority of really good shows--and I very much want to believe that HEROES has the potential to be a very good show--tend to get better as they go along. The best new show of the 2006-2007 season was unquestionably FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS (and I'm sure the few hundred people who saw it will agree with me--how can a show be so good and get so few viewers?). And there is absolutely no question that it got better and better and better as it went along. For me I saw HEROES as being good and fun for about the first two-thirds of the season and then near great for the final third (I'll leave aside the somewhat disappointing finale for a second). I know the particular episode where everything kicked into a higher gear: "Company Man," in which we learn in considerable detail the nature of Mr. Bennet's job and how he became Claire's adoptive father. For me, a series is as interesting as the characters on the show are complex and this was the first episode where any of the characters became complex as opposed to perplexing. The rest of the season increased the complexity and the depth of the characters. Earlier it wasn't clear that the writers grasped a simple truth: a show about someone who can fly or become invisible or who is indestructible is not interesting; what is interesting is how a person responds to that. But the latter part of the season did seem to "get" that.

One reason I think that Season Two has a chance to be a lot more interesting than Season One is that in Season One you sometimes had a large ensemble cast that sometimes did little or not interaction. Many of the main characters did not meet until the season finale (I actually would have loved to see how Peter, whose ability is to absorb the abilities of other "heroes," would have reacted to being around Ali Larter's character, whose ability is a super empowered alter ego). The various characters were simply spread about with little or no connections to one another. But Season Two could see a much more coordinated cast.

Since my review is either the first or second review written after the season finale (I refuse to write a review of any series that I have not seen completely and I really wish Amazon would make it impossible to review any season of a show before the finale has been broadcast), I thought I would say something about that. After a season-long build up to the finale, in which there would simultaneously be a confrontation with Sylar and an attempt to prevent the nuclear destruction of New York City, the final battle was a bit of a let down. Not only was the final resolution a bit unimaginative, there was little originality or complexity. There was very little to mark it off as special. Moreover, it is not even clear that in the final "battle" anyone even died. All that happens is Peter and Sylar meet, Hiro delivers an apparently fatal blow to Sylar, Peter goes nuclear, Claire is about to shoot him, and Nathan intervenes by snatching him and flying off into the stratosphere before he explodes. But irritatingly, Sylar turns out not to have died but crawled off into the sewer, and I'm betting that Nathan flew off before Peter exploded. And Peter, of course, will rejuvenate after exploding. One of the lessons that BUFFY taught us was that good series have body counts. A number of characters did die over the course of the season on HEROES, but having the possibility that no one died in the finale lessened the cost of the "victory." I did like the brief beginning of "Chapter Two" following the resolution of the nuclear incident. Hiro finds himself catapulted somehow to 17th century Japan confronted by a larger group of archers. A single horseman is on a distant hill, with a banner containing the symbol that is placed on the shoulder of several of the "heroes" in Season One, a horseman who seemed to bear a sharp resemblance to Hiro's father (played by George Takei). So while the finale was a bit of a disappointment, this definitely pointed towards interesting things ahead. So also did the revelation by Molly, the little girl with the ability to locate anyone by merely thinking about them, that there was someone who was far worse than Sylar. I'm sure we'll be meeting this person in Season One.

I liked the cast as a whole. I was even bothered less by Milo Ventimiglia, who I had always intensely disliked in his days on THE GILMORE GIRLS. Hayden Panettiere was adorable as the indestructible cheerleader (though there was a brief controversy early in the season when her gay best friend was suddenly de-gayed inexplicably, almost certainly as the result of network pressure in response to small but passionate anti-gay groups) and it was great to see a high school-aged character being played by someone actually that age. Masi Oka quickly became a fan favorite as Hiro, the young Japanese would-be hero who somehow aspired to being able to overcome the space-time continuum, and surprisingly managed to do precisely that. Ali Larter was wonderful as Niki/Jessica, the schizoid and incredibly dangerous beauty who struggled all season with reconciling her two natures. Sendhil Ramamurthy was a fascinating presence as Mohinder, an Indian geneticist struggling to understand the genetic permutations that allowed some individuals to develop unusual abilities. There were many others as well, in addition to many excellent guest appearances (though a shout out to Christopher Eccleston, the former DR. WHO star who teaches Peter how to control his powers). My favorite character was, however, Jack Coleman as Mr. Bennet, who is easily the most complex character on the show. Early on we suspect that he might be an utterly sinister individual; only gradually do we discover his actual agenda and aims.

All in all, this was an amazingly entertaining show. I find that different shows I watch meet different needs. I watch BATTLESTAR GALACTICA for its depth and stunning originality and I love to debate the tiniest detail with other fans. FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS I watch for the way it plunges so deeply into the emotional lives of its characters (it really isn't' about football). LOST I watch for the ongoing complexity of its rich and wonderful story (after recovering from a string of weak early Season Three episodes). But other shows I just turn off my brain and have fun. UGLY BETTY was one of these and HEROES another. I found it to be infectious and uncomplex fun. And yeah, it really was the onscreen equivalent of a really good comic book.

5 out of 5 stars

Witness the Next Generation May 18, 2007
161 out of 232 found this review helpful

This show was not suppose to be a hit, lol. The original pilot was supposedly so convoluted and downright annoying that the network made the producers basically change everything about it, and the only reason the show was greenlite was because NBC ran out of Drama pilots. But somehow, the new pilot was downright amazing, and a new hit television show was born.

This DVD box set includes all 23 season-one episodes on 7 discs along with several behind-the-scenes featurettes, mini-documentaries, 50 deleted scenes, select episode commentaries, the original pilot (w/ commentary), and a character map.

1 out of 5 stars

Finale doesn't deliver, neither does anything else August 6, 2007
66 out of 126 found this review helpful

I, along with some friends, was a faithful watcher of the show through the entire first season. Whenever we missed an episode, we'd watch it at lunch the next day. There are three things you need to know about the show before you think about buying the DVD: 1) there is a lot of vague, hazy, loose stuff in it, which I forgave all season long based upon the promise of, and an expectation of, a resounding finale; 2) the "Save the Cheerleader, Save the World" premise which was so heavily hyped never materializes at anywhere near the level which was promised (and you may notice that the ad campaign has disappeared) - although she is cute and shows some strength as an actress later in the show; and 3) the finale is so weak, and fails to deliver on so many levels, that my deferred irritation from the entire season has matured into full-blown disgust.

The strength of the initial premise suffered greatly from the improvisational nature of the writing. This viewer, at least, has the strong suspicion that the writers didn't know from one week to the next whether they'd still be employed, so they just threw stuff together without any great attempt at coherency. The overall effect of the show was gravely damaged by this lack. Regardless of any other concerns, there is an enormous amount of deliberate McGuffins, red herrings, vagueness, pointless characters, unused powers and futile actions and conversations. Tim Kring apparently thinks he can string people along forever if he's just ambiguous enough about everything, therefore the episodes tend to be 60% or more fruitless frippery.

That's not to say Mr. Kring can't put together a good episode. There was one episode in particular ("Five Years in the Future") which was very good. It really started to deliver on the promise which was shown in the early part of the series. When Kring was creating multiple story arcs, creating and killing new Heroes all the time, and working up hideously overpowered Heroes who could absorb other Heroes' powers, however, the implicit promise was made that there would be a strong conclusion to these particular arcs - or some arcs. Any arcs. Instead, he stretches it all out, churns it along, and delays resolution so that they can write whatever they want next week or next month. They throw in interesting characters, then slaughter them without mercy or remorse. While it's possible that they may be brought back in some comic-book fashion (Remind me again why Hiro can't go stab Sylar in his crib?), it's more likely that Kring will just string everyone along as long as they give him more money. I'm just not down with that plan. Stand and deliver, Mr. Kring, if you want viewer's time and money.

1 out of 5 stars

Fairly boring light entertainment with no substance June 1, 2007
44 out of 191 found this review helpful

Heroes: Season 1 is a needlessly convoluted mishmash of seemingly random stories all tortuously (and unconvincingly) forced together into a ludicrous and disappointing whole. Very few scenes last longer than a minute or two, so a charitable reviewer might say the story was "fast paced." To me, it's just aimless. Particularly ironic is that the story plods along at a snail's pace despite the obvious attempt to forcibly induce excitement with a frantic tempo.

I enjoy "light and fluffy" TV as much as your average viewer, but one thing that tends to irk me is when a show takes itself very seriously, but can't hold up to even modest scrutiny. Indeed, Heroes takes itself very, very seriously, yet the plot is rife with holes (more than it takes to fill the Albert Hall, no doubt), and is advanced solely by one ridiculous contrivance after another.

I realize this sort of TV appeals to the Ritalin doped Lost crowd that needs a loud noise and a scene change every few minutes to keep its attention, but Heroes offers very little in the way of entertainment for more thoughtful viewers.

Powered by Associate-O-Matic

T-shirts, Posters

Pentagram T-shirts, bags, etc...

Gothic Posters