201 posts
Avatar

Something is confusing me. It's in relation to the series of events in Heroes and when they take place etc. Sorry if this has all been said before. Here are a few points I want you to consider.

1- When Hiro went five weeks to the future at the very begining of Season 1, he thought it was October 2, when really it was November 8. Then the bomb went off. So its fair to assume that the entire Season 1 takes place over that time period from October to November.

2- Season 2 takes place four months after Season 1, making it about March, possibly spreading in to April. When Peter and Caitlin go to the future, the evacuation notice is dated 2008 and Peter says that's next year, so its established here that Season 2 takes place in 2007, while Season 1 must take place in 2006.

3- Villains follows on from Season 2 pretty much instantly. They comment that Arthur Petrelli died a year ago. The season 1 episode is called "Six months ago" which, if Season 1 takes place in October, puts Arthur's death about April 2006. So far, the time line is consistent.

4- The end of Villains shows Nathan speaking to the president 3 weeks after Pinehearst burns down. Thats nearly a month.

5- When Fugitives starts, Tracy says she hasn't seen Nathan in two months.

6- The new series starts 6 weeks after Fugitives. Thats another month and a bit. Obviously this season has spread out over another two weeks since Samuel says he killed Mohinder 8 weeks ago, which must have been after Fugitives.

But then they say Hiro has gone back in time THREE YEARS to save Charlie. How did they figure that out? Based on the time between seasons, as stated by show itself, the entire Heroes history covers about a year. Have I missed something? Or is it just inconsistent writing?

Posted at
Derek
Guest

Inconsistent writing.  The "Three Years Ago" thing is a plot error.  And this is inconsistent in more ways then one.  if you think about it, the entire timeline of this whole show occuring in a single year is ridiculous.

Posted at
201 posts
Avatar

Yeah. The actors are growing faster than the shows timeline is allowing for. Look at Micah.

And Adrian Pasdar has let himself go a bit too.

Posted at
Maj
Guest

I dont think the writers thought of that Ravenhill...they just automatically refer to "OUR" 3 years ago...as in 2006.  Derek I dont see how its riduculous because that concept is what "LOST" does ALLL the time...things happen that seems like a years worth of stuff but its only been like a week.

Posted at
Leland
18 posts
Avatar

I think this a good question, but I think Maj brings up a good point.  If all relative times (ie: 3 years ago, 8 weeks ago) brought up in the shows were a reference to the viewer's time aka the episode air date. Would that make your (Ravenhill) timeline more accurate?

The first several seasons of Lost took place over several days, then they went to the future which was the viewers present, then they went to the past, and concurrently all of the characters had flashbacks of their personal experiences. Although the timeline might be somewhat confusing there is only three major time periods they are working with so it's not as difficult for the show to have it's own 'internal' timeline.

However with Heroes, becuase they have Hiro, and Peter when he had Hiro's powers, and possibly other time travelers, it would be a lot harder to keep track of the timeline unless they had an 'external' timeline based on the air dates like they seem to be doing in "Flash Forward". Also another reason why they wouldn't air reruns if at all possible. 

This would explain Micah's aging (which couldn't be controlled anyway), as well as the last episodes 3 years ago reference. Don't know if it works with all of the other dates and times for the previous episodes, but  as long as they can keep it consistent from this point forward I'm fine with it.

Posted at
Maj
Guest

I agree with you Leland.  Its really something that doesnt bother me and Ravenhill although you are right as well I dont think people are looking into that much detail.  They are only looking at the plotholes and mishaps that really take a shock to heart.

Posted at
201 posts
Avatar

Yeah, I think too much. I just wanted to raise a point that had been playing in my mind for some time.

Posted at
sylarISgood
177 posts
Avatar

nothing wrong with that ravenhill. is it true that this may be the last season? because i have had a bad feeling ever since i found out it would not be on in the UK til january. it seems like they are waiting in the UK to see if this season flops in the US.....

Posted at
201 posts
Avatar

But there are many things that flop in the US that are really popular in the UK, and the same goes for the other way too. Lots of UK soap operas are considered comedies in the US, apparently. So even if this season of Heroes is unpopular, the people here might still love it.

Posted at
Maj
Guest

I really hope another station picks up the show if NBC cant figure it out.  You people in the UK cant you just watch in online?

Posted at

This forum is closed for new posts