I go and have a wonderful--if tiring--San Diego Comic Con '09 much of which I've shared here--which is why I'm tired: http://boards.9thwonders.com/index.php?showtopic=69175 (video of the "Heroes" Carnival among other things can be found there also links for most "Heroes" Panels videos.

And what are the first things I'm hear Trash talking "Heroes" without it even airing an episode. I expect as much these days from Entertainment Weekly which gleefully reports every down "Heroes" has like a back biting gossip. As it is published by a competing company I expect this.

But then when Kristen of E! who used to cheerlead for the show, suddenly says the response to S4 at the "Heroes" Panel was mixed, I have to wonder what's going on. What room was she in? Was she even there? Was she seeing the same trailer?

Its one thing to complain about certain episodes, its another to trash what I found be a very entertaining trailer full of twists & unexpected events.

Also if the episodes are bad or uninspired the show will die on its own, so why the negativism before it even airs?

Because if you're a competing network that owns publications you might use it to kill a competitor's show on the "Bubble". You certainly don't want your competitor's ratings to go up. Also "Heroes" despite ratings dips, maintains a healthy piece of the coveted 18 - 49 male audience.

So I think there is a concerted effort, not by the random disappointed fan who blogs or fan sites but by competing networks to kill Season 4 with before it even airs.

Am I paranoid?

I don't see it as paranoid. I think it's pretty likely. I've never trusted Kristen in the first place, so I'm predisposed to suspect her anyway.

On another note, I sense someone who grew up (at least in part) during the Reagen years...

Yup. I did.

The thing thats' getting to me is that if its doing badly it will go out on its own. But the trailer was of a show I'm excited about and that has so much interesting stuff going on and surprises.

So all I can think is they're afraid of "Heroes" doing what "Lost" did. Become hot again.

Ehh, I see it more as 'jilted lover syndrome'

Many of the current critics fell madly in love with the show when it was new and felt betrayed as the relationship grew sour. Now, they don't want to give the show the time of day and think they should 'warn' any future lovers away.

Hadn't thought of it that way, wolfbro. But there are definitely elements of that. When "Lost" came back in Season 4, BTW, I don't remember the critics suddenly saying "Lost" is back!. They just shut up.

So even if "Heroes" does well, it might not get acknowledged for it.

Both "Heroes" & "Lost" were the most heavily attended & popular of the TV panels at SDCC '09, according to Reuters--"Chuck" was in there (but people like my husband were there to see "Family Guy" & and Seth Macfarland's new show "The Cleveland Show").

I can tell you many hundreds, perhaps, thousands of people were turned away at the "Heroes" panel because the room was full from three hours before the "Heroes" panel.

Hi!

Well competition was, is and will always be there.

However, in my opinion what Kristen and/or other bloggers, interviewers are at the moment is precautious.

We know that she, aussielo and others were there since the beginning and as excited about the show as us, so after what the show went through and what they went through because of their "yay! whoohoo!" cheerings that turned at the end to be "OMG! ARGH! PFFFT!" for the fans and partially flaming of some fans towards them, they want to rather take the golden middle and say "mixed feelings" to be on the safe side from now on in case the show starts exciting through a trailer and goes downhills afterwards.

Because of this I would say it has nothing to do with competition or wanting the show to be cancelled.

They just want to be on the safe side and wait up on how the season unfolds/turns out to be, before they start the cheering again.

Its also about saving face. If the show does bad this season, which its possible it might (nothing is impossible now is it?), then Kristen and the others are going to want to make sure that they aren't seen as the people who cheered for a bad show. If the show does well, then they can easily come back and say that they believed in the show all along, blah blah blah.

The face. They wanna save it.

Very good point. I can understand that.

Still if they are reporting a "mixed reaction", we wouldn't have heard thunderous applause, screams and cheers.

Isn't that just lying?




I get it.

Like you I expect nothing else from the likes of EW(look at their rabid support of Twilight. Need I say more) and Kristen are two of the biggest bandwagon jumpers if I ever saw them. But reporting mixed reaction does seem like an outright lie. I wasn't able to attend to con myself but I know several people who went and got into the panel and they said that from the way people reacted it was like the shopw never had a bad moment. From watching the panel vids posting on NBS and the one of fan blogs and journal it's clear the the people in the romm were very hyped.

I heard that thousands!! were turned away from Heroes Panel since room only held 2000! ..reaction/response to panel = thunderous!

It does seem that the well is being poisoned before anybody else can take a drink. Critics and viewers alike are sitting back with their arms folded and cynical smirks on their faces just waiting for Heroes to fail so they can be right.

If Tim Kring was smart he would have invited entertainment writers and critics to a special showing to generate some buzz. Now it is early and he still might do this, but for him not to do this when the show so desperately needs saving is a stupid move.

Kristen used to be the shows biggest fan, and was even neutral when the EW article came out. But when KB was killed off seemed to be her catalyst for going negative. That or when the rest of the world started pounding on it, she decided to side with the "cool kids". Either way, it is really a sucky way to go.

You know what I say, come on Kring! Show those critics they're wrong.

I despise critics. I can decide what I like on my own, thank you very much. And that preview was AMAZING.
#### #######

Kristin is an idiot. Always has been and always will be.

And I feel compelled to add the IMO disclaimer, so there it is.

Well I never listened to Kristen either because she seems like a walking re-traction. Since some 2000 people are pumped for the new season, they're spreading the word and the general population has more influence then this women who can't get her facts straight most of the time. Where is the article or news report that she made where she's starting to sound the charge to get everyone to leave Heroes? I'd like to see it and see what it will be she will once again have to re-tract.

Don't remember that, but I do know she has more than a tendency to get her facts wrong with the spoilers she's released.

Here's the EW that upset me. http://popwatch.ew.com/wp-comments-post.php

I posted to them--vulgarly that these were the same guys who blew off "Lost" in the 3rd Season.

Here's the Kristen article http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/watch_with..._comic-con.html

"The audience response to the debut of the season-four preview was mixed, but the camaraderie shared by Kring & Co. (with two notable exceptions) was infectious. Obviously you want to hear all about it, so shape-shift yourself on in here."

She is lying about the audience reaction!

All I can say, if the Executives at NBC weren't excited about what they saw, "Heroes" would not have had the presence it had at Comic Con.

Sit & spin, Kristen.

I couldn't agree more. Like I said, she's a walking re-traction. Also, her article is more of speculation then getting people to officially leave the show, but still it does have a negative notion. What will she do with the return of the positive bandwagon?

We can hope so. I loved the panel & loved what I saw in the preview.

Here's semi-positive column on "Heroes". At least, the columnist actually says he likes the show.

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/show-patro...-fans-over.html

Maybe it's time we started doing a little publicity campaign of our own. Wherever we see these articles, especially the negative ones, we need to start posting our comments in support of the show, and we especially need to call B.S. on the "writers" who are saying that the reaction was "mixed." And if we have the chance and the access, we need to start writing our own letters to editors of magazines where these articles appear.

~PbN.

I highly support this idea.

So if we find articles, we post them here, and allow other people to comment on them?

We can post and let others here know about them here, but PBN's point is that we take these people on at whatever web site they're posting and make comments.

Try to be the bigger person...if you can and are not piled on by others. If you are piled on for liking & defending "Heroes", you might come here to let us know where this is happening and we can aid you at the web-site.

So far there has only been a few sewing negativity before the show airs. Which is why I pointed them out.

So far on Kristen's site--haven't been in a while--no one's commented.

Might be a good idea to link to articles here, so we can all go comment on them.

Thanks, LowerTheBar, I forgot to mention we should do that before going into my rant.

Its an easy way to see what is actually being said out there...so we can then, grind them into dust...Grrrrr...

Here's one. Our old tart tongued and mis informed friends over at io9

http://io9.com/5325702/heroes-season-4-tra...evil-brunettes#

Hmmm... I watched the con trailers and the interviews and I must say I would agree with her on the point in which she says "mixed" when it comes to the audience cause neither was the cheering, yelling and wows as much as in the previous seasons panels, nor did it seem to be the crowd THAT hyped.

I don't know of course how it felt or how it was there but from the clips I saw so far (the whole panel + the two previews), I see (unfortunately.. ) the biggest yelling came when sylar appeared on the screen and partially on samuel/edgar and very little on hiro/peter/angela.

When others were to be seen almost no one gave a "woohoo" or anything. Too silent in my opinion if you compare to other seasons panels in which the audience went "woohoo" at the appearance of like each and every scene no matter the characters involved. :/

You are also talking about an audience of 2000 as opposed to the 6000 from the previous years. 4000 less people is bound to be quieter.

While I remain of the opinion that anything written by Kristen has the credibility of a bathroom stall, to be fair she is still on maternity leave and it was one of her equally moronic staff members that wrote the article. I guess BS is BS no matter who writes it. LOL

I can only talk about what I heard & saw while being in the room.

They don't show the previews with the panel on video anywhere I know of and the reaction wasn't just to Zach & Robert.

There were definitely a lot of gasps of alarm & surprise at various points and gasp at a particular scene.

Plus they don't show the video that got crazy enthusiastic reaction.

In short, my perception of the audience reaction while being there, is significantly different from Kristen's or your's, Raekon, listening to video which didn't even show the audience reaction while watching the trailer.

Feel free to be mad at kirsten all you want but don't be mad at me only because I said what I saw, heard and how it felt through it.

Linkie for you: http://boards.9thwonders.com/index.php?showtopic=69210

I'm not talking about the preview that showed scenes, I'm talking about the panel and the reactions of the fans I saw in there. As I said, I don't know how it felt being there cause I wasn't there but to me it also looks as if you were "overhyped" and at the same time overeacting a bit according to your behaviour on this topic.

In my opinion, some kirstens and aussielos or "popeys" and "olives" can talk all they want.

If the fans watch the show and the ratings are high enough things will go well if not the show is doomed anyway.

Kirstens and others cheering and hypes wouldn't change a bit on this fact anyway.

Actually, Kirsten and the other can and will effect that. For reasons that I've never figured out, especially due to Kirsten's tendency (although I guess this isn't actually her, but one of her staffers, based on what Shang said) to be, who should I say it, dead wrong as often as she's right, people listen to her.

And I've seen the same videos, I think. Yes, the reaction to the panel was more subdued this year than in the past- but, let's face it, there were also 3 or 4 thousand fewer people. The reaction to the previews though? That was most definitely not "mixed".

I didn't mean to come off sounding angry towards you, Raekon. (It still odd to me how the written words carry so much more power than if they are traveling through air to your ear.)

I started this thread by saying that what is getting me riled is that the "poisoning of the well of 'good will'" towards the show, not whether it rises or fallls on its own merits.

Kristen is not cheerleading. But as others have said, "Calling the grapes sour before they've had a chance to ripen." Bashing it before an episode has aired. Others are doing the same. They even did it to great amusement of "Losties" at the "Lost" panel by having "Ben" (can't rember actor's name) read what they claim page from a "Heroes" script.

So the "piling on" began at Comic Con. It simply isn't fair.

I just saw the video you're talking about.

I maintain the reaction was not "mixed." The audience reacted, cheered and applauded.

I don't know what more evidence you need.

But in a way, audience reaction is a moot point because audience reaction to the "Villians" trailer and episode 1 of Season 3 with 6,000 people in attendance was huge and excited. See where that went.

I think many fans, like you, feeling burned, are simply taking a wait and see attitude.

However, in the room the reaction was enthusiastic and Kristen is lying.

Was the panel really THAT smaller?

I didn't knew that. I thought it was the same size as always. So Sorry about that.
What I meant about "angry" was your previous reply.

I also understand what you and sync mean but I still think that even if people like this badmouth something, as long as the series holds evidence against their talks by being great, their talks will only prove how wrong they are.

With other words they will cut on their own flesh and lose even more creditibility than they have lost already. If the show however prove them right through bad writing/direction than they will have the backup they need to prove what they already wrote anyway.

I don't know what else was said cause I didn't read the rest but the word "mixed" is for me still neutral without saying something is good or bad. Rather more like a "ying yang" reference.

I'll wait and see how the show unfolds anyway without giving much weight what critics say cause I never did that towards any movie, series or else because I like to make my own opinion by looking by myself.

I heard by others that a movie was bad and when I saw it I found it good or even awesome while I watched movies that were overhyped and I myself found them mediocre to bad so..

It's always a matter of taste. If the writing is good and makes sense while the acting, direction and flow connects than I don't see any reason to say something is bad. Give it additionaly a little spice up with fx and good camera and I'm a happy camper!

Off topic:
Did anyone else missed Tracy and Angela from the panel? :/
I worry that they will waste either both characters or tracy immediately. -.-
Most of all after the one scene with Ali getting hit I worry even more that they might kill the character immediately after they hyped us a lot with saying like how awesome she will be this season talking about being a major character. I wonder if they changed all that again and dropped Ali another punch in the stomach like they did with her previous characters and screening time in past seasons. :/
Mohinder seems to also be away.

ditto!!

Not to be rude, but you were told twice that the attendance to the panel was approximately 2 or 3 thousand smaller this year.

This Heroes Venue was able to hold only 2000 fans while last years had room for 6500 ...thousands were turned away at each

That reads quite bad, but wasn't that lower number only an inevitable result of the venue they had this year? Or am I not getting it, and there were actually less than 1/3 as many fans stoked for Heroes this year?

The venue only held 2000 people .. 2000 filled it, with thousands turned away because of no more room.

Yes and it was exactly AFTER my reply being told by you and Rebel so?
What does this posting of yours prove now?
That you like to nitpicking on everything?
I just saw that sangrila had wrote previously that it was smaller too but I had missed it.

Remember how late NBC decided to have a panel for "Heroes"? By the time NBC had made a decision to promote the show at CC all the other venues at the Convention were filled. Thats why the room was smaller not because they couldn't fill Hall H.

The execs at NBC probably saw parts or whole of a new episode and were greatly encouraged, which is why "Heroes" had not only a panel but a real Carnival at Comic Con.

Which from the looks of parents and conventioneers alike was greatly appreciated by everyone.

I've learned that people are stupid. They follow others that have the "right ideas" for everything. If people are fans, they'll watch the show despite the idiocy of the "pilers".


Never, EVER, underestimate the power fo the fans.

What you guys do not seem to understand when you bring "LOST" up is that the backlash against "LOST" lasted at most around half a season and even then the negativity never reached the level that "Heroes" did. The first half of season 3 is the most maligned period of the show, but once the end date of the series was announced the season rebounded and the second half had some of the best episodes in the series, including the much ballyhooed "Through the Looking Glass".

So while "Heroes" has two full seasons that critics and many fans dismiss, "LOST" only had to come back from a half season of weaker episodes which were never as critically panned as the worst of "Heroes."

So do you think then that if the show comes back that critics will suddenly say "Heroes is back!"?

Your point of level of difficulty regarding 'coming back' is irrelevant to the discussion point of critics and how they respond to shows doing better than what [the critics] have stated previously [regardless of if it was accurate at the time]. Coming back is coming back, no matter how you paint it, and history shows that critics would rather be silent than to eat their words.

I watched S1 of "Lost" and to me the best part of it was Greg Grunberg in the pilot, after that, it was blah.
Regardless of my bias, isn't the fact the negativity got so high for Heroes only because the initial standards set by the show itself were so high? I mean, we agree 2 & 3 weren't as good as 1, yeah, but they were still close enough to AWESOME for some ridiculously addictive glitter to rub off, right? I mean, let's be honest, all of you and I have seen every episode of 2 & 3 more than once.. Seriously, I can't remember any show ever being as great as S1 of Heroes, and just because 2 & 3 weren't AS great, people try to tear it down. There's a reason it's STILL the most DL'd show, and why all of us watched each new episode like a junkie-pre-cog hoping to make a deadline! Bottom line: Heroes could be 75% worse than whatever your personal worst episode was and still be better than anything else on the televisions. (like "internets", but for snailmailtypes.)

Well actually if you look at most critical reviews of "Heroes" the initial reaction to the first 8 or so episodes was mediocre and then picked up mid-season before a disappointing finale. I've actually seen better television than season 1 of "Heroes"
In no particular order..
-LOST
-The Wire
-Battlestar
-Mad Men
-Breaking Bad
-Damages
-The Shield
-Alias (seasons 1 and 2)
-First few seaons of Sopranos

By no means does that mean I didn't like season 1, I personally just found these shows more engaging.

I think it's going to be tough for the show to regain critical support, but there is hope. I read a couple of EW reviews last season and they seemed relatively optimistic and the finale was the best received finale of the series. However, the problem comes with people like Alan Sepinwall who don't even take the time to watch the show anymore and sites like IGN where the tide has completley turned against "Heroes."

I say just don't worry about it if you still personally enjoy the series. No message board guy or critic should be able to tell that a show you enjoy is not good.

Season finale was far from disappointing (and that is not just IMO, the majority of people I've spoken with said the same thing.)

Lost? First season was boring, imho, and it just got worse.
The Wire? Previews didn't even interest me enough to bother looking at it either on TV or online.
Battlestar? I assume you mean the BSG revival? Not worth my time.
Mad Men? Not familiar with that one. Same with Breaking Bad and Damages.
The Shield? Good for the first couple seasons, but it just rolled downhill.
Alias? As much as I loved it, it didn't even approach Heroes for quality of writing. And S2-S4 were the worst seasons of the show.
Sopranos? Even more boring than Lost.

Critical reception of Heroes was huge from the first episode. It wasn't until S2 that the critics started giving a regular "meh" response to the show.

Well, I personally like my shows to have large amounts of character developement (that's why I hated Alias past season 2). The shows I listed would draw a consensus of great (other than Alias) on any board other than 9th Wonders. Some of those shows are award winners and are considered some of the best TV produced in recent history (The Wire, LOST, Battlestar,Sopranos, Mad Men). I hold no blind devotion to any of those show, however, and can recognize that you would rather watch a fast paced show like Heroes.

I love character development. That's part of the reason I disliked most of those shows. Alias was good at it, for the first couple. Lost prefers an endless maze of unanswered questions rather than character development. (The characters are essentially the same now as they were in S1.)

What I like about Heroes is the legitimate, but not ridiculous, character development, the questions it raises throughout the season, which are always answered by the end (rather than forcing you to watch next season, or even the season after, to get the answer), and the faster paced storyline.

BSG, according to most people I've spoken with, has been a poor copy of the original series. (I've seen far more negative reviews, with the exception of the critics who are about as reliable as Sylar's good will, than positive.) I'm unfamiliar with The Wire, although the discussion about the show gives me no reason to watch it. The Sopranos is a show that never appealed to me. And Mad Men is another that has no appeal for me, based on the write ups.

I'm a big fan of The Sopranos, but I don't remember ever being "unable to wait" for the next episode or obsessing over details the way Heroes inspires me to. As for the notion "Breaking Bad" was better than S1?! There wouldn't be anyone on 9th Wonders were that the case! (the show was interesting, but hardly inspired the anticipation that Heroes does) smokey81286, what I don't get is: are you a poster on the forums of all those other shows and only get to 9th Wonders when all that typing is done first?

Actually IGN gave the finale an 8.0 or something like that, but they've been more positive then some of these other sites, the comment section on the other hand, yikes. The absolute worst site has to be TWOP.com they are completely anti-heroes they bash it every chance they get, they're even rooting for it to get cancelled, just terrible