Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 1:34 pm Post subject: Why save the Cheerleader?
Forgive my ignorance if this is a dumb question, but it has been bugging me nonetheless.
When Sylar tried to kill Peter by slicing his head off and taking his power, Peter instantly healed and thus prevented Sylar from killing him.
Why wouldn't the same thing have occurred if Sylar had started to slice off Claire's head at homecoming?
Also, in the future, Sylar (as Nathan) does indeed slice off Claire's head. Why was he able to do this? Why did she not heal like Peter did?
Since Peter got his healing ability from her, it just seems like they would both be safe from Sylar, not just Peter.
----
Also, why would shooting Peter at the end have killed him permanently? Some people seem to be suggesting that there was one fatal spot where the glass went in that would have been fatal if struck with a bullet.
Why? The glass hit that spot and obviously didn't kill him. They just simply needed to remove it. Why would he be able to heal himself against anything, even Sylar, and yet not from a bullet in one specific spot?
Posted: Fri May 25, 2007 5:30 pm Post subject: Re: Why save the Cheerleader?
texasboy2008 wrote:
Forgive my ignorance if this is a dumb question, but it has been bugging me nonetheless.
When Sylar tried to kill Peter by slicing his head off and taking his power, Peter instantly healed and thus prevented Sylar from killing him.
Why wouldn't the same thing have occurred if Sylar had started to slice off Claire's head at homecoming?
Also, in the future, Sylar (as Nathan) does indeed slice off Claire's head. Why was he able to do this? Why did she not heal like Peter did?
Since Peter got his healing ability from her, it just seems like they would both be safe from Sylar, not just Peter.
----
Also, why would shooting Peter at the end have killed him permanently? Some people seem to be suggesting that there was one fatal spot where the glass went in that would have been fatal if struck with a bullet.
Why? The glass hit that spot and obviously didn't kill him. They just simply needed to remove it. Why would he be able to heal himself against anything, even Sylar, and yet not from a bullet in one specific spot?
Thanks!
I don't know that these answers make sense, but it's the best that I can come-up with:
A) Peter started healing, AFTER he used TK to push Sylar away. If Sylar had been left to his own devices, the top of the head would have been sliced off and the brain removed. END OF PETER. Same thing with Claire. In effect, even though it hurt like hell for Peter, he reacted, and interrupted Peter, midstream, in the act. That's my interpretation.
B) I think, the expectation was that the bullet in the brain WOULD have stopped Peter from exploding, and they would have dealt with the necessity of removing the bullet AND MAYBE Peter healing afterwards...
Nah, Peter started healing while Sylar was still cutting. It's an automatic reaction to injury, I suspect.
The actual reason is that Sylar was taking his time with Peter - he wanted to enjoy it. He stopped when he saw Peter healing, which gave Peter the chance to defend himself. Five years later, when he's got Claire immobilised by TK, he knows he's just gotta cut real quick and get the brain out before she grows a new skull. Once the brain's out, she's really, properly dead. Job done.
...The actual reason is that Sylar was taking his time with Peter - he wanted to enjoy it. He stopped when he saw Peter healing, which gave Peter the chance to defend himself. Five years later, when he's got Claire immobilised by TK, he knows he's just gotta cut real quick and get the brain out before she grows a new skull. Once the brain's out, she's really, properly dead. Job done ...
Good explanation.
And that's why, to bring in another point, Hiro's time travelling power is really the strongest individual power in group - time travel can undo any death (including the time traveller's own, if he or she travels from the past right up to before the moment of death). So, Hiro could have saved Claire at just that future moment, when Sylar was cutting too quickly for Claire's healing to kick in.
Posted: Sun May 27, 2007 5:36 pm Post subject: Re: Why save the Cheerleader?
texasboy2008 wrote:
Also, why would shooting Peter at the end have killed him permanently? Some people seem to be suggesting that there was one fatal spot where the glass went in that would have been fatal if struck with a bullet.
Why? The glass hit that spot and obviously didn't kill him. They just simply needed to remove it. Why would he be able to heal himself against anything, even Sylar, and yet not from a bullet in one specific spot?
Thanks!
If Claire shot Peter in the head, it would kill him (temporarily) just like the glass before and the tree limd killed her. His powers would shut down and he could be revived later. I think the reason Nathan decided to fly Peter off instead was to demonstrate that he was a good guy again and to save Claire the trauma of shooting Peter. Even though logically, she knows that he'd most likely revive when the bullet was removed, it's a big step to change a lifetime of socialization ("Shooting people in the head is bad.")
To be honest, I was almost hoping Claude would show up and just knock out Peter again.
Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:22 am Post subject: Re: Why save the Cheerleader?
pjamese3 wrote:
texasboy2008 wrote:
Also, why would shooting Peter at the end have killed him permanently? Some people seem to be suggesting that there was one fatal spot where the glass went in that would have been fatal if struck with a bullet.
Why? The glass hit that spot and obviously didn't kill him. They just simply needed to remove it. Why would he be able to heal himself against anything, even Sylar, and yet not from a bullet in one specific spot?
Thanks!
If Claire shot Peter in the head, it would kill him (temporarily) just like the glass before and the tree limd killed her. His powers would shut down and he could be revived later. I think the reason Nathan decided to fly Peter off instead was to demonstrate that he was a good guy again and to save Claire the trauma of shooting Peter. Even though logically, she knows that he'd most likely revive when the bullet was removed, it's a big step to change a lifetime of socialization ("Shooting people in the head is bad.")
To be honest, I was almost hoping Claude would show up and just knock out Peter again.
Then teach him not to talk with the outside of his mouth!
I think that the idea behind Adam's comment to Peter was of the severity of the shotgun blast to the head at such close range.
Basically, buckshot from a shotgun at close range turns the target into putty. Thus, a load of shot into the head at such close range would not only crate a large wound, but it would also scatter the brain matter in a wide area, thus negating the effect of the healing ability.
After all, it's one thing to remove an object from a wound, and let the wound heal back together, it's quite another to gather up all the pieces of a wound, put them back into place, remove any offending material, and then hope that the wound heals.
With the previous three instances that you'd mentioned, there was only one wound, and only one piece of offending material to be removed. There was no massive trauma where the brain (or brain parts) were displaced to a massive degree. So it's my thought that as long as it's contained, then the head wound can regenerate. If it's blown outward, bye bye time.
Good point. It does make sense that the brain itself can actually heal if enough of it is intact. The only fatal move would be to remove the whole brain a la Popeye... I mean Sylar.
linderman didnt have regenerative powers though, so that doesnt really matter.... but yeah, i doubt you could regenerate from haveing a large part of your brain ripped out....
This website is an unofficial fan site dedicated to promoting the NBC show "Heroes" and is in no way affiliated with NBC or the actors. We claim no copyright to images, graphics, videos or photos which were created by the makers of "Heroes." No copyright infringement intended. THIS SITE HOSTS "ORIGINAL" CONTENT. If a video or image from an offsite provider like YouTube or ImageShack is linked in a post on this website and violates your copyright, contact us and we'll remove the link to your content immediately. HOWEVER YOU WILL STILL NEED TO CONTACT THE OFFSITE PROVIDER TO HAVE YOUR VIDEO OR IMAGE REMOVED FROM THE INTERNETS.
CONTACT US Privacy Policy
worth.
