Talk:.07%

Article and episode title

According to CBR, the title of this episode is ".07%", not ".07". (LINDERMAN REVEALS PLANS: "HEROES" CLIP FROM PALEY FESTIVAL Warning, this source contains spoilers.) Sorry about the double move, I forgot that an article shouldn't have the (Heroes) disambiguator if no other articles are named .07%. I only saw List of characters in Heroes and Parasite (Heroes) pointing to this article; if any other pages need fixing due to the move, let me know. - fmmarianicolon | Talk 22:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Should we include spoiler filled information from that article, or do we only post information that is seen on TV (thus made "official)? Ytoabn 15:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The clip shown at the festival was shown by the show creator and actors, so I'd count it as official. I added the Nathan and Linderman conversation to the "preview" paragraph because Nathan and Linderman were already conversing in "Parasite". However, if mentioning that they talk about the explosion is too much of a spoiler, then we can change it to something like "Nathan discusses his future with Linderman." - fmmarianicolon | Talk 18:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hrm. According to NBC, the episode is ".07 Percent". I hope this doesn't go the way of "(Like Any) Parasite" and get confusing. I added some information based on an image gallery that was released on NBC's own website. There is more to be said, but, for example, I saw a few pictures of Peter and could not think of a description for what I saw without being speculative. Valaqil 13:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Much the same with the pics of Sylar meeting up with a certain other Hero that can paint the future. He may have him on the ground, but is he out for the count? --Cooleyez229 07:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Nathan & Claire

The article states that Nathan and Claire will be reunited. When were they united a first time? --Kmsiever 19:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

That wording may be a bit inaccurate/speculative. Nathan knew that he had a daughter, so it could be said that he saw her as an infant. Hrm. Thinking on it, I'll change that wording for now. Valaqil 14:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

...Is this important?

"Peter has a new haircut" - ...what the? Who cares! This is unneeded info! — hippi ippi₊₊⁺⁺ 08:50, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

It's important because it tells the difficulties the production team has in the continuity of Peter's hair in scenes. But that's as far as I've read and researched. Aesthetic wise, I think short looks bad on Milo. Berserkerz Crit 09:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It also ties into the final scene of the previous episode. --Kmsiever 14:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It happens because Sylar cuts his curl off. Since its an actual show related fact, I think its fine there. Redraf 03:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not actually a new haircut. Check out episode 3, when he's at the formal dinner thing. It's the EXACT same haircut, just styled differently. 61.68.209.236 09:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Did anyone actually make out the scar he has while he combed his hair back? I remember when Hiro came back to the present from the future, he mentioned about his scar. I just dont see it... So i'm not sure whether i should put it in or not. I want to verify this before any edits are done. thanks! (NeoDeGenero 16:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC))

There's no scar from his recent encounter with Sylar--it's all healed because of Claire's healing power. In the preview for the next episode, you can see that future Peter has a scar that runs diagonally across his face. That should be the scar that future Hiro was talking about. The question is--why didn't he regenerate from whatever caused that wound so that there'd be no scar? I guess Peter's assumption was wrong--there are some things that he can't (completely) recover from. --Glenn W 17:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The latest Graphic Novel "String Theory", may help explain the discrepancy; In the original timeline which led to Future Hiro, Peter had not been warned about "the cheerleader" and had no reason to ever meet Claire, and Syler had killed Claire and absorbed her power. However, after Hiro went back and changed the past by warning Peter, these events were altered. Having now come in contact with Claire as a result of Future Hiro's alteration of the timeline, Peter now has her regeneration power and thus will not be likely to develop a scar. Noclevername 05:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I realized shortly afterwards that what we see in the previews is an alternate timeline, not the timeline that we're watching. I had even explained to someone else prior to the hiatus that in our timeline, Peter most likely would never have a scar... Just didn't put two and two together. I thought it's still "our" timeline. --Glenn W 01:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I actually thought that the scar could be the result of the explosion, peter being blasted into tiny pieces is sure to leave some kind of mark, even if he can regenerate. If a scar were to form on Peter or Claire, it would not be eliminated by their power, just as their power can't remove a shard of glass or a stick from their necks, it wouldn't be able to remove actual living flesh. Seeing as they heal so quickly in normal situations, there is not chance for scar tissue to appear, but if part of Peter were missing, such as a large section of skull, I'm sure there would be at least minor scarring. And where did the scar come from? Peter was in too much pain to stop Sylar, and only succeeded because he caught him off guard. If Sylar wanted to kill Peter in the alternate timeline, nothing would stop him. 59.167.187.141 15:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

The thought of Peter's scar as a result of causing the explosion has crossed my mind as well... before I read the latest online Graphic Novel. Peter's not the one who causes the explosion. And if he was close enough in the alternate future, without Claire's regenerative powers, he'd be dead. --Glenn W 21:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Peter Sylar fight

It is mentioned in the article that Sylar uses his super hearing recently aquired to fire the glass in one direction. What actually happened looked more like he fired in every direction without using super hearing. This might be attributed to his inability to use more then one ability at once.

Didn't he use "the voice" while still pinning Mohinder to the ceiling? An honest quixtar ibo 20:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

As far as I remember Sylar hasn't aquired "the voice" that Eden used since she blew her brains off. 213.157.1.51 21:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

That's certainly the sense I got, too.216.165.38.103 07:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, looked to me like he telekinetically picked it all up and sent it in every direction. Good idea actually, I would'nt have thought of it. Blkmasta 18.12 GMT, 24/04/07

what does having super hearing have to do with moving an object in one direction? if anything, hearing makes sound waves goes towards you, not the opposite. confused 128.122.253.212 03:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Nothing - the idea proposed was that Sylar used enhanced hearing to locate Peter, presumably by listening for his heartbeat, breathing, etc. Sylar could then direct the glass shards in the direction of the sounds. (BTW, hearing in and of itself wouldn't have any effect on sound waves - sounds travelling toward you would still be subject to the same physical laws as with anyone else. Dale, if placed in the vacuum of outer space, wouldn't be able to hear anything at all. Her advantage (and now Sylar's) lies in being able to hear sounds much, much better than everyone else. Hope this helps. --Ckatz^chat_spy 03:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sylar's painting at the end

"Sylar kills Isaac and absorbs his power, painting a picture of a monstrous-looking Nathan Petrelli in office." -- Was that really Nathan in Sylar's painting? Do we have a source to verify that? BaconLover 14:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I thought that the painting was of Sylar, himself. Did anyone else think it was Sylar? MJF150 09:28, 24 April 2007

The first time I saw it, it did kind of look like Sylar to me, also. But who knows? Sylar could just have not quite as good painting skills as Isaac. vic93 4.250.99.45 15:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was all but guaranteed that Nathan would take office as President, given all the foreshadowing - Isaac's painting, Hiro's trip to the future right before the explosion, and in .07%, Linderman's conversation with Nathan and the news article in future Hiro's apparent base. Sylar's painting seems to be a twisted version of Isaac's earlier painting. All this is perhaps bordering on OR, but there's no reason to assume it's not Nathan, as Sylar has no political aspirations that we've seen... --Pentasyllabic 16:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

No i think it is still Nathan, but a more twisted version of him. Reason, one of the newspaper clippings that Hiro saw towards the end of the episode shows a picture of Nathan using the tragedy to rally voters (NeoDeGenero 16:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC))

It's a copy of the one Linderman had, but deformed (due to Sylars twisted state of mind?). Blkmasta 18.14 GMT 24/04/07

I think it's still Nathan, but somehow in Sylar's painting, the future is different. To me, it looks more like Nathan is sad, than he is "monstrous." --Glenn W 17:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Here's the painting in question 74.192.21.115 23:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v628/Ytoabn/cm-capture-3.jpg

Its not that Peter is "monstrous", its just that Sylar is not a good painter, unlike Isaac. The painting just looks amateurish, which makes sense, althought it does essentially give the same future.--Hypergeometric2F1(a,b,c,x) 06:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

hehe, i think you meant Nathan, although, even if Syler is amateurish, how come Peter was able to mimic his power and complete the painting... hmmm NeoDeGenero 15:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't say amateurish, more like "different style." I guess it could be argued that when Peter finished Isaac's painting last time, he did not have mastery over the prophecy painting power yet, so it wasn't "his own," instead, it came out with Isaac's artistry. Sylar's painting would then be more to his own style. Artistic style aside (which would account for Nathan looking "monstrous"), Nathan's posture in the painting suggests sadness, as opposed to the prideful look in Isaac's painting. Personally, I think that's more significant than the style. --Glenn W 01:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Could it be that the person painting it adds their own point of view to the image? When Issac painted, it was never photo realistic, but made Sylar a towering shadow, gave Peter something of an aura as he floated off the roof of the building. It could be that for Issac, Nathan being president is a positive thing, something to be proud of, but to Sylar, it is a terrible thing - and the artist paints accordingly... 59.167.187.141 15:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Any consideration to the fact that Sylar and Peter's powers, while similar, are different? Peter appears to 'record' the impression of another - he 'remembers' how it feels about another persons power. It is possible that he 'records' more than just the super power of someone and remembers skills/abilities/knacks - hence getting Issac's ability to paint as well as a Seer. Sylar appears more to have to study another's power to gain the ability (get inside the brain) - Sylar certainly appears to be the type to ignore learning anything but the flashy superpower. To put it another way, its might be possible that Peter can remember 'normal' people's skills (like a highly skilled Surgeon) if he set himself to it. Ravend 04:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

After watching Five Years Gone, its clear that the painting is in fact Sylar himself - any objections to me changing this on the page?The dead don 21:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: length

For the record I agree wit Dposse's edit removing the length tag. Heroes has quite a complicated plot and thus justifies that extra bit of meat, I'm sure it could be copy edited down a bit and made more succinct but I don't think the length tag is needed. Matthew 17:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree that Heroes needs a bit more text to describe the plots, but at 13 paragraphs the summary is currently far longer than needed. The summary is almost double the length of a typical House' summary. Per WP:PLOT, it's not necessary to discuss every plot point in the article. I'm going to re-add the tag since the summary needs more than minor pruning. ChazBeckett 17:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I cleaned it up a bit. I deleted some details and merged alot of sentences. How is it now? dposse 22:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Cranes

Have you noticed that on the picture in the paper that Hiro finds in a future we can find cranes although it says under the picture that it has been taken ONE day after the explosion. Kwadrat007 9:20pm, 24 April 2007 (CET)

It's New York, there's always a lot of cranes around. Noclevername 05:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think they will be there one day after nuke :) Kwadrat007 10:45am, 28 April 2007 (CET)

Linderman's Power

In the article it says that Linderman has the ability to "heal himself and others", yet on his charcter page, it only says he can heal others. I thought he was only able to heal other things, not himself. And if he could heal himself, wouldn't that kind of make the concept of Claire's power inferior to his? Although in the episode when Nathan asks him "What do you know about healing?", Linderman responds "I know quite a bit". Maybe he was refering to healing himself as in a state of mind?

Can someone please explain to me specificaly what Linderman's power is? Vic93 20:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall Linderman ever using his power on himself, so that bit should probably be removed as speculation. --Pentasyllabic 21:06, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

If I recall correctly from the online graphic novel, Linderman did say something about how healing others takes some toll on himself. So he might not be able to heal himself, although it isn't impossible. From what we've seen, he just needs to lay his hand(s) on someone or something to induce healing. So he could theoretically lay his hands on his own wounds to heal them. Whether he can or not, at this point, would be pure speculation. But supposing that he can, I wouldn't exactly call Claire's self-healing power "inferior." Claire's power is "automatic." Her wounds heal without any conscious thought, so she can easily recover from near-fatal wounds, as long as the offending object is removed. If Linderman is capable of healing himself, he would not be able to do so after he loses consciousness. --Glenn W 01:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

What is to say that Claire and Linderman's powers aren't the same? There are only so many genes that can exist in so many combinations, maybe Linderman's ability to heal other things is a future potential development of Claire's power. At this stage, we only know that he can heal others however, and therefore, any articles about it should state only that. Anything else is only speculation. We can't possibly know for certain until it appears in an episode. (Also, we have not seen Linderman use his power on himself as he has only been in one and a half episodes so far, and all of that has been conversation with Nathan.) 59.167.187.141 15:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

It is possible that Claire's ability might develop into one that can heal others, but that's all speculative. If you read the Graphic Novels, Linderman's ability manifested quite differently from that of Claire's from the very beginning. So no, they are not the same. --Glenn W 21:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Criticism - Similarity to Watchmen Plotline

Would it be appropriate to include a criticism that .07% plotline of the destruction of New York by a former hero bears a striking resemblance to the plot of the Alan Moore Graphic Novel 'Watchmen'? Here is a link which discusses the issue http://www.nypost.com/seven/04242007/entertainment/heroes_pulls_rug_from_under_watchmen_entertainment_stephen_lynch.htm

It's an interesting link - and thanks for providing it. As for inclusion, however, I'd be inclined to say no. Why? Because the article doesn't actually provide any proof that there is a controversy. It speculates about one, makes an argument for it, but in the end cannot support the assertion. Tim Kring is unavailable for comment, Zack Synder is "probably" ticked off (but doesn't actually comment) - sounds as if the Post is trying to drum up a bit of a controversy to sell papers. Thoughts? --Ckatz^chat_spy 05:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Ckatz. It shouldn't be included. dposse 17:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I saw the episode first and when I realised the similarities between the two, I found many forums about it. I saw on IMDB that someone mentioned the similarities to Tim Kring who replied that he has never read a comic book, although this was not credited to any source. Could a "Trivia" section be added, detailing references to poular culture, and mentioning Watchmen? Heroes is almost certainly inspired by a number of comics - X-men (Evolutionary mutations, Claire/Wolverine's powers) to name one. As if no one on the production/writing team hasn't read Watchmen and could have mentioned the similarities to Kring. I think Its worth mentioning. 59.167.187.141 14:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

No. Per WP:TRIV, trivia sections are to be avoided on wikipedia. dposse 16:17, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not really a "criticism" either. Lots of plots are similar to other plots. Now if Heroes makes a reference to Watchmen in some way, then it might be worth mentioning the similarity, just like "the Architects of Fear" are mentioned in the Watchmen article because the series namechecks it. Aexia 18:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Inconsistency?

I think this is inconsistent - can someone explain?

- When Hiro is transported to New York moments before the explosion, he sees the decapitated remains of Isaac Mendes.

- However, when he is transported into the future in this episode (0.7%)it is clearly after the explosion, and yet he is under the impression that Isaac Mendes may still be alive.

- If Hiro believes that he cannot change the future by changes events in the past, how can he assume in 0.7% that Isaac Mendes is alive when he saw him die prior to the explosion? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.154.250.63 (talk) 03:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

Hiro does believe that the future can be changed, what he sees when he arrives to the future only led him to believe that he failed to make the correct (or enough) changes. To change something as major as the destruction of half of New York would obviously take a lot more work than trying to prevent just one person from dying. Hiro believes that since he's already warned Isaac about being killed, it should have averted his death.

On a side note, it's ".07%", not "0.7%"--those two values are quite different. --Glenn W 09:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Angela Petrelli

With the implied Superpower of Angela Petrelli, I think she has a Precognition power, which is where Peter appears to gained his ability to see the future. Given his closeness to his family / mother it seems to make the fact that in his dreaming state he could see the future on a certain subject (ie, flying) when you consider he would have had the 'power imprints' of both his mother and his brother at the start of the series (but not the conscious control at that time to use them. Ravend 05:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I think that its pretty certain that Peter got precog powers from Issac. Before meeting Issac, he only says things such as "I think I can fly" but does not visualise it until after their meeting. It is like with a power such as Eden or Zane's, where it is not an automatic or constant thing. They can probably "feel" their powers in much the same way that you can feel where your arm is without looking at it. You can touch your nose without sight becuase you know where all the parts of your body are in relation to each other. It is like that with Peter's flight, he can feel the power, but can't move it yet. His pwers of flight also would only have manifested when Nathan's did, so the fact that he hasn't though he could fly since birth is also explained. 59.167.187.141 05:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

See, I disagree with you here. Peter was having the dreams well before meeting Issac, given the information we know in the show (ie, having not met Issac before any of the episodes)

Quote from Genesis: Opening scene: 'Meanwhile, a different man, Peter Petrelli is seen standing on a building, then falling. Peter then wakes up in the home of Charles Deveaux, a patient under his care.' & 'Back in New York, Peter keeps "having these amazing dreams" when he closes his eyes, specifically dreaming he can fly'

Both these parts happens before he meets Isaac (with Simone) - sometime after seeing Isaac's picture is when Peter jumps from the building. Ravend 06:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

That was kind of my point before. He believes he can fly and imagines himself doing so. But, for example, when he dreams that he flys out of Charles' window in the episode when Charles dies, he is not seeing the future. At no point does he (or CAN he for that matter, now that Charles is dead) talk to Charles and then fly out of the window. I think it might be a bit like a phantom limb, when you can feel it there, but it doesn't actually exist. Peter can feel his power but doesn't know how to use it yet, and his power seems to leak through into his dreams. Its the same way that Sylar knows what to do to gain a person's powers. He didn't have to be told how to, he could just feel it. This conversation is probably better suited to Peter's specific character article, rather than the episode guide. 121.44.204.229 06:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

If Sylar has Charliee's super memory, shouldn't he have that list memorized by now?

Maybe He never saw the list for long enough to memorise it. Charlie still had to practice things a few times to get it right. Maybe Charlie's illness prevented her brain from being useful to Sylar for power acquiring purposes. 121.44.204.229 06:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

MySpace Videos: Exclusive Heroes – Link defunct

The link to "^ MySpace Videos: Exclusive Heroes (2007-04-03). Retrieved on 2007-04-04." is not working anymore. I suspect the video has been removed, so I would assume that the link should go.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on .07%. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070626120429/http://goldderbyforums.latimes.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1106078764/m/53610293 to http://goldderbyforums.latimes.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1106078764/m/53610293

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)