Spoiler talk:.07%

This Kristin chick is awful at her "spoilers". I think she's given a good spoiler maybe twice so far, and about 20 misleading spoilers. Worthless. --Bob 09:33, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

• Didn't she say that Sylar getting pushed out a window was just her theory? Heroe 10:45, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
  • I think her entire blog is just a desperate "look at me, look at me!" cry for attention. -- KristinHater (talk) 11:16, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
• So let me get this straight ... according to Kristin, Sylar gets pushed out a window and dies in episode 19 ... and then eats somebody's brain in episode 22. Golly, but she's worthless.--Hardvice (talk) 12:30, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
  • Not only that, but Tim Kring said that he'll be back for Season Two. Hmm... If he does die, I think it'll be a pretty short-lived death. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:19, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
    • Isn't episode 19 in the future? With Hiro and Ando? --BottomlessPitMan 23:21, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
      • Right now, spoilers say ep. 19 is in the present (as indicated by the continuation of the Linderman/Nathan scene they showed at Paley) and ep. 20 is in the future.--Hardvice (talk) 00:04, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
        • Oh, then damn.... --BottomlessPitMan 17:52, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
          • What is the "FTD man" from that last spoiler?--Bob 16:49, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
            • FTD is a flower delivery company, and May 13 is Mother's Day. The spoiler is suggesting that Peter and Nathan might not be Angela's kids. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
              • AAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaah.--Bob 18:51, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
                • I just took it to mean that she's a crummy mom. What with the knowing about her secret granddaughter while her son didn't and all.--Leshia 20:12, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

Title official I guess (with some cool pics)

http://www.nbc.com/Heroes/photos/general/15024.shtml#photo

They refer to the episode as ".07 Percent". Also, for those who want to upload pics, there are some great pics.--Bob 15:12, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

• Yes, however, they're still referring to Parasite as Like Any Parsite. *grumble* — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:28, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
  • I guess we'll have to wait for the season 1 dvd to confirm titles. --Xmuskrat 16:34, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
    • Not really, since they appear on-screen at the beginning of every episode.  :) Not surprisingly, NBC.com is just wrong (again, and again, and again).--Hardvice (talk) 17:35, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

New Gallery

I uploaded a lot of great spoiler images from .07%, though it's certainly not all of them, just what I thought were the best. Somebody else can add the captions. Check out all the pics here. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:52, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Fantastic job! --Xmuskrat 15:53, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Thanks, I didn't do too much though, just a little save and upload. They're intriguing pics, though, aren't they? — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:56, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

.07% Spoiler Question

I'm gonna ask a question here, and try to do it in an unspoilery way. Even so, stop reading here if you don't want to take a chance on interpreting my question. Spoilery Question: Do we know how exact (attention to detail) Isaac's paintings are to the actual true scenes they depict? If you carefully examine the detail of the .07% paintings, both the victim's arm positioning, arm 'attachments', facial-hair, shoulders, tank-top, as well as 'the other persons' clothing(sleeves, trim, collar, buttons), ---they are definitely different than the 'live-action' .07% spoiler clips that are posted. Makes me wonder if they are trying to make us think it is the obvious, but will end up being someone else that no one is expecting instead. Thoughts??? --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 03/14/2007 16:57 (EST)

• A few notes: Tim Sale has said he is not very good at likenesses -- instead he paints a "mood" or a "tone". Second, not all of the paintings have been realized exactly as Isaac painted them. Hiro and the Dinosaur is a great example -- the sword is unsheathed in the painting, but sheathed in the museum.

  I have a feeling Isaac won't die, but that's just my gut speculation. The only other time Isaac painted a death scene was Jackie's--which was believed to be Claire's death for son long, but turned out to be a red herring. I have a feeling there's something similar going on here. We've been teased with this death since the freakin' second episode. The buildup has been so big, now, that I can't see it happening just as they're making it out to be. I say there's still a big twist coming up. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 17:51, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

• Most of the "inaccuracies" in Isaac's paintings can be written off as either a difference of perspective (the scene is filmed from a different angle than the painting), which is really no big deal, or things which end up being ambiguous. Then there are some that are fairly trivial (positioning, expressions, clothing, and the like) which could easily be the result of artistic license or the failing of Isaac's perceptions (he is painting the future, after all, not taking its picture). While my gut tells me Isaac's not going to die (at least not yet), I don't know how much can be read into the details of the paintings -- particularly if, like the Homecoming paintings, they were done by Tim Sale before the scene was filmed (meaning he had no reference images). And Isaac dying would fit nicely in with Kristin's (*shudder*) spoilers about a hero whose ability is central to the plot being killed off, but their role being absorbed. If Sylar gets him some Isaac McNuggets, then either he or Peter will still be able to paint the future. There was talk earlier in the season about Santiago having some contract problems (he has conflicting film commitments, as I recall). And wouldn't it be an interesting way to keep Sylar around if *he* took over for Isaac as the paint-the-future guy? Sylar as a paint-flinging Hannibal Lector character would be awfully intriguing.--Hardvice (talk) 18:04, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
  • I mentioned this in the talk for another photo where it's like a ceiling view, but it appears that a) they're looking at something/someone coming from the ceiling, and b) it appears there's another set of feet in the room at the top-left (see here). Who's to say Isaac will die now instead of later (though you'd think he'd get his ass out of town if he survived a Sylar attack).

On a side note:

• 
  Notice the shirt...
• 
  Same shirt, different room (and it's buttoned up).

--Bob 19:09, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

• • • I'm hoping the sheat and no-sheat is a trick on the audience, and not a fulfillment....Hiro's got to go back to the Land of the Lost!! (Someone today said they thought the 'Isaac' wasn't really Isaac at all, but would be Ted Sprague (sans beard) --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 03/14/2007 22:00 (EST)
      • Just realized the trail of blood Hiro finds is when Isaac's body was probably moved from the explosion painting to the room where Hiro found him. In addition to that, the "Godsend" paintings from Heroes 360 look alot like the ones found in the future (same colors w/ the Symbol). Weird stuff. Can't wait for the episode.--Bob 17:49, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

NBC Blurb

Since it's the official blurb from NBC, should we add it to the episode page?--Bob 16:35, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

• No. We keep those on spoiler articles. Heroe(talk) 16:38, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
• What Heroe said. The episode articles are non-spoiler articles. Until the episode airs, they're really just placeholders with (clearly labeled) links to the spoiler pages. That lets visitors choose to keep spoiler-free (well, except for the big blurb on the Main Page...) Although, honestly, if you don't want spoilers, you'd think you'd avoid articles for unaired episodes... Nevertheless, it keeps the policy nice and bright-line: spoilers only in the spoiler namespace.--Hardvice (talk) 17:06, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

• Gotcha. Just wasn't sure with the Main Page having the blurb on it. --Bob 18:43, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

.07% preview clip : Thompson ?

Didn't really know where to post since it may be spoilerish...It seems Thompson isn't THE leader, he say to Mr. Linderman so;ething like "I'm waiting for the order. That's what we do here, we follow orders" meaning he has someone above him in the Company. Was it known before this preview ? -- FrenchFlo (talk)       

• Not known, but suspected. I don't believe the Big Boss would do the hiring. I also never got the sense that he was the one giving The Orders. Kind of a upper middle management guy. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:53, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
• Also in Company Man, Thompson pulled Claude away so Kaito could talk to Bennet alone. You just got the feeling that Kaito was more in charge than Thompson, especially since he had baby Claire.--Bob 21:00, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Linderman's Power

Who thinks Linderman's power isn't quite healing, but resurrection ? --Xmuskrat 10:13, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

• But by his own admission, he can't bring back the dead! Besides, how can you deny he has healing when we've seen him do it? Heroe!(talk) 10:25, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Wjhere did he admit that he can't bring back the dead? That flower looked pretty dead to me. --Xmuskrat 10:45, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
    • Austin in the GNs admitted he couldn't bring back the dead. That is why he was only able to heal Dallas and not the rest of the team. It is still yet speculative, to say definatively, that Austin is Linderman, therefore we shouldn't assume anything about resurrection or not resurrection either way. The flowers were wilted, but still purple not brown, (showing some signs of life still remaining)...therefore not showing resurrection conclusively; and since the topic between Nathan and Linderman was explicitly Healing not resurrection, we shouldn't speculate resurrection. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 04/5/2007 11:15 (EST)

Good points. --Xmuskrat 11:26, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Brian - New Character?

• I just added two SpoilerFix spoilers. That combined with the latest item on Hana's Blog might be one and the same character? Bkdelong 20:10, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
  • Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Somehow I think Micah will somehow be involved with the hardware while this guy deals with the software.--Bob 20:13, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

Disputed Theory (.07% = Almost Drunk?)

I'm putting this here in talk since it was deleted from the article page.

".07%" might refer to one or more characters getting almost legally-drunk (.08% is the Blood-Alcohol Content (BAC) limit in many states including New York). It's actually a much disputed fan theory I saw on the message boards, but I think it's a valid one that should be considered for inclusion (.07% would be the reading on the breathalizer).

My guess is that, if true, it will be Nathan who drinks. We already know he is worried about Peter (with good reason). And from the episode preview photos, it can be assumed that Nathan will have to deal with a proposition from Linderman and meeting his daughter, Claire. He has quite alot to deal with and not really anyone he feels he can lean on. Plus (and this is a stretch), there is the matter that one of Isaac's paintings shows Nathan in office. Nathan could be testing his ability to alter the future shown by that painting.--MiamiVolts 01:47, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

• The spoilers published literally quote Linderman saying .07% is the "small price to pay", referring to the results of the explosion.--Bob 01:59, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
  • On the other hand, few of the episode titles have only one meaning. Not that I buy the drunk theory; just saying.--Hardvice (talk) 02:04, 17 April 2007 (EDT)