This wiki is a XML full dump clone of "Heroes Wiki", the main wiki about the Heroes saga that has been shut down permanently since June 1, 2020. The purpose of this wiki is to keep online an exhaustive and accurate database about the franchise.
Talk:Psycho
The Number 23
(Not about Psycho but the motel rooms) Just after they showed Mohinder checking in to room 23 there was a advertisement for The Number 23, probably just a coincidence. -Level 15:47, 20 February 2007 (EST)
- AFAIK, there's no tie-in with the producers of The Number 23 and the producers of Heroes. Plus, NBC tends to be pretty, um, blunt with their in-show advertising (see Nissan Versa, see Staples on The Office). But stranger things have happened. :) — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:38, 20 February 2007 (EST)
Any official word?
Have any of the writers actually said there are intended parallels with Psycho? If not then this page needs to be changed (or even deleted) and much of the content moved to theories (or the page reworked so that it itself can be placed in the Theories category). (Admin 20:26, 20 February 2007 (EST))
- None of which I know. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:33, 20 February 2007 (EST)
- I'm missing what makes a reference to another work, whether intended by the writers or not, a theory. It seems like any discussion of references and themes is necessarily not about the content of the show, and both references and themes are organized under the production categories, not under Category:Heroes, for just that reason. All such articles are going to be, at some levels, analytical, not discursive.--Hardvice (talk) 16:10, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
- Well, I dont particularly care for the theme articles, either, since we're drawing our conclusions there as well. Specifically for this article it's drawing a link between the two shows that is not necessarily intentional. Since it's subject to interpretation, it's much more like a theory than a regular article. While perhaps calling it a "theory" isn't the most precise use of terms, it's certainly more subjective than the other articles and I feel it deserves to be noted that this page is documenting what appears to be a relation versus what the writers have explicitly said was designed to be a reference. (Admin 18:41, 29 April 2007 (EDT))
- Yeah, I don't think there's any harm in including it in the theories category. It's also okay as a reference. I don't think it needs to be deleted, though. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:02, 29 April 2007 (EDT)
- Well, I dont particularly care for the theme articles, either, since we're drawing our conclusions there as well. Specifically for this article it's drawing a link between the two shows that is not necessarily intentional. Since it's subject to interpretation, it's much more like a theory than a regular article. While perhaps calling it a "theory" isn't the most precise use of terms, it's certainly more subjective than the other articles and I feel it deserves to be noted that this page is documenting what appears to be a relation versus what the writers have explicitly said was designed to be a reference. (Admin 18:41, 29 April 2007 (EDT))
Deletion
I'm pretty sure this reference wasn't intentional. As in the discussion above, there was no official word as to if this similarity was even intentional. Heroe!(talk) 14:46, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
- I honestly think it would eliminate about half of our reference articles if we were required to prove the reference was intentional. There's a difference between this (which sure seems like an homage) and, say, Friday Night Lights, which was tenuous at best and where the writers' statements that the Wildcats logo wasn't chosen by the crew disclaimed any connection. Expecting the writers to tell us what is and isn't a reference seems like doing literary analysis and rejecting an interpretation merely because the writer didn't specifically say she intended it, which seems ... odd.--Hardvice (talk) 16:03, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
- I'm going to have to agree with you, Hardvice. The references are not really canon and are up for a lot of speculation (unless, of course, a writer comes out and says that something was or wasn't a reference). That might mean a bit of extra back-and-forth on the talk pages, but that's probably a very healthy thing. For instance, I know there are some people who are dying to make a Lost article. Personally, I don't see it, and I think it's just an overzealous group of fans (myself included) looking for references where there are none. But hey, if somebody can really justify it and back it up, then fine. Rain Man is a good example of the flip side: to me, it was a very obvious homage to a great show. Some people questioned whether or not it was a coincidence (which is a good thing). I don't know of any quotes that definitively say "Yes, that was a reference to Rain Man," but that doesn't discount the validity of the article, which clearly shows a link.... It wouldn't hurt to slap Category:Theories on this page, but I certainly wouldn't delete it. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 16:56, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
- Well, the similarities between Sylar and Norman Bates might not be intentional, but I feel the shot of the hotel is almost certainly an homage. --Frantik (Talk) 16:09, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
- Can I move to set a deadline for resolving this issue? I hate that orange banner :'( --Frantik (Talk) 18:04, 29 April 2007 (EDT)
- I don't think we need a deadline, but we should probably come to some form of concensus. Personally, I don't mind the page. I don't have any strong opinions one way or the other, but I don't think it needs to be deleted. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:25, 29 April 2007 (EDT)
- I vote to keep it because we just watched it for Film Study and it is very very similar to Unexpected. There are many things referenced in HEroes, and I think Psycho is a big one that we should keep. Jason Garrick 16:09, 21 May 2007 (EDT)