Spoiler talk:The Kindness of Strangers

Published Spoilers: Bob?

In the published spoilers section it says they revealed Bob to be Molly's boogeyman (which blew my mind, btw). What happened to Kane? Earlier spoilers say Kane is Molly's boogeyman, and that Kane is Kensei. Have the writers completely changed the story or is something wrong here?--IMax 22:29, 8 October 2007 (EDT)

• He's Right,,,what happend here? First a magazine says that Kane can see molly, but now someone says that bob can see her? and it will be mostly stupid that Bob is the one who can see molly, because: he dont look worse then sylar or scary at all, like...come on!! the voice of the being who can see molly when he says "i can see you" is totaly 100% different from bob's! -- Tomer vainstein
  • Simply put, not all spoilers should be treated equally. Consider the source. I wouldn't put too much trust in the National Enquirer or in Kristin Veitch, for instance. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 11:15, 11 October 2007 (EDT)

Almost-spoilers

I found it pretty funny that all of the National Enquirer spoilers were almost correct, but still each of them was a little bit wrong:

• a new hero (Dana Davis) has the power of photographic reflexes, meaning she can replicate any physical motion she witnesses. (Check)
• She foils a stick-up man by snatching his gun and flooring him with a double backflip she once saw during a wrestling show. (Didn't look like a double-backflip to me...)
• American students Derek and Maya find Sylar lying face down in the Mexican desert and rescue him. (Derek's an American student, but Maya clearly isn't)
• He tells them his name is Gabriel Gray and seems willing to help them but secretly kills Derek at a gas station. (Check)
• Molly's "nightmare-man" turns out to be the mysterious Bob from the Company, who is actually Matt's father. (Well, nightmare man is Matt's father, and is in the same picture as Bob, but definitely isn't Bob) --Maelwys 07:19, 17 October 2007 (EDT)
  • Always consider the source. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 08:24, 17 October 2007 (EDT)
    • Oh definitely. I didn't expect any of them to be right, I was just impressed by how close they actually got to the truth, while still completely missing on some critical details. --Maelwys 11:47, 17 October 2007 (EDT)