• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Painkillerjane

Shadeydm

First Post
Caught the first show on SciFi last night. I didn't really care for it it felt cheap and rushed but maybe I am just spoiled by Heroes.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I found it to be conceptually interesting, but practically pretty dull. I can easily imagine having to listen to the lead grunt and groan every single weak, to show how much pain she's in, which frankly, doesn't appeal. Maybe if I was into S&M.
 

Conceptually, it's kind if the opposite of Heroes. In Heroes, normal people start manifesting superpowers, and a shadowy organization is hunting them down for their own ends. The viewer is definitely led to be on the side of the people manifesting the powers. (Heroes = good guys.)

In Painkiller Jane, normal people start manifesting superpowers, but in the process they all end up "bad." (There was something explained about their inability to tell good from evil or something like that - I can't recall the exact explanation.) A shadowy organization is hunting them down to neutralize the threat that they represent. The viewer is led to be on the side of the shadowy organization. (Neuros = bad guys.)

The problem is, Painkiller Jane herself is basically Claire, the cheerleader character from Heroes, aged several years and given DEA training. It shouldn't be a big surprise that the show pales in comparison to Heroes, which more or less provides everything this show provides and a whole lot more.

I'll give it a couple more episodes - it could turn out to be a pretty decent show. It kind of reminds me a bit of the "hunt the mutant" episodes of The X-Files, which I always liked a lot better than the "mythology" episodes.

Johnathan
 


I found it hard to follow, but my wife and I watched it after a party and I was still pretty drunk, so YMMV. Didn't inspire either of us, but we'll probably give it a few more episodes to see if it improves. If it doesn't I imagine that we'll bail on it.
 

Richards said:
Conceptually, it's kind if the opposite of Heroes. In Heroes, normal people start manifesting superpowers, and a shadowy organization is hunting them down for their own ends. The viewer is definitely led to be on the side of the people manifesting the powers. (Heroes = good guys.)

In Painkiller Jane, normal people start manifesting superpowers, but in the process they all end up "bad." (There was something explained about their inability to tell good from evil or something like that - I can't recall the exact explanation.) A shadowy organization is hunting them down to neutralize the threat that they represent. The viewer is led to be on the side of the shadowy organization. (Neuros = bad guys.)

The problem is, Painkiller Jane herself is basically Claire, the cheerleader character from Heroes, aged several years and given DEA training. It shouldn't be a big surprise that the show pales in comparison to Heroes, which more or less provides everything this show provides and a whole lot more.

I'll give it a couple more episodes - it could turn out to be a pretty decent show. It kind of reminds me a bit of the "hunt the mutant" episodes of The X-Files, which I always liked a lot better than the "mythology" episodes.

Johnathan

I have not watched it yet. Its on my DVR waiting.

The comparison to Claire is interesting. Painkiller Jane came first there has been several Painkiller Jane movies on SF. I caught one of them and I enjoyed it which is why I DVRed the pilot.
 



Well, I just watched it tonight as a re-run after the Dresden finale. I thought the show was interesting. I'm probably a heretic for saying this, but I've not watched Heroes, so can't speak on the comparison.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top