Page 2 of 142 FirstFirst 1234561252102 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 2121
  1. #16
    Hopeless Forum Addict Halberdier17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 12
    Location
    The Phantom Zone formerly Krypton
    Posts
    5,822
    I gave them one and one half seasons to turn it around.

    I try to be optimistic about a lot of things but if they made the same mistakes two seasons in a row; I don't feel like giving them another shot even if it pains me because I loved the first two seasons. I wish I loved the 3rd and 4th seasons as well but I didn't.

  2. #17
    Forum Whiz Carmine-Infantino's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 14
    Posts
    835
    Smallville fans might like this

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3mS-jknfgGw

  3. #18
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    May 11
    Posts
    164
    JDBentz, it's nice to have a level headed discussion. I appreciate that.

    From what I remember between season 3 and 4, the only news we got was that the tone would be lighter, magic&mystism would play a major role and HIVE and Damien Dark would be the big bad. That's it.

    Now, after an admittedly average to below average season, what we are hearing is much more specific. There will be new vigilantes, mirroring Oliver's early days. There will be a crime lord looking to fill the power vacuum. Artemis will be joining on a recurring basis. Roy Harper will be back for an arc. Oliver as mayor will be prevent. A reporter will be coming from Coast City looking for dirt on Oliver. A character we havnt seen in 2 years will be back. The flashbacks will focus on Russia and the Bratva. Curtis' role has been fleshed out.

    I am encouraged by all this because I see the focus switching back to Oliver Queen and bringing the show back to what made it great. Oh and most of all no Olicity news.

    Again it's all in the execution, only time will tell.

  4. #19
    Forum Regular Arrow_47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 15
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    Well, for me, I try not to judge something before I've seen the final product. Subjectively speaking, of course one could argue the season will suck without having seen 1 frame of footage. Objectively though, that's extremely unfair to the show runners, especially when it seems like steps are being taken to fix the problems. Much of the season 5 news has been positive and shows me that they are trying to correct their mistakes. Last season, I believe the best episodes were directed by James Bamford, and he's directing the first to episodes of this season. To crap all over a product you havnt seen really does a disservice to the show and to yourself as a viewer. If you expect it to be bad and continually convince yourself it will be, then no matter what, the negatives will stand out. (For example, it started to happen last season with Felicity. I agree she was part of the problem, but even when she really had no influence on an episode, people found a problem with her, because they were expecting one).

    All that being said, 3 strikes and your out. If this season is a disappointment, especially after all the positive news so far, then being objective going forward will be extremely difficult.
    Not to be argumentative, but are we playing baseball or talking about a TV show that has failed in every attempt to produce a quality show with so much source material available and a huge following after two seasons that you would have to be a no-talent hack to mess it up? Because if it is baseball, sure, give 'em one more strike. But if it's the latter, the only way they heal the wounds and make it something to look forward to is by announcing a change in who is calling the shots.

    Side note: I would bet that if Season 5 turned out to be a good season, you could buy the DVD set without seasons 3 and 4 and you wouldn't miss anything in the storytelling. That is how meaningless the last two seasons have been.

  5. #20
    Site Groupie Shelby Kent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 12
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,754
    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    Well, for me, I try not to judge something before I've seen the final product.
    To be clear about what I’m going to say, I’m going to define “judging” as the act of forming an opinion. Now for me, I guess I see different ways of judging and it really depends on why I am judging and what is at stake. True, I could form an opinion AFTER I see the final product, or I could form an opinion beforehand, based on speculation, which itself could be based on different types and sources of information (I can also form an opinion beforehand and then change it as more info becomes available…).

    If I’m going to have to invest something that I consider to be of substantial value (such as time or money; and “substantial value” being a term that can only be determined by the investor) then usually I’m going to want to try to form an opinion ahead of time as to whether I think I’ll get a good return on my investment. If I’m looking at buying a particular model of car which has been in existence for several years for example, I’m going to look at feedback and info about that model for the prior years, before I’m willing to jump in and make that kind of investment. And if most of the info tells me that model is crap, then I’m comfortable thinking ahead of time odds are good that this year’s model will also be crap. Now, if something’s changed at the company for the year when the model I’m looking at has been manufactured (such as new leadership) then I might be more willing to suspend my negative opinion. But if it‘s the same leadership and they’re just saying lots of positive things, when in fact, that’s what they did for the year leading up to last year’s crappy model, then I won’t consider their “hype” as reliable, b/c of course it’s in their self-interest to say great things about what they’re going to be providing. They are not disinterested informants.

    Or for another example, if my family member is going to have non-emergent heart surgery, then I’m going to try to form a judgment about which cardiovascular surgeon we’re going to use, rather than just let any CV surgeon have the “job” and then wait to form an opinion after the final product is available (ie the heart surgery has been completed…)

    When I watch Arrow, I’m investing time that I won’t ever get back, so it’s a matter of whether or not I think I’m going to get a good, or useful, return on my investment (however I might want to define that and which no one can define for me, as this is a subjective experience). If the last 2 seasons of Arrow for me have been crappy, then I’m going to take that into account before I invest more time (I might actually have gotten something out of the crappy episodes I watched, but was it enough to off-set the time I invested…?)

    So I guess I differ from you here in that sometimes I am very willing to form an opinion about, or “judge” something before I “see” the final product (as with a TV show, when I have to invest time in order to “see” the final product)

    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    Subjectively speaking, of course one could argue the season will suck without having seen 1 frame of footage. Objectively though, that's extremely unfair to the show runners,

    I have a different view for myself of what is “fair” for the showrunners. If watching their show is a type of transaction, in which they produce something and my role as viewer is that I’m thinking of investing my time by watching it, then I do believe I’m entitled to consider their prior work in forming an opinion about the likely quality of their show, before I invest my time. I think that’s fair for me and fair for them. I’m not judging them by anyone else’s work, but by their own prior work. For instance, if Kreisberg were coming back to be a co-showrunner, then I might form a hopeful or even positive opinion about S5 before even seeing it b/c I know I liked the first 2 seasons. Or if two totally new showrunners were replacing MG and WM, then I might decide to approach S5 as a “blank slate.” I think that’s fair and smart for me to do. I do the same thing with authors. If I read a book by someone and really don’t like it, then I judge that their next book is likely to be of similar quality and I won’t read it, unless I am given a reason to override that judgment (for instance, someone who I respect, or who I know has similar taste in books, recommends the author’s subsequent book…)


    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    especially when it seems like steps are being taken to fix the problems. Much of the season 5 news has been positive and shows me that they are trying to correct their mistakes. Last season, I believe the best episodes were directed by James Bamford, and he's directing the first to episodes of this season.
    I won’t argue that for you, the news sounds encouraging. For me, I don’t agree. While it may be true that the intent behind the “steps being taken” is to fix problems, I have been provided with no evidence that that goal will be achieved. They can have all the good intent in the world, but that doesn’t translate into good execution. I’m not sure if there was any “negative” news released last summer, prior to S4; in fact, I recall reassurances that S3 problems would be “fixed” and IMO that didn’t pan out. Yes, I believe they were “trying” in S4 also, but again, “trying” alone doesn’t determine outcome. While commendable, “trying” alone isn’t good enough to result in good execution. In fact, I suppose for me, the only “evidence” I do have, as to whether or not they are capable of following through on their good intent with good execution, is evidence of what they have done in the past – and for me, the evidence demonstrates that they did not succeed. All IMO and subjective of course. Because I am aware of people who liked S3 & S4 better than S1 & S2, so of course there is always a different perspective on these things.

    As for S5 news being positive, I think that depends on interpretation and expectations. I’ve seen comments by Olicity fans who do not feel there has been positive news, b/c what they consider “positive” would be comments about Olicity and OTA (or Oliver/Diggle/Felicity) activities and what they have heard does not pertain to Olicity or OTA. I’ve seen comments by other fans who are concerned that the number of cast members announced so far, regular and recurring, is going to result in “bloat” and the phenomena of once again “too many masks.” Finally, I've also seen several posters elsewhere who did not react to the news of Bamford directing as if it were positive news. They had concerns about how he handles "character" moments in episodes he has directed. So IMO it’s all really just a matter of speculation and interpretation on the part of the reader/viewer. And speculating in the positive or optimistic direction IMO has no more validity or value than speculating in the “negative” direction.


    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    To crap all over a product you havnt seen really does a disservice to the show and to yourself as a viewer.
    Again, I won’t dispute that this is your personal belief. My belief can be found above, when I talked about why I might choose to go by someone’s prior work product to make a judgment before I invest time watching the final product. To me, I would be doing myself a disservice if I did not consider MG’s prior work as showrunner on Arrow. As for the show, IMO I don’t owe the show more consideration than I owe myself. I am under no obligation to bend over backwards, at my potential expense, to extend any credit to the show.


    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    If you expect it to be bad and continually convince yourself it will be, then no matter what, the negatives will stand out.
    I don’t agree with your opinion here, as I don’t believe it is always the case that expecting something to be bad means that no matter what, one will find the negatives to outweigh any other aspect of the experience. I believe that sometimes, for some people, in various situations this is true. Other times, not true. It’s a generalization that may have some grain of truth but it can easily be proven wrong by examples. Here is a personal example in my case regarding the show, Jane the Virgin. When I first read about that show, I thought that was the dumbest premise I ever heard. I thought there was no way that could work. I expected it to be bad. I’m someone who generally does not like rom-com series. I tuned in out of curiosity, expecting to see CW stupidity, fully anticipating a trainwreck, and yet I was blown away by how clever and funny I thought it was. I went on to watch quite a few more episodes, and only drifted away from the show for reasons having nothing to do with what I thought of the quality of the show. (Maybe one day, I will go back and finish it) And I’ve got lots more other personal examples where other shows and other situations are concerned… Anyway, I believe same thing about people going into situations expecting good; what they expect and what they end up experiencing and concluding will vary depending on the person and the situation.

    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    (For example, it started to happen last season with Felicity. I agree she was part of the problem, but even when she really had no influence on an episode, people found a problem with her, because they were expecting one).

    If it is your belief that, in an episode in which Felicity really had no influence (whatever that means…), the only reason people found a problem with her was b/c they were expecting one, then that is your belief. However, what I believe is that you cannot know this is true for all those people you are generalizing about unless you go out there and conduct a well-designed study, with proper sample size, control of bias for confounding factors, etc. to demonstrate evidence supporting your theory about why people had a problem w/ Felicity. So I personally am unable to accept your premise at this time. Again, I accept that this is your belief, but I do not accept that you have demonstrated the objective truth of this belief. Therefore, this does not do anything for me with regard to showing support for your argument that if one expects something to be bad, then the only thing one will see is the negative aspect of the experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    All that being said, 3 strikes and your out. If this season is a disappointment, especially after all the positive news so far, then being objective going forward will be extremely difficult.
    Now I might be misunderstanding here, but if by 3 strikes you’re out you mean: after 3 seasons in which one judges the show to have been of lower-than-desired quality, then it is acceptable, or rather understandable, if one is no longer able to approach the beginning of subsequent seasons in a “non-judgmental” (I’m substituting that for what I think I understand you to mean by “objective”) manner -- then to me, that just sounds like the argument is not that judgment should always be withheld until the final product has been viewed, but rather that the argument is more about using a different standard regarding how long one should avoid “pre-judging” before it is finally acceptable to begin doing so. And I don’t see any reason why 3 seasons is not an arbitrary number, or perhaps it is a length of time that has personal value to you but not necessarily to everyone else. Which really, to me, then brings it all back to this just being a matter of people having different philosophies about the purposes and uses of/need for making judgments. It sounds to me like for you, the time trade-off at the 3 season mark may be appropriate. But I suspect for others, their timeframe may vary along with their rationales for those timeframes, and I think that is something only each individual can decide for himself/herself.

    So while I see and understand your points about why for you, it is reasonable and desirable to take the “suspension of judgment” approach for the upcoming S5, I am not convinced that what works for you has been demonstrated to be the right approach for everyone else. I see no standards presented here that I think are truly objective and/or universally applicable for every poster’s possible particular situation, values and relationship with television viewing that would justify posters being obligated to suspend discussion about S5 quality until the season has finished (in fact, I think one could argue that, if we were all to agree that we do have that particular obligation, then it follows that we should not make any comments about quality at all, including anticipation that the quality might be good or improved). Again, I think what posters "have got to do" here in terms of discussing S5 quality issues, can only be decided by each poster (keeping in mind of course, the rules of the board)


  6. #21
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    May 11
    Posts
    164
    I'll just clarify what I mean by "3 strikes" and my thought process.

    Season 3 wasn't a bad idea, but the execution was bad. TPTB decided to change it up tonally (lighter, magic etc). Oddly enough, for me, that was their mistake. What they really needed to do was execute on what made ARROW great. Don't change the tone, especially when the execution was the main problem.

    That's 2 strikes for 2 different reasons. Why I am willing to give them this season is because I like everything I'm hearing about tone, no powers etc. also I'm hoping that steps have been taken to ensure execution is on point. If I'm disappointed again, then they've exhausted all reasonable ways to improve this show under current management. Changes, then, will be the only way to fix things.

    In sports sometimes the coach or GM gets one more chance then maybe they deserve after a couple losing seasons (be it because of past performance, current relationships, money etc.), but if things don't change, ownership usually has no choice but give them the boot.
    Last edited by 134sc; 06-30-2016 at 02:03 PM.

  7. #22
    Forum Whiz
    Join Date
    Sep 14
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen, Germany
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    I'll just clarify what I mean by "3 strikes" and my thought process.

    Season 3 wasn't a bad idea, but the execution was bad. TPTB decided to change it up tonally (lighter, magic etc). Oddly enough, for me, that was their mistake. What they really needed to do was execute on what made ARROW great. Don't change the tone, especially when the execution was the main problem.

    That's 2 strikes for 2 different reasons. Why I am willing to give them this season is because I like everything I'm hearing about tone, no powers etc. also I'm hoping that steps have been taken to ensure execution is on point. If I'm disappointed again, then they've exhausted all reasonable ways to improve this show under current management. Changes, then, will be the only way to fix things.

    In sports sometimes the coach or GM gets one more chance then maybe they deserve after a couple losing seasons (be it because of past performance, current relationships, money etc.), but if things don't change, ownership usually has no choice but give them the boot.
    By the end of season 3 Arrow had 2 outs and their next hitter already had 2 strikes, I was being as lenient as I could by checking in now and then to see if ANY improvement occurred and (for me personally) that wasn't the case. Season 5 is where DRASTIC change would be needed and I don't see it coming. I see the same team that brought us the desaster and a similar direction as seasons 3-4 with elements of season 2 to pacify those less interested in Olicity than in the comics. The trouble is, as the showrunners have already shown us with other iconic comic figures, just telling us they're bringing this character or that one in does nothing if they are still willing to disregard who that character is supposed to be, as they continually demonstrated by possibly further dumbing down Oliver Queen in order to fit Curtis into the show. Even season 1 absolutely screwed up Huntress so if they claim to bring in Hal Jordan it still won't make me any less sceptical of Season 5.

    Let us say this was Daredevil instead of Arrow and they were just now introducing Punisher, I would be worried as hell because even the showrunners with a positive track record might screw him up.
    Last edited by DoubleDevil; 06-30-2016 at 02:43 PM.

  8. #23
    Forum Regular Arrow_47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 15
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleDevil View Post
    The trouble is, as the showrunners have already shown us with other iconic comic figures, just telling us they're bringing this character or that one in does nothing if they are still willing to disregard who that character is supposed to be, as they continually demonstrated by possibly further dumbing down Oliver Queen in order to fit Curtis into the show. Even season 1 absolutely screwed up Huntress so if they claim to bring in Hal Jordan it still won't make me any less sceptical of Season 5.

    Let us say this was Daredevil instead of Arrow and they were just now introducing Punisher, I would be worried as hell because even the showrunners with a positive track record might screw him up.
    Couldn't agree more. Taking some girl and calling her Artemis doesn't make her Artemis. Without the canon backstory, she is just a character who shares the same name as Artemis from YJ. Now if it was the daughter of Sportsmaster and Huntress, and she had a sister who was Cheshire, then I might have confidence they knew what they were doing. But they don't, so I don't. And since MG already ruined Green Lantern on the big screen, there is no doubt he will do no better here.

  9. #24
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 13
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by TyrantLord View Post
    With Supes coming into play for Supergirl now, hopefully WB will see the wisdom of allowing Hal to make an appearance in Flash or Legends (no arrow appearances, please, Last thing Green Lantern needs is for the CW's Hal to be yet another contender for Felicity (*barfs and gags*) )
    Last thing Hal needs is to have Gugg be in charge of him again. Ughhh bad memories of the GL movie.......

  10. #25
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 11
    Posts
    1,876
    Quote Originally Posted by 134sc View Post
    JDBentz, it's nice to have a level headed discussion. I appreciate that.

    From what I remember between season 3 and 4, the only news we got was that the tone would be lighter, magic&mystism would play a major role and HIVE and Damien Dark would be the big bad. That's it.

    Now, after an admittedly average to below average season, what we are hearing is much more specific. There will be new vigilantes, mirroring Oliver's early days. There will be a crime lord looking to fill the power vacuum. Artemis will be joining on a recurring basis. Roy Harper will be back for an arc. Oliver as mayor will be prevent. A reporter will be coming from Coast City looking for dirt on Oliver. A character we havnt seen in 2 years will be back. The flashbacks will focus on Russia and the Bratva. Curtis' role has been fleshed out.

    I am encouraged by all this because I see the focus switching back to Oliver Queen and bringing the show back to what made it great. Oh and most of all no Olicity news.

    Again it's all in the execution, only time will tell.
    Believe me, I know the feeling. There are a handful of posters I don't mind discussing things with, whether I agree or disagree with them.

    Well, a lot of the changes you mentioned (aside from the Damien Darhk/HIVE bit) was in response to the heavy criticism they received for Season 3. After Season 2, MG claimed the show would move to a lighter tone, and began the season with the murder of Sara Lance, and then took us down the path towards a conflict with Ra's al Ghul and the League of Assassins, but did his damndest to avoid using terms like "Lazarus Pit" despite the casting call for Ra's saying he was a long-lived man who "respected what Oliver is trying to do, but believes he thinks too small." So we got the ridiculous storylines like "penicillin tea" until, oh, Ra's wants Oliver to replace him but we need a reason for it, so let's say the Lazarus Pit has a finite effect on its users as time goes on. Considering what we discovered about Tatsu this past season, it is far more plausible that she used magics that are associated with her order, a rival of the League, to bring Oliver back from actual death than the whole "hey, the snow froze his wounds and he somehow survived getting his lung pierced."

    Now, taking a look at this season: they said we would have a lighter tone. We did, but it was incredibly forced because they decided to reveal that they were going to kill off a major character this year, but they didn't make the choice of who (at least, not from any official sources) while planning it out. So, right off the bat, we had a horrible bit of storytelling because any storyteller worth their salt knows that if you intend to kill a beloved character, you decide which one it is right from the get-go. You don't wait until you write that chapter/episode/scene (book/TV Show/Film) to decide who it is who's going to die, and you don't discount ANYONE early in the game. You let the story take you through it naturally. Now, putting aside Felicity as a candidate because Love Interests tend to have similar Plot Armor to Protagonists (though not always), it seems that almost everyone else could have easily been the person to fill the grave and propelled the story forward. Diggle's storyline is finished and now they have to come up with a new one. Thea has decided she's more her father's daughter after all through a set of retconning that makes the heavy-handed retcon of Sara's mindset in Season 2 of "Arrow" look 'natural'. Sara spent most of Season 2 running from the League and becoming something other than a killer, and then she suddenly decides she actually is one and can't be anything else, so she's going back to the League. And all of that was clearly to make room for Olicity in Season 3. Thea, this season, spent most of it fighting the bloodlust and even going so far as to risk dying than kill another human, even despicable types like child predators. Then, suddenly, in the finale she is willing to kill a child and decides she can't be a vigilante anymore? That Laurel, who herself took up arms to fight the corruption in their city, would tell her to 'get out' of the life? Quentin Lance has gone from being the police contact for Oliver to being nothing more than Donna Smoak's boy-toy, and I say that with all the disrespect it is due because it is not character development for Quentin, or even regression since he was never anyone's 'boy-toy'. No, what it is is the degradation of a character. Finally, they went to great lengths to introduce Curtis as someone who could rival Felicity's own intellect in computer sciences and build new toys for the team. Why do this if she was going to come back to the team in the end?

    Now, the official reason for Laurel's death was that they "had no more stories" to tell with her. Unofficial reasons that have plausible reasoning based on Guggenheim's tendency to listen to the Twitter/Tumblr portion of the fanbase (he has even outright said in recent weeks to "keep tweeting" about what they want to see!) is that there were too many masks on the show and that Laurel was "dead weight". I was irritated, but I accepted these reasonings... until the recent casting announcements. Adrian Chase/The Vigilante is the new Star City District Attorney and a vigilante in his own right, who is more 'controlled' (at least for the time being) than the other vigilante cast, Wild Dog, or the track record of the newly-labeled Artemis.

    So, right off the bat, we have a 'mask' killed off and then the creative decision to 'save the show' from its own stupidity in doing so is to bring in even more masks. Okay, kind of able to buy that, since it doesn't appear we'll see much of Spartan and Speedy, though Arsenal will return in a recurring role.

    Next we have a District Attorney who is also a secret vigilante... now, what storylines could Adrian Chase possibly bring to the table that Laurel couldn't as the District Attorney and a secret vigilante? The only one I can think of is to drum up Olicity angst by having him involved with Felicity, seeing as the showrunners and writers did a bang up job of removing any reminder of Laurel and Oliver's history until her final episodes. That's not even getting into the fact that the Black Canary has 70 years' worth of stories to draw on.

    You are right that it is all in the execution. But unless the showrunners/writers are not only listening to those outside of Twitter, but to their own cast, Season 5 will probably start with a bang like last season but die with a whimper by mid-season.

  11. #26
    Site Groupie President_Luthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 04
    Posts
    3,028
    Bringing the focus squarely back on Ollie is one early sign that they may be attempting if not a reset, then some sort of course correction. Arrow not being used as a new series launching pad in '16-'17 is news that I welcome as actual good news (fingers crossed that the four-show(!!) crossover won't impact it in a similar fashion).

    Putting aside the series' usual suspects of melodrama and characterization issues, it's the addition of new "masks" that would concern me, esp. since they've made a point of thinning the roster's ranks by the S4 finale. Maybe they did realize that they now need these characters to do the functions that Laurel/BC handled -- or was capable of handling had they not largely neglected to give her the opportunity story-wise to do so. On this front, I completely understand the skepticism.

    I will brace myself for the possibility that the new characters may end up drawing focus away from Ollie and his story, provide more fodder for melodrama and replicate the too-many-masks dilemma Ollie found himself in by S4.

    The Arrow fan in me wants them to prove me wrong, that they will actually use the new characters well and it won't come at a cost to Ollie's own development. How this course correction will play out will depend on how well all these ideas are executed in S5. I still want to see how Ollie's journey ends -- it's the reason I'll still follow it.

    I will say that a dose of optimism with a dash of skepticism is how I'll approach Arrow (and, yes, the rest of the DCTV Berlantiverse) next season.

  12. #27
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 14
    Location
    Some where in the Untied States
    Posts
    1,284
    Quote Originally Posted by JDBentz View Post
    Believe me, I know the feeling. There are a handful of posters I don't mind discussing things with, whether I agree or disagree with them.

    Well, a lot of the changes you mentioned (aside from the Damien Darhk/HIVE bit) was in response to the heavy criticism they received for Season 3. After Season 2, MG claimed the show would move to a lighter tone, and began the season with the murder of Sara Lance, and then took us down the path towards a conflict with Ra's al Ghul and the League of Assassins, but did his damndest to avoid using terms like "Lazarus Pit" despite the casting call for Ra's saying he was a long-lived man who "respected what Oliver is trying to do, but believes he thinks too small." So we got the ridiculous storylines like "penicillin tea" until, oh, Ra's wants Oliver to replace him but we need a reason for it, so let's say the Lazarus Pit has a finite effect on its users as time goes on. Considering what we discovered about Tatsu this past season, it is far more plausible that she used magics that are associated with her order, a rival of the League, to bring Oliver back from actual death than the whole "hey, the snow froze his wounds and he somehow survived getting his lung pierced."

    Now, taking a look at this season: they said we would have a lighter tone. We did, but it was incredibly forced because they decided to reveal that they were going to kill off a major character this year, but they didn't make the choice of who (at least, not from any official sources) while planning it out. So, right off the bat, we had a horrible bit of storytelling because any storyteller worth their salt knows that if you intend to kill a beloved character, you decide which one it is right from the get-go. You don't wait until you write that chapter/episode/scene (book/TV Show/Film) to decide who it is who's going to die, and you don't discount ANYONE early in the game. You let the story take you through it naturally. Now, putting aside Felicity as a candidate because Love Interests tend to have similar Plot Armor to Protagonists (though not always), it seems that almost everyone else could have easily been the person to fill the grave and propelled the story forward. Diggle's storyline is finished and now they have to come up with a new one. Thea has decided she's more her father's daughter after all through a set of retconning that makes the heavy-handed retcon of Sara's mindset in Season 2 of "Arrow" look 'natural'. Sara spent most of Season 2 running from the League and becoming something other than a killer, and then she suddenly decides she actually is one and can't be anything else, so she's going back to the League. And all of that was clearly to make room for Olicity in Season 3. Thea, this season, spent most of it fighting the bloodlust and even going so far as to risk dying than kill another human, even despicable types like child predators. Then, suddenly, in the finale she is willing to kill a child and decides she can't be a vigilante anymore? That Laurel, who herself took up arms to fight the corruption in their city, would tell her to 'get out' of the life? Quentin Lance has gone from being the police contact for Oliver to being nothing more than Donna Smoak's boy-toy, and I say that with all the disrespect it is due because it is not character development for Quentin, or even regression since he was never anyone's 'boy-toy'. No, what it is is the degradation of a character. Finally, they went to great lengths to introduce Curtis as someone who could rival Felicity's own intellect in computer sciences and build new toys for the team. Why do this if she was going to come back to the team in the end?

    Now, the official reason for Laurel's death was that they "had no more stories" to tell with her. Unofficial reasons that have plausible reasoning based on Guggenheim's tendency to listen to the Twitter/Tumblr portion of the fanbase (he has even outright said in recent weeks to "keep tweeting" about what they want to see!) is that there were too many masks on the show and that Laurel was "dead weight". I was irritated, but I accepted these reasonings... until the recent casting announcements. Adrian Chase/The Vigilante is the new Star City District Attorney and a vigilante in his own right, who is more 'controlled' (at least for the time being) than the other vigilante cast, Wild Dog, or the track record of the newly-labeled Artemis.

    So, right off the bat, we have a 'mask' killed off and then the creative decision to 'save the show' from its own stupidity in doing so is to bring in even more masks. Okay, kind of able to buy that, since it doesn't appear we'll see much of Spartan and Speedy, though Arsenal will return in a recurring role.

    Next we have a District Attorney who is also a secret vigilante... now, what storylines could Adrian Chase possibly bring to the table that Laurel couldn't as the District Attorney and a secret vigilante? The only one I can think of is to drum up Olicity angst by having him involved with Felicity, seeing as the showrunners and writers did a bang up job of removing any reminder of Laurel and Oliver's history until her final episodes. That's not even getting into the fact that the Black Canary has 70 years' worth of stories to draw on.

    You are right that it is all in the execution. But unless the showrunners/writers are not only listening to those outside of Twitter, but to their own cast, Season 5 will probably start with a bang like last season but die with a whimper by mid-season.

    Very well said on all of this. I have nothing more to add.

  13. #28
    Forum Whiz Amarice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 14
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    826
    All I have to say is that Arrow's showrunners suceeded in killing my interest in the show completely. In this case I think I have Amanda Waller's approach - you can make only a certain level of mistakes while in this line of work, afterwards you are crossed out.

    The fact they can't write women characters doesn't help, and the way they were treating them is particulary offensive to me as a female viewer. Laurel is the victim of lack of thinking when it comes to planning out the development of the chracters, Amanda is the victim of DC/WB politics and Felicity is also a victim - combination of the worst thing when it comes to responding to fandom demands and extremely bad writing.

    So, you will see me in the episode comments section again only after Amanda Waller and Laurel are resurrected, Doctor Pressnall becomes a series regular and Oliver will start again be the vigilante hero figihting for little guys. Which means - never. I probably won't be around here too mach on the fall, as the main focuss will be season 5, which I choose not to follow to keep the rest of my mental sanity intact.

    Participating in the discussions here with you guys was the main thing I will miss regarding "Arrow" and which kept me with the show longer than it deserved to be watched. So see you around on other forums (LOT? Flash?).
    Last edited by Amarice; 07-01-2016 at 04:02 PM.

  14. #29
    Hopeless Forum Addict Halberdier17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 12
    Location
    The Phantom Zone formerly Krypton
    Posts
    5,822
    http://www.greenarrowtv.com/cody-rho...rrow-season-5/

    Cody Rhodes is going to play someone in Season 5.

  15. #30
    Forum Whiz
    Join Date
    Jan 13
    Posts
    748
    Quote Originally Posted by Halberdier17 View Post
    http://www.greenarrowtv.com/cody-rho...rrow-season-5/

    Cody Rhodes is going to play someone in Season 5.
    I'm confused. Don't Stephen Amell and this guy hate each other or something? In which case why is this guy joining Arrow?

Page 2 of 142 FirstFirst 1234561252102 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •