Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 98
  1. #16
    Site Groupie President_Luthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 04
    Posts
    3,049
    It's an interesting discussion, though it would be fair to say that the show hasn't done as good a job in ironing out this issue and likely will do little more than scratch the surface on it.

    ARGUS' work is every bit as murky and bloody as anything Oliver has done, but they have the official consent of the gov't to do such works. Some of the stuff they do is morally wrong by any standard -- more so -- but they have the legal green light to do a lot of it.

    Oliver never had that green light officially, barring some ARGUS-sanctioned tasks, though we could also argue he's also had the implicit consent of the local authorities to do much of his actions aka they'll look the other way. He might not be as "official" as when Capt. Lance had a press conference to praise the Arrow's deeds back in S3, but he's been given access to crime scenes, evidence, etc. -- though, again, some of that stuff was under the table too. In principle he is a vigilante or do-gooding outlaw. I would say he's one level below Batman in terms of having the consent and/or outright cooperation of the local police after five seasons.

    In the field, he's more like a privateer with a letter of marque in his pocket during the age of piracy -- he seems to have a quasi-legal presence in the city (in practice, even though he doesn't have the papers or badges of officialdom) ... at least among the cops and authorities. As mayor (for the moment), he has more clout now to smooth over any hiccups and can leverage the actual political power he has to make GA and his deeds appear more legitimate in SC.

    As for the people of SC, it's always been a love-hate relationship. They embrace him when he stops the chaos, they loathe him when his deeds cause chaos. They actually stood with him and fought by his side, TDKR-style, in the S4 finale. The number of charges Joe or Jane Citizen (or the cops!) pressed against GA for killing Damien Darhk in cold blood: zero.

    IRL, he is a killer and murderer. In the fantastical world of the Arrowverse (where IRL standards don't apply), he's the morally grey vigilante/anti-hero that the cops, authorities and even the citizens themselves are willing to accept to protect them in a city full of madness. The city itself has allowed him to operate like this with increasingly wider latitude. (Same could be said for The Flash in CC or SG in NC.)

    Maybe it's collective indifference at what he does, but it's also tantamount to consent -- even if the state governor hasn't passed a Green Arrow bill to officially legalize his vigilantism.

  2. #17
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 14
    Location
    Some where in the Untied States
    Posts
    1,292
    Quote Originally Posted by President_Luthor View Post
    They won't please everyone -- some will say they're still too bloody, others will say they're not bloody enough. Great Scott, Team Arrow, just choose one already.
    Really that's my biggest thing at the moment of they never cane seem to pick one. It's like while I like season 1 The Hood, but I get the green Arrow who either kills when needed or not at all but regardless they can't make up their mind. So kind of hard to even get behind anything due to their mixed signals.

  3. #18
    Board Master Dagenspear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 11
    Posts
    2,173
    Quote Originally Posted by President_Luthor View Post
    I feel the Flash series, as the next senior show, is also fast approaching its own ethical crossroads in needing to settle when it is okay for Barry to mess with time and when it is not. LoT may be okay with a temporal free-for-all, but Flash shouldn't.
    It would be nice to see some lessons applied to their future behaviour: Barry
    That was the whole point of this past season. They established the rules. Barry has stated that he won't change the past again and he's maintained that. Have a very great day!

    God bless you all!

  4. #19
    Pirate King Backward Galaxy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 03
    Location
    The Danger Zone
    Posts
    10,941
    My impression was that Oliver's no killing policy wasn't really the point of last season. It was really more about why a policy exists more than what that policy is. He has to come at it from a different angle, now. He understands now that part of the reason he would kill in the past was because he enjoyed it. There was something primal about it that lit a fire within him. When he killed DD last season, as an example, I think part of him did it because he wanted to. He wanted revenge. What Chase did to Oliver is sour that part of him, which in turn neutered Oliver for a while. I think they can still have Oliver kill in the future if they so choose, but it will come from a place devoid of satisfaction. It'll hurt him now.

    That was my take. I could be wrong.

  5. #20
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 12
    Posts
    1,557
    Quote Originally Posted by evaba View Post
    I could have been clearer, but my complaints didn't really concern the status of the Oliver/Felicity romance in relation to Oliver's killing sprees. I was more thinking in terms of characterization. To me it is a bit jarring when Oliver in some episodes is presented as this damaged/jaded man with a killer mindset, who won't hesitate to terrorize/beat up simple criminals in order to obtain information about the bigger bads, or who can break a man's neck because "nobody must know his secret"....and then in other episodes he takes on the role of the perfect romantic hero, who tenderly kisses his beloved, or gets down on his knees to propose to her.
    Actually, this is quite a classic characterization. Certainly in ancient stories like the Trojan war (all the heroes are also killing machines), but also in recent times. For example: Jason Bourne comes to mind - the one written by Robert Ludlum not the cinema version. The main character has many similarities to our Oliver Queen in Arrow: for example he, too, can become "something else". Two kinds of "something else", even: the professional killer Jason Bourne and the killing machine Delta. On the other hand he is also professor David Webb, husband and father, loving his family and friends, devoted to his students. If you like complex characterisations I recommend these three books.

  6. #21
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,140
    Actually, this is quite a classic characterization. Certainly in ancient stories like the Trojan war (all the heroes are also killing machines), but also in recent times. For example: Jason Bourne comes to mind - the one written by Robert Ludlum not the cinema version. The main character has many similarities to our Oliver Queen in Arrow: for example he, too, can become "something else". Two kinds of "something else", even: the professional killer Jason Bourne and the killing machine Delta. On the other hand he is also professor David Webb, husband and father, loving his family and friends, devoted to his students. If you like complex characterisations I recommend these three books.
    Thanks for the recommendations! I'll check these books.

    I'm sure that the scenario you describe could result in some interesting, complex storytelling. Maybe my dislike for the Oliver/Felicity relationship has more to do with how it is done? To me it feels like the writers are forcing a romcom/cliché romance novel narrative onto a rather dark vengeful anti-hero story arc, and it just fails to capture me. I personally think it would have been more interesting if the first phase of the Oliver/Felicity relationship (or any canon relationship between Oliver and a woman) would have been to explore what consequences Oliver's "five years in hell"/killer mindset/PTSD would have for his ability to function in a close emotional relationship, or how his woman would deal with the fact that the man she loves sometimes turns into a coldblooded killer. Instead we got Guggenheim sending fake postcards from Olicity's happy "honeymoon" during hiatus, cheesy domestic bliss scenes about failed omelets, even cheesier fake wedding episodes etc. etc.

    The conflicts/dilemmas which would have been interesting and engaging in terms of character development were hardly touched on and instead we had the pointless Baby Momma debacle and forced trust issues that frankly made Felicity look self-centered and unreasonable. Of course, I don't think the "Arrow" writers have the skill or finesse (or even the interest) to deal with these issues in a relevant manner, and I'm not sure that SA and EBR have the actings chops to take on such demanding storylines either.

  7. #22
    Posting Pro Aurora Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 14
    Posts
    1,235
    I have to agree with evba. With Jason Bourne/David webb it was done right, because they were able to show the sides and how they meshed together seamlessly. It also had to do with the mood/timing, etc. Sometimes it feels like the CWTV writers seem to have no idea how to shift from a dark mood into a romantic one naturally... so as an result it seems jarring. It's like... in one scene you get Oliver killing and brooding about it, and then in the next scene it's romantic drama. There's nothing in between those scenes to help the viewer shift from a dark mood into a romantic mood seamlessly. If that makes sense.

  8. #23
    Chlark Addict BkWurm1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 08
    Location
    Land of 10,000 Lakes
    Posts
    2,692
    I personally think it would have been more interesting if the first phase of the Oliver/Felicity relationship (or any canon relationship between Oliver and a woman) would have been to explore what consequences Oliver's "five years in hell"/killer mindset/PTSD would have for his ability to function in a close emotional relationship, or how his woman would deal with the fact that the man she loves sometimes turns into a cold-blooded killer. Instead, we got Guggenheim sending fake postcards from Olicity's happy "honeymoon" during hiatus, cheesy domestic bliss scenes about failed omelets, even cheesier fake wedding episodes etc. etc.
    I tend to think that they did deal with Oliver's returned mindset on how it affected relationships in the first three seasons. It was the reason why he decided they couldn't be together at the start of season three. The show never takes the time to delve deeply into anything so there's always room for improvement, though had they spent more time on the subject I expect there would have been even more complaints that the show was turning into a romantic drama.

    About that last bit, well, during the postcards, failed omelets and honeymoon period, Oliver had dropped being the Arrow altogether, so none of that should be a concern if one is concerned about jarring tone. And I can't label the fake wedding cheesy, it was horridly painful and pretty cruelly done of Oliver to even suggest IMO. Cheese implies IMO something fluffy and fun, while I found it painful that they'd do it. Felicity certainly didn't seem happy about it either. Oliver might have snatched up the chance to read her his vows, but moving as they were, being love with each other wasn't the problem so of course he only made things worse and forced her to have to leave the team.

  9. #24
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,140
    I'll have to come back with a response to the Oliver/Felicity issue, but here is a good video with Oliver's season one kill count (56 human beings according to this count!). Not your ideal romantic hero, by any means!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0PlbRUFI38

  10. #25
    Chlark Addict BkWurm1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 08
    Location
    Land of 10,000 Lakes
    Posts
    2,692
    Quote Originally Posted by evaba View Post
    I'll have to come back with a response to the Oliver/Felicity issue, but here is a good video with Oliver's season one kill count (56 human beings according to this count!). Not your ideal romantic hero, by any means!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0PlbRUFI38
    But I guess that's my point. That was season one Oliver. This seaon ended with him declaring he wasn't that man anymore.

  11. #26
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by BkWurm1 View Post
    But I guess that's my point. That was season one Oliver. This seaon ended with him declaring he wasn't that man anymore.
    Well, he didn't change completely, but he did lessen his kills. According to this chart, Oliver's kill count was down 60% in season two:

    http://www.cbr.com/infographic-cbrs-...ow-kill-count/

    Of course, in season five saw him return to form when he snapped someone's neck "because nobody can know his secret"! I guess the producers'/writers' gave us this throwback to season one because they thought his S1 killings were kinda cool....That's why I sometimes find this talk about Oliver becoming a better/different man because he stops killing somewhat inconsequential, because oftentimes it seems as though he doesn't have any major problems with taking a man's life, despite his no-kill code. Also, I really don't think that Oliver declaring that he is a changed man, or Felicity giving him a pep talk about not being a killer somehow exonerates him from the killings he has committed....at least it wouldn't if this were real life. Besides, Felicity telling Oliver that he's not a killer is kind of strange in itself, since she has more or less ordered him to kill three times (Malcolm, Ra's Damien Dahrk). I'm sure you'll claim that she only told him to kill these men because it was necessary, or because she was fearing for his life, but it's still odd how the woman that so many Olicity fans claim is Oliver's innocent light and salvation is the same woman who urges him to break his no-kill code.

    Anyway, "Arrow" is not real life, it's an escapist fantasy aimed at the young adult demographic, where murderous vampires and killer vigilantes are presented as ideal lovers in typical romance novel scenarios. The rather bizarre approach to human relationships and romantic love seems to have become a fashion in the wake of the Twilight series, but the IMHO dated and regressive romantic trope of an innocent and almost flawless young woman whose love is so powerful that it will heal a damaged man is much older, of course.
    Last edited by evaba; 07-16-2017 at 02:58 PM.

  12. #27
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 12
    Posts
    1,557
    Quote Originally Posted by evaba View Post
    Of course, in season five saw him return to form when he snapped someone's neck "because nobody can know his secret"!
    I don't think that this was the only reason he killed. Both in season one and five the guys whose necks he broke while saying this had killed innocents while Oliver could only watch. So they had lost the "protect status" Oliver grants innocents.

  13. #28
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Freawaru View Post
    I don't think that this was the only reason he killed. Both in season one and five the guys whose necks he broke while saying this had killed innocents while Oliver could only watch. So they had lost the "protect status" Oliver grants innocents.
    You're right....however, the thing that stuck in my head was that the S5 scene was a repeat of a scene from the Pilot, which also was the first time we saw Oliver kill anyone. IF Oliver has supposedly gone through this transformation, which has changed him from a remorseless avenger who kills in a rather perfunctoriy manner to a man who has embraced a no-kill principle, it was kind of jarring to see him kill someone in the same manner he did in season one (another example is when Oliver and Helena kill the thugs who had kidnapped them.... in an episode where Oliver is supposedly trying to show Helena "a better way"!).

  14. #29
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 12
    Posts
    1,557
    Quote Originally Posted by evaba View Post
    You're right....however, the thing that stuck in my head was that the S5 scene was a repeat of a scene from the Pilot, which also was the first time we saw Oliver kill anyone. IF Oliver has supposedly gone through this transformation, which has changed him from a remorseless avenger who kills in a rather perfunctoriy manner to a man who has embraced a no-kill principle, it was kind of jarring to see him kill someone in the same manner he did in season one (another example is when Oliver and Helena kill the thugs who had kidnapped them.... in an episode where Oliver is supposedly trying to show Helena "a better way"!).
    If you ask me, Oliver should simply accept who and what he is and move forward from there. Trying to "become better" or "a hero, who never kills" simply is not a way that works for him. It would be a step backwards, IMO. In a way Chase actually helped him here: acceptance. The step forward would be for Oliver to analyse why he liked (and maybe still likes) killing. For example, he clearly does not like killing indiscriminately.

    If we look back to the people Oliver met during his "five years in hell" there seem to be several types of killers, all of them killed and liked it. Even Shado. I doubt Shado had any bad conscience after killing Fyres' men - it must have been she who taught Oliver the breaking neck move we saw in the Pilot and again in 5.1, btw. Shado did it to that guy who tried to compromise Oliver in Yao Fei's cave when Oliver went back to get the healing herb. She looked quite pleased with herself after she killed that guy.

    Not only Shado killed and taught her skills to Oliver, but also Yao Fei, Slade, Maseo and Tatzu, Waller, Anatoli, Talia, (did Taiana kill?). Pretty much everybody Oliver connected to and who taught him and saved his life were killers. Before the island Oliver was just a spoiled playboy who never cared about whom he hurt, but who couldn't even kill a bird to survive. After the "island" he was able to kill but also he had made big steps regarding caring for others. One is connected to the other.

  15. #30
    Site Groupie Shelby Kent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 12
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,755
    Quote Originally Posted by Freawaru View Post
    I don't think that this was the only reason he killed. Both in season one and five the guys whose necks he broke while saying this had killed innocents while Oliver could only watch. So they had lost the "protect status" Oliver grants innocents.
    An interesting take - that Oliver's motivation for cold-blooded execution in these instances would be due to the juxtaposition of innocents being killed WHILE Oliver is helpless to intervene. The combination of innocents killed PLUS Oliver's inaction. (Different from, say, a scenario where innocents are killed but Oliver was actively fighting against the antagonists...) To me this would imply that Oliver felt powerless (ie he "could only watch") and therefore he chose to kill (or rather execute the men) in those 2 instances as a way to make himself feel better, to assuage his feeling of powerlessness. To regain his "power." In that case, the killings have nothing to do with justice and are not about the people who were killed, but rather are about Oliver and how HE felt: helpless. A psychologically selfish reason for killing, then. Not very heroic, noble or principled, really.

    Of course, like most posters here, I agree that there were multiple reasons for why he killed. But I never thought about this particular possibility/explanation (at least, not consciously...) until reading your post

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... 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
  •