NumberCruncher

I don't get that upset at TV shows anymore either, but even I have to admit that was a rather crappy way to end things. I knew something was up when DL disappeared for the last 4 or 5 episodes last season and then had spotty attendance this season so I wasn't the least bit surprised at Jack's demise, but I will say that my 74 year-old mom (who isn't the least bit TV savvy) was devastated. They really should have just written him off back in S4 rather than making the audience play the will-he-or-won't-he game each episode and taunting them with promos touting the happy union between Jack and Elizabeth during every commercial break. That built up a certain expectation with the audience that (rather cruelly) got ripped away only 2 episodes post-wedding. I get that this happens all the time in TV land (ala Game of Thrones), but not usually on a network like Hallmark where people flock to find the happy. I understand why some people are feeling manipulated. If the show ends up being cancelled, I can't cry in my soup about the crew. Most of them move from one show right to another in no time. Vancouver is a Hollywood-lite these days. There are new shows popping up there all the time. I'm pretty sure the entire CW network roster of shows film there. The crew members would be just fine.

Wow. Clearly you missed it when I said this: ...but sure, I was definitely saying what happened was okay. So sorry for trying to comment on historic plausibility.

Disney also released plenty of R-rated movies under the Hollywood Pictures banner during its heyday back in the 90s.

I thought the same thing! I would love it to be included in the soundtrack (which isn't usually the case with trailer music). All I know is that the story being a giant homage to all things 80s, this movie better have a kick-ass soundtrack.

A killer, yes. Not a murderer. In Teo's case, that was straight-up self defense as Letty feared for her own life. I think an strong argument can be made it was manslaughter for the security guy since she was clearly panicked and didn't intend to kill him. Murder would require premeditation, no?

Except that's not how Amazon rankings work. The rankings are based on individual seasons, not the show in general. I suspect that it has more to do with Arrow's audience skewing older than the other CW shows. Basically, older audience = more disposable income = higher sales.

The best part of Stephen's video is where he mentions how "asinine" the whole fanbase competition is and how that shouldn't detract from appreciating what these fans did. Raising $7K for charitable purposes should be celebrated, not mocked. You can go back to hating whatever else you want about the show but don't crap over people doing something good.

This is why I will never understand the arguments over ratings between the various Arrowverse shows as an indication of which couples/characters/shows are "most popular". Ratings vs. sales are dependent on a variety of factors. A show with lower real-time ratings can end up with higher DVD sales where the inverse may be true for another. All of the Arrowverse shows target their own specific niche and clearly viewers have different priorities when it comes to viewing habits, time constraints, disposable income, etc., so the infighting is useless. That said, while I do think the sales of Arrow are likely having an impact as to why it has lasted six seasons, I wish the network would consider ending it next season as the show has always had a huge problem of recycling/repeating old storylines. To me, that's a indication that your arc is played out and you need to plan an exit strategy. I strongly suspect that's why Arrow ratings have been declining faster than the norm as well. I know personally I've been fairly bored the past few seasons and only skim the episodes out of loyalty and love of specific characters. Guggenheim & Co. have always said they planned a 5-year show to coincide with Oliver's backstory arc, and even at that, it felt as though they sometimes had to stretch out the plot to fit that timeline at the sacrifice of quality. When it became clear that the network had no intention of canceling Arrow, I think the showrunners didn't really know where to go next so they hurriedly introduced a bunch of new characters that nobody really warmed to in an attempt to continue the gravy train. While I don't think most general viewers hate the newbies as much as many people here do, I do think they are a lot more disposable in terms of audience loyalty so focusing on them so much (especially last season when the ratings really started their slide) hasn't really done the show many favors in retaining viewers when the stories are weak.

This...especially the bolded. I enjoy Javier just as much as the next guy but on no planet are his and Letty's deeds comparable. He's a killer, regardless of whether his victims deserved it. To me, he gets a lot of credit for calling Letty out for being the train wreck she is, but at the end of the day, the only person she is likely to kill is herself. Yes, it's a fiction and JDB is hot, but we're not supposed to admire Javier's chosen profession. In fact, this episode was practically screaming to the audience just how monstrous his deeds had become. It wasn't just murder--he pretty much tortured that woman to death. Yuck.

Brief break from the crossover meltdown discussion to appreciate the beauty that was Diggle's arms in last night's episode. *le sigh*

You raise a very interesting point. The showrunners literally have zero control over how the network chooses to promote the show--Guggenheim is especially vocal about that. Clearly the network did the fans no favors here by focusing so much on something that wasn't really the main theme of the crossover. I tend to think that's usually because they didn't want to give too much plot away and be spoilery. This is why I never rely on promos to tell me what CW episodes are really about because 9 times out of 10 it's something different.

I didn't get the impression that this show was picking on the Mormons. I think it was more of a case of taking a tragedy involving some Mormon criminals and using it (rather stupidly...ahem) to mold the Big Bad they wanted. HA! I thought that as well. I'll admit to also being confused that they never expanded on whether Bill was in fact going blind or just had really, really awful eyesight. Maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but by the 1880s didn't people have relatively fair access to spectacles? He couldn't have been the only one in town with bad eyesight so as to conclude his world would go black.

Bringing over this post from @Delphi in the episode thread... That's the whole point of these crossovers though--characters from all the shows interact on all four shows. I would have thought that after four seasons of doing them people would have caught on to this concept but I guess not. The other thing that I don't really get is the anger over certain characters being highlighted in a given year's crossover versus other years. That's also been the case for four seasons now. I mean, didn't we all have to endure the boring-ass Hawkman/Hawkgirl drama that consumed the 2nd crossover when they weren't even regular characters in the Arrowverse yet? Re: the wedding drama this year, I can get the annoyance that thunder was somehow "stolen" (which is even questionable given the messy, haphazard timing of the thing being tacked onto A FRIGGIN' FUNERAL), but in my mind that's not much different than fans of Arrow being so frustrated that they had to share its 100th episode with the characters from all the other shows last year. That's just how the DCTV cookie crumbles when it comes to the almighty crossovers. I suspect that next year we'll be dealing with whole different set of pissed off fans because their characters/couple didn't get the spotlight.

*SQUEEEEE* (That is all)

Because it can't be said enough.