S05.E09: What We Leave Behind

[GirlvsTV]

5 minutes ago, SmallScreenDiva said:

What would kill Olicity is not the damn temporary love interests. It's how stupidly the writers are writing Oliver.

THIS. Tbh, I think he is too far gone for me to ever enjoy the show as much as I did before 4b. I actually tried to watch the LOT premier and when Oliver showed up, I had such a visceral reaction of 'UGH' that I immediately changed the channel. Then, when he was with Barry in the xover it was double the 'UGH.'

The ending of 5x09 just moved the needle from 'UGH' to 'GTFO.' 

[way2interested]

10 minutes ago, SmallScreenDiva said:

I don't care if it was shot and not shown, that fadeout implied the sex, whatever Stephen says. 

I get the implication with the cut to him in the same clothes later in the lair, but if there was a sex scene filmed and then cut out, given the two scenes that they had in the episode, there wasn't much they could have done to stop an implication other than reshoots. For instance, if the episode was exactly the same but with the sex scene and then some decision to get rid of the sex came up, they still have to keep the ending scene for the cliffhanger and they still have to keep the kiss because it comes right after his big monologue. They have to keep the scene with him talking to Susan because it has the monologue and explain where he was because the cliffhanger scene begins with him entering the lair (with the previous scene including Oliver being him in the lair already after he tells everyone that he killed Billy). From there, you'd have to reshoot the ending with Susan to show it doesn't lead to sex (difficult because scheduling/sets/etc.), reshoot the scene with a different character (a bit easier, but then a similar problem of scheduling a reshoot, along with rewriting a scene and figuring out a set because he can't be in the lair or in the loft, yet I guess they could have had a scene in his office with Thea or Lance's apartment with Lance, but there's still the problem of rewriting and extra filming in general), or keep the scene and just editing it so everyone can stay on schedule.

That was a ramble, but it's just me thinking that if they had to cut the sex instead of just choosing to for an arbitrary time reason, cutting it the way they did is pretty much the only thing they could do to avoid possibly complicated reshoots. It was just a badly set-up scene that they were trying to save.

On a side note, watching again, there wasn't a fadeout or a fade to black or even really a fade/crescendo in music from that scene to the final scene. Just an abrupt cut without any transition. It doesn't stop the implication of "deep kiss+soft music+cut to next scene wearing same clothes=just had sex," but if the scenario was cutting a section of a scene that they wanted/needed to keep, but idk to me it would kind of show an attempt to get rid of sex in the scene. It's still just a lousy scene because of visiting Susan in general, but if that's what happened, I could see the reasoning (not agree with it, but still...). It really comes down to if it's true and when did they decide to cut it (if it's not true, then it's just a lousy scene that had a weird/not romantic implication).
   

[BkWurm1]

2 hours ago, SmallScreenDiva said:

The timing is the issue for me. He'd just killed the boyfriend of the supposed love of his life and he's dipping his wick into a sketchy reporter who's already played his sister? Kinda stupid.

I don't care if it was shot and not shown, that fadeout implied the sex, whatever Stephen says. 

What would kill Olicity is not the damn temporary love interests. It's how stupidly the writers are writing Oliver.

Given all the circumstances, I wouldn't deeply care what Oliver does except for the the flash to show Felicity alone crying.  I wouldn't have loved that Felicity's boyfriend is murdered and we only get Oliver's PoV but if that's what we got including either a sex scene or a fade out from the kiss, I'd just shrug.  By adding in Felicity crying alone as contrast, it just makes Oliver (and even more so the show runners) look like an ass, IMO.  I could see them really wanting to do the montage of everyone suffering and only then realizing, crap, we can't have Oliver getting his rocks off while Felicity, Curtis, and Diggle are all miserable.  

I mean, they did, but clearly they are idiots, ;)

Way to make the lead sympathetic.  

Edited December 18, 2016 by BkWurm1

[insomniadreams88]

7 minutes ago, BkWurm1 said:

Given all the circumstances, I wouldn't deeply care what Oliver does except for the the flash to show Felicity alone crying.  I wouldn't have loved that Felicity's boyfriend is murdered and we only get Oliver's PoV but if that's what we got including either a sex scene or a fade out from the kiss, I'd just shrug.  By adding in Felicity crying alone as contrast, it just makes Oliver (and even more so the show runners) look like an ass, IMO.  I could see them really wanting to do the montage of everyone suffering and only then realizing, crap, we can't have Oliver getting his rocks off while Felicity, Curtis, and Diggle are all miserable.  

I mean, they did, but clearly they are idiots, ;)

Way to make the lead sympathetic.  

Especially after the scene of everyone making sure Oliver knew they weren't leaving him. Felicity, Curtis and Diggle didn't get that. Felicity was left mourning alone, both in the lair (hug from Thea aside) and at home. Curtis got one conversation with Felicity about Paul earlier. And no one was even doing anything to try to help Diggle prove his innocence. Everyone is acting like Diggle being confined to the lair is no big deal now that he can have his son with him sometimes. 

[statsgirl]

I think the point of the montage was to show that  Oliver is justified in his guilt, that everyone associated with him suffers from that association.  Curtis' marriage is over, Felicity is crying because her boyfriend is dead, Diggle is going back to jail, even Lance is in rehab because Laurel died through association with Oliver.  But...

39 minutes ago, BkWurm1 said:

   By adding in Felicity crying alone as contrast, it just makes Oliver (and even more so the show runners) look like an ass, IMO.  I could see them really wanting to do the montage of everyone suffering and only then realizing, crap, we can't have Oliver getting his rocks off while Felicity, Curtis, and Diggle are all miserable. 

It's such a "Roy electrocuted and left lying in a puddle" scene.  To show everyone associated with Oliver is miserable through their association with him while Oliver is making himself feel better by banging the reporter boggles the mind.

I really want to know who noticed that this could be a problem, and what the consequent conversations were like.  Was it anything like "Oh, crap, how do we fix this now?"

[ComicFan777]

If Oliver did have sex with the reporter right after accidentally killing a good man, then it really just comes across as disturbing to me.  I don't really understand how someone can even get it up after doing that - it almost comes across as sociopathic or a pathological sex addiction - for someone to want to have sex so soon after killing a good person...I just don't know what to think about it other than it being extremely disturbing when I really think about it.  Add on top of that, Felicity left alone to cry it out just makes it beyond bad.

[arjumand]

21 minutes ago, statsgirl said:

I think the point of the montage was to show that  Oliver is justified in his guilt, that everyone associated with him suffers from that association.  Curtis' marriage is over, Felicity is crying because her boyfriend is dead, Diggle is going back to jail, even Lance is in rehab because Laurel died through association with Oliver.  But...

It's such a "Roy electrocuted and left lying in a puddle" scene.  To show everyone associated with Oliver is miserable through their association with him while Oliver is making himself feel better by banging the reporter boggles the mind.

I really want to know who noticed that this could be a problem, and what the consequent conversations were like.  Was it anything like "Oh, crap, how do we fix this now?"

I get your first part - especially with the bit I noticed in second viewing, that you see Felicity when he says "no matter how much I love them". I could practically hear the (writers, EPs) yelling at me in the background.

But you're right - whoever's shooting or watching the dailies or whatever just can't see how bad the optics are for some (most?) things they're showing Oliver doing. I wonder who's sending back notes with WTF in all caps, lol.

To me it harks back to last year's visit or visits to William, and how bad it looked for Oliver to be haring off to another city to spend time with his son behind his wheelchair-bound girlfriend's back.  It took them ages to accept that it looked bad, and their fix was to keep insisting that there was only one visit, the one we saw - which then begs the question, what the fuck was the point of all that?

And now we've arrived at "Oliver gets sexually aroused by accidental murder." Sure, he just needed someone to talk to, because whoever wrote this needed a speech which was more naturalistic than voiceover narration. Plus, you get sexy lady in sexy lingerie which I'm sure is a bonus for someone. And I'm sure someone was whining pre-episode "We showed Felicity having her nooner* with her boyfriend, what about Oliver?"

But this was not a good idea.

 

 

*Shudder. Then vomit. 

[BkWurm1]

18 minutes ago, arjumand said:

And I'm sure someone was whining pre-episode "We showed Felicity having her nooner* with her boyfriend, what about Oliver?"

Well if Oliver's girlfriend is about to be killed, she can have a quickie too.  ;p

Edited December 18, 2016 by BkWurm1

[arjumand]

8 minutes ago, BkWurm1 said:

Well if Oliver's girlfriend is about to be killed, she can have a quickie too.  ;p

Heh, I thought it was just Sam Winchester who had the 'penis of death'! Though I haven't been watching Supernatural, so I don't know if Sam's girlfriends still die after sleeping with him.

[ComicFan777]

Just as cartoons in the 80's hired child psychologists to consult on scripts, I think Arrow really does need to hire a psychologist for their show to make the characters come across as consistent and rational.

[lemotomato]

I'm already plenty dissatisfied with what actually made it on screen, I can't muster the effort to be angry at alleged scenes that were cut. Not part of the aired episode = didn't happen. 

FWIW, every time the show wanted to show that the characters had sex, they're pretty clear about it, either showing the characters getting naked as they fade to black, or post-coital in bed/getting dressed. Neither of which happened in the Oliver/reporter scene. 

Edited December 18, 2016 by lemotomato

[BkWurm1]

1 hour ago, ComicFan777 said:

cartoons in the 80's hired child psychologists to consult on scripts

Seriously?  

I was a kid in the 80's.  Now I want to know what child psychologists might have said about (or fixed, lol) on He-Man or She-Ra or The Smurfs.  I wonder if they are responsible for the GI Joe episode tags that included a "lesson" where some kid got to ptoclaim "Now I know!  And knowing is half the battle!"?  It bothers me that any mental health professionals might have been associated with any of that, lol.  

[ComicFan777]

I actually learned that at the He-man panel at SDCC - the writers from He-man consulted a child psychologist on their scripts and from what I hear, that person is credited at the end of every show.  They also mentioned that it was very common back then that the cartoons had one on hand to consult with.

[BkWurm1]

7 hours ago, ComicFan777 said:

I actually learned that at the He-man panel at SDCC - the writers from He-man consulted a child psychologist on their scripts and from what I hear, that person is credited at the end of every show.  They also mentioned that it was very common back then that the cartoons had one on hand to consult with.

That's hilarious.  And fascinating.

[GHScorpiosRule]

This is so interesting because I though He-Man and She-Ra were just...fluff. Then again, I was a kid and wouldn't have known about consulting a psychologist.

I do know that the producers of Batman: The Animated Series did consult with psychologists or psychiatrists when doing the story of how DA Harvey Dent became Two-Face due to his suffering from multiple personalities. But that show was also very dark and I'm sure they consulted when doing Dick Grayson's origin story-letting the music explain that his parents were murdered, along with the image of the broken trapeze. Very powerful.

[ComicFan777]

Yeah, it was a long time ago, so I don't remember all the details.  The He-man cartoons were created solely to sell the toys, so many concerned parents had accused the manufacturer that these toys and cartoons (basically toy commercials) encouraged violent behavior.  To combat these claims, storylines were crafted around lessons/morals of the day.  Also, the psychologist advised that He-man only punch objects/robots and not people - instead they had him do the grapple attack on people by grabbing around their shoulders to discourage violence.

[BkWurm1]

Well, Castle Greyskull was a pretty awesome toy.  They should make an Arrow Lair.  With different stations for different characters.  

Edited December 19, 2016 by BkWurm1

[rtalive]

On 12/18/2016 at 1:22 AM, AyChihuahua said:

I'm hearing Guggie said they filmed a full-on Oliporter sex scene and cut it. Pretty cowardly...if you're going to send Oliver to a rando to bang right after killing the supposed love of his life's boyfriend, who's a good guy, have the courage of your choices.

Now that is disappointing. This show became too marginalized and playing it safe. If they wanted a sex scene, they should have showed it. They are just so afraid these days to upset people, but are still upsetting them anyway. 

[Carrie Ann]

15 minutes ago, rtalive said:

Now that is disappointing. This show became too marginalized and playing it safe. If they wanted a sex scene, they should have showed it. They are just so afraid these days to upset people, but are still upsetting them anyway. 

I don't think we've seen a source for this, so may not be worth getting too annoyed about it.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Carrie Ann

[statsgirl]

Even if they did film a sex scene, I can see them cutting it when someone realized how revolting it makes Oliver, getting sexually aroused not only after killing an innocent, good man but having sex with a sketchy woman as Felicity cries mourning Billy alone.  There's making him cold  in s1 as a result of the torture of his five years away, and there this, which looks borderline sociopathic.

[catrox14]

The only way I can see for writing and filming a sex scene that doesn't regress the current Oliver to a complete uncaring, insensitive dickbag is that it was HumanTarget!Oliver OR it was Bizarro/Prometheus!Oliver (which is my ongoing theory). It would explain the weird cut from the kiss to Oliver getting off the elevator at the lair and finding "Laurel" which IMO did not imply any lapse of time. So in my theory Actual!Oliver never goes to Susan but goes to the lair at the same time that  HumanTarget!Oliver was going to Susan.  That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[statsgirl]

Oh, the things we do to try to make this show make sense!

[catrox14]

3 minutes ago, statsgirl said:

Oh, the things we do to try to make this show make sense!

LOL, it was so much more fun back in s1 and s2 when I didn't have to head!canon EVERYTHING LOL.

[bethy]

3 hours ago, catrox14 said:

So in my theory Actual!Oliver never goes to Susan but goes to the lair at the same time that  HumanTarget!Oliver was going to Susan. 

This could work, though, right? Admittedly I haven't been paying the closest attention the last few episodes (or even watched all of them), but surely one of the points of having someone who looks like Oliver running around is that the writers can then pull "fun" tricks on the audience. Like, "Ha, ha, ha, we made you think Oliver had slept with the horrible reporter, but it wasn't really him! HAHAHAHA!"

Maybe the reason they cut the sex scene (if there was one) was that someone realized how AWFUL that would make their hero look. And that maybe playing that particular trick on the audience might be taking it too far.

Maybe?

[BkWurm1]

Since the show runners seem to be doubling down on "They didn't have sex!", I'm doubting that a sex scene was ever filmed for this episode.  Like someone else pointed out, would they really give up the chance to show her reaction to his Bratva tatoo?  

[statsgirl]

It could have been a quickie where he didn't take his shirt off.  Or his pants......

Really interesting though that they are doubling down on the "Oliver didn't have sex with Susan" now after strongly hinting that he did in the episode (she's wearing lingerie and doesn't say "Give me a minute to put something on" before starting to seduce him, the cut to black as she's kissing him).

[way2interested]

16 minutes ago, statsgirl said:

It could have been a quickie where he didn't take his shirt off.  Or his pants......

Really interesting though that they are doubling down on the "Oliver didn't have sex with Susan" now after strongly hinting that he did in the episode (she's wearing lingerie and doesn't say "Give me a minute to put something on" before starting to seduce him, the cut to black as she's kissing him).

I think they're just backed into a corner because they needed a moment with Susan at the end (no matter how little sense it makes), but they didn't want it to come off as a sex scene. They needed a kiss because they were building up to it in a way, but they didn't want to come off as Oliver having sex after murdering Billy. They did have things to tone it down from a sex scene (not showing anything but them kissing, no music dynamic/change, no movements, no fades or cuts to black and just an abrupt cut to the next scene), but some implications that were kept in the scene (lingerie, emotional support, soft music, the kiss) don't help. 

It could be that they're just backtracking from complaints with the opportunity they have since they didn't actually show sex, but idk, they didn't show sex or an after-scene, so I don't even care about possible implications. I'm just fine with saying that they didn't.

[statsgirl]

If they didn't want it to look like a sex scene, 1. they shouldn't have had her in lingerie, and 2.  they shouldn't have had her kissing him and Oliver kissing back.  A hand squeeze would have been good enough to show emotional support if that's all they were going for.

Even emotional support would have irritated me after all the hugs to Oliver in the lair and none to Felicity.  But I really think the EPs were trying to imply sex comfort till they realized how bad it looks.

[lemotomato]

1 hour ago, statsgirl said:

If they didn't want it to look like a sex scene, 1. they shouldn't have had her in lingerie, and 2.  they shouldn't have had her kissing him and Oliver kissing back.  A hand squeeze would have been good enough to show emotional support if that's all they were going for.

Even emotional support would have irritated me after all the hugs to Oliver in the lair and none to Felicity.  But I really think the EPs were trying to imply sex comfort till they realized how bad it looks.

When the show wants to imply that sex happened, it is very clear that sex happened.
Season 1:
Oliver/Helena- naked in bed
Oliver/McKenna- falling into bed, taking their clothes off
Oliver/Laurel- taking their clothes off, heading into the bedroom

Season 2:
Oliver/Shado- half naked making out
Oliver/Isabelle- Isabelle lounging in bed, Oliver putting his clothes on
Diggle/Lyla- naked in bed; taking their clothes of headed to the bedroom in 216
Oliver/Sara- taking their clothes off, making out; naked in bed

Season 3:
Felicity/Ray: naked in bed
Oliver/Felicity: big epic love scene
Roy/Thea- naked in bed

Season 4:
Oliver/Felicity: naked in bed; in bed making out

So you can assume what you want (and judging by the many many posts discussing this point, looks like yours is the majority opinion), but given that the Oliver/reporter scene followed none of these previous patterns, and SA and WM went out of their way to insist that they didn't have sex, I think it's fair to say that the show did not intend for the viewer to think that they had sex.

Edited December 20, 2016 by lemotomato

[catrox14]

Just now, lemotomato said:

ex, I think it's fair to say that the show did not intend for the viewer to think that they had sex

I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion that there was no intention for the viewer to think they had sex. IMO they wanted to imply sex was on the table for Oliver and Susan without showing it. Playing both ends against the middle so to speak.

[Sunshine]

Maybe they wanted  to make sure people knew she was interested in Oliver for more than just a story for whatever happens in her next appearance 

Spoiler

Which looks like it's 5.12 Bratva, especially if there is supposed to be some resolution with a twist so she's not Isabel 2.0. SA has a shirtless scene so he's either getting his tattoo in fbs and/or she "discovers" it this episode.

[BkWurm1]

36 minutes ago, lemotomato said:

When the show wants to imply that sex happened, it is very clear that sex happened.
Season 1:
Oliver/Helena- naked in bed
Oliver/McKenna- falling into bed, taking their clothes off
Oliver/Laurel- taking their clothes off, heading into the bedroom

Season 2:
Oliver/Shado- half naked making out
Oliver/Isabelle- Isabelle lounging in bed, Oliver putting his clothes on
Diggle/Lyla- naked in bed; taking their clothes of headed to the bedroom in 216
Oliver/Sara- taking their clothes off, making out; naked in bed

Season 3:
Felicity/Ray: naked in bed
Oliver/Felicity: big epic love scene
Roy/Thea- naked in bed

Season 4:
Oliver/Felicity: naked in bed; in bed making out

So you can assume what you want, but given that the Oliver/reporter scene followed none of these previous patterns, and SA and WM went out of their way to insist that they didn't have sex, I think it's fair to say that the show did not intend for the viewer to think that they had sex.

I get where you are coming from but a viewer seeing it's late at night, they are drinking, alone in her apartment, she's in lingerie, he's looking for comfort, she's comforting him, they kiss, and the scene fades to black - a viewer shouldn't have to have watched and compared the history of every sex scene that's ever happened on Arrow in order to know that all they just saw didn't result in sex.     

[Chaser]

I think there's a possibility they wrote a sex scene but someone pointed out that Reporter would see the mark and they realized that wouldn't work so they cut it. Its possible that their future actions never confirm sex so after the backlash they decided to deny they were intimate at all.

Or they quickly reworked the Oliver and Reporter interactions because it was getting such a negative response that they decided to trim as much as possible. 

Or it was a poorly done scene and they never meant to imply they had sex at all and needed to clarify for the audience.

Basically, I think there are a bunch of possibilities. All  I actually know is I only want to think of Oliver having sex with Felicity. I'm perfectly happy to ignore the scene and take their word they didnt have sex. 

[insomniadreams88]

Maybe they initially meant to imply sex. Then in editing, they realized how it would look - Oliver having sex while Felicity and Curtis are miserable and Diggle is being arrested - and decided to say there was no sex. They couldn't cut out Oliver going to Susan's, so they decided to just go with, "nope, no sex. Ignore that she's in lingerie. Great." (Have they ever shown any other female waiting around in lingerie like that? No, right?) But it just became a mess where they now have to actually answer that question. And the fact that they are makes me think it doesn't come up on the show. 

[SmallScreenDiva]

So I know Stephen said on his FB thingie that Oliver and Susan didn't have sex. Did any of the writers or EPs mention this? I feel like I missed a tweet or interview or something.

[catrox14]

24 minutes ago, SmallScreenDiva said:

So I know Stephen said on his FB thingie that Oliver and Susan didn't have sex. Did any of the writers or EPs mention this? I feel like I missed a tweet or interview or something.

Stephen said they didn't sleep together.  I know it seems like I'm splitting hairs but that doesn't preclude some kind of sexual activity or even a quickie.

[SmallScreenDiva]

2 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Stephen said they didn't sleep together.  I know it seems like I'm splitting hairs but that doesn't preclude some kind of sexual activity or even a quickie.

Sorry, I was unclear. My question was more about who else "confirmed" that they didn't have sex. Because I keep seeing "they" in reference to who said this but the only person I know is Stephen. So I was wondering if I missed a tweet from the writers underscoring this.

[lemotomato]

8 minutes ago, SmallScreenDiva said:

Sorry, I was unclear. My question was more about who else "confirmed" that they didn't have sex. Because I keep seeing "they" in reference to who said this but the only person I know is Stephen. So I was wondering if I missed a tweet from the writers underscoring this.

WM also said they didn't have sex, according to Matt M from TV Line (tvecho's post here)

Edited December 21, 2016 by lemotomato

[SmallScreenDiva]

1 hour ago, lemotomato said:

WM also said they didn't have sex, according to Matt M from TV Line (tvecho's post here)

Thanks!

[ParadoxLost]

On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 0:59 AM, ComicFan777 said:

Just as cartoons in the 80's hired child psychologists to consult on scripts, I think Arrow really does need to hire a psychologist for their show to make the characters come across as consistent and rational.

 

On ‎12‎/‎19‎/‎2016 at 10:31 AM, rtalive said:

Now that is disappointing. This show became too marginalized and playing it safe. If they wanted a sex scene, they should have showed it. They are just so afraid these days to upset people, but are still upsetting them anyway. 

I think that the show could do with some irrational behavior.  The way Felicity and even Oliver reacted to his being set up to kill Felicity's boyfriend made no sense.  No one would be told that news and then go immediately to reassuring the person that pulled the trigger that its not his fault.  Grief is irrational. 

That grief is irrational is the only reason shows do this type of thing.  its done so Oliver can wallow in guilt and spiral out of control.  Its done to create conflict between Oliver and Felicity. Major passionate throw downs.  Feelings laid bare.  Its done so everyone else can get caught in the middle.  Its done so the villain can get the upper hand by fracturing the team.  its done so there can eventually be reconciliation.  Major passionate reconciliations;) Its done for the sake of drama or what the hell is the point.

So I think I agree that the show is playing its too safe.  They set up this major conflict and then turn around and shut it down immediately.   Because they're scared  Everyone has to say its not Oliver's fault quick before the audience gets mad.  Its annoying.  I'm not a simpleton.  I can understand and sympathize  multiple points of view and understand motivations and forgive behavior that is driven by emotional trauma.

On a related note, I was watching an old episode on TNT today where Thea told Laurel that she killed Sara.  Its was so like the reaction to Oliver killing Felicity's BF that I did a double take.  Laurel immediately went to it not being Thea's fault because she was drugged or whatever.  There is a reason that anger is one of the steps of grief.  I would appreciate it if the show would stop jumping right to acceptance.

Edited December 23, 2016 by ParadoxLost

[tv echo]

17 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

On a related note, I was watching an old episode on TNT today where Thea told Laurel that she killed Sara.  Its was so like the reaction to Oliver killing Felicity's BF that I did a double take.  Laurel immediately went to it not being Thea's fault because she was drugged or whatever.  There is a reason that anger is one of the steps of grief.  I would appreciate it if the show would stop jumping right to acceptance.

The reason for the similar reactions is that Laurel had about as much emotional attachment to Sara as Felicity did to Malone. Or so it seemed like at the time.

[rtalive]

On 12/23/2016 at 10:09 PM, ParadoxLost said:

 

I think that the show could do with some irrational behavior.  The way Felicity and even Oliver reacted to his being set up to kill Felicity's boyfriend made no sense.  No one would be told that news and then go immediately to reassuring the person that pulled the trigger that its not his fault.  Grief is irrational. 

That grief is irrational is the only reason shows do this type of thing.  its done so Oliver can wallow in guilt and spiral out of control.  Its done to create conflict between Oliver and Felicity. Major passionate throw downs.  Feelings laid bare.  Its done so everyone else can get caught in the middle.  Its done so the villain can get the upper hand by fracturing the team.  its done so there can eventually be reconciliation.  Major passionate reconciliations;) Its done for the sake of drama or what the hell is the point.

So I think I agree that the show is playing its too safe.  They set up this major conflict and then turn around and shut it down immediately.   Because they're scared  Everyone has to say its not Oliver's fault quick before the audience gets mad.  Its annoying.  I'm not a simpleton.  I can understand and sympathize  multiple points of view and understand motivations and forgive behavior that is driven by emotional trauma.

On a related note, I was watching an old episode on TNT today where Thea told Laurel that she killed Sara.  Its was so like the reaction to Oliver killing Felicity's BF that I did a double take.  Laurel immediately went to it not being Thea's fault because she was drugged or whatever.  There is a reason that anger is one of the steps of grief.  I would appreciate it if the show would stop jumping right to acceptance.

I agree with you, they do need to hire  psychologist. The character does not feel like real people, they change personalities and opinions so often, switch sides and react irrationally.

For example why Felicity will get darker now, and will want a revenge now, why not last season when Darhk put her on a wheel chair, which made so much more sense.

And yes, it is not Oliver's or Thea's fault for killing Billy and Sara, but they still shot those arrows, so I don't get how Laurel or Felicity can be at ease at their presence after that. There at least should be a certain moment of time they would not like to see them.

[BkWurm1]

7 hours ago, rtalive said:

And yes, it is not Oliver's or Thea's fault for killing Billy and Sara, but they still shot those arrows, so I don't get how Laurel or Felicity can be at ease at their presence after that. There at least should be a certain moment of time they would not like to see them.

This I don't actually find strange, well, not for Felicity.  I think Laurel has the personality type that would have held a grudge against anyone that had done her wrong no matter what the context.  But Felicity has the capacity of not holding the past against someone*  and on top of that, Felicity's clear sense of right and wrong still allows for her to accept those grey lines.  

She could without irony or hesitation consider Oliver a hero even in the first season when he occasionally was dropping bodies.  For Sara, she let her off the hook for her time as an assassin.  Nyssa even got respect.  

Also we have to remember that Felicity loves Oliver and we as humans are pretty wired to let those we love off the hook if we can justifiably excuse them.   

So to Felicity, it isn't a question of being able to see that technically Oliver isn't responsible.  She sees it as crystal clear, no questions that Prometheus did this.  Oliver in her mind is going to be another victim to what Prometheus did.  I honestly don't think she'd feel uncomfortable around Oliver because of what happened but I can see Oliver not knowing entirely how to act.  And really, they are already not acting right around each other.

* I mentioned that Felicity doesn't hold the past against people, but of course she is holding Oliver accountable for his actions in regards to William.  But it wasn't the past that was her main issue, but that it was going to be a repeating and on going issue.  So that's different.  

Edited January 9, 2017 by BkWurm1

[ParadoxLost]

On ‎1‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 6:07 PM, BkWurm1 said:

This I don't actually find strange, well, not for Felicity.  I think Laurel has the personality type that would have held a grudge against anyone that had done her wrong no matter what the context.  But Felicity has the capacity of not holding the past against someone*  and on top of that, Felicity's clear sense of right and wrong still allows for her to accept those grey lines.  

She could without irony or hesitation consider Oliver a hero even in the first season when he occasionally was dropping bodies.  For Sara, she let her off the hook for her time as an assassin.  Nyssa even got respect.  

Also we have to remember that Felicity loves Oliver and we as humans are pretty wired to let those we love off the hook if we can justifiably excuse them.   

So to Felicity, it isn't a question of being able to see that technically Oliver isn't responsible.  She sees it as crystal clear, no questions that Prometheus did this.  Oliver in her mind is going to be another victim to what Prometheus did.  I honestly don't think she'd feel uncomfortable around Oliver because of what happened but I can see Oliver not knowing entirely how to act.  And really, they are already not acting right around each other.

I still feel, in the moment that she found out, that there would not be instant clarity that it was all Prometheus and that Oliver couldn't have done anything to stop things from turning out that way.  There should have been, in the moment, demands that Oliver prove he didn't act rashly, etc.  I don't quibble about Felicity not holding a grudge.  Its the instantaneous acceptance I quibble over. No denial, anger, or bargaining. Just straight to depression and acceptance.,  Generally, I think this is because they paced this all wrong and wanted to end the season at a  certain place and didn't leave enough time to adequately deal with Felicity's reaction.

I'm not sure whether they care about Felicity's reaction.  So I go back to what is the point of having Oliver accidentally killing Felicity's boyfriend if they aren't going to milk the impact it has on Felicity and Oliver's relationship (whatever that is at this point)?

It will be interesting to see if they continue along the instant acceptance path or if they backpedal and create Felicity/Oliver angst out of this.  If they don't create more angst with Felicity, then I think there are other characters that would have had more of an impact on Oliver that they could have offed if they wanted to off someone and make Oliver act a certain way.

[LeighAn]

Maybe if they had gotten rid of all the trying to be funny but really just super cringeworthy lame and always double date scenes between Oliver/Susan and Felicity/Billy they would have found more time to make the Oliver reveals the truth scene hit a better note. But alas.

[statsgirl]

I agree that Felicity absolved Oliver too quickly in terms of how a real person would behave. 

But I wonder if in terms of the rest of the season, it was necessary for her not to blame Oliver.  I hope that wherever the show goes, it's important not to have Felicity have any feelings of anger or resentment towards Oliver.  His guilt should be enough to keep them apart for however long the show plans to.

[LeighAn]

I'm hoping this doesn't leak into spoiler talk but maybe it's important Felicity doesn't blame Oliver so that Oliver won't blame Felicity for events that may stem from this?

[BkWurm1]

Quote

I agree that Felicity absolved Oliver too quickly in terms of how a real person would behave. 

See I disagree with the blanket statement.  I agree that a lot of people wouldn't have reacted like that, but I don't think it's fair to say no one would.  Oliver had already sworn that there was no way that he could have known it was Billy and not Prometheus and yeah, Felicity could have asked him to walk her through what happened step by step but as big of a gulf that there is between Felicity and Oliver on a personal level, I don't believe that she at all wouldn't have trusted that he hadn't already told her the whole truth.  She didn't need to know anything more to know it wasn't his fault or to know that he was putting the blame all on himself no matter what he was saying.    It's exactly how I would have expected Felicity to react.  

The lack of human reaction for me remains the part where almost no one remembered to comfort Felicity as well.   

[Hiveminder]

45 minutes ago, BkWurm1 said:

See I disagree with the blanket statement.  I agree that a lot of people wouldn't have reacted like that, but I don't think it's fair to say no one would.  Oliver had already sworn that there was no way that he could have known it was Billy and not Prometheus and yeah, Felicity could have asked him to walk her through what happened step by step but as big of a gulf that there is between Felicity and Oliver on a personal level, I don't believe that she at all wouldn't have trusted that he hadn't already told her the whole truth.  She didn't need to know anything more to know it wasn't his fault or to know that he was putting the blame all on himself no matter what he was saying.    It's exactly how I would have expected Felicity to react.  

The lack of human reaction for me remains the part where almost no one remembered to comfort Felicity as well.   

I have to agree with this. I know a lot of people would mistakenly place some kind of blame on Oliver, but it's not a reaction I completely understand. Of course, I often don't really get what all the fuss is about when people have a strong emotional reaction to some things. 

[Midnight Lullaby]

6 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

 

I'm not sure whether they care about Felicity's reaction.  So I go back to what is the point of having Oliver accidentally killing Felicity's boyfriend if they aren't going to milk the impact it has on Felicity and Oliver's relationship (whatever that is at this point)?

It will be interesting to see if they continue along the instant acceptance path or if they backpedal and create Felicity/Oliver angst out of this.  If they don't create more angst with Felicity, then I think there are other characters that would have had more of an impact on Oliver that they could have offed if they wanted to off someone and make Oliver act a certain way.

I think her reaction was what it was because they want to avoid drama between them. They are still writing Oliver and Felicity as if they weren't engaged last year and things between them are totally fine so I imagine they'll keep writing them as platonic team mates with no angst in their relationship or they would be forced to acknowledge that a relationship exists.