The CW Picks Up "Arrow"

[Surtur]

Respectfully disagree. It works both ways. If keeping the old names are inconsequential, then making new ones are equally so. As for personal names...whims of the parents. I've seen some pretty odd names on job applications.

The question is really not whether one name has more or less meaning is not the point. The point is why do the change at all? What purpose is served by it?

So far the only thing I can think of to changing Green Arrow to Arrow as a title is that shorter names are considered more memorable plus it would make more sense if they are going the way of Batman Inc with not only Ollie (or is that outdated too?), but also Roy and so forth.

I'm not trying to start an argument. I'm trying to figure out the "Why Bother?" of the name changes.

I would think they are simply changing the names of characters just so they can stand out as something different and new.

[jediracer]

They probably changed the names around a bit so that hardcore fanboys won't cry and whine (or maybe they will) when the characters and storylines are not exact carbon copies of the comic universe.

[listenuscrewheads]

That is the biggest fear from what I hear, that the quality won't be maintained. If it is, I can see Arrow doing for superhero TV what Avengers did for superhero movies.

From what you are saying, it would be more along the lines of Arrow doing for superhero tv, what the Nolan Batman films did for superhero movies, ie got a mainstream audience to take them as seriously as any straight drama.
The Marvel guy, Kevin Feige, said that the Nolan Batman films helped maintain a high interest in the superhero genre in the mainstream, and helped their movie's success in the lead up to Avengers.
The Avengers in turn will get more superhero films greenlighted, as it is making so much money, but whether those movies will be any good is another thing if they take their cue from avenegers, ie they might think you don't need much of a story as long as you have lots of fighting onscreen. So, the Avengers could also be a bad thing for the genre.

edit: whereas the Nolan bat-flicks made everyone up their game when it came to telling a story, instead of coasting on special effects, when you look at Iron-Man1, you can see a lot of Batman Begins in there, and that is the most story led superhero flick Marvel studios has produced yet.

[Mr. Holmes]

That is the biggest fear from what I hear, that the quality won't be maintained. If it is, I can see Arrow doing for superhero TV what Avengers did for superhero movies.

Yeah I have the same fear. I really hope you're right, as well that it maintains the quality. Don't care about any of the name changes, I just want a well written drama.

[Little MY]

These guys really did their homework and you can tell they like/respect the character. I, for one, can not wait for this to hit the airwaves in September (CBS is so confident about it, they ordered and entire season, which is rare for an untested show). For now, I'll just have to rewatch it over and over since yes, I got myself a copy of it. :)

What about Black canary, or Dinah/laurel Lance, how was she portrayed, would appreciate if you can shed some light on how big her role was in the pilot.

[pariah-1972]

There seems to be this underlying idea that for a comic book translation to do well it must make some wholesale changes even when they don't make much sense.

[Iron_Fist]

What about Black canary, or Dinah/laurel Lance, how was she portrayed, would appreciate if you can shed some light on how big her role was in the pilot.

I really don't want to spoil too much for people but she has a fairly prominent role in the Pilot. She goes buy Laurel almost the whole show until you learn near the end her first name is Dinah. The Pilot focuses on Oliver and Green Arrow and setting up both's identities and surroundings. Dinah is front and center around the Oliver Queen identity. I also liked the actress they got to play her. It's real early but based on the pilot, Lance will have a big role to play in the story.

Yeah I have the same fear. I really hope you're right, as well that it maintains the quality. Don't care about any of the name changes, I just want a well written drama.

It's only the Pilot but I was impressed with the level or writing, acting, SFx, and fight scene qualities. If they can maintain this throughout the series, in my opinion, this will be a benchmark show for superheroes on television.

I showed a friend of mine the pilot and he went nuts, i.e. loved it. He actually thought the action and fight choreography was better than Hawkeye and Black Widow's in the Avengers. He felt it was more realistic and sold it better while not being fantastical. Personally, I don't know if I would say it was better as much as it was just as good. I think people's mileage will vary but just the fact they can be compared is a win for a TV series. There is one scene where GA does something I can't wait to discuss because it's perfect for the character and showing his prowess but it's really something people should experience for themselves.

From what you are saying, it would be more along the lines of Arrow doing for superhero tv, what the Nolan Batman films did for superhero movies, ie got a mainstream audience to take them as seriously as any straight drama.
The Marvel guy, Kevin Feige, said that the Nolan Batman films helped maintain a high interest in the superhero genre in the mainstream, and helped their movie's success in the lead up to Avengers.
The Avengers in turn will get more superhero films greenlighted, as it is making so much money, but whether those movies will be any good is another thing if they take their cue from avenegers, ie they might think you don't need much of a story as long as you have lots of fighting onscreen. So, the Avengers could also be a bad thing for the genre.

edit: whereas the Nolan bat-flicks made everyone up their game when it came to telling a story, instead of coasting on special effects, when you look at Iron-Man1, you can see a lot of Batman Begins in there, and that is the most story led superhero flick Marvel studios has produced yet.

I agree your analogy is better. I used the Avengers because it's the current shiny new movie most people have seen and because it had Hawkeye in it, the closest analogue to Green Arrow. Strictly in my opinion, I thought the Green Arrow character was better done in Arrow than Hawkeye was done in the Avengers so I'm glad it was Queen getting the TV series, i.e. more room to develop and tell complex stories. I also think the actor did an excellent job on portraying Ollie. And because of all the previous, I think Arrow's story is more in line with the complexity of Dark Knight than Avengers simpler story. Also it isn't anywhere near as funny; it is very serious.

[QuickDevilRed]

here's the first footage, looks pretty cool
http://screenrant.com/arrow-tv-show-...w-yman-172546/

[Mr. Holmes]

My only concern is that the Berlanti/Guggenheim writing crew doesn't give me much faith.

[StoneGold]

DC Entertainment (who's funding the show through WBs iirc) didn't skimp on the budget, even though a CW show, i.e. they could have put this on CBS is they wanted.

So you're saying it's a boring procedural for the geriatric set?

[StoneGold]

I really don't want to spoil too much for people but she has a fairly prominent role in the Pilot. She goes buy Laurel almost the whole show until you learn near the end her first name is Dinah. The Pilot focuses on Oliver and Green Arrow and setting up both's identities and surroundings. Dinah is front and center around the Oliver Queen identity. I also liked the actress they got to play her. It's real early but based on the pilot, Lance will have a big role to play in the story.



It's only the Pilot but I was impressed with the level or writing, acting, SFx, and fight scene qualities. If they can maintain this throughout the series, in my opinion, this will be a benchmark show for superheroes on television.

I showed a friend of mine the pilot and he went nuts, i.e. loved it. He actually thought the action and fight choreography was better than Hawkeye and Black Widow's in the Avengers. He felt it was more realistic and sold it better while not being fantastical. Personally, I don't know if I would say it was better as much as it was just as good. I think people's mileage will vary but just the fact they can be compared is a win for a TV series. There is one scene where GA does something I can't wait to discuss because it's perfect for the character and showing his prowess but it's really something people should experience for themselves.



I agree your analogy is better. I used the Avengers because it's the current shiny new movie most people have seen and because it had Hawkeye in it, the closest analogue to Green Arrow. Strictly in my opinion, I thought the Green Arrow character was better done in Arrow than Hawkeye was done in the Avengers so I'm glad it was Queen getting the TV series, i.e. more room to develop and tell complex stories. I also think the actor did an excellent job on portraying Ollie. And because of all the previous, I think Arrow's story is more in line with the complexity of Dark Knight than Avengers simpler story. Also it isn't anywhere near as funny; it is very serious.

I can buy the pilot is good. The question is really more what happens six weeks in. Action shows are kind of a hard sell these days, especially with that long a season order. These things seem to work better these days on cable, where you only have to do 10-13 episodes a season.

[Legato]

They probably changed the names around a bit so that hardcore fanboys won't cry and whine (or maybe they will) when the characters and storylines are not exact carbon copies of the comic universe.

Don't underestimate the fanboys. They'll find something about the show to whine or cry about

[Stressfactor]

I can buy the pilot is good. The question is really more what happens six weeks in. Action shows are kind of a hard sell these days, especially with that long a season order. These things seem to work better these days on cable, where you only have to do 10-13 episodes a season.

It sounds like they're burying some hooks though. From the trailer it looks like Ollie will have a list of people to 'get' who had some connection with ruining his dad or events leading up to his dad's death. There are also the hints that his mother may be involved in something.

So it looks like there are some potential mysteries that they can use to suppliment the action-adventure side of the plot.

What happened to Ollie's dad? Why? Who might be pulling strings behind the scenes? And again, why?

[aNamored]

The more I see, the more I believe in Ollie anyway :)

[Iron_Fist]

It sounds like they're burying some hooks though. From the trailer it looks like Ollie will have a list of people to 'get' who had some connection with ruining his dad or events leading up to his dad's death. There are also the hints that his mother may be involved in something.

So it looks like there are some potential mysteries that they can use to suppliment the action-adventure side of the plot.

What happened to Ollie's dad? Why? Who might be pulling strings behind the scenes? And again, why?

They have buried a *lot* of hooks in the Pilot; the more you know Green Arrow lore, the more hooks you'll find. I think this show will have the legs to handle a full season.

Ollie's Dad is addressed in the Pilot but not the "why." The "pulling the strings" and why are also the future.