“Nolanitis” is a disease I named after Christopher Nolan, the director of the Batman Saga. A definite sign of the condition is when film makers feel the need to render the fantastic, the wonderful, on more human terms, sapping the aforementioned fantasticalness and wonder in the name of a realism no one asked for in the first place.
How do I know this? I have yet even seen an episode of “Arrow” (which has received a full season order from the CW, by the way)? No? Then what the frak am I talking about?
To the left is an image of the Royal Flush Gang, from DC’s wiki. Sure, it’s silly, literal and very visual.
That’s mainly because comics are a visual medium, besides oftentimes being directed at young people (and in my case, those young at heart;).
Then again, so are movies and television shows (being a visual medium, that is).
Here is the Royal Flush gang, as interpreted by the creators of “Arrow.” If you couldn’t tell, this guy is ‘Ace.’
Now look at the image above, and look at the shot of ‘Ace’ again. Notice something? While the first is too fantastical to be on any self-respecting television show, the second could have been taken from an episode of “Law & Order” or “CSI” without missing a beat.
Also notice that he’s carrying some sort of rifle. I don’t know a lot about guns, but it looks like an automatic weapon. I mention it because he and about four other people are fighting (Green) Arrow, a guy who shoots…arrows!
Here’s another image. In it, (Green) Arrow faces two members of the gang. If realism were a goal–which was the primary reason for changing the ‘gang’ so drastically–then our hero would probably be very, very dead. This time he may have got lucky, but let’s not kid ourselves: Arrows are cool, but if an armed gunman were fighting an archer, I would put my money on the guy with the gun. In fact, the closer they are to each other, the better the odds that the gun wielder wins.
Now, I stated earlier that I have not seen “Arrow” at all, never mind the episode in question. It may even makes sense that a man armed with a bow and arrow somehow beats four or five men armed with rifles.
But I really, really doubt it, because if that were the case, we would all be Native peoples, instead of living in a country that on one very simplistic level came into being on the strength of a bow and arrow being not quite as effective as a gun, especially when you goal is to do as many people harm as possible.