Re: "The Wire"
1) the "fate of lex" scene doesn't show a "number 2" situation at the 3:00 mark or anywhere else. all of the crew (even the lowliest hitter) contribute in marlo's fact finding mission. it's marlo calling the shot based on the information he is provided by the crew.
2) chris doesn't "party" with marlo. chris is marlo's bodyguard. of course he's expected to be there.
3) we see the same thing play out in the "reveal" of avon's trojan horse ploy.
4) their roles are clearly defined in the holding cell, when marlo reminds chris of his place:
Of course the leader calls the shots..no one said chris was a partner or co-leader and a number 2 doesn't call shots..they just weigh in their opinion or knowledge and it carries more significance than anyone else.
When marlo asked the soldier what do you think the soldier said kill everyone and take the corner which would be in line with what they've been doing. Chris disagreed when marlo asked him and he agreed with chris's call (sometime later when bodie built up the corner marlo and chris came back and took it..3 guesses on who advised that move).
when Marlo said that Mike should make his bones and said he should kill Bodie to do it..Chris nixed that idea since Bodie was someone mike knew..
a bodyguard couldn't do that. Marlo talks to Chris like theyre contemporaries not employee-empoyer.
On at least two occasions marlo mentions partying on 2 occasions and both times he comes off more like chris is his roll dog than bodyguard.
in this clip he says he's lets celebrate in AC and chris nixes it because he's concerned about omar coming back and his family.
A bodyguard goes where he's told period.
in the jail cell..yes marlo is the leader no one is disputing that..but chris purposefully withheld info from him..(hmm...who else did that with leader of their crew...was it Stringer???) now why would chris feel free enough to do that if he sole role was employee only?
first sentence is merely your assumption.
second sentence is because the bad decisions far outweigh the good decisions. moreover, there are few to no good decisions to cite.
agreed that stringer bell was certainly the vehicle for a story arc.
first sentence, so what? who cares about accolades? how are accolades (given or ungiven) relevant to our discussion? we have measurable results.
what are the successful real estate transactions you attribute to stringer bell? can you enumerate them? and explain briefly why you regard them to be successful?
disagree[/QUOTE]
you completely missed the point..the reason you can reference and enumerate instances of mistakes because the writers had to, in a sense, build a case against stringer so that his mistakes justify his demise in the story. The story arc was designed so that you notice the mistakes.
There's at least two instances of successful real estate transactions where string was able to buy condos in their names rather than fronts. And freamon noticed that the barksdale crew was moving more and more into real estate properties when they busted the councilman's driver with cash.