@Geek_XX said:

@Satai Delenn said:

@write2topcat said:

What I mean is she lied to him, betraying his trust. How can you trust someone who has lied to you? That said, I thought he would have found some lesser way to deal with that. Kate told him that he couldn't keep Liz safe and that was why she came up with the plan. But that plan left her unprotected as well and led to Liz and Agnes being taken, and led to that guy trying to kill Tom. I understand why Kate did what she did. But I also understand Red feeling betrayed and angry. But I was hoping she would have gotten a time out or something I guess. lol I thought it was unrealistic to have him shoot her. Someone who is that close a friend and confidante for that many years? Unless Red is actually sociopathic, I think he would have dealt with it differently. He should have. Anyway, this sets the stage for some interesting shows going forward.

I do think he might be a sociopath. He claims he dislikes killing but he'll do it if he has to. Some might call that being pragmatic, but I don't believe that. I believe he's just a plain natural born killer who will do whatever it takes to protect himself. Which may mean he could be a narcissist. Has he ever admitted he was wrong about anything (and I don't mean like being wrong about Kaplan. I mean making a decision about something and then realizing it was the wrong decision and admitting it)? Because he still refuses to believe he was wrong about anything he did in regard to Liz, even when Kaplan stared him straight in the face and told him he was wrong.

Red just kills anyone that wrongs him. He is a sociopath.

Even last night. When he found out that guy who was working for Red helped Kaplan clear his bank accounts, shot him dead without a mere thought of what he was doing.

And funny for some reason, I didn't mind it earlier during the first couple of seasons, but for some reason, since his war with Kaplan, I'm having second thoughts about his behavior.

I wasn't surprised or bothered too much by Red killing the accountant who helped Kaplan wipe him out financially. The accountant must have realized that betraying Red and stealing from him would cost him his life if he were caught, but he decided to take a chance that he would not get caught in hopes of getting a huge payoff out of it.

I was actually shocked when he shot Kaplan. I thought it was way, way far over the line. From Red's perspective, I suppose he felt he was being consistent. He has always had a zero-tolerance policy toward those who betray him. (I know some would argue that it was not a betrayal since Kaplan was trying to keep Liz safe. But she also knew she could not deceive Red. And she did that. That was where the betrayal came in. )

I guess he could be called a sociopath. The reason I hedge on that is that Red does have a conscience. He lies at times as we all do. But he keeps his word when he makes a promise. He has chosen to be a criminal of course and thus lives outside the constraints of the legal system. But he does operate within the rules of the criminal world and has a good reputation there. Sociopaths typically demonstrate a lack of emotion. Red shows emotions, though I would say his expressions of them are somewhat blunted, even for a man. But he does feel and show them. As far as him killing without compunction, without remorse most of the time (he felt terrible about shooting Kaplan), those who kill people usually describe a coarsening of their conscience which happens after they have killed a couple of times. I don't mean just the sicko murderers, but also soldiers, intelligence officers, and others who kill people legally.

I had a friend whose work required him to kill people sometimes. He told me he hoped I would never ever have to kill anyone in my life. He told me it changes something inside of you. His first kill was an enemy sentry. He wasn't torn up inside about it because he thoroughly believed in the rightness of his action and his cause. Still, he knew it made him coarse inside. (By the way, my friend was the most trustworthy person I knew. If he told me he was going to do something, I could depend on it. He expected the same from others. He was also the most loyal friend I have ever had. )Toward the end of his life, he wondered about where his soul would go. He never wavered in his belief that his cause and his actions were just. But having had to kill people, he said, changed the way he viewed them. He didn't want me to ever have to go through that.

Red has expressed sentiments at times which remind me of what my friend said. Red spoke to Liz once about a certain kind of fish which was trapped in some caves in Mexico and never saw light. Over time it lost the use of its eyes and learned to survive without them. Red compared himself to that fish when he said he wondered what would happen if he ever saw the light again, whether it would make him a little less hideous. That and other things he has said reveal that he is aware of how monstrous he has become. The world he decided to become a part of in order to build the money and power he needed to protect Liz is an ugly, violent, and evil world. (For that matter, the world of politics is often the same way.) Those who show weakness are preyed upon by others. Red has become what he is in order to survive in that ugly, extra-judicial, world.

It was a bad choice. You would think there would have been some other way to protect Liz. But if he had chosen a different way, then we would not be watching The Blacklist. lol

@write2topcat said:

Gee, I just saw the Requiem episode (I watch the show on demand at my leisure) and got the whole backstory on Kate. It certainly sheds light on why she felt so strongly about protecting Liz that she went behind Red's back, lied to him, and let him suffer through the grieving process over Liz. This episode gives the audience Kate's perspective on the issue. And Kate's actions revealed at the end of the show seem to destroy any hopes that she and Red could ever come to terms, work things out. I had been hoping for something like that to happen. Of course it would be hard for anyone to go back to someone who shot them in the back of the head. I was shocked when he shot her; I just didn't think he would do that to her.
Anyway, now Red is in for some real trouble. Kate is going to create many new enemies for Red. Presumably, some of his current friendly associates may find that Red was behind murders of their friends, or that he caused destruction in their lives. And others who have left him alone because they were not aware of his actions may now become sworn enemies of his.
I recall something being said in the episode when he shot her about how she knew too much for him to let her live, and that he now could not trust her. Well here we see that she literally knows where all the bodies are buried, because she dug them all up. Kate has always been a weird little lady, and now she gets to play the nemesis to Red.

And now we have more information about Liz and Red's past than we have been privy to before. Red has always said that he is not Lizzie's father, and that her father died the night of the fire. But at some point he did believe he was her father. So I wonder who Liz's real father is. Who was it that Masha shot that night? This show always keeps some mystery, it keeps us wondering, and keeps us coming back.

POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD EVEN THOUGH THE SEASON IS OVER:

I'm not sure where you live (country, I mean) but I had already seen this episode at the point you made your prior post which is why I said what I did. I still feel that Kate did not betray him, and the lying? She had to. He was never going to let Liz go, and Kate had forgotten her promise to Liz and to Red (that she'd put Liz first) and she is simply returning "to her roots" so to speak. As far as I'm concerned, he betrayed her, not the other way around.

He is her father (though I was hoping he was not), and I do believe he's a sociopath. His behavior has always shown him to be that. Does that mean he doesn't have his own personal sense of right and wrong, or that he still can't care about someone? No, but he is always going to put himself first with the possible exception of Liz, and I think if she were to push him far enough, he'd kill her too.

And now that the season is over, and Kaplan killed herself, I'm sad about that, but I fully understand her decision. I just want to know if what I think the secret is that Liz thinks she knows now but doesn't is correct and further, for the first time since this show began, I'm FINALLY happy to see Tom (I couldn't stand him prior to now, and when Liz kidnapped and tortured him, I enjoyed that SO MUCH!).

I never thought I'd turn on Red because in the first few seasons he did seem noble and charming. Unfortunately, that's what a narcissist is and how he/she fools people. That he's a sociopath to boot does not help. I'm actually looking forward to him losing his hold on Liz. What's she going to think/how's she going to feel when Tom shows her what's in that suitcase? (and yes, I know what's in that suitcase and it will be Red's undoing where Liz is concerned. Why Kaplan didn't reveal it sooner is my only question. Ergo, I don't understand how Kaplan could continue working for Red after finding out that he (appears to have) killed Liz's mother. She loved Liz's mother.

POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD EVEN THOUGH THE SEASON IS OVER:

I'm not sure where you live (country, I mean) but I had already seen this episode at the point you made your prior post which is why I said what I did. I still feel that Kate did not betray him, and the lying? She had to. He was never going to let Liz go, and Kate had forgotten her promise to Liz and to Red (that she'd put Liz first) and she is simply returning "to her roots" so to speak. As far as I'm concerned, he betrayed her, not the other way around.

He is her father (though I was hoping he was not), and I do believe he's a sociopath. His behavior has always shown him to be that. Does that mean he doesn't have his own personal sense of right and wrong, or that he still can't care about someone? No, but he is always going to put himself first with the possible exception of Liz, and I think if she were to push him far enough, he'd kill her too.

And now that the season is over, and Kaplan killed herself, I'm sad about that, but I fully understand her decision. I just want to know if what I think the secret is that Liz thinks she knows now but doesn't is correct and further, for the first time since this show began, I'm FINALLY happy to see Tom (I couldn't stand him prior to now, and when Liz kidnapped and tortured him, I enjoyed that SO MUCH!).

I never thought I'd turn on Red because in the first few seasons he did seem noble and charming. Unfortunately, that's what a narcissist is and how he/she fools people. That he's a sociopath to boot does not help. I'm actually looking forward to him losing his hold on Liz. What's she going to think/how's she going to feel when Tom shows her what's in that suitcase? (and yes, I know what's in that suitcase and it will be Red's undoing where Liz is concerned. Why Kaplan didn't reveal it sooner is my only question. Ergo, I don't understand how Kaplan could continue working for Red after finding out that he (appears to have) killed Liz's mother. She loved Liz's mother.

I take your point about Kate being true to her promise to protect Liz. The issue though was that she had also had a working relationship with Red which was based upon complete honesty and trust between them over decades. She lied to him, and not just a small thing. That is where the betrayal comes in. You said "she had to". Whether that is true or not, and I grant that perhaps it was true, it marked a betrayal of the trust they had for years to be honest with each other. And Red could not depend on or continue to trust someone who had not simply lied to him but had planned an elaborate deception. As I said, I was shocked when he shot her. I thought he would have banished her from his business, set her up somewhere or something. The writers decided to send Red down this dark road, for whatever reason. I can only surmise that they want the audience to begin to dislike Red now.

It makes me wonder if they are laying the groundwork for the end of the series. Having started the series with Red as a lovable though violent criminal, perhaps they have concluded that they must make Red very unattractive and unlikable as they work toward the conclusion of the series. Crime does not pay. Murderers are not lovable people. These are the messages they need to impart to the audience, the take away from the series. It would not do for them to leave us liking Raymond, given his penchant for violent conflict resolution. So they need to get the audience to dislike Red now. In the beginning Red only killed bad people, so the audience wasn't upset over it. But trying to kill Kate was different. Like Dembe, we disagreed with Red over this.

As for Red killing Liz, I don't see that ever happening. Of course, he is a fictional character. But based on everything they have shown us about Red so far, he would not kill Liz. He has repeatedly offered himself up to save her from harm. For Red to ever harm Liz would ruin the continuity of a central element of the story. It just wouldn't make sense to write the story that way. Red sacrificed everything in his life to save Liz and keep her safe. He continually places himself in harm's way to save her from danger. I suspect that the writers will have the story tell us that Red and Liz's mom disagreed on what should happen with Lizzie, that Red was convinced that Liz's life would be in danger if Liz's mom's plan prevailed, and that he killed her in order to shield Liz from danger. I don't know that of course, but based upon what we have been shown so far, that would be my guess as to the reasoning offered.

Red does exhibit many of the characteristics normally associated with sociopaths, and I suspect as the series continues we will see more of these highlighted, for reasons discussed above. The audience needs to begin to dislike Red more and see him as badly flawed. If we always saw him as a lovable criminal who only killed bad people who deserved it, it would send the wrong message. Impressionable young men might identify with Red too much and try to emulate him. So we have to see how flawed and destructive his life of crime is.

I think the writers will keep the element of Red's love for his daughter as a central element, and perhaps the only truly good thing about him.

@write2topcat said:

Impressionable young men might identify with Red too much and try to emulate him. So we have to see how flawed and destructive his life of crime is.

More will identify with Tom Keen, who is closer to their age. He is the heir apparent, and will take over when Red is gone. Tom will do anything to protect Liz and Agnes and he already has his parent's empire which he will ultimately inherit.

I think the writers will keep the element of Red's love for his daughter as a central element, and perhaps the only truly good thing about him.

So if Red is replaced by Tom, will it then be Tom's love for his daughter Agnes and his wife Liz...

@write2topcat said:

POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD EVEN THOUGH THE SEASON IS OVER:

I'm not sure where you live (country, I mean) but I had already seen this episode at the point you made your prior post which is why I said what I did. I still feel that Kate did not betray him, and the lying? She had to. He was never going to let Liz go, and Kate had forgotten her promise to Liz and to Red (that she'd put Liz first) and she is simply returning "to her roots" so to speak. As far as I'm concerned, he betrayed her, not the other way around.

He is her father (though I was hoping he was not), and I do believe he's a sociopath. His behavior has always shown him to be that. Does that mean he doesn't have his own personal sense of right and wrong, or that he still can't care about someone? No, but he is always going to put himself first with the possible exception of Liz, and I think if she were to push him far enough, he'd kill her too.

And now that the season is over, and Kaplan killed herself, I'm sad about that, but I fully understand her decision. I just want to know if what I think the secret is that Liz thinks she knows now but doesn't is correct and further, for the first time since this show began, I'm FINALLY happy to see Tom (I couldn't stand him prior to now, and when Liz kidnapped and tortured him, I enjoyed that SO MUCH!).

I never thought I'd turn on Red because in the first few seasons he did seem noble and charming. Unfortunately, that's what a narcissist is and how he/she fools people. That he's a sociopath to boot does not help. I'm actually looking forward to him losing his hold on Liz. What's she going to think/how's she going to feel when Tom shows her what's in that suitcase? (and yes, I know what's in that suitcase and it will be Red's undoing where Liz is concerned. Why Kaplan didn't reveal it sooner is my only question. Ergo, I don't understand how Kaplan could continue working for Red after finding out that he (appears to have) killed Liz's mother. She loved Liz's mother.

I take your point about Kate being true to her promise to protect Liz. The issue though was that she had also had a working relationship with Red which was based upon complete honesty and trust between them over decades. She lied to him, and not just a small thing. That is where the betrayal comes in. You said "she had to". Whether that is true or not, and I grant that perhaps it was true, it marked a betrayal of the trust they had for years to be honest with each other. And Red could not depend on or continue to trust someone who had not simply lied to him but had planned an elaborate deception. As I said, I was shocked when he shot her. I thought he would have banished her from his business, set her up somewhere or something. The writers decided to send Red down this dark road, for whatever reason. I can only surmise that they want the audience to begin to dislike Red now.

It makes me wonder if they are laying the groundwork for the end of the series. Having started the series with Red as a lovable though violent criminal, perhaps they have concluded that they must make Red very unattractive and unlikable as they work toward the conclusion of the series. Crime does not pay. Murderers are not lovable people. These are the messages they need to impart to the audience, the take away from the series. It would not do for them to leave us liking Raymond, given his penchant for violent conflict resolution. So they need to get the audience to dislike Red now. In the beginning Red only killed bad people, so the audience wasn't upset over it. But trying to kill Kate was different. Like Dembe, we disagreed with Red over this.

As for Red killing Liz, I don't see that ever happening. Of course, he is a fictional character. But based on everything they have shown us about Red so far, he would not kill Liz. He has repeatedly offered himself up to save her from harm. For Red to ever harm Liz would ruin the continuity of a central element of the story. It just wouldn't make sense to write the story that way. Red sacrificed everything in his life to save Liz and keep her safe. He continually places himself in harm's way to save her from danger. I suspect that the writers will have the story tell us that Red and Liz's mom disagreed on what should happen with Lizzie, that Red was convinced that Liz's life would be in danger if Liz's mom's plan prevailed, and that he killed her in order to shield Liz from danger. I don't know that of course, but based upon what we have been shown so far, that would be my guess as to the reasoning offered.

Red does exhibit many of the characteristics normally associated with sociopaths, and I suspect as the series continues we will see more of these highlighted, for reasons discussed above. The audience needs to begin to dislike Red more and see him as badly flawed. If we always saw him as a lovable criminal who only killed bad people who deserved it, it would send the wrong message. Impressionable young men might identify with Red too much and try to emulate him. So we have to see how flawed and destructive his life of crime is.

I think the writers will keep the element of Red's love for his daughter as a central element, and perhaps the only truly good thing about him.

You bring up several good points, and I don't disagree with you. I'm not saying for sure he'd ever kill Liz, but at this point I wouldn't put anything past him. People change. What they wouldn't do at one point, they might see they have no choice at another.

Yes, these are fictional characters, and we are all just speculating, but that comes with the territory of getting involved with a show, lol.

As for people identifying with Red or wanting to emulate him and the writers having to make him so bad people will stop liking him/identifying with him/etc.? That's out of the writers' hands. People don't solely need fictional characters who are evil to emulate. There's enough in the real world, and people are going to do what they're going to do. Turning a character on a show into something else won't change that.

@Satai Delenn said:

@write2topcat said:

POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD EVEN THOUGH THE SEASON IS OVER:

You bring up several good points, and I don't disagree with you. I'm not saying for sure he'd ever kill Liz, but at this point I wouldn't put anything past him. People change. What they wouldn't do at one point, they might see they have no choice at another.

Yes, these are fictional characters, and we are all just speculating, but that comes with the territory of getting involved with a show, lol.

As for people identifying with Red or wanting to emulate him and the writers having to make him so bad people will stop liking him/identifying with him/etc.? That's out of the writers' hands. People don't solely need fictional characters who are evil to emulate. There's enough in the real world, and people are going to do what they're going to do. Turning a character on a show into something else won't change that.

Oh yeah, I agree. There are plenty of bad examples in real life which influence impressionable people to go down a dark path and do bad things. No question about that. A TV show cannot change that. I am admittedly "mind reading" the writers quite a bit; I am just speculating on what they might be thinking or how they may write things going forward. So this is just my guess, based on what I have seen from Hollywood and a little intuition perhaps. Even though modern film and TV has changed a lot in many ways from the early period, there is still something of the old film noir tradition, with the idea that crime ultimately doesn't pay; like the karma concept, or the biblical "you reap what you sew" idea. I still see writers using this trope in crime dramas.

And even though TV shows cannot make someone commit crimes, those making the shows are a little sensitive about that charge. Various groups of people, including some psychologists, have periodically pushed the idea that TV shows and movies which seem to glorify violence and criminal activity can influence impressionable young people to emulate the glorified criminal characters played by popular Hollywood actors. (I don't doubt that to some degree kids are influenced by this. If they go out and commit crimes, they are still responsible for their own actions of course.)
I think that filmmakers cannot help but be influenced to some degree by these charges, not because they are worried about being sued (even though in our litigious society anything is possible) but because the charge that they are insensitive to how their films might influence young people stings. Nobody wants to be publicly portrayed as promoting the idea that a life of violent crime is glamorous and without serious consequence. The writers don't let it interfere or censor their work, they still show the crime and violence. But they frequently also include the crime doesn't pay message, intentionally or not. SPOILER about Sons of Anarchy[The show Sons of Anarchy (excellent show) for example, depicted violent criminal activity of biker gangs and other gangs. At the end of the series the main protagonist Jax Teller extracts a promise from his loved ones to make sure, after he was dead and gone, that his son be taught to hate what he had done. Jax ultimately had to pay with his life because of his violent, criminal choices. A central element of the story was the idea that violent criminal activity was the wrong choice. Jax's father was killed for believing this and Jax struggled with the issue throughout the series.]

For whatever reason, this trope shows up a lot.

In the beginning of the series Red was a likable villain. The audience liked him. He was funny. When he did kill people, they were people we saw as deserving of punishment. We gave him a pass. But when Red shot Kate it was a shocking departure from the likable Red. The task force has become more critical of Red again, a big change from the respect for Red and collaboration with him back when they were all trying to take down the cabal. I don't know, but I get the sense that they want us to notice Reddington's flaws now, they want him to be less likable. Is this a temporary plot twist? Are they laying the groundwork for the eventual end of the series? I don't know.

I do think that even if they keep having Red display his dark side, even if they are using the crime doesn't pay trope here, they won't make Red a completely unlikable guy.

" I'm not saying for sure he'd ever kill Liz, but at this point I wouldn't put anything past him. People change. What they wouldn't do at one point, they might see they have no choice at another."

Hey, he shot Kate, right? Who saw that coming? You make a valid point.

But the reason I strongly doubt they would ever have him kill Liz is that it would destroy the continuity of the central element of the story. His entire reason for embarking on a life of crime was to (according to what we were told) build the resources and make the contacts he needed to protect Liz from harm. He has often offered his own life up to save Liz. And he ruthlessly kills anyone who threatens any part of the system he has built to protect Liz. Hell, Kate was his closest confidant for decades, and he tried to kill her because her deception put Liz in danger. Red basically lives and breathes Liz, protecting her from harm. People do change. But that would be a fundamental change in his character. For Red to intentionally kill Liz would be almost like having him announce that he is getting a sex change. The viewers would be totally shocked. Red would be this different person.

But who knows? I could be wrong. I've been wrong before.

I got a bit long winded on this, sorry about that.

@wonder2wonder said:

@write2topcat said:

Impressionable young men might identify with Red too much and try to emulate him. So we have to see how flawed and destructive his life of crime is.

More will identify with Tom Keen, who is closer to their age. He is the heir apparent, and will take over when Red is gone. Tom will do anything to protect Liz and Agnes and he already has his parent's empire which he will ultimately inherit.

I think the writers will keep the element of Red's love for his daughter as a central element, and perhaps the only truly good thing about him.

So if Red is replaced by Tom, will it then be Tom's love for his daughter Agnes and his wife Liz...

Tom is a more likable character than Red in many ways. And he is younger as you pointed out and this helps young guys to identify with him. Still, young guys can and do respect and admire older actors too, and do identify with their characters sometimes. I think Ryan Eggold is a good actor and would be a good lead in his own show. I liked Blacklist Redemption and was sorry to hear it might not be picked up for another season. I don't know if they will try to keep The Blacklist going without James Spader. The central plot revolves around Reddington and Elizabeth Keen.
But I think Tom would be good in a spinoff show. I hope blacklist the redemption gets picked up for another season. I think it is a good show.

@write2topcat said:

@Satai Delenn said:

@write2topcat said:

POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD EVEN THOUGH THE SEASON IS OVER:

You bring up several good points, and I don't disagree with you. I'm not saying for sure he'd ever kill Liz, but at this point I wouldn't put anything past him. People change. What they wouldn't do at one point, they might see they have no choice at another.

Yes, these are fictional characters, and we are all just speculating, but that comes with the territory of getting involved with a show, lol.

As for people identifying with Red or wanting to emulate him and the writers having to make him so bad people will stop liking him/identifying with him/etc.? That's out of the writers' hands. People don't solely need fictional characters who are evil to emulate. There's enough in the real world, and people are going to do what they're going to do. Turning a character on a show into something else won't change that.

---

Oh yeah, I agree. There are plenty of bad examples in real life which influence impressionable people to go down a dark path and do bad things. No question about that. A TV show cannot change that. I am admittedly "mind reading" the writers quite a bit; I am just speculating on what they might be thinking or how they may write things going forward. So this is just my guess, based on what I have seen from Hollywood and a little intuition perhaps. Even though modern film and TV has changed a lot in many ways from the early period, there is still something of the old film noir tradition, with the idea that crime ultimately doesn't pay; like the karma concept, or the biblical "you reap what you sew" idea. I still see writers using this trope in crime dramas.

And even though TV shows cannot make someone commit crimes, those making the shows are a little sensitive about that charge. Various groups of people, including some psychologists, have periodically pushed the idea that TV shows and movies which seem to glorify violence and criminal activity can influence impressionable young people to emulate the glorified criminal characters played by popular Hollywood actors. (I don't doubt that to some degree kids are influenced by this. If they go out and commit crimes, they are still responsible for their own actions of course.)
I think that filmmakers cannot help but be influenced to some degree by these charges, not because they are worried about being sued (even though in our litigious society anything is possible) but because the charge that they are insensitive to how their films might influence young people stings. Nobody wants to be publicly portrayed as promoting the idea that a life of violent crime is glamorous and without serious consequence. The writers don't let it interfere or censor their work, they still show the crime and violence. But they frequently also include the crime doesn't pay message, intentionally or not. SPOILER about Sons of Anarchy[The show Sons of Anarchy (excellent show) for example, depicted violent criminal activity of biker gangs and other gangs. At the end of the series the main protagonist Jax Teller extracts a promise from his loved ones to make sure, after he was dead and gone, that his son be taught to hate what he had done. Jax ultimately had to pay with his life because of his violent, criminal choices. A central element of the story was the idea that violent criminal activity was the wrong choice. Jax's father was killed for believing this and Jax struggled with the issue throughout the series.]

For whatever reason, this trope shows up a lot.

In the beginning of the series Red was a likable villain. The audience liked him. He was funny. When he did kill people, they were people we saw as deserving of punishment. We gave him a pass. But when Red shot Kate it was a shocking departure from the likable Red. The task force has become more critical of Red again, a big change from the respect for Red and collaboration with him back when they were all trying to take down the cabal. I don't know, but I get the sense that they want us to notice Reddington's flaws now, they want him to be less likable. Is this a temporary plot twist? Are they laying the groundwork for the eventual end of the series? I don't know.

I do think that even if they keep having Red display his dark side, even if they are using the crime doesn't pay trope here, they won't make Red a completely unlikable guy.

" I'm not saying for sure he'd ever kill Liz, but at this point I wouldn't put anything past him. People change. What they wouldn't do at one point, they might see they have no choice at another."

Hey, he shot Kate, right? Who saw that coming? You make a valid point.

But the reason I strongly doubt they would ever have him kill Liz is that it would destroy the continuity of the central element of the story. His entire reason for embarking on a life of crime was to (according to what we were told) build the resources and make the contacts he needed to protect Liz from harm. He has often offered his own life up to save Liz. And he ruthlessly kills anyone who threatens any part of the system he has built to protect Liz. Hell, Kate was his closest confidant for decades, and he tried to kill her because her deception put Liz in danger. Red basically lives and breathes Liz, protecting her from harm. People do change. But that would be a fundamental change in his character. For Red to intentionally kill Liz would be almost like having him announce that he is getting a sex change. The viewers would be totally shocked. Red would be this different person.

But who knows? I could be wrong. I've been wrong before.

I got a bit long winded on this, sorry about that.

You make a lot of good points. And you could throw Pulp Fiction into your list too. That was an incredibly violent film and I am sure it "inspired"/influenced a lot of young people into contemplating gory violence as a solution to their problems. That film essentially glorified gangster life and violence. Please note that I am not saying it wasn't a good film, it was, but it was one of the most violent films I'd ever seen and while I was able to watch it once, I can never watch it again.

At this point, all we can do is speculate our theories and wait for the return of the next season.