@Sue Ann: Bruno Heller was extremely smart to keep Patrick and Lisbon's love lives separate. Not only does it avoid the "Moonlighting" problem, it also gives the program more scope.
As for this week's Castle, the only good thing I'll say is that it was still better than this week's Bones -- but then, that's a bar set too low to cast a shadow.
@@Sue Ann: It's possible you're on to something there. When we saw Eyes Wide Shut my wife commented on the rather strange lack of chemistry between Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise. It was not long after this that they announced their separation. (Of course, none of this explains the atrocious writing in Bones.)
The big problem, of course, is that bringing together the "star-crossed lovers" is sure death. No show has survived it. It can be done with secondary characters, but not with main ones. The most famous instance, of course, is David and Maddie from Moonlighting. But there are dozens of others. Once Niles and Daphne got together, the Frasier show was pretty well over. That Seventies Show only stayed alive after Eric and Donna got together by pulling them apart again. Same with Cheers, with Sam and Diane. Buffy and Angel could never really come together, but at least in their case there was a very, very good reason. And of course, Captain Reynolds and Inara would not have been able to become a couple if Firefly had continued. (Although I will say that if anyone could pull it off, it would be Joss Whedon.)
To be honest, I wonder why so many people create shows with star-crossed lovers as the foundation, since they know it's a lose-lose situation
@geek: I was so pleased with The Mentalist when it became apparent that Patrick and Lisbon were never going to be romantically involved. This makes it unnecessary for the writers to come up with increasingly idiotic obstacles while trying to decide when the characters should finally "consummate their love" (and effectively end the show).
The particular obstacle now in play with Castle is somewhat believable. Not a lot, mind you, and certainly not something that she couldn't fix in about five minutes, since she already knows how he feels. But what isn't believable is Castle becoming a complete moron, losing all interest in the police work, and dreaming up schemes that a six-year-old would reject as childish.
Get together. Don't get together. I don't care. (Well, I do, but not as a make-or-break deal.) What I object to is the decline in writing as they fiddle with this trying to draw out the tension, and the lack of integrity to Castle's character.
So they're really going to do this? They're really going to drag out this whole relationship thing with implausible misunderstandings and goofy timing?
Okay, fine -- as NoHassle says, that's their job. In a way. But as Josie points out, there is good potential story material for after they get together, too. And if there isn't, then the writers shouldn't have moved it along as they have.
And what's with making Castle into a dork? Why is he suddenly uninterested in the cases? He decided to stay on, despite the fact that he believes Beckett doesn't love him, because he feels like he's doing something important. So why blow off a case for a lunch appointment? And really -- in what world would he (or anyone outside of a very bad sitcom) come up with a plan to get fingerprints that involved rappelling down the side of a building with a contortionist in a gym bag!
Damn! I like Castle, and I'm really happy that Fillion has this show (unless, of course, they put him back on Serenity, where he belongs), but this is getting a bit hard to take.
Bones has changed so slowly from a smart, funny forensics show into a cartoon parody that I never even noticed.
Oh, wait. Yes I did.
Seriously -- she endangers the baby by tearing through a crowd of prisoners, assuming she's completely safe because criminals don't hurt children or pregnant women? A woman dedicated to science would rather have the baby at home, where a simple thing like a breech birth can result in death, rather than trust hospitals -- which are responsible fro bringing down the incidence of infant mortality hundreds of percent? A group of wine connoisseurs is so snobby that they refuse to help a woman going through labour, and don't even bother calling the hospital after shoving her into the horse stall?
Please tell me this is the last season and that this show won't embarrass itself even further.
I have to say, I was floored. (1) There are rules to these things. The prime suspect is never guilty. This is especially true if the prime suspect is a relative of a major character. (2) When you introduce a B-grade actor into a small, seemingly irrelevant role in the first half hour of the show, this is the guilty party. (3) People who have been in trouble in the past, but who are now trying to make things right are never liars. (4) Homeless people are never guilty. (Okay, so that one doesn't apply for this episode -- I just thought I'd mention it.)
I've been a bit worried about NCIS of late, but this went a long way towards earning back my respect. Excellent episode.
I admit to being quite disappointed with the investigative aspect of this episode, as Renata has pointed out.
As for the marriage proposal, I'm kind of rooting for Penelope. They've got a good thing. Why screw it up by forcing it into a conventional box. Frankly, I'd like to see Kevin go -- not because I particularly dislike the character, but because I've never been comfortable seeing Xander Harris as a sweaty, bumbling nerd. The guy took on vampires, for crying out loud!
Why do you always see the mistakes in your comment only after posting it? That should be "the person with high moral standards."
© 2013 TV Fanatic