@bw&r thanks for responding to my lament(s). i think what we have is the writers trying to wrap up rj by year's end to appease some of the viewers AND trying to anticipate the show being canceled after thirteen episodes AND trying to set up the post-rj arc for if they're picked up. there's an old yiddish saying that translates to "with one ass you can't dance at two weddings." i think that's what going on here. no one has enough cheeks. i can't imagine a new arc that would be so personal to patrick as to get the same traction. he's not law enforcement with a mission. how can they top his family getting killed due to his hubris? that enormous a blow can't acceptably befall him again. anything he chases, CBI/FBI/Tyger/KGB cannot resonate in the same way the charming, beautiful, brilliant patrick seething inside because of deep personal tragedy did. i'm willing to be proven wrong and will never stop watching as long as simon shows up.
in the first three seasons: stiles, mc allister and bertram. not hafner nor smith. does that mean rj is one of those?
@bw&r yes, kirkland was a disappointment and a loss. even if they couldn't give him a more insidious reason to be, they should have kept him around longer. and i love lorelei and wish they hadn't killed her. it would be cool if she was still out there.
@bw&r think you're right that bertram would be the juiciest. i enjoy him the most of who's left. and i would like rj to be someone i have a history with. all the others minus stiles seem too thin in terms of development to make a satisfying rj. stiles would be a big let down. but if it's good, it don't care.
i too don't understand why people are glad rj is over. i think the premise of the show will be irreparably damaged. the shakespearean tragedy will be resolved. i'm depressed because they're cramming it all into eight weeks and after that, what? wish they could have spread it out over season six.
@bw&r hello there. my money is on bertram too. have no idea why they killed partridge first. maybe just to make the voice recognition fans crazy.
problem with bertram is smith chewing him out because he didn't know how much jane knew -- not something you do to your boss or if not your boss, a serial killer. also, that he appeared to be in league with kirkland whom we know to be an rj hunter. unless he is rj fooling kirkland.
agree that stiles would be stooping.
@euterpe i agree.
@carobachik agree with pretty much everything you're saying.
also, seems like a cheat to make someone like smith or haffner or mcallister red john since they don't have much personality or history. the writers can imbue them with anything they want so that seems like a cop-out.
they've already done u-turns with two of them.
mcallister has changed from a bumbling hick sherif to a dark, vaguely threatening character.
hafner went from a doctrinaire colleague that teresa hardly knows to a soft-spoken fan of teresa's, an old friend.
now smith seems like a guy who could get abducted by the mossad for war crimes. so he's consistent if not interesting.
funny. and don't forget mauve and puce.
agree that it was some kind of "hail, brother." it just seemed really corny and campy; like a cartoon or i guess, a video game. i can't imagine being an actor and seeing that in a script. pass.
if kirkland has long suspected that jane is red john. why didn't he kill him along time ago? he doesn't seem to require proof.
@katempw don't know if i'm really arguing for smith. it's just they're certainly making him plugged in. i'm sure i'm wrong about everything.
wonder if people who aren't consistent viewers are having a hard time keeping up with the show? they're bringing back a lot of one ep characters and quickly describing their backstories.
also why does hightower always have a gun on jane? it's stupid. hasn't he proved himself over and over for her?
© 2013 TV Fanatic