This show seemed strange to me because, in my opinion, Kate was rather uninvolved, just agreeing with Castle as he thought out loud and semi-directed the investigation. He even seemed to always ask the lead question in the interrogations. The comment someone made about the case not seeming to be central to the episode struck me as maybe a reason. Don't know.
The question shouldn't be if social networks have the power, but if lynch mobs should have the power to punish whomever they want (meaning whomever one group or another decides someone needs to be punished). It's sort of like an up-to-date version of de Tocqueville's tyranny of the majority (or what can be called bullying today). I enjoyed this episode and appreciated how it all tied together. Really good script! But, this might make a good discussion in an ethics class.
The Mentalist is my favorite show -- and this disappoints me: people watched Person of Interest ... and then turned the TV off rather than watch Mentalist?
I don't know of any real-life cases, but it is a somewhat standard plot device going back at least as far as CRIME AND PUNISHMENT and TV shows like Columbo or movies like Heat for criminals to try to match wits with the detective after them or John Sandford's Lucas Davenport police deputy chief who's writes computer games is an example of serial killers calling him up to give him clues or complain about something they think is unfair. With Red John and Jane, I find the device believable/enjoyable that RJ would play games with Jane.
Jane can't turn out to be an evil bad guy (being a con man et al makes him interesting, like "bad boy", not bad). The simple reason is that it would ruin the millions of dollars they would all get a piece of in syndication. That doesn't mean they won't try to play games with the fans for the fun of the twists -- Simon Baker has pretty much said as much about the twists in interviews. Still, I would think they would have to do something new each time (meaning wouldn't Wainright being RJ's guy be a repeat of Bosco's secretary and wouldn't Darcy being killed or driven insane be a repeat of the psychic who went crazy?).
@ Sara Luck - regarding Cho and Summer (actress = Samaire Armstrong) ... I like them too and was thinking maybe she'll be on the second episode listed for this week (Friday, March 9, in Ohio) due to this plot summary: "Jane and the CBI try to narrow down the list of suspects when a terminally ill man, is found murdered. Meanwhile, Cho is forced to face his demons." But, the site where I found that info also lists 3 guest stars for the episode and none are Samaire Armstrong?? So, hope, but glad anyway for maybe resolving Cho's back problems and pain killers.
The secret that's going to come out is Castle's involvement with those hindering Beckett's mother's case. Not a good thing -- and maybe set back Castle-Beckett??
This is a late comment, but a thought I had thinking about this episode. Grace has kind of become a character like Mel Gibson's in Lethal Weapon, the kind that might get a crazy look in her eyes and jump off a building. What I was thinking is that they maybe got stuck there with her and needed to "cure" her of her malady ... and that's what the Stiles and letting your anger go was all about. And, sure, it might be a thread they can play with the next Stiles episode, but they needed her to go back to the Grace of before??
Wendy did seem to me like revisionist history. The impression I had from the earliest mention of her was that she was a super femme type Daddy's girl who taught little kids and probably happily clung to Tony and that dumping him at the last minute was Daddy induced he's-a-cop-not-our-kind. Women on TV have to be powerful and motivated and have a career equal to any man ... so we get the Wendy we saw in this episode.
Wouldn't it be some twist if the kid was Tony's and Wendy had something incurable and was dying and that that was why she'd been wanting to get together with him?
I don't like Michael, since I'm one of the people he calls stupid -- but he seemed to especially enjoy this episode, which actually made me glad for him. It had the very elements he desires ... and it made me think that all of us NCIS fans have characters or scenarios we each particularly like, and all together we all are fans of the whole show. For instance, I like episodes that feature Tony showing leadership and initiative (rescuing Ziva was one of my favorites and season 3 is still my favorite season), but I know a couple who love NCIS, but don't like Tony at all, consider him a shirker and immature and only tolerate him because they love the show. So, Michael got one he enjoyed a lot. Good for him!
The reviewer points out the bad in the show because he's disappointed. People who say they want a "cheerleader" review don't, not really -- because it would be obvious bull, and you'd have to wonder if the reviewer wasn't just being sarcastic and making fun. All of the defenders of the show would have a valid point about Glee being a musical and not a sitcom if the show did one thing: be consistent from week to week. Is there any other show that's all over the place like Glee this season?
Oops! Just got to watch this episode -- so there was somebody sitting there (yes, sitting there Jane-like, as a commenter said) while Jane was at the other end of the phone. I like twists like this -- where we can at last know they aren't going to try to turn Jane evil.
@Mark -- To me they were hinting that the "current" Red John could be Jane, that Jane really killed Red John ... then started being him psycho-like. To me, that's what the producers and Simon Baker wanted us to consider even possible (for their fun with us). And, like I said in previous comment, I just think they're playing games, that they couldn't really twist the story like that for all the money they'd be giving up in future syndication.
We all kind of take it for granted that Red John is still alive, that Jane didn't kill Red John ... but what if he did? What if Red John is dead? Just another twisty possibility.
They seem to be toying with us with hints that Jane could be Red John -- and not just in the show, but in interviews, like they really love being as twisty as they can get. What I think, though, is that shows make a lot of money in syndication and I don't think they'd make near as much if the main character turns out to be an evil, insane serial killer.
When I was very little, my favorite shows were The Lone Ranger and both the weekly primetime Disney show which showed episodes of Zorro and Davy Crockett (I even had a coonskin cap ... "King of the wild frontier ...") and the Mickey Mouse Club, and (I think their names were) Karen and Corky. The TV I remember most from back then, however, were afternon movies (was Dialing For Dollars way back then?) and the movies I remember loving the most were Judy Garland musicals and Ginger Rogers comedies. As a teenager I loved Bewitched. I named my cat "Sammi," which was what Paul Lynde always called Samantha.
I can't remember where I read it (so it might have been here, since I'm here regularly) but, irregardless of the somewhat lukewarm reviews of the Britney tribute episode, it had huge ratings and led to, and continues to lead to, more tribute episodes, like Michael Jackson, which had some story to it.
I'd be willing to bet that maybe 90% of everyone who's commented, no matter their age, has at sometime in the past, if only in the secrecy of their own bedroom, tried to moonwalk -- so I think MJ's music lives on in fans or fanatics. I was surprised in a conversation with some very young relatives about "Across the Universe" and their recognizing and appreciating it was all Beatles songs and Beatles characters and how cleverly it was plotted from song to song ... when the Beatles were "generations" before them! But then, you can hear an MJ or Beatles song or even Elvis Presley song on the radio on any gicen day -- and members of a Glee Club would probably be even more into the trendsetters or giants or however you want to describe Michael Jackson and the others of his stature.
I was thinking during the last episode and this one confirms the idea for me that Lisbon is treating Jane like she treated Bosco, her old partner -- accepting and trusting his intent, but not too hesitant to criticize his methods and keep him grounded. I like it because I like cop partners in mysteries I read and even on other shows (like NCIS, for instance).
Glee is a musical, but it is not a variety show (Dean Martin Show, Judy Garland Show, Smothers Brothers Show) -- and musicals have plots. Besides, the songs are not what makes Glee special, the story is -- OR, Ryan Murphy is rich and guaranteed he'll be producing shows that will get one of the networks to air them because of the original 13 episodes of Glee, which were plotted like a 13 episode mini-series. To say now that the show is something else than what made it a hit is really giving Murphy a pass. And why did he even bother hiring writers? There's a saying that goes something like, "Dance with who brung yuh," or something.
annie921 - In the "Gibbs Delivers" review is where he directs the "aren't smart" directly at me (one of the last comments, so easy to find). I do agree that fans can have all different points of view and still be fans. That's what makes reading the comments fun -- and I've read many more but have even been involved in a few back and forth opinions of what some episode of one show or another meant at TV Fanatic. I would like to think that the comments are for the sharing of enthusiasms and, yes, the frustrations of our favorite shows as well -- except as a sharing and not an alienation.
It is Michael who says all the time that if you don't agree with him you "aren't smart." He also says you must agree with him or you aren't a "real fan." Don't ever criticize anyone for responding to his hatred of everyone! The people who comment are not garbage for Michael to stomp on while we lay palm fronds in front of him.
I see Tony and Ziva as partners, much moreso than McGee with either one of them -- and hope they don't get together romantically. I just can't see them doing couples things (and spending Christmas eve together, say, watching a movie is, to me, partners and/or best friends kind of activity when each is alone at Christmas). And, in spite of some opinions, they do seem to recognize what each other brings to the team and appreciates each other's contributions.
Comments by Keith Vlasak (Page 11)
Castle Review: I'll Be Brian Dunkleman!
CSI Review: Trend Setters
TV Ratings Report: A Nightmare for Awake
The Mentalist Review: A Red John Disciple?
The Mentalist Review: A Red John Disciple?
The Mentalist Review: Blowing Red Smoke
Castle Review: A Grimm Case
The Mentalist Review: Blowing Red Smoke
NCIS Round Table: "Secrets"
NCIS Review: The Secret Life of Tony DiNozzo
NCIS Review: The Secret Life of Tony DiNozzo
NCIS 200th Episode Review: Again, For the First Time
Glee Review: La Cuenta, Por Favor!!
The Mentalist Review: The Devil Will Find You
The Mentalist Review: The Devil Will Find You
We all kind of take it for granted that Red John is still alive, that Jane didn't kill Red John ... but what if he did? What if Red John is dead? Just another twisty possibility.
The Big Bang Theory Review: The End of the Roommate Agreement?
The Mentalist Review: The Devil Will Find You
TV Fanatic Staff Round Table: Childhood Favorites
TV Ratings Report: Not Bad for Glee
Glee Review: Rock Salt with You
The Mentalist Review: The Talking Dead
Glee Review: Messy Love, Storytelling
NCIS Round Table: "A Desperate Man"
NCIS Round Table: "A Desperate Man"
It is Michael who says all the time that if you don't agree with him you "aren't smart." He also says you must agree with him or you aren't a "real fan." Don't ever criticize anyone for responding to his hatred of everyone! The people who comment are not garbage for Michael to stomp on while we lay palm fronds in front of him.
NCIS Round Table: "A Desperate Man"