I have to be honest. I don't know what program Sunny, ZukiLama and SnaketheCritic were watching, but it wasn't the â€œCastleâ€� episode on my set. First; â€œJ.A.G.â€� flirted with the prospect of a relationship between its two main characters for ten years (TEN!) and did so quite successfully. Yes, it can get somewhat frustrating, but in the end I for one think itâ€™s for the best. Stana Katic is a big advocate of getting Beckett and Castle together, and I respect her opinion; sheâ€™s a â€œZorba the Greekâ€�, â€œLive life to the fullestâ€� kind of gal. She uses â€œThe Thin Manâ€� movies as one of many great examples of how married couples/characters can interact well on-screen. And I agree -- WHEN you introduce the characters as a couple and begin your relationship with the audience in that way. I think we should respect Andrew Marlowe's vision and timing of if, when, and how Castle and Beckett will finally get together. But it doesnâ€™t take a rocket scientist to know that if they finally do get together, they must stay together; they canâ€™t ever break up. They can have their spats and squabbles, and one or the other can go off in a huff for a week or two, but thatâ€™s about it. They can decide â€œthe first timeâ€� was a mistake (maybe they got drunk at a party), but thatâ€™s it, too. So goes the success or failure of the relationship after â€œintentionallyâ€� putting them in bed together, so goes the success or failure of the series. Second, short of exploding the budget to feature film proportions, Adrian Pasdar's character and his various interactions was clearly (and merely) intended to represent a microcosm of the DHS circus that must certainly go on when/if this type of event occurs. And kudos again to Marlowe and the team at Beacon for another budgetary decision that respects their audience. Have you ever noticed how the Ford emblems are covered on the police cars in â€œCastleâ€�? That's because the auto industry recently decided their "trademark" has value. How many shows have we all seen in the past year or two when some little, not-so-subliminal commercial pops up right in the middle of the storyline. The cops are chasing the bad guy and the partner in the passenger seat makes a comment about how cool the new Nav System is in the dash. In return, the automaker gives the show a small promotional fee, or gives them the cars so they donâ€™t have to buy, rent or lease them out of their budget. "Castle" doesn't play. Marlowe says "Keep your fee, weâ€™ll buy our own. Our audience isn't tuning in to hear about your stupid car." And finally, whether itâ€™s "Law and Order" or "Castle", there's no way to nail every detail of a crime in the 43-minutes producers have available. L&O can take more time and cover more (but still not all) of the details because it's not trying to blend their crime story with the well-rationed comedic moments and the engaging secondary character relationships we all love about "Castle". Lighten up!
© 2014 TV Fanatic