Castle review

POSTED BY: whozit
UPDATED: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 16:08
VIEWED: 9072
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE

WHOZIT

Saturday, March 7, 2009 1:51 PM

http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2009/03/castle-review.html

Atleast it's getting a great lead-in and time slot

RALLEM

Saturday, March 7, 2009 3:07 PM

I went to ABC's website and they have clips of Castle, but not the whole show. Do any ABC shows get posted on HULU? If not are there any other sites which post ABC shows?

http://www.swyzzlestyx.com/index.html

ECGORDON

Saturday, March 7, 2009 7:14 PM

Even if it is going to be available on Hulu or abc.com that won't happen until its first episode is broadcast, which will be next Monday, March 9.

RALLEM

Saturday, March 7, 2009 9:38 PM

Oh thanks. I thought last Monday was the first episode, and am now relieved that I haven't missed the pilot.

http://www.swyzzlestyx.com/index.html

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 3:46 PM

Nathan made that show a must-see. And it was a good show in its own right. Very Remington Steeley in its humour, yet a serious crime drama at the same time- that's a good trick.

The laughing Chrisisall

SINGATE

Monday, March 16, 2009 8:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Nathan made that show a must-see. And it was a good show in its own right. Very Remington Steeley in its humour, yet a serious crime drama at the same time- that's a good trick.

You are spot on about Nathan. I'm really amazed that he isn't a bigger star. He definitely has "it".

This shows looks very good right out of the gate. The chemistry between the characters is surprisingly good given this is only the pilot. Castle's relationships with his mother, daughter, ex-wife, poker buddies, and important contacts are totally believable. The back and forth between him and his partner was a joy to watch. Can't wait to see how that developes what with his clever ploy to remain in her life.

_________________________________________________

We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.

BIGRICHARD

Monday, March 16, 2009 9:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by singate:
This shows looks very good right out of the gate. The chemistry between the characters is surprisingly good given this is only the pilot. Castle's relationships with his mother, daughter, ex-wife, poker buddies, and important contacts are totally believable. The back and forth between him and his partner was a joy to watch.

The question is...how much of that is because of Nathan, and how much of it is the writing?
Would you have enjoyed the show as much if it had been someone else? (I'm guessing everyone will say probably not, but I mean, was the writing exceptional, or is it that Fillion-brilliance (and other casting) that made the chemistry believable and interesting?)

On a separate note...
....has anyone else looked at my username lately.
BigRichard. I only just realised how that can be taken the wrong way...ugh...stupid name.

2X2

Monday, March 16, 2009 11:46 AM

Quote:
On a separate note...
....has anyone else looked at my username lately.
BigRichard. I only just realised how that can be taken the wrong way...ugh...stupid name.

Dude, don't look at it in a negative way, it could have a very positive meaning too ;o)

2X2

Monday, March 16, 2009 11:50 AM

Nathan was definately the draw for me to watch, but that being said, I did quite enjoy the pilot.

I liked the supporting characters - even the daughter, and that is rare for me. The lead actress playing Kate Beckett doesn't drive me up the wall, thank god, so that's good too.

But I do admit, I'm completely biased because Nathan's in it, and I enjoyed watching him. However, if the show itself was terrible, I wouldn't - for example (and no offense to those who like it) but not even Nathan Fillion could make me watch Desperate Housewives... So, the show (IMO) must have some merit of its own.

I'm looking forward to watching it!

KWICKO

Monday, March 16, 2009 5:21 PM

Yup, Nathan was the reason to watch. That being said, though, the show was much better than I expected it to be. Why? Well, for starters, because they in effect let Nathan be Mal. He's almost Malcolm Reynolds in this show - same give-a-s**t attitude, nothing much to live for or care about (only Rick Castle is plainly enjoying his decadence and loss of belief...), just going along with a snarky comment and a smirk on his smug lips. He's nearly everything we loved about Mal - except he hasn't tossed anyone through an engine. Yet. :)

The question arose as to whether it's Nathan bringing the chops, or the writing bringing it out of him. I'd say it's both. He can do wonders with well-written stuff, but tends to try too hard when given less-than-decent writing (see "Drive" and "Two Guys, A Girl, and A Pizza Place" for examples). Joss brought it out of Nathan, and apparently the writers of the new show do as well. It's a symbiotic relationship, and when it's good, it's very, VERY good.

I love the chemistry between Castle and the detective, but Nathan is - so far, at least - clearly outshining his co-star. But I'm hooked already; I WANT to see where this goes. I'm watching with interest, not out of boredom. That's saying something. (Dollhouse, on the other hand, I'm watching purely because of Joss; if it weren't for him, I'd be long gone after the first episode... There, I said it.)

And like Chris mentioned, I like that Castle actually HAS some mad skillz, and doesn't rely on his cuteness to solve cases. He comes at a case from a different direction than the cops, but a no less valid direction. It works. It makes me believe.

Solely on the strength of the pilot, I'm penciling this one is as a winner.

Mike

The "On Fire" Economy -
The Dow closed at 10,587.60 on January 20, 2001, the day GW Bush took office. Eight years later, it closed below 8000 on the day he left office - a net loss of 25%. That's what conservatives call an economic "success".

1 2 NEXT PAGE