10/31/11 Episode
POSTED BY: Bup
UPDATED: Thursday, November 3, 2011 14:24
VIEWED: 8873
PAGE 2 of 2
You are right. I was so busy watching Beckett and Castle together it didn't occur to me to ask. I'm sure that is what the show is counting on. No one questioning it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I learned from X-Files...Trust No One and Question EVERYTHING, Muh haha... Beware the Terror that flaps in the night, I AM DARKWING DUCK!!
Found a videotape of that the other day, my kid thought it was hilarious... What happened to the fun kid shows, anyways...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
They got rid of the good kid shows. Too violent. Instead there are boogers and characters puking on each other. Because we know that's so much better.
I finger the jerks with the puking cartoon characters. 
Give me Classic Bugs Bunny or give me death.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bup:
We may never know whose parts those were. SNIP
I'm pretty sure the body parts were really from the bank robbers because the abusive husband who planned the robbery double-crossed them to cover the evidence of what he was actually having stolen.
There is no reason for "CASTLE" to go all X-Files with this story.
It is not a story-arc like the conspiracy behind Beckett's mother's murder.
Far as the Castle-Beckett relationship, yes, I believe it is developing.
If it is handled in a logical, mature way,
there is no reason for the series to crash-and-burn from the "Moonlighting Curse".
The only "curse" is when shows stop being about what they are about,
and start being about the characters "hooking up".
As long as the writers focus on solving mysteries
and allow the Castle-Beckett relationship to logically develop as the "B-story",
I think the show will be fine.
As I noted in my letter to series creator Andrew Marlowe:
McMillan & Wife (September 17, 1971 to April 24, 1977) and Hart to Hart (1979 to 1984) built watch-able shows on characters in solid relationships. I have always viewed the Beckett/ Castle relationship as developing from like-minded pals into a serious, committed-to-each-other partnership. THAT is a story/ character arc I would like to see unfold.
A changing character dynamic is the kind of "change" a GOOD writer can use to keep a series fresh,
as opposed to the cheap trick of killing a character to stir the pot,
(which I consider to be lazy writing in most instances).
Also from my letter:
A relationship would accelerate the character development curve where by Beckett is loosening up and Castle is becoming more in touch with the fact that for most folks, life is about consequences. I see story possibilities where Castle and Beckett begin to worry about the risks they face. Should they continue to put their lives on the line? Should Beckett shoot for a desk job and Castle stay home and write? How would Beckett handle fame and fortune? Or would Castle have to reign in the glam for a more mundane family life? How would Castle’s family react? Would Alexis relish the idea of Beckett joining their family while Martha, perhaps, feels a bit threatened?
Because solving the mysteries should stay the primary focus of the show, these relationship developmental plot points would be spread out over a full season or two. Unlike “hooking up” as the once and done consummation, developing a real relationship for the Castle and Beckett characters is a springboard to further development.
I have high hopes that "Castle" will finish out its run with solid character development while never losing focus
on the bones of what makes it what it is.
Mike
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME