rspad
-
Posts
37 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by rspad
-
-
25 minutes ago, KaveDweller said:
I find it really interesting too. I knew the studio is the one who negotiates, it just seemed to me that the network would have given the studio a heads up that they weren't going to renew to save them all that trouble, especially since they both have the same owner. The decision about Stana was supposedly made by both the studio and the network and they were both getting a ton of flak for it, so you'd think they'd have announced the cancellation earlier to shut people up. Maybe the network really hadn't decided what to do, but I have a hard time believing they weren't leaning in one direction.
The network may have been leaning, but if the studio saw any daylight for renewal (and the chance to make more $$), they'd do whatever it took to get the show to a creative/financial place for S9 to present to the network. That's why I really do think it was a down to the wire decision by the network because, like you said, they could have just announced cancellation earlier and saved themselves the trouble.
Remember too, the news of Stana & Tamala not being asked back was never any official announcement from the studio or network. The report was going to be published, they were likely asked for comment before it did, and that's what we saw included from ABC. If they had their choice, I believe the studio & network would have wanted that news to come out in a whole other way, if at all. Just like people, studios/networks don't like their dirty laundry aired in public - or show how the sausage is made, so to speak - and prefer to shape their own PR. :-)
5 minutes ago, TWP said:Wrrrrr (siren sound), correction police here. Nashville is produced by Lionsgate, not ABC Studios. Lionsgate is attempting to shop Nashville to another channel, hopefully with some success. We'll see.
Just thought I'd be annoying, LOL, because it matters so so much (or not).
Ha! Oops, my apologies. Yes, Lionsgate. But my point is the same, the studio hired the new showrunners in an attempt to make it more attractive to the network for renewal.
-
1 hour ago, KaveDweller said:
Something else I have been thinking about....I know there was a lot of talk about why they would have been negotiating with the actors when they were going to cancel it. It makes me really wonder about who was involved with negotiations and the difference between ABC Studios and ABC network. Because a few weeks ago they announced that Nashville would have new showrunners for next season, which made a lot of people think that show would be renewed. However, it was also cancelled. So maybe it's not so weird to negotiate with people without a guarantee.
Don't forget, studios create the shows, networks air them. The studio can negotiate/sign with cast/crew all day long, but there is no guarantee a network will air a show. A studio and network may be under the same corporate umbrella, but they act, for the most part, independently of each other. ABS Studios can produce a show, but sell it to anyone - ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX - and vice versa. Of course, most sister companies like to "keep it in the family" when they can.
It was ABC Studio's job to produce Castle and make it as creatively/financially attractive as possible to the ABC Network. So while ABC Studios was doing everything it could to get the show ready for a S9, it ultimately was the network’s decision to renew/cancel.
Of course, nothing works in a vacuum, so I can only guess the Network gave signals to the Studio it was open to renewal under the right circumstances, the Studio tried to meet those circumstances, but in the end, it was a down to the wire decision and the Network felt their pilots gave them a better shot at higher ratings. How the news trickling out of contract negotiations, who was/wasn't asked back and all the rest of it was handled is a whole other matter.
I think NBC’s Bob Greenblatt’s comments this morning also help illustrate the point of corporate synergy vs not, particularly:
Quote“We certainly take into consideration ownership issues when we decide where a show goes on schedule. But at the end of day, we are looking for the best shows to get the best places on the schedule. It is an advantage if the shows come from our studio, that’s great, but we wouldn’t do that at the detriment of our schedule.”
As to Nashville, again, it was ABC Studios that hired the new showrunners to show the ABC Network that it recognized that show needed a new creative direction, attempting to make it more attractive for renewal. It obviously wasn’t enough.
P.S. Sorry if you already know the studio vs network thing, KaveDweller. It's just that I've seen similar comments (“Why sign the actors if you aren’t going to renew?”) and the reality of corporate synergies in media and how that impacts some of the creative and financial decisions made are always interesting to me.
-
1
-
-
Wow. After constantly refreshing this forum for the latest news, what a day for me to be offline. I've caught up liking numerous posts as you've all hit so many of the thoughts running through my head.
I made no secret I thought a S9 without Beckett was a terrible idea, and I don't think I could have held back the slew of expletives I would have hurled at the TV if they had killed off Beckett, so I can't be sorry for feeling a bit relieved. Yet at the same time, I have loved this show for 8 yrs and am sorry it's come to an end, especially under such a cloud of gossip, speculation and fan angst. I can only hope the finale will end with that happily ever after so I can get rid of the bad taste in my mouth from the last few weeks and properly say goodbye to a great show.
-
11
-
-
24 minutes ago, TWP said:
People assume that if Castle is cancelled, showrunners would write a satisfying ending. Look at HIMYM, Lost, the Sopranos. Series endings can be pretty disappointing. Given the showrunners' track records, I wouldn't trust them with a happy ending for Beckett, even with cancellation.
As far as I know, they have never explicitly said that the cancellation alternate ending would be happy, just that it wraps things up. Anybody ever hear them imply a happy ending?
Very true, there's never a guarantee a series will end on a high note, and I too don't recall them implying an ending would be happy.
Having said that, I've done my best to give these showrunners the benefit of the doubt all season. I went along with the separation storyline although I found their execution to be lacking to put it mildly. If they don't have a cancellation ending that's happy, they're even more tone deaf than they've already been accused of being.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, CheshireCat said:
Well, maybe someone can dig up that artifact again, so Castle can disappear off into an alternate universe in the first episode of S9.
Ha, exactly!!
-
12 minutes ago, KaveDweller said:
I kind of think this is what we'll get. Beckett will barely be mentioned next season, we'll just see Castle having fun solving cases without any sign that he's a man that lost the love of his life. Really sad way to go with the series.
It is sad, but in my "perfect world" I literally meant a S9 where Beckett doesn't, and never has, existed. Like some bizarro parallel universe. That way there's none of the blatant disregard of her character while Castle is off having "fun" solving cases. We get the proper ending to S8 and then they can go off and do whatever they heck they want in S9.
Like I said, never gonna happen. If ABC is hell bent on continuing the series with so many of the same characters, I think a true spinoff/reboot like that are slim to none at this point.
-
10 minutes ago, WendyCR72 said:
But do we know she dies? I will concede that a happy ending is probably not in the cards and it sucks for the 'shippers. But (asking honestly here) would that knowledge be a bit less hard if the character still leaves alive - even if C/B split?
That's what makes this a no-win for me. A Beckett who walks away for Castle's safety (again!) or Witness Protection or some other such reason is potentially just as bad for me as the character's heroic death because both paths mean that the storytelling of the past 8 yrs has led to heartbreak. (Although her being alive leaves the ever so slim possibility of a guest spot in any future season, but that is a long shot I wouldn't bet on.)
While the shipper part of the series has been a big part of my enjoyment of the show, it goes beyond that to the dynamic of those two characters investigating together and playing off each other in those settings. So...I guess I'm just going to dislike any ending other than an alive Beckett, a happily ever after Caskett and a S9 rebooted universe where all the players are the same, but act as if Beckett never existed. What? Perfect worlds don't exist? Yeah, not gonna happen that way, but there you go. :-)
-
3
-
-
Quote
The whole war exhausts me.
That's a good word for it - exhausting. Frankly, I could care less. Even reading the rumors over the years, it never affected my perception or changed my enjoyment of the show. I care about the characters and storylines I've been watching for 8 years. That's what bums me out, that a storyline I've so enjoyed is limping to an end like this.
-
2
-
-
39 minutes ago, FlickerToAFlame said:
I agree, but it would be kind of funny if after all this cluster they cancelled it anyway.
Ha, could you imagine? But yeah, I suspect a renewal is coming. At the least, I think it'll be a 13 ep mid-season order so it can be brought in if a new show of theirs fails in the fall.
And even as I am near-sure it's coming, I can't help but still be bummed about it. I won't be watching any S9 (simply because the Castle/Alexis/Hayley eps this year made clear to me that I just don't care for that dynamic), but really hope those that do enjoy it. I guess for me it boils down to having zero faith this season's ending will be a happy one for Beckett and that they'll do a complete reboot of sorts for the new season. I just don't see it happening. I hope I'm pleasantly surprised. It would make letting go a lot less bitter.
-
Why are they renewing this again??
I'm holding out the slimmest of hopes that they ultimately won't, although signs are pointing that way.
Yes, I know the argument about people's jobs, etc., but these last few eps are already so depressing to watch, I truly hope for an end to it so I can have some semblance of a good memory of the show's finale with all characters alive and well.
-
3
-
-
Perhaps she felt the show would only go one last season and she'd stick it out for love of the show/character/fans and/or a good 'ole paycheck? Who the heck knows. All speculation. All I do know is the reality we're now stuck with.
-
3
-
-
Rob Hanning tweeted an early draft of a script for Still that had this dialogue in the opening scene, as opposed to what we really got in that episode.
Ah, thank you! I thought I was experiencing the strangest case of deja vu.
They are literally recycling scripts at this point.I'm both laughing and sadly shaking my head. I liked what we got in Still, and am glad we eventually get to see this scene too, but...yeah.
ETA: And thanks to you, Verdana.
-
YMMV but Nathan and Stana's chemistry is still on for me. Maybe not on fire, but definitely still there for me. I think it's actually improved this year on some recent bits of recent seasons for me.
Agreed. In fact, their scenes in some recent episodes made me completely forget the separation/Lockset storyline and threw me back to seasons past.
I admire the creativity of your plotting, KaveDweller, but I fear the finale(s) were written with nothing more in mind than Beckett lives or dies and we come back to Castle PI in the fall. The show for me is one with the other, simple as that.
Very short Sneak #4. Is it me, but wasn't this exact scene a script snippet from a previous episode that was either cut or never filmed? I can't for the life of me remember what episode, but I would have seen it posted on this board. Or is my Castle brain so traumatized I'm completely making that up?
-
Maybe neither or perfect and they both had issues???
Exactly why I said the truth is always somewhere in the middle. I just think some sensitivity from all sides would be nice in the face of the fandom reaction.
-
2
-
-
I don't think anything can be gleaned from his twitter "likes". He also liked a tweet (that was in response to his statement about these events) that simply said "Fuck you." so ...
Really? Lol. That's actually pretty funny. I don't look at twitter at all so have no clue what goes on there.
-
Remember the recent news Marlowe and Terri were developing a show about a PI and out of rehab actor? I waved it off as Castle 2.0 thinking they'd never be able to strike lightening twice. Never thought I'd find myself hoping that pilot actually goes somewhere. Never thought I'd be wishing for Marlowe to still be in charge to maybe have mitigated this disastrous ending. What a mess.
And did Nathan really like a tweet that said Castle could survive without Beckett? He's made no secret he likes the antics over the romance, but man, know your audience. Does he not hear the outrage among the very people online who would notice that kind of thing? And this is the same person who admitted he was wrong about getting Caskett together as the show enjoyed its highest ratings when they did. I don't think he's the devil these unnamed sources stories are portraying (the truth is always somewhere in the middle), but talk about tone deaf, or more likely, just not giving a shit what people think.
-
If anything was a tst about that exit, it was this season as a whole. I guess ABC feels that test was passed, even if it is in D+ territory.
Taking my emotion out of this whole thing, that's what I find so interesting. I know on-line comments aren't the whole picture, but it seems the Castle PI, Alexis and Hayley heavy episodes haven't been well-received. Add to that, comparing those episode ratings to a S9 are apples and oranges in my opinion. I sat thru Beckett-lite episodes because I knew the character was still around and would be back on screen. That's a whole different animal than watching a season with no Beckett which I don't plan to do. ABC is probably accounting for a ratings drop off in its calculations, but it boggles the mind the $$ still make sense after that consideration.
ETA: I should note that while Caskett has been a big part of my enjoyment of the show, it goes beyond that. I like Castle and Beckett working cases together with the boys. Period. That was my big problem with this S9 trial balloon (aside from some of those eps having to accommodate actors' time off). Just had to say that. I hate when fans get labeled, usually by defensive showrunners, as crazy shippers :)
-
3
-
-
Thanks for the heads up on that tumblr, BellyLaughter. True or not, their points are interesting. Reinforces my thought that there is always much more to the story.
Lesson I still need to learn - stop getting emotionally invested in television characters :)
-
1
-
-
If I had to guess, ABC issued this announcement now to soften the blow when the renewal announcement comes. I feel like Castle 2.0 is almost a given now or else why bother with the backlash? Deal with this news now and hope the conversation at renewal turns to how "exciting" and "fun" it'll be.
I'm surprised by how angry I'm feeling about the whole thing. While the direction of S8 was lackluster to say the least, and I did find myself not as invested in the show, I still enjoyed most weeks and found the chemistry btw Nathan/Stana just fine (whatever BTS issues there may/may not have been). I hand-waved the separation and just enjoyed it for what it was - a favorite show in the final throes of its existence.
I was expecting cancellation, and it would have been fine. I was expecting Stana deciding on her own not to come back and the show going on without her, and it would have been fine (although I wouldn't be watching). But for ABC to purposely not renew her contract as a cost-cutting measure? WTF? So last year's negotiations were tough? So what. When the co-lead on one of your long-running top-performing (for ABC anyway) shows asks for a raise and some time off, that's not unheard of. They want a possible 9th season to wring more money from the show? I wonder how that'll pan out when people stop watching.
I'm not naive, I get it's a business and I'm sure there's a whole lot more to the story we'll never know, but like I said, at first glance on what's being reported, my initial reaction is anger. It's a real shame all the way around.
-
5
-
-
Love the spirited debate and share the gripes lately shared about the show's direction, but just a little side-track that helps put things into perspective for me...grateful to be here to complain about a beloved show.
http://tvline.com/2015/11/11/nathaniel-marston-dead-car-accident-dies/
He played a small role in S3 "Last Call"
-
It is a bit clueless in the grand scheme of this season, but they are repeating that episode on Monday so probably just trying to promote the rerun. It does surprise me, though, that's the episode they're going with to repeat. Rub the salt in indeed.
-
1
-
-
More than that, the BI is in no way confirmed to even be about Castle...thus the "speculation" part of the discussion.
-
ETA: from this interview http://tvline.com/20...adeleine-stowe/
yes, Amanda DID get Victoria's heart.Not quite...
Madeline Stowe says in that interview that Emily got the heart in the original draft, but they changed things up in the end:
TVLINE | Let’s talk about Emily possibly getting Victoria’s heart. Your thoughts on that twist?
I’d like to think Victoria always had a mighty heart, but nobody knew it. So now she’s got her enemy’s heart — which might not be so bad. When we did the table read, it absolutely happened. But they wanted to go for a little more poetry and have it be in her psyche so that you saw she was troubled by this. They’d never tell a transplant recipient who gave the heart unless both sides agreed to it. In the original draft, it absolutely happened.Agree with ElectricBoogaloo...what I see on screen counts for me.
Emily Van Camp is also on the side of "nightmare", that Victoria will just haunt her forever...
“The part about the heart was strange and we wanted to make it clear that it was a psychological idea that she couldn’t leave Victoria behind. So we incorporated this in a dream sequence — it’s Amanda/Emily’s worst nightmare, and we had to flesh out what the dream meant. Where is it coming from? Sunil made it clear that it was a psychological frame of mind, even though she received a happy ending. The idea that Victoria will follow her for the rest of her life is an interesting one. You don’t want to see Amanda get off without any kind of pain or suffering,” she says.“She doesn’t have Victoria’s heart — that’s a strange and iffy thing. But the idea psychologically that Grayson will haunt her for the rest of her life is absolutely true. The dream is symbolic; the idea that Emily will never truly be happy. She was driven to be this person by this woman, which in turn created so much hate in this young girl. To have her gone is bittersweet in a weird way.” added VanCamp.
And Sunil Nayar just seems to like the debate it's created:
TVLINE | I know it was supposed to be open-ended, but did Amanda really get Victoria’s heart?What I’m hearing from people’s reactions is that they don’t know whether that’s true or not. For me, I think that’s great. I think that the show lives in the world of nightmares and memories, so for the psychological nature of it, it’s good regardless; you realize this is going to haunt Amanda for the rest of her days. It’s a fun question for the audience to toy with: If it did happen, what does that mean? It’s a bizarrely theoretical cliffhanger, which I hope inspires conversation. I like the debate of it.
The mystical, spooky heart wrap-up was “a big discussion” says Nayar who looped in VanCamp and Stowe. “They had strong opinions about it, but I felt we struck the right balance. The show is fueled by the nightmares that Amanda Clarke had as a child. The question of Amanda’s heart will linger in the air and never have an answer. It plays with the ‘two graves’ Confucius philosophy and ultimately the feeling that the heart captures every moment of a person’s past in the physical and metaphysical sense.”
-
1
-
-
Confirmation bias anyone? Nice to see everyone's opinions here are respected. Sorry but that just made me laugh.
FWIW, my opinion is I'm thrilled the show's renewed and hope it's for as many episodes as possible. It entertains me, even on its worst days.
Agreed that there seems to be little chance of a change in direction if Marlowe is still involved. If TPW is allowed to guide this massive ship on his own, and do it even half as well as his best written episodes, I'll be happy.
-
1
-
S08.E22: Crossfire
in Castle [V]
· Edited by rspad
Was the ending tacked on? Heck yeah, but I expected nothing less when the showrunners described it as a "button" of a scene should the series be cancelled. I for one am so thankful we got even that, no matter how tacked on, awkward of a transition and quick it was, because the alternative was obviously them setting up a dead Beckett in S9. Wow. That still makes me irrationally angry.
As for the Loksat stuff...whatever.
Madmaverick, I too had a vision of Beckett being blown sky high off the bed when Castle turned on the burner...lol.