Mislav

Speaking of recurring characters, well, when it comes to DAs... Probably the only DA that I liked was Casey Novak. She was smart, wonderfully idealistic, brave, and cute as hell (which probably sounds weird, but I think that is a perfect way to describe her). And not afraid to call out Olivia on her bs when needed. Probably the closest SVU has ever gotten to actually developing a real strong female character; or any strong character, actually. Looking back at it now, Alex Cabot was/is annoying af, to say the last. She pushed a molestation victim to suicide with her harassment, for God's sake. He survived, but was left with a significant brain damage. And she only got a one month suspension for that! But when Casey broke the rule in order to put a rapist and murderer behind bars (not saying that was OK, just putting things in perspective), she was almost disbarred. And when Alex returns, she literally frames a man for murder. Great. Are we supposed to be rooting for her? Would anyone feel safe knowing that they are DAs like her in real life? Sonya Paxton was close to the worst though. Completely worthless. She should have been disbarred after showing up drunk in court and blowing any chances to convict the guy who actually was guilty, not to mention her history of rude and counterproductive behavior before. What a POS. Barba was OK, occasionally great, but the way they wrote him off has ensured that he can never return. Not as the DA, at least.

Your loss.

So, "Criminal Minds" got renewed... Yay or nay? Nay, I still have to go with yay. Pure hope. Anyway, I've spent a lot of time thinking about the (eventual) series finale. Now, there's a pretty big, and complex problem with series finales: writers and showrunners usually try to do something big and memorable, but that often ends up disrupting the dynamic and tone that has been established. Plus, "Criminal Minds" has done so many "big" storylines already, especially for season finales-anything more would have been an overkill by this point, no pun intended. That is why it is usually good to establish some big, recurring story arc from the beginning, so you can have a big, complex mystery spread throughout the whole series, that can finally be resolved in the series finale. But it's now too late for "Criminal Minds" to pull that off. Of course, that doesn't always work either. "The Mentalist" screwed that up. I think that "Monk" did it right. That is why I think "Criminal Minds" finale should be relatively simple-to an extent. I think it should last 90 to 120 minutes, like a movie; or two episodes. Even three, if necessary. And it should simply feature BAU working on a serial killer case... but doing it right. Using lots of profiling, while still keeping it realistic. Interrogating lots of possible suspects and red herrings, rather than having the unsub turn out to be some random creep that Garcia found using her magic computer. Not showing the unsub (in the act, I mean) until the final act. Not to mention, making sure that the ending is unexpected, shocking even-but also logical and poignant. In a similar vein to the twist ending of 4x11 "Normal", for example; but not that same, recycled twist, of course. Sometimes, less is more. Make the case fairly realistic and gritty, but still a tad bizarre and complicated, so Reid, in addition to profiling, could really go over lots of interesting facts that he knows, in order to eventually figure out the unsub's motive. Make Emily finally act like an unit chief. Maybe the local detectives don't want BAU snooping in on their case, and Emily eventually has to... make some things clear, so to say. That is the least she could do. Add some action scenes and door-kicking (nothing over the top, please), so Luke and Matt get a chance to shine. (I'd still prefer Derek, of course, but hey...) Have JJ be the one to address the public. (I know she hasn't been a media liasion in years, but she can still put her original skills to good use.) Maybe also have her talk to the victim's family. She seemed good with that in early seasons. But actually put an effort to make the scene moving, and have the questioning eventually result in a potentially useful lead. Have Garcia actually take some time to hack into certain databases, and at least have her mention that her searches are illegal. Give Rossi a really sharp snarky line or two. (Or three, or four, or five...) Also, feature some callbacks to good old times. Maybe the unsub is sending some complex cryptic notes/riddles to the authorities, which leads to Reid asking Alex Blake for help? And some of the victims could be previous victims of a sexual assault, and linked to the rape crisis center, that is run by no other than Elle Greenaway. Maybe the case they are investigating bears a certain resemblence to one of the cases they had previously solved (just one case; no "Replicator 2.0", please), leading them to interrogate some memorable unsubs from earlier seasons (maybe Vincent Perrotta, Amber Canardo, Jonny McHale, Norman Hill, Joe Bachmann, or even Karl Arnold-again?). That could also prompt them to call in Derek Morgan, and have him assist with with the investigation. Maybe they can even feature some sort of a support group, consisting of some of the victims that the BAU rescued over the years. I'd also like to see Cat Adams and Lindsey Vaugn again, but I'm not sure how would they fit them into all of that. Maybe there can be some sort of a subplot Cat has a connection to a cold case that has become active again, but she only wants to talk to Reid? Of course, I think the finale shouldn't be all case; it should also provide some sort of a closure to the characters, at least most of them. And those arcs should be set up in advance, spanning throughout at least the whole final season before finally reaching the conclusion in the series finale. I'd like to see the writers finally give Spencer a love interest, and dedicate at least one whole season to developing that arc (not in every episode, of course, but you know what I mean). I'm not sure should the finale end with something as big as Reid getting married (though I certainly wouldn't mind!), but I think seeing him propose to his girlfriend, and her saying "Yes", would be lovely, and almost as satisfying. Also, maybe Rossi finally decides to retire (again). I really like him, but he's probably getting too old for this s... stuff, no offense. As for JJ and Garcia... I'm not sure, honestly. JJ pretty much got her closure before that could even become an issue. (Out of all the characters...) She seems satisfied with her current position, she is happily married and has two children. So maybe just leave things the way they are? As for Garcia, maybe Kevin Lynch shows up again, and he and Garcia rekindle their long forgotten romance? I mean, I don't care much about her love life, but I liked Kevin. I know that Nicholas Brendon has been going through lots of personal issues lately, but I hope he recovers. I also know that Penelope went on to date Sam, but he hasn't even been mentioned since season ten or so... I think. I can't really decide about Luke, Matt or Tara. Neither of them has had much character development, so I don't know what direction they should head in, so to say. I kind of hoped that Rossi and Tara would become a couple though... I'm such a weird person. [I recently realized that several actors and actresses from "Buffy: The Vampire Slayer" have appeared on "Criminal Minds". Not only has Nicholas Brendon, who portrayed Xander Harris on "Buffy: The Vampire Slayer", portrayed Kevin Lynch on " Criminal Minds", but Angela Sarafyan, who guest starred in "Buffy", went on to portray the unsub, Lucy, in season six finale of "Criminal Minds", and Michelle Trachtenberg, who portrayed Dawn on Buffy, portrayed Diane Turner on "Criminal Minds". I keep waiting for Sarah Michelle Gellar to show up as a paranoid schizophrenic staking Twilight fangirls under the delusion that she is slaying vampires.] They will probably never have Thomas Gibson on the show again, not even for one appearance in a series finale, even if the legal matters get sorted out, and that sucks. But oh, well... we can't have everything, I guess. I hope Emily and Spencer will mention him, at least. They could also include some flashbacks from earlier episodes, featuring Hotch. I'd argue that Gideon also deserves a mention for the series finale. Basically, what most of the fans still enjoy about "Criminal Minds", what originally made the show so good and was heavily featured, are the following elements: 1) Profiling (detailed and fairly realistic), and team work. 2) Interesting, gritty, and fairly realistic cases. 3) Well-established, complex protagonists with a good, fun team dynamic. The finale should feature all of that, providing both a creepy, interesting, complex case of the week, and a closure to the characters that we know and love. The kind of finale that wouldn't only serve as a great ending to the show, but could even serve as a gritty, stand-alone TV movie that even the people unfamiliar with the show could quite enjoy. But again, that is just my idea. I'm sure many will disagree; and it probably won't work out like that in real life, either. Maybe series finale should really feature something big-huge, even. Maybe writers/showrunners will never give Reid a love interest, or have Rossi retire. But I still have some faint hope that they will do it right. (Meaning: my way LOL. How humble of me.) I also know that there have been unsubs who got away, so an argument can be made that "Criminal Minds" finale should be focused on capturing them, but honestly, aside from Shane Wyland, I don't find any of those unsubs memorable or interesting enough to be the subject of the series finale. They should either remain at large, just to show that, sadly, not all the cases get solved and not all the bad guys get captured, or the writers should tie up those loose ends before the series finale, if they feel a need to finally resolve those storylines.

Elementary is great honestly, though season five was arguably weaker than the first four. Cases are usually investing and complex enough that you often don't see the twist coming until the end, even though it seems predictable in retrospect. Watch episodes such as 1x3 "Child Predator", 1x10 "The Leviathan", 1x17 "Possibility Two", 1x23 "The Woman", 1x24 "Heroine", 2x8 "Blood is Thicker", 2x12 "Diabolical Kind", 2x18 "Hound of the Cancer Cells", 3x4 "Bella" and 4x7 "Miss Taken", those are some pretty good mysteries with the done-before twist, so to say.

A response to the post in the "Mixed Signals" thread about cases being "too complicated": I'm sort of on the fence. I enjoy complicated storylines, especially in mystery shows, but 1) they have to make sense by the end 2) the team has to reach the conclusion(s) through profiling, or at least some thrull detective work 3) it has to be at least fairly realistic. In other words, "complicated" doesn't equal "intelligent" or "enjoyable"; which the last couple of seasons clearly displayed. Let's take the episode 9x10 "The Caller", for example. Husband and wife from St. Louis have been receiving anonymous calls, apparently from a little boy, saying things like "I'm gonna get you." Eventually, their son goes missing, there is blood on the front door, and soon after the horrific discovery, they get another call, with that creepy voice saying: "Did you see what I did?" BAU is assigned to the case. Reid notices that exactly the same thing happened in Memphis fifteen years prior, and the boy was found dead soon afterwards. The team notes that fifteen years is an unusually long cooling-off period, so the unsub was likely incarcerated, institutionalized, or somewhat incapacitated for a while. The blood on the door later turns out to be an animal blood. Spencer and JJ examine the boy's room. They note that they are no signs of a struggle, and that the sneakers are missing; meaning that the boy, for some reason, left in the middle of the night, on his own. Meanwhile, Garcia traces the taunting phone calls to the woods about a mile away from the family home. The victim's father remembers that his son used to play there, so the team leads the father to that area, followed by the search team, hoping he can help them discover something important. Fair enough. The search team soon finds the boy's dead body; he was murdered almost immediately after having gone missing. Later, Alex Blake examines the original tape of the taunting phone call. She uncovers some background audio; Brazilian woman being whipped for money. They talk to a local pimp, who tells them about two Brazilian girls who worked for him almost two decades ago. They pay a visit to one of them, who remembers that, years ago, she was paid to engage in BDSM with a married couple; American man and an Eastern European woman, who seemed frightened. Eventually, the second victim's mother is abducted too, and the father receives another taunting phone call! The team goes over the details of the case. They note that both children were strangled to death, were neither tortured nor molested, and were posed in a "peaceful" position, like they are sleeping. That leads them to believe they are looking for a mercy killer. Blood on the door could be Bible reference: "When I see the blood, I will pass over you." But according to the Bible, the families with blood on the door DIDN'T have their children killed, so the unsub seems to have gotten it backwards... like murdering children is an act of rescue, of mercy. The team also notes that both child victims lived in similar families: Eastern European mother and an American father. Then they note that the first victim's mother had committed suicide, and the taunting calls started on the anniversary of her death. Then they remember that the former Brazilian prostitute told them she was paid to engage in BDSM with a married couple, American man and an Eastern European woman, who seemed frightened. They figure out that was the unsub's family; and now he is projecting, murdering boys living in family structure similar to his, in order to spare them the perceived suffering at the hands of a father. Then they suspect that he abducted the mother in order to "rescue" her too, and suspect that the unsub's mother also committed suicide. Garcia searches for Eastern European women in Memphis area who had sons and committed suicide over the last few decades. Unsurprisingly, there aren't many of them. She finds one match. The woman drove a car into a lake, while she and her son were inside; she drowned, but the son managed to escape. Her son's name is Daniel Milworth; he worked in the same school that the first victim (from fifteen years ago, in Memphis) attended. Sometime later, Daniel was arrested for torturing a prostitute, and was institutionalized for eleven years, which is explains the long cooling-off period. During that time, he was diagnosed with a bipolar disorder and pathological embitterment, and he revealed the details of his abusive childhood. There are no records of him following the release; he must have created a false identity. The team shows Daniel Milworth's photograph to the (second) victim's father. He identifies him as the man named Burt Solomon; his son's computer science teacher. (The flashback reveals that the boy sneaked out in the middle of the night hoping to receive a new videogame from his "favorite teacher".) The team rushes to Burt's/Daniel's home and rescue the mother. The unsub attempts to shoot Alex, but Reid shoots him to death. The end. (The calls he made were actually recordings: the boy's voice was a recording of the unsub himself as a child. The background audio came from his father's sex tapes, that the unsub was forced to record as a child. Yikes.) Of course, the episode isn't without its flaws. For one, the unsub smeared the pig's blood on the door, when in "Exodus", it was clearly stated the the lamb's blood had to be used (though I'm not sure can you even buy an animal blood, let alone a specific one, so maybe the unsub just had to make do?). And I'd imagine the parents would have been granted a police protection (they could have declined it for some reason, or the unsub could have distracted the cops somehow, but that angle was never explored). Still, the episode's strengths outweighed the weaknesses, so to say. Was that case complicated? Hell yeah! But it was also awesome. It made sense by the end (because everything was explained and all the pieces fell into place), the team figured the unsub out (and tracked him down) through profiling, and the case was still relatively realistic. (The unsub was a mercy killer who was abused as a child, and would murder boys living in families similar to his, in order to "save them", and he'd murder them by strangling them to death; not, like, unleashing bugs on them, or freezing them to death, or lobotomizing them and then drowning them in concrete, or poisoning them with a radioactive substance, or mauling them to death while pretending to be a werewolf.) Unsurprisingly, "The Caller" was written by Sharon Lee Watson. I see seasons eight and nine as sort of a transition period. The cases started getting more contrived and over the top, but they were still (mostly) well explained and relatively realistic, and the team had to work hard, and explore many different angles, in order to solve them. There were contrived but bad cases back then too, such as "Magnum Opus" and "200", but not nearly as many as today. Bigger problems started to emerge in season ten, continued throughout season eleven, and it's pretty much been downhill ever since.

And Jonny Lee Miller portrayed a serial (proxy) rapist in "Dexter".

Our detectives are called in to investigate a brutal rape and murder of a prisoner (maybe in Rikers, before it gets closed down?) Shortly after they arrive there, a riot breaks out. It soon becomes apparent that the rape and murder of a prisoner was just a ploy to lure SVU detectives into prison, and now all the rapists and murderers that they captured over the years are after them, hoping to kill them all.

That was fascinating. They should have featured real-life psychologists more. But he appeared in "Outfoxed", not "Omnivore". I know I'm nitpicking, but I can't help myself.

Hell no.

Please, no.

Other than the fact that he is my favorite character, there is one more reason why Spencer leaving, at least by this point, would be really anticlimatic: other than his mother and a few possible friends and love interests that never appeared more than once, the writers have given him pretty much no life outside the BAU (guess thirteen seasons wasn't enough time...), and pretty much no friends except for his colleagues (except for Ethan, who also only appeared once), not even much character development (don't get me wrong, I really like the good doctor, quirks and all, but other than becoming bit socially skilled, has he changed at all?) So, with him leaving the BAU, it is like he ceases to exist. You can't really imagine him doing much else or simply be happy. After years of build-up, there would be no conclusion to the character. After spending thirteen years in the BAU, he wouldn't leave with having developed so much as a character, or having accomplished something really exceptional, or after really finding happiness outside the work or anything, be it a love interest or someone/something else (all those complaints applying if he were to leave by this season finale, that is). He'd just... fade away. It's not like with Derek or even Hotch (as rushed as that was), where you can at least say: "Oh, he's enjoying a peaceful life with his wife and child, he's probably happy" (or just a child, in Hotch's case). I find that kind of terrifying, to be honest. I mean, if such an integral character can just leave without any real closure or conclusion, and the show can just go on, what was the point of getting that invested in him for years? Why should we care about any characters later on? If any of them die or simply leave, a new one will arrive sooner or later, and it would still be the BAU, big happy family, right? (Gag.) But again, if Matthew Gray Gubler wants to leave, that is his choice.

Honestly, they hit bottom of a barrel over a year ago, they are just scrapping it by this point.

I am not arguing that everything they do is legal (I've complained about Garcia's hacking before), but none of those things caused innocent person's death, which seemed to be the main objection in the original post. Also, none of those things were mistakes [in a way that they led them in the wrong direction or ruined innocent person's life] because the team turned out to be in the right. [Except the time when Rossi handcuffed an unarmed suspect in "Hashtag".] Not to mention that, like you pointed out, there are agencies and experts in charge of reviewing the investigations-so why are they not doing their job here? Of course the writing is contrived in later seasons (including the current one), and it can get really annoying, but still, not all the fault is on the BAU. And lastly, is not like they have put an innocent person away or gotten an innocent party killed... yet. Of course it isn't realistic-but I care more about the cases themselves being realistic, which, sadly, is almost non-existent now. I'd rather not have Garcia do so many illegal searches or profilers tricking/manipulating an unsub into confessing, but I don't think that's the main problem, at least not currently. I mean, they also did some questionable things to protect Reid and get him out of prison in season twelve, but I didn't mind, because things could have worked out very differently (read: worse) if they hadn't. But, of course, I really wanted him out...

That was the aforementioned 8x19 "Pay It Forward". And again, Alex was the one to conclude that; though I could be wrong, since it's been a while since I watched that episode. And I am not sure how long it took her, but she provided relatively convincing-albeit circumstantial-proof of that, because the statement was phrased in an odd, contradictory way.

4) When did that ever happen? They only investigated serial rapists a few times, and none of those cases featured a false rape accusation. There was a false rape accusation in 8x19 "Pay It Forward", but Alex was the one to conclude that. 7) Again, when did that happen? Maybe in season two finale and season three premiere, with the whole double suicide (and, in latter case, murder/suicide) outcome, but none of those people were innocent civilians who just got caught up in the pursuit, it wasn't just a result of the BAU possibly making a mistake, and the team was sanctioned and investigated by Strauss over those deaths. Elle had murdered a serial rapist, and Hotchner fired her for that, though there was not enough evidence to prosecute her. The closest I can think of is Rossi tricking unsub into trying to shoot him in season ten, so he [Rossi] could gun him down. And didn't they testify in court in 3x19 "Tabula Rasa"?

"200" was a trainwreck. Almost no actual profile work, in a 200th episode of a crime/mystery show about profilers and behavioral science. JJ's backstory, as revealed in "200", made no sense. There's no way she'd be assigned to tracking down Osama Bin-Laden. I know that she wasn't a team leader or anything, but still. Almost solely focused on JJ, with other characters not really amouting to anything. In 200th episode of the show, no less. The team that JJ was a part of was ambushed in Afghanistan, she suffered a miscarriage as a result, and in over two years since she returned, there was not even a hint that she ever suffered such a traumatic experience-until the 200th episode came along. It would have been pretty bad even as a "regular" episode-let alone 200th episode. I do agree about Beth though-she was cute. I don't get the criticism. Also, somebody brought up the unsub from "Pleasure is my Business" as a comparison; speaking of that, I never really cared much for Megan Kane, honestly. Her storyline just came off as cliche, one-sided and almost emotionally manipulative... and I hate that.

I really liked Alex Blake too. She had her own specific set of skills (forensic linguistics) and she'd actually get to use that during the investigation from time to time. Her bond with Reid was pretty good too; both intellectual and emotional. They shared similar interests and skills, as well as understood each other well, and cared for each other as friends. Her banter with Rossi was also fun; witty and amusing. But she didn't seem really close to every member of the team, and she didn't seem to simply fit in right away. Kate Callahan had a good potential, but the writing was just bad. She was said to have her own particular set of skills (undercover work), but she never really got to use it in the field, except for one scene at the beginning of 10x1 "X" when she wasn't even a part of the BAU yet. She seemed to fit in right away, without any awkwardness nor conflict or even development, but we never witnessed her actally bonding with anyone, save one conversation with Reid, a scene or two with JJ, and cringy gushing over animal pics with Garcia. The parts that were supposed to make her come off as strong and witty were just bad and, frankly, made her pretty unlikeable. For example, her bragging about beating up a perp in 10x1 "X", or lying to a suspect in order to extract information in 10x6 "If the Shoe Fits". [Though, to be fair, Reid did something similar in season nine "Persuasion", twice, but the first time the guy was delusional and Spencer played by his "logic", and in the final act they knew who the unsub was and needed a confession but had no evidence.] Not to mention Kate's borderline derogatory comments about the victims in the same episode. ("Killer and I have the same type. Dark haired handsome guys in their twenties."-God... SHUT UP!). Still, I probably don't judge her as harshly (anymore), because I like Jennifer Love Hewitt, and later seasons are much worse. (Not that that necessarily effects a quality of a particular character, but it affects the overall experience.) Plus, at least her character was supposed to serve a purpose (a replacement for Alex Blake, who was a replacement for Emily Prentiss), unlike some new characters that come off as completely unnecessary (such as Stephen Walker and, now, Matt Simmons).

I recently remembered the "Rumble", an episode from the original "Law & Order". A murderer is acquitted and the victim's family beats him to death in front of the courthouse. McCoy decides to not only charge them with murder, but with terrorism also, since he argues that they were sending a political message by beating the victim to death in front of the courthouse, and because innocent people got injured (or even killed?) in the process. My memory of the episode is a bit fuzzy, but that was the gist. Even though I am not a fan of recycled storylines, I wonder if something similar could work on SVU. Three women, sexual assault survivors, murder three different sex offenders on public locations. Maybe the men who abused them, or maybe not sex offenders but the men accused of sex crimes, only not convicted yet, to make the case a bit more morally ambiguous. (Not sure why would SVU be investigating that though; maybe they are investigating a rape case, go question a registered sex offender living close to the crime scene, and stumble upon a murder?) Maybe some innocent people get hurt or killed in the process, and maybe the murderers then post a manifesto online, containing details about the murders, as well as revealing semi-political motives (maybe arguing that rape is an under prosecuted crime; that thousands of rape kits collected in the state of New York alone, some going back decades, still haven't been processed due to a lack of funding and personnel; that sex offender laws aren't strict enough, and that the murders were necessary to start a "great change"?). After the murderers are tracked down and arrested, the DA decides to charge them with murder, conspiracy to commit murder-and, based on the circumstances surrounding the murders (nature of the crimes, political element, collateral victims), terrorism. Lots of questions being raised: did the victims deserve to die? Were the perpetrators' actions, no matter how cruel and dangerous, still justified or even necessary, at least in part? And, even if those women are criminals, and both legally and morally in the wrong, are they terrorists? In the end, the women are found not guilty on all counts; in part due to a sympathetic jury, in part due to flimsy evidence. The DA admits that was his fault, and that he probably should have prosecuted them for murder and conspiracy to commit murder only. But as the killers leave the courthouse, they are killed in a drive-by shooting by an unidentified assailant, implying that the circle will continue. The message would be pretty clear: even if you can argue that violence is warranted and necessary, it is ultimately self-destructive and dangerous, and doesn't really fix anything. It would also be the kind of ending where nobody wins, for a change. The victims, as evil as they might have been, are dead, the jury not only failed to recognize the perpetrators' actions as terrorism but basically let them get away with murder (x3), and though all three murderers were found not guilty, they got killed only few minutes later. The circle continues. Violence breeds more violence. You reap what you sow.

Wait, has anyone actually believed those were *the* Mulder and Scully? Because that would mean that "Criminal Minds" takes place in a supernatural universe, and that would really be a final nail in the coffin.

Well, I'd argue that most of us have low expectations by now... but the writers keep hitting a new low LOL Besides, once or twice every season they still manage to write a fairly good, even great episode, some of them even on par with episodes from earlier seasons ("Nelson's Sparrow" and "Mr. Scratch" in season ten, "Entropy" and "Devil's Backbone" in season eleven, "Green Light" in season twelve), and even fairly bad writers can write a good episode once in a while (Erik Stiller, probably my "new worst current Criminal Minds writer" [since Virgil Williams left], also wrote "Pariahville", which I kinda liked), so it is frustrating because you know that they can do better when they try; and you often find yourself wondering "Will this the episode where they finally get things right, for a change?" Plus, it is just hard to give up hope on the show that you used to enjoy so much. Well, at least I still have "Elementary", I guess...

Yeah, only the team seemed to be "humming along" because, ever since season ten or so, they use little to no actual profiling (which is something that takes effort and skills, and it is the premise of the show, as well as interesting to watch), Penelope does most of research/detective work by being able to hack into almost any database (or even just computer [system] itself) within seconds, and there has been no real character development to any of the characters, old or new ones, save for some stuff about Tara's family and that soapy storyline about Rossi discovering he's had a daughter and a gradson the whole time. So including a turd like Barnes won't change anything, the same way almost nobody liked Spencer's prison arc (until maybe the twist at the end of season twelve, which doesn't completely excuse all the shitty episodes building up to it, though I was glad to see Cat Adams back, and it was smart to bring back one of the victims BAU had previously rescued [Lindsey Vaughn) as the unsub). And the same way how they overused Peter Lewis until he was neither realistic or even that scary anymore, and everyone just wanted him to go away. Bringing in a new character thirteen seasons into the show, just for drama's sake, is probably the most desperate thing showrunners can do, save for, God forbid, killing off one of the "original" characters. They already did that with Matt Simmons [I'm referring to including a new character thirteen seasons in, of course], and now they're doing it again. Honestly, it isn't even funny anymore. Disobeying the rules was never the main problem (though Garcia's hacking abilities have become increasingly outrageous-but I somehow doubt they will really address that, of course!), so this changes nothing. And even so, we've already seen things like that addressed and explored before, and addressed and explored better, multiple times (in most of the episodes featuring Strauss). Yeah, I know that TV shows change, and the quality is almost guaranteed to drop after this many seasons, but after bullshitting through over three seasons, maybe it's time for writers and producers to get their shit together, and make the show interesting and exciting again by focusing on the characters that are already a part of it, and on the core premise of the show: profiling. I'm sure there are bunch of real-life cases that could inspire you, writers and showrunners. If that isn't enough, go watch "Wire in the Blood" or something. Or hire Sharon again. Or, if you're feeling adventurous, hire me as a writer. I'd do it for free. Just stop with all... this, please.

In that case, I hope they actually do something with his character the next season (if we get it).

It's pretty annoying that, ever since season ten or so, Spencer appears to have literally nothing to do outside the BAU (except for taking care of his mother. And getting framed for murder once). In seasons eight and seven, at least he'd give lectures or something. I know some things may be happening off screen, but I don't tune in so I could think of what might be happening to one of the main chatacters.

For some reason, I have a bad feeling that they will either kill off Reid in season finale, or Matthew Gray Gubler will leave the show after season thirteen. But I'm probably just paranoid.

Ever since about season ten, "Criminal Minds" keeps living up to that old, wise (and nihilistic) proverb: "No matter how bad things are, they can always get much, much worse".