JMO

Going against the grain here. I have nothing against a fulfilling storyline for Reid, and it would be nice to see him happy--- for a while. But I think the character has been well substantiated as a classic tragic hero, whose life is bittersweet at best. For me, it would seem non-Reid-like to be otherwise. One of the many scenes that comes to mind is the one of him watching Henry in his Halloween costume. The smile is there, the 'happy' is there, but the bittersweet of not having a kid of his own is also there. It would have been a completely different scene (and much lesser, in my opinion) if Reid had just packed up and gone home to his wife and two kids. I wouldn't mind the last few episodes of the show hinting at unseen good times ahead, but I think it would be completely odd to watch them played out on screen. And MGG plays emotional whump so well, I think it would be a waste not to take advantage of it. I know I'm standing alone in a field, but that's my take.

I sympathize with you, SevenStars. I'd feel the same way if it was MGG leaving. If SM does leave, I will miss Morgan.

Can't speak to Wyoming, but, until today, this was the universe where it didn't snow in Baltimore and Boston, in January!

Apologies for simply copying my post from another forum, but it didn't warrant the additional expenditure of energy: It was 'acceptable' on the Reid-meter, but off the charts on the snooze-meter, the too-much-unsub meter, and the lame-reason-for-serial-killing meter. And that's all I will remember of it.

I enjoyed the episode, too, despite its faults. There will always be something that could have been done better, but this one still had an awful lot going for it. Like: It spun the wheel all the way around, and then some, on the Reid-meter. I could stop right there, but there was much more to like. At the beginning of the season, MGG indicated that he thought we would see a more mature Reid this year---and here he was! I hope the rest of the writers were watching, because I don’t want to see any backsliding in how the character is written. This was the Reid of ‘Uncanny Valley’, without the hotheadedness. MGG’s performance, both verbal and non-. Those eyes speak volumes. As to Aubrey---I thought she grew into it by the end of the episode, but wasn’t convinced at the beginning. Loved her single tear as she was taken away in the police van. The wedding ring looked good on that finger. I found myself wishing he really was playing a husband of four years, with or without a pregnant wife. The ‘brothers from other mothers’ finding that relationship again. I also liked that it seemed like Reid and Savannah have developed a friendship, pointing again at the closeness between Reid and Morgan. The parts that could have been done better, in my opinion: The entire plot, pretty much. It seemed like they went out of their way to make it as convoluted as possible, which I found distracting from the psychological warfare taking place at the table. If this had simply been a case about a single serial killing hitwoman, and all we had to focus on was the back-and-forth, I think it would have been more intense. Instead we got this thing with the flash drive, and the wheel, and the Snowman and the kid, and the multiple types of serial hitmen that we saw in action for a matter of seconds, each. I found it distracting and detracting. The use of the team. I wish they’d done all the set-up for this episode in the ones that preceded it, so that we could have had more of the team acting and reacting in real time. Instead, they were mostly used for exposition. Only Hotch reacted to Reid’s change of plans at the end, but I would have liked to see each of the rest hear it, and process it, and figure out what he was up to. Instead, we got the kind of rushed ending that has plagued so many of the season finales. The ‘did you get yourself tested’ bit. I know it’s being debated on several forums whether a test exists, or whether it’s used. The answer to both questions is: it depends. It depends on the circumstance, and the kind of dementia, and whether they are trying to rule something ‘in’ or rule something ‘out’. But that’s not my issue. My issue is that I think the tragedy---and the real drama---- of his mother’s dementia lies, not in what it means for Reid several decades hence, but in what it means for him now. That he’s losing the only person in the world who puts him first, and remembers the child he was, and who was his biggest fan. That’s what drove him to the swings. That JJ didn't proposition Reid. Having seen that outfit in BTS photos, I was hoping she would. Anyway, yay for CM and yay for us, that we finally got something to enjoy!

Nice interview with Breen Frazier: http://criminalmindsfans.com/exclusive-criminal-minds-breen-frazier-tells/

He's 6'2" and the tallest regular cast member on CM. That was about it.

I have to agree with Old Dog and Normasm, and I would caution against deciding which opinions, or behaviors, constitute the identity of the 'true fan'. One could argue, for instance, that the true fan is 'true' to the origin of the series, and the original portrayal of the characters, and thereby dissatisfied when they undergo substantial changes. On the other hand, someone who only discovered the show in recent years, and became a fan of how the characters and stories are currently written, might have difficulty relating to how they were in the past. Yet, that person might consider themselves the 'true fan', because they are enjoying things as they are, and not wishing them to be as they were. For better or worse, television is an art form, and the value of any type of art is determined by the individual beholder.

Well, if you're really saying it makes sense to dislike a character because of that character's fans, then i disagree. But the 'long version' doesn't sound like that's what you're saying. I realize it happens. But, when it does, I find it to be baseless opinion, and regard it as such.

CoStar, I don't understand. Are you saying you think it makes sense to dislike a character because of her fans? Somehow, I think JT and JLH are too mature (and successful) to pay attention to the rantings of whatever number of deranged fans. I think JT left because she wasn't written for, and could probably find better things to do with her time. By all accounts, the days on set are long and probably pretty boring for an actor relegated to the sidelines. And I think JLH left for precisely the reason she gave: because she wanted to raise her new baby full time----and could afford to do so.

I can personally testify that it is possible to go days (weeks) between checks of one's own twitter account. And AJ and her husband have two small kids. At Christmas time. I agree with FA that it's likely they don't even know about it. But I also think it's possible they're mature enough to leave it alone or to have addressed it privately, not publicly---and especially since so many other fans have done it for them. To have an expectation that they will act in a certain way, and then be disappointed that they don't----to me, it's the same root issue that got the controversy started in the first place. AJ fans had an expectation of how Josh Stewart should act, and were disappointed. The problem was theirs, in feeling privileged to have those expectations. As to disliking the character and/or actress because of the behavior of her fans---I don't follow the logic.

Re: Josh Stewart----I think he has ongoing friendship with Paget and her husband, and perhaps with MGG, by extension. As much as I don't care for his CM character (liked him in 'Jones', and never since), I've actually come to like the actor, via his tweets. Apart from the hunting thing, he seems to have a good sensibility. I get the sense that AJ and her husband have a lifestyle (the beach or the mountains/desert) that mostly leads them away from the glitz, If it suits them,and they're happy, good for them. It's probably best for the kids as well. As to the Twitter response----I'm Twitter-lite, meaning that I see some of it, but not all of it. Is this a small group of people tweeting repeatedly, or a large group (of crazies)?

Ugh. So sorry, secnarf. Hoping you'll at least find solace in the meaning of the season. Wishing all a wonderful day with family and/or friends tomorrow, whether or not you're marking a holiday or holy day. Because that's what both of those things are about.

I agree with both of you, secnarf and Normasm. And, in my opinion, another non-centric situation is the storyline that runs entirely separately from the case. Not really even in parallel, where there might appear to be some similarities or overlap in theme, but something entirely different. Garcia's death penalty story is one example. The latter two of the three involving Rossi's military friend also qualify. They're not 'centric', because they've entirely removed the rest of the team from the equation. In contrast, I thought the first of the Harrison Scott episodes was appropriately centric, because it taught us something about Rossi, while keeping him involved in the case with the rest of the team. Time will tell, but right now it seems like this upcoming episode (Entropy) may prove to be Reid-centric in that it will show us his prowess in a game of wits, even when we already know him to be a genius. I hope so. And I truly hope he hasn't been duped into this date. I'm not so reassured by the promo. But the press release sounds promising.

I know that there are those who disagree, but 'Lo-Fi' and 'Mayhem' are two of my favorite episodes of the entire series. The whole team was involved, they worked with NYPD. and not just at odds with them, the BAU brought something new to the investigation, the case was interesting and complex, the tension was real, and based on relatively realistic circumstances. Even Garcia and Morgan were more touching than annoying. She was panicked, but she did her job. And his 'You are my God-given solace' line stayed with me for a long time. The guest stars were all good, and they were mostly the good guys! And I loved the ending, where Hotch analyzes Morgan's heroism in a way that is complex, and right on point. If these were the episodes being put up on Wednesday nights this season, I'll bet CM would have a host of new fans.

Maybe I'm just as inconsistently written as Reid is, but I can personally attest that it's entirely possible to be familiar with the popular culture of one's youth (because of the need to 'belong'), and yet be totally out of the loop regarding current popular culture. And, since the '80's were part of when I was too busy to care, I thought it was 'Susie and the Banshees' until I saw it in print here.

Reidfan, I saw elsewhere that you were unable to get this video in Canada. But it's on YouTube, and I think that might work:

I'm actually asking something different. I agree that, once put out there, history is history, and should be abided by. But what I'm really asking is: At what point do the writers no longer have the right to create additional, even apparently conflicting, backstory? For example---and I'm totally making this up (obviously)---what if, in the upcoming Morgan arc, we find out that his father wasn't quite the hero Morgan remembers him as? Does that destroy all of the canon arcs where Morgan related to kids losing their fathers? Or Morgan's reason for going into law enforcement? Or does it just make him a more complex character, a boy who couldn't accept the truth? Is the writer a fool, for not 'following canon', or is the writer free to reinterpret the past, while not quite re-writing it? Using the Hotch example, what if we find out that he and his father actually had a healthy relationship? After all, he made an implication, not a statement. What if he just threw those lines at the unsub? Would a future writer be free to come up with an alternative reason for Hotch to be so driven, as long as it was compelling? Or would that be too hard for fans to accept? I ask these questions because the writers are often criticized for writing the characters 'out-of-character', usually based on backstory. I think there is an interesting dynamic that leads us, as viewers, to take ownership and become protective of personalities and characters created by others. It seems like there's a point at which we decide a character is as fully evolved as they ever will be (or we will ever allow them to be), and insist that the writers write them that way. But does that stifle the character? Does it stifle the writer? I don't think there's an absolute answer. I just find it fascinating.

This is a little bit of 'cart-and-horse' (ie, which came first). But the team did have six profilers when it lost Emily----the audience might have known the character was leaving, but the team didn't. I recall some dialogue between Hotch and Rossi about whether Seaver was considered fully fledged or not, or if she was even a permanent addition. So losing Emily put them back to their four fully trained and one 'partially-fledged' profiler. Ostensibly, when Rossi hired JJ back, he didn't realize Emily was still alive. But I'd venture he had more confidence in her than he did in Seaver. Having said that, I do agree that 5 profilers is enough, and wish that, if they felt the need to expand the cast, they'd chosen to replace the liaison, or to use Lewis in some other capacity, rather than bringing the team up to six profilers.

While I miss the BAU having a media liaison position, and thought JJ was very good at the job, I also don't begrudge the character becoming a profiler. To me, it doesn't matter that she once said she didn't want the job. Changing one's mind is not inconsistency. It's the privilege of age and experience. She might have had an advantage in the transformation. I remember her telling Jordan that the job she was doing (case selection) required profiling skills. (And, frankly, that job should probably have belonged to Hotch.) I don't think the move to profiler was portrayed as happening overnight. From the time JJ left it, the team was without a liaison. But, from the time of Emily's 'death', it was also without a profiler. I think we were meant to understand that, when JJ told Rossi, at the end of season 6, that she would return to the BAU, she was returning to take the profiler position. If it had already been offered to her, then Rossi knew she'd already been undergoing training. It could have been happening both during her time away, and during however many months were supposed to have elapsed between seasons six and seven. All of that might have worked in the chronology of the already unrealistic milieu of our TV BAU---until, of course, (the awful) 200 put the whole timeline in disarray. Now I don't know what we are supposed to make of it. Anyway, I don't mind JJ as a profiler. But I do think the writers missed a golden opportunity to show us her progression to confidence in the role, as she learned from her colleagues. It would have offered so many opportunities for rich interaction among the various individuals, and maybe even a glimpse at the challenges to one's psyche of having to get inside the mind of a serial killer. It could have been fascinating, especially as it happened to someone we already knew and cared about. For Morgan, there was also a change in characterization, from jacket-and-tie cerebrality to door-kicker. But it came early enough in the run of the show, that I think it came across more as the revelation of another aspect of his character than as a change. More an 'unfolding of canon' than an inconsistency with it. Begging the question----at what point does character development transfer from the writers to the fans? That is, at what point does it move from 'creating canon' to 'flying in the face of it'? Do the writers lose the right to create new backstory? Is backstory set in stone? Can they add to backstory, as long as they don't change what's come before? Or have the characters become etched to the point that the fans won't accept that?

I like Reid with just about anybody except Ashley Seaver and Tara Lewis (because I don't like either character). Particular favorites are Reid/Hotch, Reid/ Morgan, and Reid/ Prentiss, with theoretical Reid/JJ and early Reid/ Garcia coming up behind. Love Reid / Diana. Would love to see Reid/Henry or Reid/Michael, but those are more in my head than anywhere else. I like the Hotch/JJ and Hotch/ Emily relationships as well, even more than I like Hotch /Rossi. I liked Morgan/Emily as well, could tolerate early Morgan/Garcia, but not now. I also like the Morgan/Hotch relationship, because it has enough ups and downs to make it real. I could actually have seen a Hotch/ Emily romance. I know I write Reid/JJ, but that's because the characters get out of control. My own preference is to see them as friends. And to get rid of Will altogether.

Actually, Qwerty, I think you spurred one of the more interesting discussions we've had on this thread----so, thanks! Of course, the fact that the most interesting thing we can find to talk about is swearing in fanfiction---or even what causes us to swear----speaks volumes about the quality of the episodes we've been given this season. I venture to say that there has been a fair amount of swearing at our TV screens on Wednesday evenings!

I don't know, Danielg. I grew up in an NYPD household, and was surrounded by cops (not with my hands up!) much of the time. Can't say that it infiltrated their language.

These are two different things, Danielg. Being able to communicate on the street---or even in the doctor's office----does, indeed, require the professional to understand, and sometimes speak, 'street lingo'. But four letter words aren't inherent to the lingo. They're the 'enhancements'. Even in such conversations, they are unnecessary. It's remarkable how quickly they can disappear from someone's vocabulary, when they need to.

I'm finding this whole conversation fascinating. There seems to be a pervading belief that stress must be relieved with profanity, so there is an assumption that it must be a natural part of the vocabulary of those in stressful occupations. That has simply not been my experience, working in one of those occupations. People manage to express themselves in other ways, And it's not generational. In our medical training program, swearing is enough to bring one up for review, because it's so unusual to hear it, either inside or outside of the professional situation. And, believe me, there are plenty of stressful, scary, sad and even dangerous situations. Those who resort to it are often suffering from emotional maladaption to the situation they're in. It's a sign that they need help. So, it happens, but it's not a given. I think, used as above, it has its place in the arts. But, all too often, in the entertainment world, foul language is touted as 'adult', and marketed as something desirable. Something 'sophisticated' or 'mature'. To my eye and ear, it's just a sign of a vocabulary that is greatly in need of expansion. There are better, clearer, and more accurate ways to express oneself..