S07.E01: Driven

[kbs]

Since I'm already half way out the door with no expectations whatsoever and no desire to pay too much attention, this episode worked for me in a way. NF finally showed some presence and some effort again, and as a result, the Castle/Beckett scenes were much more watchable. Even though they were at odds and not really close, the connection was much better than in these dull couple scenes last season.  

 

Could also be that all the X-Files "tributes" (even the music when Beckett entered Castle's room was a ripoff of the Scully theme) left me a bit mellow and nostalgic.

 

Nonetheless, I liked the last scene, how Kate let her guard down and how Castle was there for her showing interest and empathy. If the writers hadn't screwed up similar opportunities miserably before, I'd say the two of them slowly getting closer again (over two episodes max.)  could be done in a non-cringeworthy way.  But I guess either the offscreen option or the dragging-over-half-a-season-option will probably be too tempting again.

 

[KaveDweller]

During the hiatus, Molly Quinn stated that there was tension between her and Kate, but it was never shown in the episode.

I don't think she specified that it was in the premiere, just that it was going to happen this season.  But Molly is not that reliable when it comes to spoiler information, so I wouldn't put too much weight on what she says.

[madmaverick]

Somehow I forgot to mention the important stuff :P, and I don't believe anyone has mentioned it yet, but did Lanie see Castle naked when she 'inspected' him?!  Heh.  She did note that he was shot and found a key in his pants.

 

And oh, the scruff was nice.  Sunburn nicely done too.

 

BTW, I wonder if AM got inspiration from Agatha Christie's mysterious real life disappearance episode (think they found out she went to some hotel away from home but it was never explained why?), same way he got inspiration for Beckett's forgotten drunken wedding. ;)  But of course they couldn't have Castle be found in such a mundane location as a nondescript hotel room, or even a torture basement ;).  Nope, it had to be a dinghy and a small tent. 

Edited October 5, 2014 by madmaverick

[WendyCR72]

Looks like Driven did well in the ratings.  From AM's point of view, his gamble with the burning car cliffhanger to delay the wedding further + insert new mythology must have paid off?  It didn't pay off for me in terms of delivering quality TV, but others must not agree considering the higher ratings... the highest for a premiere in a few seasons, right?

 

Season premieres always tend to do well. And with DVRs now plentiful, I guess the Live+3 helps many a show. I think the test as to how many are willing to ride the wave with this new mythology will be episode 2. And I'm sure Castle has the casual viewers who just want to be entertained and don't care how as LONG as they are, and some don't really think of the romance stuff so much.

 

Whatever the case, Marlowe has scored a victory. For now, anyway!

[BkWurm1]

I'm a pretty firm Castle apologist.  I love the show.  I don't expect perfection.  I roll with the silly and over the top. I enjoy the serious episodes. I don't have a problem with any of the acting or any of the characters.  I've had no complaints about the on going mysteries and drummed up angst.   I am unfazed by wedding day interupus and the missing groom. 

 

I state this to provide context when I say this current "mystery" is stupid and contrived and worse yet, completely unneeded.  It makes me shake my head and sigh with disappointment.

 

I know it's not going to ruin the show for me since I watch for the characters not the writing but while usually I can just go with it, this time the hand of the writers is so in my face that I can't not see it. It's such an obvious reset, a way to drag the character growth backwards without actually doing something damning to the characters.  I guess in a way this is a much better option than making either Becket or Castle lie or cheat or betray one another but it just feels so fake. 

 

And did I mention unneeded?  The show didn't need the relationship to stall or move backward.  Stagnant is a dirty word but that's why I was looking forward to them moving forward into new territory. Do any one of us really believe that Castle would willingly walk away?  We know there is going to be a [somewhat] logical reason behind everything so it's hard to care in the meantime. 

 

Even if Castle had been willingly camping down by the river (where was his van?) we [beckett] know him well enough to know he had to have a damn good reason. Same with the money drop.  They are cops.  They know very well that people can be coerced to do things without needing a gun pointed at their head the whole time. 

 

I'm fine with character's having moments of doubts but they writers picked the wrong moments.  The video of Castle making the drop should have confused and worried everyone, not be viewed as proof of him planning the conspiracy.  So I guess I'm complaining that if they were going to do an eye rolling plot in the first place, they should have made the parts that pointed to Castle complicity actually do that rather than make me say, yeah, so?   Plus, Alexis should have been allowed to be way more upset than we ever saw her or they should have given me a good reason why she wasn't.  I felt like I was literally watching the writer move around dolls, the strings were just too obvious. 

 

I'll get over it before next week and just pretend that they sold their premise because I do like this show a lot, but yeah, a weak, weak episode. 

 

On some shows I wouldn't forgive this kind of crap but in the end, it doesn't really change anything on Castle. It delays where it's going, but it's still headed in the same direction.  It's just lucky that I like the journey enough to stick around. 

[VinceW]

One of the online TV rating sites reported after the premiere that there was a big drop off in viewer numbers after the first 30 minutes. The amnesia component probably was part of it along with the Beckett doubts and mistrust scenario. If viewers didn't stick around for the last 15 minutes, they had to wonder what the hell will happen to the relationship and they might just skip episode 2.

Edited October 5, 2014 by VinceW

[WendyCR72]

One of the online TV rating sites reported after the premiere that there was a big drop off in viewer numbers after the first 30 minutes. The amnesia component probably was part of it along with the Beckett doubts and mistrust scenario. If viewers didn't stick around for the last 15 minutes, they had to wonder what the hell will happen to the relationship and they might just skip episode 2.

 

But that isn't unusual. Many shows have half-hour decreases. No idea why, but it is common. So I'm not sure they will skip the next episode; maybe peek in as they did for the premiere and stay if they are interested, and turn the channel during the second half again if they aren't.

[KaveDweller]

Even if Castle had been willingly camping down by the river (where was his van?) we [beckett] know him well enough to know he had to have a damn good reason.

Is the whole camping theory that much less believable than the idea that some super-villian kidnapped Castle in a way that drew immediate attention to the dissapearance (with the burning cars and the pending wedding), threatened him into making the money drop, did whatever the hell they did for two months, drop him into a little boat, manage to plant all his stuff in the tent, and get a witness (who's photo matched the DMV photo) to lie? And that Castle just so happens to not remember any of it? I mean, that's a ridiculous series of events to accept.  My mother only watches the show casually, but when I asked her what she thought of the premiere, she said it was stupid because she didn't think any of it could ever happen.  And she's right, this kidnapper with unlimited resources is more over-the-top then the Joanna Beckett murder saga.

 

And did I mention unneeded?  The show didn't need the relationship to stall or move backward.  Stagnant is a dirty word but that's why I was looking forward to them moving forward into new territory.

I agree with this, there's no need to introduce angst to the show to keep viewers interested.  Marlowe seems to like angst though.

[VinceW]

But that isn't unusual. Many shows have half-hour decreases. No idea why, but it is common. So I'm not sure they will skip the next episode; maybe peek in as they did for the premiere and stay if they are interested, and turn the channel during the second half again if they aren't.

Point well taken, but I look forward to your explanation post next Tuesday if the viewership number records at 8 million viewers.

[WendyCR72]

Point well taken, but I look forward to your explanation post next Tuesday if the viewership number records at 8 million viewers.

 

Well, Castle is an aging show, so would the decrease matter, really? I think ABC doesn't care as long as its utility player holds.

[KaveDweller]

I think most shows do drop after a premiere, whether it is series, season, or even mid season one.  Actually, most shows just drop as time goes by anyway.  That's why years ago a 5.0 would be horrible ratings and now that is considered amazing.

 

The test for Castle will be seeing where it bottoms out.  I think it will drop this week, but if it stabilizes around 1.8-1.9 like it did last year it will be okay.  Depending on the rest of the ABC lineup.

[oberon55]

Is the whole camping theory that much less believable than the idea that some super-villian kidnapped Castle in a way that drew immediate attention to the dissapearance (with the burning cars and the pending wedding), threatened him into making the money drop, did whatever the hell they did for two months, drop him into a little boat, manage to plant all his stuff in the tent, and get a witness (who's photo matched the DMV photo) to lie? And that Castle just so happens to not remember any of it? I mean, that's a ridiculous series of events to accept.

 

What is the alternate theory? That Castle set all this up? That he intentionally shot himself, got whatever fever he had on purpose & then marooned himself on a boat 80 miles offshore just to get out of marrying her? The whole damn thing is ridiculous whichever way you look at it. The thing is if Castle is proved innocent how could he ever forget that she didn't believe in him? On the other hand if Castle is involved at some level how does she forgive him for letting her & his family think he was dead even for a few minutes. I know they said they come out of this stronger but I have never seen any relationship strengthened by lies or lack of faith in ones partner. That idea seems to be the most ridiculous of all.

[TWP]

Well I don't know about the ratings, but I'm one who will be watching real time tomorrow, uh, with 20 minute delay.  This is new for me.  I haven't watched Castle same-day since about 2012.

 

I enjoyed the whole fantasy last week, the new mythology.  It's amusing.  It's not supposed to be real, any more than any other dram-comedy show.  I still wonder a tad if the ridiculous story might be a dream.  But I don't care.  I liked it and I'm THRILLED that I actually like this show again. 

 

But I totally see the point of view of those who don't agree.  I was there for about 2 years.  I think completely distancing myself from the sucky implementation of the romance has really helped. I could care less if Castle and Beckett ever touch each other again. It also helps that so few shows on TV meet my needs, and this one does -- right now. 

 

It's almost Castle Monday, it's almost Castle Monday!  Snoopy dance.

Edited October 6, 2014 by TVWithPity

[pepper]

The whole damn thing is ridiculous whichever way you look at it. The thing is if Castle is proved innocent how could he ever forget that she didn't believe in him? On the other hand if Castle is involved at some level how does she forgive him for letting her & his family think he was dead even for a few minutes.

 

I believe Castle's loved ones were threatened so he made the drop but,, then again, I didn't see Beckett "not believing in him". I saw Beckett struggle to come up with a logical explanation for everything she was seeing and hearing and a mass of physical evidence.

 

That was no body double - in fact she recognized Castle's body and movement at the money drop before asking for a confirming close-up of his face. And he was alone; no kidnapper with a gun on him. No overt sign of coercion. And when the FBI gave up and the DMV-confirmed witness ID'd Castle, (the size of the tent is a bit of a crap reason to doubt the obvious when Castle showed up in the guy's boat), she believed him. But she struggled; in fact she wanted his help to give her a reason to believe. And sorry, in real life "love" is not a reason to ignore common sense, physical evidence and what you actually see. It would be like believing "Brad is my personal trainer and he's on top of me teaching me the proper form for naked push-ups" kind of thing...

 

But she didn't give up or start dating again FFS, she struggled. The idea that Castle should throw back his head and gasp at her fickle, fickle womanhood just doesn't make sense to me. Guy was presumed dead and she kept at it. Which is why I understood the conversation between them in canon way more that the anti-Beckett vitriol. Every time she struggled she found something to remind her of what they had and it kept her from giving up or from believing he'd choose to leave.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm in the camp that doesn't think the kidnapping storyline stands up to scrutiny unless they pull a bunny out of their hat next week. So far the implication is that it is all an elaborate plan to ruin Castle's life by setting him up to have planned his own kidnapping. (Seriously? Dr. Evil, much?) But the Big Bad would have had to have known about the cash way in advance while they planned all the other stuff - the hacking to create a witness, scouting the location for the fake camp site, scouting a location and making plans to move him to and from this supposed tropical prison where he was held for two months and contracted dengue fever. And they would have had to have known about his link to the mobster and about the series of clusterfucks that led to the last-minute relocation of the wedding. Or did they destroy the Manhattan location as well? Yeah, not a believable storyline either way. But I'm not seeing the Stand By Your Man or You're Evil crriticism myself. *shrug* Mileage, I guess.

 

But I'm all prepared to suspend disbelief and spend a superficial hour. Roll on episode two!

[KaveDweller]

What is the alternate theory? That Castle set all this up? That he intentionally shot himself, got whatever fever he had on purpose & then marooned himself on a boat 80 miles offshore just to get out of marrying her? The whole damn thing is ridiculous whichever way you look at it

 

Exactly, the whole storyline is ridiculous.  So, how can we judge anyone based on real life logic, when we're dealing with things that are so removed from real life? It's just silly, and I want them to finish dealing with it so we can get back to normal episodes.

[oberon55]

I believe Castle's loved ones were threatened so he made the drop but,, then again, I didn't see Beckett "not believing in him". I saw Beckett struggle to come up with a logical explanation for everything she was seeing and hearing and a mass of physical evidence.

 

That was no body double - in fact she recognized Castle's body and movement at the money drop before asking for a confirming close-up of his face.

 

I'm sorry but this is a world where serial killers & insane doctors surgically create doubles right down to the tattoos they have. But of course eagle eye Beckett could recognize Castle from a grainy video yet they let fake Esposito walk in and out of precinct with all the 3XK evidence (I'm still wondering where the hell Beckett got 3XK's file since they made a point of it all being gone). Remember the scared look on her face when she heard the song? Why didn't one of them say "Oh no the evil & sadistic super surgeon made a copy of Castle?"

[madmaverick]

Bottom line: the narrative and character choices made by the writers to get out of the cliffhanger weren't the right choices at almost every turn imo.  Not compelling, not emotionally resonant, not consistent with characters' pasts.

 

Overwhelming feeling was that the characters were manipulated on puppet strings by writers into inorganic positions to propel their mythology and manufacture unnecessary angst.  Yep, with the poster who said that the strings were way too obvious.  Making it even harder to engage with the characters in what should have been an extremely emotional ordeal.  Plot over characters as usual and it wasn't even good plot.  It was just setup for some whatever plot in the future.

 

The doubting Castle angle + amnesia was badly chosen imo and no doubt Marlowe's idea of another 'organic' obstacle ever present in the great love stories as he spelled out in FBFW. ;) Squeezing every bit of mileage he can to put off the wedding further. ;)  Overkill, unnecessary, unbelievable (to doubt Castle) and amnesia tends to be a tiresome device in storytelling.

 

The closing Castle/Beckett scene wasn't the best but it wasn't the worst from them either.  At least it spoke of comfort even if I thought just Castle reaching out to make amends was too one sided.

Edited October 6, 2014 by madmaverick

[verdana]

To me the writers are putting their characters in a no win situation. Either Castle is the victim & Beckett let him down when he needed her trust the most or Castle is behind it all and stabbed Beckett right in the back. Whichever way they play it does not bode well for them as a couple. They are too far along in this relationship for this level of deception or distrust.

If they go down the road of Castle being involved in some way then that's doing a grave disservice to the character and I don't see how any relationship could recover from that not only with Beckett and his family but with the audience.  They could never really trust what he has to say again and that's one of the things I loved about Castle was that despite his faults he seemed like fundamentally an honest, straightforward kind of guy. Especially when it came to the people he loves. But Marlowe doesn't seem to have a clue how to write genuine, mature relationship situations and dialogue so this is what we get instead. It can surely only end up damaging the characters in one way or another but he won't care, he relies on the audience moving on quickly and forgetting about it which seems to be what happens for the most part. 

Edited October 6, 2014 by verdana

[WendyCR72]

I have no idea what TPTB have planned, but doesn't Castle being any sort of spy/officer of the law basically shoot the premise of the show to hell? Fish out of water playboy writer (hence writer vest, no less!) kind of plays cop with Beckett to solve crimes?

 

Part of the premise's charm was that Castle as the audience knew him early on didn't have the training nor the emotional constraints to BE a cop and his input was much more "every man".

 

This new mythology - if he is some spy or whatever - would just be a major retcon and basically undermine the entire premise AND character.

[verdana]

I'm not applying real-life anything to this. What I want is character consistency. What I want is for Kate to stand by Castle the way he did with her. What I want is for the two people who claim they're the love of each other's life, to act that way, no mater how weird, outlandish, crazy and out there they say the situation was that happened to them. 

I don't believe that he ever wavered in his conviction, Castle didn't have to obviously struggle to believe Beckett when she was caught up in something serious, pity that doesn't go both ways. Instead they always end up going down the Beckett doubts Castle road when it comes to situations like this and it doesn't do either character any favours. Their relationship ends up looking unbalanced and it makes me not want them to be together, in real life I don't think they would work out based on what I'm seeing.

 

Wendy is right any reveal that says he's spy or agent of some kind would be a total WTF for me for the exact same reasons. But then the writers often forget what they've done before setting a character up in a particular way so him being an "every man" would be ignored for the purpose of the latest drama. 

Edited October 6, 2014 by verdana

[St. Claire]

Seriously. It's good these guys are the best cops in NY. They'are a crack team, I tell ya.

 

I think you mean "they are team on crack, I tell ya."

 

TBTB have written themselves into a corner, I think, There is no way to make this crazypants mish-mash of plot make sense. They can't reconcile the glaring weirdness (Castle, the patron saint of creature comforts, living in a pup tent? The dedicated family man leaving his mom and daughter in the dark for two months? Highly decorated/successful detectives who have themselves been falsely accused of crimes cannot fathom that this whole thing is hinky?) with the characters and plots as they stood just a few episodes ago. I'm not asking for long term continuity; I just want something that doesn't suggest that the everyone on the screen has been given a lobotomy and personality transplant since the penultimate episode of season 6.

[sinkwriter]

I think the overall idea had merit -- to have the famous mystery writer become the mystery that needs to be solved, that could be very interesting. Where has Castle been for 2 months? Why does he turn up unconscious, in a boat, with these strange details like that dengue fever thing (spelling?) and having been shot/grazed by a bullet? What happened to him? Why can't he remember? Was he drugged? What was the aim of whoever took him? Did they think he would die in that boat, never to be found, and no answers would ever be uncovered? Those are all very interesting questions to me as a viewer.

 

However... I wish they wouldn't have made it so "Castle might be in on it! What's he hiding?? DUN DUN DUNNNNNNN!" I think showing Castle dropping off the money was when things really started to veer, because then everyone started doubting him and the story became about that instead of about the grander mysterious possibilities. To have his own fiancé treat him like a suspect in her interrogation room, to have his friends doubt him so readily (well, Espo anyway; Ryan held out for a while), to have the entire episode be treated like an investigation instead of an emotional journey... that's what didn't work for me. So much seemed to be missing, and the emotional moments they did have felt staged. All starting from Beckett's overdramatic sitting on the ground in her wedding dress while the firefighters' water sprayed over her (seriously?), I wanted to connect but felt removed from it all.

 

Rather than forcing the mystery by manufacturing all these melodramatic details about the tent and money drop, I would have preferred this episode be about Castle being missing and the emotional toll it takes on not only Beckett, but also Martha and Alexis and Ryan and Esposito. They all have specific relationships with Castle; I would have loved to have seen their losses and feelings explored, as they tried to find him. I would have also preferred that we saw a little more from Castle, how confused and weirded out he must feel, waking up and realizing he's been through all this crazy stuff and he has no memory of it. After that, in a separate episode, I would have liked the real investigation to begin, where Castle gets a chance to examine all the clues and see himself and his missing timetable as this ultimate mystery for himself and Beckett to figure out. And if it must cast doubt on Castle at that time, I would have liked to have seen Castle get defensive and stand up for himself and say "I DON'T KNOW but I think you should give me the benefit of the doubt!! I wouldn't do this to my family, not intentionally!"

 

Unfortunately, as I've learned in my years of TV watching, I sometimes see things differently than the showrunners and they take things in directions I don't like or that I wish would have more emotional depth.

Edited October 6, 2014 by sinkwriter

[BkWurm1]

That was no body double - in fact she recognized Castle's body and movement at the money drop before asking for a confirming close-up of his face

 

This was one moment that I found believable since Ii actually did the same thing when the clip was shown.  I recognized his gait and the shape of his body before they ever reacted on TV.

 

Of course the whole thing is ridiculous, but the point is that Kate believed he shot at himself, let himself float aimlessly in a dinghy, and got critically ill on purpose, AND let his mom and daughter think he was dead...to get out of marrying her.

 

I think we saw Kate having one moment of worry that he could have ran from her and the wedding but I don't think it was ever presented as a rational worry, just a sign of the self doubt that she carries with her in regards to relationships.  It was just one of those crazy thoughts that hit you when you have no answers.  Martha quickly and completely reassured her and even later when she did think he for some reason had stayed away and let them think he was dead, I never got the Impression that she ever again thought it was specifically about her or their wedding.

 

I also didn't get the impression that she was completely disbelieving of his amnesia story, just really frustrated that he couldn't explain away his actions and that's why I saw her as throwing all their "proof" at him, she wanted answers, needed them.  If she didn't , she wouldn't have stuck around to listen to anything he had to say. 

 

I do think the whole "plot" is an eye roller but again, it's not going to make a huge difference long term to the characters even if the show treats this as their season long mystery. 

Edited October 6, 2014 by BkWurm1

[Ticketyboo23]

The biggest loser in it all has been Beckett. They have a number of wild detours to create 'tension' (in the viewer's case extreme frustration) & flipped the character about to achieve it. This is just another occasion where they have sold Beckett out. It started in S5 where she suddenly decided a man willing to risk being blown up wasn't committed enough & a year after 'I just want you' she was ready to ditch him for a job with the FBI. They have made her flighty, selfish & insecure. Based on form by episode 3 we should be getting the adoring looks again until they need another overused plot device shoehorned in again......sigh....

They would have less of a problem if they stopped the wimpy writing. They need to commit themselves; either the evidence points strongly to Castle being involved (then they would actually have to do some work explaining it away) or it doesn't. By sitting on the fence they produced unconvincing evidence & Beckett eg al look bad for suspecting. In Castle's case it should be innocent until proven guilty.

[verdana]

 

I do think the whole "plot" is an eye roller but again, it's not going to make a huge difference long term to the characters even if the show treats this as their season long mystery. 

 

I don't think it will make any difference to the characters whatsoever by the season end. If this new mythology even makes it that far depending upon the audience's reaction to it over the rest of the season. Supposedly life changing events happen to these characters and yet it causes no emotional repercussions. 

 

What I got from Driven is that Kate may love Castle but she doesn't trust him fundamentally, okay she wanted answers but the guy has amnesia he can't fucking remember! So she was going to have to deal with that somehow as best she can rather than demanding instant answers he can't possibly give her at this time. I thought it was unfair that he has to be interrogated like he's a suspect with guilt already attached to him when he's been through this apparent huge trauma and is acting confused. 

Highly decorated/successful detectives who have themselves been falsely accused of crimes cannot fathom that this whole thing is hinky?)

 

I initially read that as kinky, it would be a damn sight more entertaining if it was. 

Edited October 6, 2014 by verdana

[KaveDweller]

Of course the whole thing is ridiculous, but the point is that Kate believed he shot at himself, let himself float aimlessly in a dinghy, and got critically ill on purpose, AND let his mom and daughter think he was dead...to get out of marrying her.

I don't think she believed he got critically ill on purpose, just that he was camping up by that Henry Jenkins guy.  She knows that's not the whole story, that's why she kept asking Castle what was going on.

 

 

My  point is, these people have had to swallow some pretty ridiculous stuff, including what went on with Kate where EVERY piece of evidence said she did it, and everyone stood by her.

I think there's a lot more evidence against Castle than there was against Kate.  And, Castle did ask Kate what she was doing at Vulcan Simmons place.  He didn't just assume she was innocent.  I think Kate was pretty desperate to hear something that supported Castle's side of the story, but she kept not getting the answers she wanted. First she had an emotional reaction to the video tape, but then thought about and realized she didn't believe he would leave.  Then she had an emotional reaction to the tuxedo, but then instead of getting reassurance from Martha, she hears Castle joking about missing the wedding (before he realized what happened), not able to answer any questions, and the doctor saying she thinks Castle is lying. I think she looked so disappointed every time she found a flaw in his arguments about the tsunami fear thing.  But I don't know anyone who wouldn't have some doubt once they see all the evidence.

 

Someone posted way back that maybe Martha knows about what happened, and after rewatching the episode, I have to agree.  She directs people away from wondering what happened at least twice.  That seems weird. If someone I knew disappeared for two months and came back with no memory, I think all I would want to talk about is WTF happened.

 

I also noticed a nice moment in that final scene. After Kate is leaning on him for awhile, she starts to turn like she is going to get up, and Castle sort of tugs her back down

Edited October 6, 2014 by KaveDweller

[BkWurm1]

I never got the Impression that she ever again thought it was specifically about her or their wedding.

 

She believed it enough to not give the love of her life a kiss and tell him she was glad he was alive. She believed it enough to stand far, far away from him and interrogate him the moment he opened his eyes. She believed it enough to INSIST he was in the tent where he "chose" to be. She believed it enough to say to him that it was him in that tent, because his fingerprints/DNA were there.

 

The ONLY time she stopped believing it, was when she found out that guy was fake. So, that had nothing to do with her faith in him at all.

 

To me, that is more than a "moment."

 

I think she only had a moment of doubt that made her wonder if he left because of their wedding.  That is what I think she never again thought.  She had plenty of obvious doubts about Castle's role in his own disappearance but I never again saw it played that she thought his disappearance was designed to specifically get out of marrying her.  That is what I was referring to.  If anything, she thought their wedding was just collateral damage to whatever bigger thing he had going on. 

 

I think Kate was pretty desperate to hear something that supported Castle's side of the story, but she kept not getting the answers she wanted.

 

Yes, this.

[Driad]

 

I keep reminding myself that "Castle" is set in a universe in which a dinghy launched in Massachusetts could drift south to Delaware.  If the Gulf Stream works backwards in the Castle-verse, maybe a lot of other things like human nature do too.

[McManda]

I keep reminding myself that "Castle" is set in a universe in which a dinghy launched in Massachusetts could drift south to Delaware.  If the Gulf Stream works backwards in the Castle-verse, maybe a lot of other things like human nature do too.

 

This was probably meant to be facetious, but I also feel like that's how you have to approach a show like Castle. Don't take it too seriously. Don't pick it apart. It's a fluff-fest that's supposed to make you feel good, not degrade it for its lack of accuracy.

 

It's a much better show that way, and sometimes I feel like we forget that around here.

[sinkwriter]

 

It's a much better show that way, and sometimes I feel like we forget that around here.

 

I'm less worried about accurate details than I am about character development and emotional connection. If they're missing that, then you better believe I'll pick on them for it. Especially because it's something they used to excel at. When the showrunners and writers stop doing what they used to do really well, I'm going to say something about it. The people who gave me "A Chill Runs Through Her Veins" did not create a marshmallow fluff show. It's fun and funny, but it's also demonstrated great potential for powerful and meaningful drama. You can't give that to the audience and expect them to not notice when you stop doing it.

Edited October 7, 2014 by sinkwriter

[McManda]

No, but it feels like 85% of the criticisms around here aren't the lack of character development and emotional connection. I get those kind of criticisms. Ragging on Marlowe's use of "mythology" or the idea that Castle wouldn't spend two months in a tiny tent or whatever Lee of Loftland picks out as being crappy police procedural is not constructive, intriguing, or thought-provoking.

[La Tortuga]

Didn't ABC learn that the whole amnesia, "You've been missing for almost two [units of time]" nonsense kills a show when they pulled that crap on Alias?

[WendyCR72]

No, but it feels like 85% of the criticisms around here aren't the lack of character development and emotional connection. I get those kind of criticisms. Ragging on Marlowe's use of "mythology" or the idea that Castle wouldn't spend two months in a tiny tent or whatever Lee of Loftland picks out as being crappy police procedural is not constructive, intriguing, or thought-provoking.

 

Maybe not, but all that you listed invite feedback which, as long as it is done with respect, is fine. That is why everyone's here, I hope!

[Ticketyboo23]

No, but it feels like 85% of the criticisms around here aren't the lack of character development and emotional connection. I get those kind of criticisms. Ragging on Marlowe's use of "mythology" or the idea that Castle wouldn't spend two months in a tiny tent or whatever Lee of Loftland picks out as being crappy police procedural is not constructive, intriguing, or thought-provoking.

I gave up nitpicking the details when CSI started producing DNA results by the time they had lunch. I don't hold much stock in L of L reviews because to be realistic any procedural would be 'boooorinngg'. The problem here is that the story weakness directly relates to character development. Beckett, and for that fact Ryan etc should have had faith in Castle, having worked with for years/friends with/nearly married the bloke. For that faith to be shaken there should have been reasonable proof as in Probable Cause (and they should have been even more sceptical given the events of that storyline). But the details were so flimsy & weak that not only did they look like pretty poor friends/girlfriend they also looked like stupid cops.