Unpopular Opinions

[McManda]

The point is she immediately assumed the worst. It's almost like the first time didn't happen. After working with him daily for 4 years & being together for about 6 months she couldn't tell if it was him or not. But now she can spot him in a poor grainy video instantly. We need Castle to be accused one more time to break the tie. So far she's 50/50 in the recognizing Castle on video sweepstakes.

 

Vaguely related:

I read somewhere that for the surveillance video/photos from Probable Cause, both Nathan and his stunt double created versions and they weren't sure who they'd use in the actual episode. I'm pretty sure that the video they ended up using in the episode was actually of Nathan, though it was supposed to be his doppelganger.

 

More related:

The surveillance video from Driven where she was sure that was Castle was much, much clearer than the video they had from the jewelry store in Probable Cause. Plus, now they were engaged, presumably pseudo-living together and spending every spare moment together. I'd buy that she'd gotten to know his mannerisms and could pick him out of that video better than she could back when he was being framed.

[oberon55]

For me it's a question of continuity and who Beckett is as a character. In this world that they have created there have been at least 4 instances of people being framed or impersonated:

1 Castle was impersonated & framed for murder.

2 Esposito was impersonated by a surgical double so well that he could carry a large amount of   evidence out of the precinct without getting anybodies attention.

3 Lanie was surgically impersonated right down to her tattoo.

 

4 Beckett was framed for murder.

 

Now since all these things happened it should have given her room for doubt. I know if it was my fiance I would be looking for any loophole to believe in their innocence rather than immediately assuming the worst. It would have played out so much better if just one person (especially Beckett) had said "Hmm, I wonder if Castle is being impersonated".

Edited January 15, 2015 by oberon55

[WendyCR72]

Compare that to another ABC show

Example #1

Example #2

 

Speaking of Scandal and OT just for a sec, I had absolutely no idea that Tony Goldwyn is part of the Goldwyn family who founded MGM Studios, i.e. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer! Saw it on a write up on another site talking about the recent death of his father, Samuel Goldwyn, Jr.

 

At least Tony Goldwyn does have acting chops and doesn't seem to rely on nepotism. But wow! What a factoid.

[KaveDweller]

It would have played out so much better if just one person (especially Beckett) had said "Hmm, I wonder if Castle is being impersonated".

 

Do you mean in Driven? I think Ryan did suggest that and that's when Beckett said she could tell it was him by it's movement and not some kind of double.  So, I don't think that would have made it play out better because it would have been a sign that she didn't know him well enough to tell it was him.  If it was someone impersonating him then I would agree with you.  She did wonder if he was being forced to do it or has some other reason, so it's not like she saw the video and assumed the worst (after the initial shock of seeing it anyway).

[Samantha84]

Yes, Wendy I found that out [re: Tony and MGM] when I listened to his Shondaland podcast. He's uber talented and has been acting and directing in the industry for years; good for him. 

 

Speaking of my kissing unpopular opinion. Last night another one of my ships got together [season 2 by the way] and their 1st kiss/makeout was hot, sexy, and awesome. It's also a procedural so not the "soap" of SCANDAL. 

Another example of kissing that's not over the top, or soapy, but doesn't look like 2 pre teens experimenting. 

[pepper]

I don't remember but I think the mob guy said Castle paid him so she was right. The point is she immediately assumed the worst. It's almost like the first time didn't happen. After working with him daily for 4 years & being together for about 6 months she couldn't tell if it was him or not. But now she can spot him in a poor grainy video instantly. We need Castle to be accused one more time to break the tie. So far she's 50/50 in the recognizing Castle on video sweepstakes.

I guess I just don't get what she was assuming. When she recognized him it was just a fact, not an assumption. He was delivering the ransom and she just sounded hurt and baffled because she looked for coercion and could find no evidence of it. There's lots to criticize the writing of Beckett for, but being the one to recognize her man in a video where her man is actually the one in the video doesn't seem like something she should have learned not to do because she was wrong the last time she thought she did it. I think...

 

Or maybe I still don't get understand the point. I'm always willing to accept that I just don't get it. :o

[KaveDweller]

Speaking of my kissing unpopular opinion. Last night another one of my ships got together [season 2 by the way] and their 1st kiss/makeout was hot, sexy, and awesome. It's also a procedural so not the "soap" of SCANDAL.

 

Well Caskett's first kiss was hot, sexy, and awesome too.

 

I'm not trying to start anything here, but is it necessary to compare Castle to every other show out there?  I'm not saying don't criticize it, obviously people can say whatever they want.  But it doesn't seem to add to the discussion to just keep adding to the list of shows people think are better than Castle.

 

Sorry if saying that's out of bounds, but just my opinion.

[Samantha84]

That's a matter of opinion and isn't that what this thread is about?

.

.

.

.

.

.

Ya know what? Your right. I'm done. Mouth [well, fingers] shut. Carry on. 

Edited January 16, 2015 by Samantha84

[McManda]

I guess I don't understand the argument, because I recall a lot of people being excited about Castle and Beckett's first kiss (undercover), first real kiss (in Always) and even this season (in "The Way of the Ninja). So ... why all the comparisons to other shows?

 

It seems to me what we get is entirely dependent on the director, the circumstance, and how Nathan and Stana feel like playing it on any given day. It's not that they can't, or won't, or are unwilling. I wish it were more consistent (and said as much in the recent ABC panel questionnaire), but don't think that is really reflective of the chemistry.

[WendyCR72]

Okay, it's starting to get just a wee bit dicey here. As this is the Unpopular Opinions thread, I think it is okay to find C/B and their chemistry lacking or their kisses or whatever. That is what this thread is about and, so, defending a different choice is unnecessary.

 

I think the issue lies in direct comparison to other TV couples. So, feel free to go off the beaten path in this thread, but let's try to keep the "whys" related to this particular show and its style and whatnot and leave other shows out of it.

 

Thanks!

[pepper]

So on the subject of kisses, I think their first kiss had the best chemistry and I find that grab, swing around and lock-lips thing they do  now to be very un-sexy. The difference between the two (despite way better circumstances than an audience who wants to kill you) is that there was a focus on the kiss itself, and how it felt good enough even to distract them and not just the guy who wanted to kill them. They sold that. To me, the strength/focus of the recent kisses is as foreplay - as an indication of their desire to get to the next thing - not the kisses themselves. Which makes them lack the sensuality of that first kiss which was a source of stand-alone heat.

 

So McManda maybe it's the direction, acting, circumstances, but none of these should really affect the chemistry of a kiss between two people who want each other. I reject the argument about time slots and my opinion has nothing to do with whether I prefer other shows to Castle, but I admit that while watching a re-run of Zen, a quick kiss between frustrated lovers which was technically chaste, carried so much hunger that it reminded me of the "involuntary" heat in that first Caskett kiss and also of the grab and sweep-off-her-feet motion that either the directors or NF seem to think is hot in recent kisses and which, to me, is more like a tween version of heat than real adult sexual want.

 

That opinion, I know, fits firmly in this thread! I

 

truly don't think that even the "respect the process" scene, which (I think) I have now seen on YouTube, really lives up to the potential of that first, undercover kiss. And I guess one would argue that sexual heat between the leads is not necessary for the dramedy genre, but why squander an opportunity like that, even if you can get by with less?

[Samantha84]

...the grab and sweep-off-her-feet motion that either the directors or NF seem to think is hot in recent kisses and which, to me, is more like a tween version of heat than real adult sexual want.

 

Exactly; agree w. all this! 

As I've said before ... I don't need tongue, I don't need sex all over everywhere, but I do need to watch and not be taken out of the scene b/c it's so glaring. I just don't get sexy from Castle and Beckett anymore. I don't know what's happened and I don't really care but I don't like that for whatever reason that something has made it to my screen. 

[KaveDweller]

hey sold that. To me, the strength/focus of the recent kisses is as foreplay - as an indication of their desire to get to the next thing - not the kisses themselves. Which makes them lack the sensuality of that first kiss which was a source of stand-alone heat

 

I agree with your point about the focus being on the kiss rather than foreplay made a difference in the first kiss, which is why the first kiss between a couple is usually hard to match.  But I also prefer their Always kiss to the undercover one, and that was also about what it was leading up to.

 

I do think some of Caskett's quicker kisses have more heat than some of their makeout sessions, which I think shows it'is impacted by directing/acting/etc like McManda mentioned.  In last week's episode I thought the morning scene in the bedroom was sexier than the kiss the night before.  (But I still liked both scenes).

[pcta]

For me any kiss is fine IF it doesn't include slurping noises

[madmaverick]

Been reluctant to venture into this thread because I think it can be a bit of a hornet's nest, and actually it can be a bit hard to tell what qualifies as unpopular opinions these days, but since it's a hiatus week...

 

I admit that while watching a re-run of Zen, a quick kiss between frustrated lovers which was technically chaste, carried so much hunger that it reminded me of the "involuntary" heat in that first Caskett kiss and also of the grab and sweep-off-her-feet motion that either the directors or NF seem to think is hot in recent kisses and which, to me, is more like a tween version of heat than real adult sexual want.

 

I watched Zen when it first aired and remember it as very good at generating a smouldering, adult, Italian kind of sensuality, as befitting its source material.  Completely different from the vibe Castle tries to generate most of the time, to be honest.  I do think that the kisses and scenes of physical intimacy (as in we finally got them! ;)) have been better on Castle this season, but there's definitely room for more improvement.  Or for them to take a different approach to them from time to time.  The way they do it now seems quite orchestrated, if people know what I mean.  There's usually lines of innuendo preceding or interspersed with the kisses to act as foreplay, and whilst sexy banter has always been a part of Caskett and something I love about them, it doesn't always have to be a part of a love scene. Often with dialogue, less can be more.  They can try generating sexual heat through heated silences and touches for a change.  A slow and sensual pace can be just as powerful and passionate, if not more so, than fast and furious which seems to be what we are mostly getting.  I wouldn't mind another version of the Always scene, both the actual one and the deleted one, which embraced a more adult kind of vibe.  I wouldn't mind getting some naturalistic sexy scenes just in their everyday that don't have to form a part of a coitus interruptus plot or be case related or related to any kink or roleplay.  Just making out after a long day's work, or a passionate thank you in a domestic moment.

 

Now I don't know if this is a popular or unpopular opinion, but I do think while something has been gained from getting Caskett together (and the dance couldn't realistically have gone on indefinitely), I venture that something was also lost by that step.  The sexual tension can still be generated in different ways now that they are a couple, but it's not quite the same as that yearning and that longing that filled their interaction in the days before they were together.  As much as I am glad they got together, part of me also misses that earlier vibe.  Their first kiss isn't my favourite because I think it was kind of awkwardly executed, but it's hard for them to replicate that kind of desperate, adult want post-Always.  Especially considering that we don't really get love scenes in dramatic situations since, just lightweight fluffy ones with a comedic bent.

 

On the shallow end, I think that not only did NF look his best in earlier seasons, but SK also.  I miss her earlier, fresher, less made up Hollywood generic supermodel look.  And has been discussed elsewhere, I thought both Castle and Beckett presented with more interesting personalities in the beginning.

 

I also think that NF tends to unfairly get more of the blame and less of the credit from the fandom.  I say this as someone who likes both actors (a rarity?) and is completely tired of the love for one/hate for the other that some fans insist on.  Honestly, I don't understand how some people can watch a show centred on a romantic duo when they dislike one half of it so much.  

Edited January 26, 2015 by madmaverick

[pepper]

madmaverick I thought the intention of this thread was just to provide a place to post an opinion that many dare not speak without having to defend it against more mainstream, popular, but opposing opinions.

 

When you look at it that way, it's less or a hornet's nest and more of a catharsis...

 

But, just to be clear, I wasn't comparing Castle to Zen in any way - I don't think Castle would compare favorably there and it wouldn't be fair - my point was simply about an isolated scene with a relatively chaste, public kiss which carried more heat than even the most impassioned Caskett kiss. It debunks most of the excuses I've read for the lack of heat (that I perceive). But that's what this thread is for - for opinions like mine that there just isn't anything hot about Caskett kisses for some reason. Which is a shame. 

 

Many opposing opinions abound, along with the reasons why I'm quite wrong! LOL

[madmaverick]

Pepper, didn't mean to imply that you had to defend your opinion if that's what was understood.  I understand that's not the purpose of this thread.  My personal preference is for opinions to be supported and defended though.  I just jumped in here because I thought what you touched on in Zen was interesting in relation to Castle's much different approach.  Perhaps Castle could generate a touch of the Zen heat if they really wanted to but problem is, I don't think they believe that approach is right for their show.

 

I do think Caskett are capable of generating heat from kisses and otherwise (Always had heat for me) but they could be more thoughtful and inventive about how they do it in adult ways.  And no, that doesn't include referring to offscreen kinky handcuff usage again.

Edited January 27, 2015 by madmaverick

[pepper]

My personal preference is for opinions to be supported and defended though.  I just jumped in here because I thought what you touched on in Zen was interesting in relation to Castle's much different approach.  Perhaps Castle could generate a touch of the Zen heat if they really wanted to but problem is, I don't think they believe that approach is right for their show.

 

You've crystallized where my problem lies. Why on earth would hot, sexual chemistry that would technically bypass the censors at Disney be an approach that is "not right" for a dramedy with a romantic relationship at its center? Mind you, I've never seen any indication in interviews etc., that this is deliberate and always thought of it as a writing/directing/acting fail, although not one that affects my enjoyment of the show to any great extent. I'm interested in why you believe it's deliberate.

 

For those who haven't seen Zen, it airs on PBS and it very closely follows the novels about Italian detective Aurelio Zen, who gives the impression of being constantly out of his depth politically and personally as he tries to solve crimes in a somewhat corrupt department. But he always comes out on top and manages to have a secret affair with the office admin whom all his colleagues want to bed. The romance takes up 10 minutes at most of a 90-minute episode, including all the politics around it and the possible consequences of "fornication and debauchery". In other words, it is never the focus of the show.

[KaveDweller]

Why on earth would hot, sexual chemistry that would technically bypass the censors at Disney be an approach that is "not right" for a dramedy with a romantic relationship at its center? Mind you, I've never seen any indication in interviews etc., that this is deliberate and always thought of it as a writing/directing/acting fail, although not one that affects my enjoyment of the show to any great extent. I'm interested in why you believe it's deliberate.

 

I know you weren't responding to me, but I wanted to jump in.  I think it's deliberate that they want to keep the show at a more PG type rating, but I also think they could even be better at that if they tried.  Because we see some of that greatness at times.  They seem to be phoning it in at times, and I'm not really mad at any individual about that, because who hasn't felt like that about their jobs at some point.  But it's just a little disappointing as a viewer to think it could be better.

 

But to keep this about an unpopular opinion.....I still really enjoy the show, despite these flaws.

[amensisterfriend]

In my very UO: I think the show should have just embraced its destiny as a fluffy comedy---maybe even with hints of deliberate satire---and not even attempted to do 'deeper', angsty drama that they IMO have always kind of sucked at. The world (or at least my world!) needs more spirited, lighthearted, humorous mysteries, and this could have been such a great one if they had better developed their characters and stopped trying to insert grim angst at such frequent intervals. I also think comedy is what both lead actors do far better than heavy drama. 

[femmefan1946]

Now that we are done with the Mombatross storyline, and are moving toward ending the XYZ123 stuff, making the show more of a satire/comedy might be the way to go.

The airwaves are flooded with procedurals, we have several actors who excel at comedy in the cast... maybe it is time for the musical episode?

 

But not before Nathan does his dark side again. Like this...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPRlHwwVIug

Negotiation skills...

[verdana]

maybe it is time for the musical episode?

 

 

It will never be time for a musical episode.

 

Cop Rock - Let's Be Careful Out There

 

Steven Bochco what the hell. 

 

I'm not sure if this is an unpopular opinion but if they ever go there, it will be the first episode of Castle I'll happily skip. 

Edited January 28, 2015 by verdana

[madmaverick]

Why on earth would hot, sexual chemistry that would technically bypass the censors at Disney be an approach that is "not right" for a dramedy with a romantic relationship at its center? Mind you, I've never seen any indication in interviews etc., that this is deliberate and always thought of it as a writing/directing/acting fail, although not one that affects my enjoyment of the show to any great extent. I'm interested in why you believe it's deliberate.

 

I know you weren't responding to me, but I wanted to jump in.  I think it's deliberate that they want to keep the show at a more PG type rating, but I also think they could even be better at that if they tried

Agree with Kave's assessment.  Castle's always aimed to be a PG, family friendly kind of show, in my opinion.  Perhaps in part because Castle had a young daughter in Alexis, they were never going to be a full on adult kind of show.  They wanted to go easy on both the sex and the violence.  Castle's an old-fashioned, retro kind of show that plays it safe and doesn't take a lot of risks (burning car cliffhanger doesn't really count in my book and besides, nothing's really changed from that anyway).   The romantic, sexual chemistry is played out in a safe, PG way as it's done in many forgettable Hollywood romantic comedies (but we are lucky to have 2 leads with better chemistry that those featured in many of those films).  It's more escapism than realism and it's never going to get very deep.  We're not going to see lust and desire explored in a more adult and messy way like in truly adult dramas.    We get the more sanitized, Disney version, more sweet than sexy, complete with comedic interruptions when it starts getting hot ;) and they barely make enough time for that in a procedural framework.  I didn't come into the show expecting cable or European TV sensibilities, but it would be good if they went more adult and grown up sexy, and not just more slapstick on Castle once in a while.

 

Also agree that there's definitely something to be said for the show embracing its destiny as fluffy (romantic) comedy.  A lightweight but entirely satisfying dessert (souffle?) after dinner.  I would embrace biting wit and deliberate satire over overwrought melodrama, but the writers seem far more capable of the (easier) latter option.  And it's like every show can't escape the claws of high stakes and mythologies these days.  Sigh. 

Edited January 28, 2015 by madmaverick

[mledawn]

Amen, sister friend! I'm with you on that "unpopular" opinion. There isn't a lot that distinguishes it from other shows exactly like it, unfortunately. ;)

[pepper]

 

Agree with Kave's assessment.  Castle's always aimed to be a PG, family friendly kind of show, in my opinion.

Did I mention that the scene I was using as an example would have passed the Disney censors. There are ways to imply sexual heat without being overt. I was in no way implying that the show should be more explicit, "adult" or violent. I put adult in inverted commas because I would like a more mature approach the Castle/Beckett relationship at times, which does mean injecting emotion as well as humor into the romantic moments - and they did that quite effectively in early seasons. The remnants of that are the tedious coitus/kissus interruptus hat the writers apparently find hilarious.

 

It's frustrating when it's implied that what I'm criticizing is the PG level of sexuality (straw man?), when I promise you, I am not. Mind you, it's ironic that open-mouthed kissing is a gasp-inducing shocker while close-ups of violent death are apparently child-friendly... But the show isn't really supposed to be child-friendly IMO, it's a 10 pm show that should be embracing its dramedy designation and it's humorous sexiness. Instead, much of the time it is working too hard to be a "serious" show while at the same time being distinctly un-sexy (to me). The level of the humor and sexual situations too often seem to appeal to the Belieber mentality rather than the baby boomers who are reportedly its core demographic and who started the sexual revolution. 

[KaveDweller]

It's frustrating when it's implied that what I'm criticizing is the PG level of sexuality (straw man?), when I promise you, I am not.

 

I didn't mean you were criticizing the PG-ness, I was just saying I thought that the show tries to be PG.  There are certainly still things that can be criticized about their attempts to do that.

[madmaverick]

I didn't mean to imply that you were criticizing the PG level of sexuality either.  I'm actually in agreement in hoping that the humour as well as the sexual situations are elevated to a more mature, intelligent, sophisticated (what i meant by 'adult') level.  But they seem to like to prefer the easy, dumbed down, lowest common denominator.  Maybe they think that's most crowd pleasing?  I don't know.  They definitely have more room to push the envelope for a 10 p.m. show but they deliberately choose not to.  Just look at The Good Wife.  That's a network drama/procedural that is so much richer and adult (not to mention sexier!) in how it portrays sexuality (without being overt either).  It's made an art out of being sexy without showing the sex.  There's really no comparison.  But I don't believe Castle writers think their show should adopt that kind of tone, unfortunately.  And honestly, I'm not sure they could even if they tried. I think the actors could do it but not sure about the writers' capabilities.  I mean, look at Cuffed, written by the then showrunner and his wife who pretty much set the tone of the show.  Cuffed had a scenario that could have been rife with sizzling sexual tension, but instead they really went for unsophisticated grunting and jokes and really completely wasted a lot of potential.  

[verdana]

We cuffed our hands together and walked around the house. We figured out the comedy, figured out stepping on each other’s toes. We got into a little bit of a back and forth that is kind of reflected in some of Castle and Beckett’s back-and-forth.

Andrew Marlowe, on writing “Cuffed” with Terri Miller

 

 

The focus for MilMar appears to be on the comedy aspect of their interactions first and foremost not the romance. I thought Cuffed was awful which may be an unpopular opinion since I see many raving about it. I thought it lacked any genuine heat, sexual tension and was riddled with missed opportunities to further their relationship given the situation they were in and I cringed over some of the crass humor on display. The more I hear the showrunner and his wife talk the less surprised I am with what I see "romance" wise on the show or think it will ever change so I had better attempt to put up with it.  Seems clear that the people who run things don't want anything more intimate or "adult" on their show and they plan to keep it that way. If they did we would have seen it by now. That's their right but it's a pity because they're frittering away the wonderful chemistry of the two leads when they should be maximising it now they're together.  

[pepper]

I'm struggling with the idea that not liking "Cuffed" is unpopular. I thought it was such a shit show that the best thing about it was the 30 seconds in which they wake up together. I just assumed anybody not interested in currying favor with "Andrew and Terri" thought it was awful. Wrong again!

 

Here's an unpopular one: after getting off TWOP for most of the summer because I was tired of the vitriol being directed at the yet to be aired DC arc, I quite liked it. Yup, I liked the episodes set in the Hollywood version of DC, despite the usual gun-loss problems that followed Beckett to her new jurisdiction. I never thought that she should have turned down the job to prove her love for Castle, or that he should have hated her for making him a. move to an awesome city and b. have to commute a whole 2 hours on a train to visit his mother and college-bound daughter. I though it was just what loving couples do, when one's career offers relocation and the other's career is geographically flexible.

 

Sure, she could have told him before her interview, but I also understood her wanting to be sure it was what she wanted so that her own thoughts would be clear before the "family" discussion. In real life, she would have had time to tell him, but plot dictated that he find out accidentally so that drama could ensue. But he handled it realistically by admitting his hurt and being annoyed, she was shaken and sorry, she apologized and they moved on. I was good with all of that. Being good with all of that was NOT popular!  

[madmaverick]

The focus for MilMar appears to be on the comedy aspect of their interactions first and foremost not the romance.

 

Definitely agree that the show takes this approach and it colours the romantic scenes as well, which very often end on a comedic note to lighten it or something.

 

We seem to have had less romantic scenes in dramatic episodes since they got together (no more drama?) so perhaps that's another reason why it feels more like romantic comedy than pure romance or romantic drama.  We haven't had anything like the intensity of the Always scene. 

 

But as has been said, there's no reason why we can't have hot, adult, tender, loving heat without the funny from time to time.  Foreplay doesn't always have to be funny and they don't always have to be interrupted. 

[AntiBeeSpray]

Definitely agree that the show takes this approach and it colours the romantic scenes as well, which very often end on a comedic note to lighten it or something.

 

We seem to have had less romantic scenes in dramatic episodes since they got together (no more drama?) so perhaps that's another reason why it feels more like romantic comedy than pure romance or romantic drama.  We haven't had anything like the intensity of the Always scene. 

 

But as has been said, there's no reason why we can't have hot, adult, tender, loving heat without the funny from time to time.  Foreplay doesn't always have to be funny and they don't always have to be interrupted. 

 

Here, here! I'm a little tired of shows doing that kind of thing. The whole interruption plot gets old fast. Don't mind the humor at times, but enough with the interruptions.

[Lucynda]

I'm struggling with the idea that not liking "Cuffed" is unpopular. I thought it was such a shit show that the best thing about it was the 30 seconds in which they wake up together. I just assumed anybody not interested in currying favor with "Andrew and Terri" thought it was awful. Wrong again!

Just check out the world of fanfiction - everyone there loves that episode ;) 

I don't like it for the many missed opportunities of creating heat/tension and the possibilities of getting the two a little closer/forward in their state of whatever they are, but I do like it for the things we learn about Castle and Beckett. 

[madmaverick]

I don't like it for the many missed opportunities of creating heat/tension and the possibilities of getting the two a little closer/forward in their state of whatever they are, but I do like it for the things we learn about Castle and Beckett.

 

Same.  I did like how Caskett learned to work as a team and got over being annoyed by each other.  Those bickering bits at the beginning rang true to the partnership.  Although there were many missed opportunities and a letdown in terms of sexual tension and moving them forward, I did enjoy them sharing extensive screen time together.  I remember it being a bit of a dry spell in terms of one on one interaction at that time.

[verdana]

Well I guess it's unpopular then that I like that they go for comedy?

 

I'm not criticizing people's dislike of that, but I guess I'm surprised that one wouldn't figure that's where they would go.

 

In the pilot episode Castle told Beckett she could spank him.

 

I mean it's a show about a mystery writer playing cop. 

 

Why would they not make everything comedic?

 

Castle never came over as pure comedy hour to me. If it was just about the comedy I wouldn't have started watching it. I'd call the show a "dramedy" mixing wry, often subtle, slightly zany humor with some dramatic elements (never too dark obviously it's what I call "safe" drama but can still be very effective) with the partnership of C&B at its centre and that's what drew me to the show. Stana once described Castle as having a little bit of everything - drama, fun, suspense, romance - like dessert after dinner which is quite a neat description.. However, the comedy element although an important draw shouldn't consume everything else. I find they've gravitated to a more crass, slapstick style humor which I don't like and it's not balanced out by enough (good) drama or more intense emotionally driven moments of the kind they used to blend together so well.

[GeorgieNY]

There is a big difference in tone between slapstick comedy and smart, witty humor. Seems like we get much more of the slapstick then the wit nowadays,

[KaveDweller]

I'm struggling with the idea that not liking "Cuffed" is unpopular.

 

I think everyone must think more of what they think is unpopular than is actually the case.  And that's not a criticism, just an observation.  I'm sure I do it too.

 

There is also the question of what is unpopular on this particular message board versus on tumblr versus the fandom in general.  Because often what is discussed here is widely different than what people think elsewhere.

[AntiBeeSpray]

Same.  I did like how Caskett learned to work as a team and got over being annoyed by each other.  Those bickering bits at the beginning rang true to the partnership.  Although there were many missed opportunities and a letdown in terms of sexual tension and moving them forward, I did enjoy them sharing extensive screen time together.  I remember it being a bit of a dry spell in terms of one on one interaction at that time.

Me too. Only it's Castle and Beckett for me. NOT Caskett. Never liked that term AT ALL. Even though they are a couple, they still are two separate people.

[WendyCR72]

Me too. Only it's Castle and Beckett for me. NOT Caskett. Never liked that term AT ALL. Even though they are a couple, they still are two separate people.

 

Smoosh names always make me twitchy. Damn Bennifer and Brangelina (twitch) for starting that idiotic trend! Grrr...

[verdana]

I must admit I do use Caskett a lot when referring to them mainly because I'm lazy and it's become a habit but I don't really like it even though it was made "official" and outed in Murder He Wrote which seemed to delight many fans.  

Edited January 30, 2015 by verdana

[AntiBeeSpray]

Smoosh names always make me twitchy. Damn Bennifer and Brangelina (twitch) for starting that idiotic trend! Grrr...

 

Me too. And Brangelina sounds like a brand of bran cereal imo XD.

I must admit I do use Caskett a lot when referring to them mainly because I'm lazy and it's become a habit but I don't really like it even though it was made "official" and outed in Murder He Wrote which seemed to delight many fans.  

 

Ah. Yea guess it saves up on letters.

[femmefan1946]

They wanted to go easy on both the sex and the violence. 

And so they start most episodes with closeups of a dead bloodsoaked body.

 

Castle's an old-fashioned, retro kind of show that plays it safe

How old-fashioned do they have to get though? Firefly (yeah yeah, I'm a Browncoat) had a naked girl in the opening credits in 2002.

Friends had a lot of bed-hopping among the cast and guest stars in the 90s.

Golden Girls was very open about sex in the 80s, as was The Mary Tyler Moore Show in the 70s.

And all of those shows were on between 8pm and 9pm when they were first broadcast.

[WendyCR72]

They wanted to go easy on both the sex and the violence. 

And so they start most episodes with closeups of a dead bloodsoaked body.

 

Castle's an old-fashioned, retro kind of show that plays it safe

How old-fashioned do they have to get though? Firefly (yeah yeah, I'm a Browncoat) had a naked girl in the opening credits in 2002.

Friends had a lot of bed-hopping among the cast and guest stars in the 90s.

Golden Girls was very open about sex in the 80s, as was The Mary Tyler Moore Show in the 70s.

And all of those shows were on between 8pm and 9pm when they were first broadcast.

 

But none of the shows you list are "in house" at ABC. ABC Studios shows ALWAYS tend to play it safe. Why? I don't know. But it's just the way it is. Maybe because ABC's parent company is Disney. But that's simply conjecture.

 

As I said prior, ABC's FIRST in-house incarnation (at least, I assume it was in-house as ABC was also part of the company title), ABC Circle Films in the '80s (which produced or was one of a few which helped to produce Moonlighting) seemed to allow for less safe material. See the Dave/Maddie sexfest and basically the less vanilla dialogue in any episode of that series on YouTube. But the current company's content just seems to play it safe 9 times out of 10.

[verdana]

Violence is considered okay to watch though on most network American TV shows and Castle is no exception to that rule, it's when they get around to showing sex TPTB get squeamish.

[WendyCR72]

Violence is considered okay to watch though on most network American TV shows and Castle is no exception to that rule, it's when they get around to showing sex TPTB get squeamish.

 

That's true. But that isn't an issue strictly related just to ABC. That ass-backward policy covers all "Big 4" broadcast networks.

[madmaverick]

I'm guilty of using Caskett a lot too even though I don't find combined names cute in general.  But mainly because I'm too lazy to type their names separately.  Maybe C&B would save me even more time heh... CB even more so. :P

 

The double standards re sex and violence annoy me too, but that's Hollywood for you.  

[pepper]

I don't think you can blame Hollywood; it's a function of American society. Sexuality, especially female sexuality, seems to be terrifying to vast swathes of the population, whereas depictions of violence seem to be more acceptable than they are in many/most developed countries (since it's the season I'll mention wardrobe malfunction at the Superbowl and the response to both as emblematic). So the studio may very well be giving the people what they want - or at least erring on the side of less backlash, but the result is often juvenile.

 

Admittedly, what I think of as juvenile seems to thrill many on tumblr and twitter, and they seem to be the majority of the on-line fan base. So those of us who'd like to see something different may be tilting at windmills.Still... I live in hope.

[KaveDweller]

I'm guilty of using Caskett a lot too even though I don't find combined names cute in general.  But mainly because I'm too lazy to type their names separately.

 

I do it sometimes more for variety and less as a shortcut. But I do hate how every time two characters talk to each other on a show someone comes up with a silly nickname.  

 

The double standards re sex and violence annoy me too, but that's Hollywood for you.

 

Yeah that double standard is really annoying, but is definitely not unique to Castle.

[femmefan1946]

Cracked.com had a video (vlog?) about the L-shaped bedsheet recently. Pretty funny.

[vanarnd1]

I am not sure if this is an unpopular opinion because it seems to be mixed overall, but I have not been a fan of the PI arc. It seems like the writers are thinking very short term and are trying to get by a few episodes at a time, and instead of focusing on Caskett as a newly married couple, they throw in another last second plot device as a distraction to the audience.

 

I think it was a bad sign that the first episode after the honeymoon was Espo-centric and it seems like the writing recently is always set-up to only show Castle and Beckett in small doses. Maybe it is partly because of filming time constraints but for a show that is so reliant on the two leads the TPTB keep trying to find ways to separate them at all costs. That is why I am hoping that Castle is back at the 12th within the next few episodes.

[KaveDweller]

I think it was a bad sign that the first episode after the honeymoon was Espo-centric and it seems like the writing recently is always set-up to only show Castle and Beckett in small doses.

 

I think that episode was Espo-centric because the previous two had been very Castle/Beckett heavy and they wanted to give the actors a break.

 

I agree about wanting the PI arc to end though.  It works as something different for a couple episodes, but not as a long term change.