Spoilers, Speculation & All Things Media!

[Lucynda]

They should just have Alexis move into the apartment. Would solve more than just one problem... 

[FlickerToAFlame]

Jackie Tohn was on American Idol and a TLC reality show for songwriters, right?

[KaveDweller]

They should just have Alexis move into the apartment. Would solve more than just one problem...

 

Alexis doesn't deserve that apartment.

 

I can buy that she just hasn't gotten around to getting rid of the apartment. Either her lease hasn't ended or she hasn't been able to sell it yet.  She's practically living in the loft, so it's not like she's living apart from Castle.  They should have had a line explaining that by now though.  But that may be what we're getting in the episode.

[turnitwayup]

Yep, she was on AI s8 and Bravo's Platinum Hit. I didn't realize she was acting too.

 

Looking at the responses in Jackie's instagram. Awww that really sweet of Nathan.

 

queenofgoodscents
Omg..omg..omg..only like one of our favorite shows EVER...steve and I will PLOTZ when we see you..

 

queenofgoodscents
And I have such a crush on Nathan. .loved him since the movie waitress...

 

jackietohn
@queenofgoodscents my mom loves it too! Nathan called her and they had a hilarious conversation. It was so you!

Edited October 26, 2014 by turnitwayup

[madmaverick]

Rachel Eggleston, the young lady who played precocious Emily in Child's Play, has been tweeting about her experience on Castle.  She's only 9 and already tech savvy.  Hope fans will be nice and respectful with her.  Sounds like she had a good time on set.

 

Rachel Eggleston @heyraeraehope
He's really nice and friendly like his character Castle @NathanFillion @Castle_ABC @Stana_Katic

 

Can you tell me who is the funniest person in castle set ?!
@heyraeraehope

Nathan is definitely one of the funniest!

 

how would u describe @NathanFillion?

awesome,nice,friendly

 

was it fun to play princess with @NathanFillion ?
Btw your acting was great

YES!!! He was also a great Princess ;)

 

Yes, I hit him. Nathan told me to @NathanFillion

 

did you spend some time with Stana behind the scenes?:)
yes of course :)
Omg that's so cool:) Can you tell me what did you guys do? How is she in real life?

she's super nice

 

what are the best to work with @Stana_Katic?

she's just awesome, who would enjoy working with her ;)

 

 

[madmaverick]

They've neglected Beckett's apartment for so long in the same way they've neglected Esplanie for so long, I really don't care about both anymore...

 

They have to really invest in a lot of effort to generate meaningful emotional impact for me again and I'm sceptical about any "defining moment" for Esplanie coming this late in the game.  Yawning more than goosebumps are likely. ;)  And Caskett better get proper attention in the Xmas episode too.

 

There's a split second in the promo for the upcoming episode where Beckett's looking at something with a kind of teary eyed expression in her face?  What do you guys think that's about?  Personal or COTW?  It couldn't be that Castle's proposing again, right?  I'd love to see another, better proposal but I don't think they'd write one.

Edited October 26, 2014 by madmaverick

[verdana]

They've neglected Beckett's apartment for so long in the same way they've neglected Esplanie for so long, I really don't care about both anymore...

 

There's a split second in the promo for the upcoming episode where Beckett's looking at something with a kind of teary eyed expression in her face?  What do you guys think that's about?  Personal or COTW?  It couldn't be that Castle's proposing again, right?  I'd love to see another, better proposal but I don't think they'd write one.

I know what you mean about Beckett's apartment it's all too late now (like so many things when it comes to addressing certain issues) but it still annoys me. Her apartment is something they should have discussed at least once since they hooked up whether it's the lease or some other reason at least clue the audience in.

 

I saw that look from Kate and I must admit I did wonder if they're going for a round two of the proposal but that would involve them carrying over the aftermath into the next episode in all probability and do they want to do that?  I would love Castle to propose again (joyously this time!) but like you I'm not getting my hopes up, it probably has something to do with the case.

[verdana]

Stana interview in Australia’s TV Week

 

Stana promises despite the delayed wedding there is a "sweet pay off" in the end. But I don't want a pay off, what I wanted was to see the wedding that I waited all season long for, which should have happened in #6.23. 

 

As to what the wedding will be like she says "so much of what brought them together revolves around murder and mystery, so it would probably be out of character for that not to be a part of the final tying of the knot right?"

 

I thought it was interesting that when she was asked what else she would like covered on the show she said "to see something that full-circles the Washington experience" which was dropped like a stone. 

Edited October 26, 2014 by verdana

[McManda]

I thought it was interesting that when she was asked what else she would like covered on the show she said "to see something that full-circles the Washington experience" which was dropped like a stone.

 

While I'd like to see something that ties the DC experience into Beckett's current character, or a reference to the time she spent away, I disagree that it was dropped like a stone. I like the way they got Beckett out of DC - it was a great experience on paper, she took a shot, realized it was incompatible with her ethics and morals, set out to try to reconcile her ethics and morals with the job, but failed. It made Beckett feel real, made her feel fallible, which is a big complaint that people had with her character (she's too perfect), but it did so in a way that I don't think destroyed her character (like maybe forgetting she had a pretend/real wedding 15 years ago).

 

On another note ... so yeah ... looks like a wedding happens, and most likely in episode 6, just like everyone thought.

[madmaverick]

The wedding will be "surprising", huh?  Don't know whether they've over or underestimated fans' ability to be surprised.  So much of what they do is so predictable, though I will say I didn't see the events of FBFW coming (partly because they opted for the worse cliches).  Safe to say I don't want to see another surprise in the vein of FBFW.  I'm not sure how I'd feel if Castle surprises Beckett with a wedding or something like that through an elaborate COTW fakeout... I feel weddings are not like birthday parties and more meant to be joint decisions than suddenly sprung on you.  The "sweet pay off" better mean it's satisfying romantically and enough screentime.  

 

I am looking forward to the AU episode but I hope exploring what might be if Caskett hadn't met doesn't mean they don't share much screentime together on screen.

 

I thought they had pretty much come full circle on the D.C. arc.  Perhaps they can explore career promotion opportunities for Beckett again at the end of the show.

 

Was the wedding dress Stana mentioned the first ugly one or the beautiful second one?  'Cause I wouldn't mind the second one making a reappearance but it sounds like not?

 

Luckily for Stana she wasn't asked what she thought about her absurd, drunken, forgotten wedding in Vegas. ;)

 

I think it's still hard to say whether Stana and Nathan really will resign for more seasons... don't think you can go by much of what is said in these public interviews.

Edited October 26, 2014 by madmaverick

[Ticketyboo23]

While I'd like to see something that ties the DC experience into Beckett's current character, or a reference to the time she spent away, I disagree that it was dropped like a stone. I like the way they got Beckett out of DC - it was a great experience on paper, she took a shot, realized it was incompatible with her ethics and morals, set out to try to reconcile her ethics and morals with the job, but failed. It made Beckett feel real, made her feel fallible, which is a big complaint that people had with her character (she's too perfect), but it did so in a way that I don't think destroyed her character (like maybe forgetting she had a pretend/real wedding 15 years ago).

 .

I think the DC arc was profoundly more damaging than the 'previous marriage'. Youthful mistakes are one thing but ditching Castle to become a Fed not only undermined their whole relationship but also her character. Early Beckett was disdainful of the Feds & wanted to speak for the victims, suddenly she wants the hotshot job. Her acceptance of the proposal based on the fact she was taking the job successfully undermined that & I've never warmed back up to Beckett since. Which is a shame as Beckett version s1-3 was my favourite character. They could have saved it with Beckett quitting & a mea culpa to Castle but alas no. The idiotic doubting of Castle in the first 2eps this season nearly made me quit the show for good.

[verdana]

Agree with Ticketyboo about the DC arc I thought that was way more damaging for Beckett's character and all the OOC behaviour that arose in order to play it out than a quickie marriage in Vegas when she was in college. Beckett made no firm decisions at all during her time in DC that I could see, Castle resolved their living arrangements whilst she feebly wrings her hands at a total loss as to what she should do and then she gets fired, yet again someone else is taking the decision process out of her hands - how very convenient for her.

 

I just wish during that time the writers had shown Beckett making some firm decisions instead of letting others do the job for her but they didn't. I found nothing enlightening about the whole saga and it certainly didn't make her feel more real/human to me - she just came over as clueless and strangely forgetful about her prior experiences - her actions left a bad taste and even to this day I think the whole DC arc was a low point for the character. 

 

And what did she learn from all this? I have no idea, she never said anything to Castle when she returned about her experiences and how it changed her as a person and no one bothered to show any interest in asking her so the whole thing seemed a monumental waste of time. You could have cut out all those episodes and have no idea the characters ever went through any such upheaval, they both remain unmarked by it. 

 

 

 

[verdana]

I've heard quite a few fans suggest that Castle could go down the "surprise" wedding route for Beckett, I don't want them to. I'm with mad maverick a wedding is not the kind of event to spring on your loved one as a surprise. And certainly not have it look like some pay back by Castle for what Beckett did to him back in TLOO. That's really rather crass and not something I feel is romantic or respectful if they choose to go in that direction and Castle risks coming over as a douche. 

Edited October 26, 2014 by verdana

[Ticketyboo23]

I think a surprise wedding could be ok but with the past form of the writers it would be on this show a fail of epic proportions. So I'll add my no to a 'surprise wedding' & I'm already cringing at the thought of what they might have produced. I also sincerely hope they ignore Katic's suggestion to pick over the DC arc, although I think the fact that they dropped it so quickly was due to the realisation that it was a huge mistake & about to drive the show into the ground. I found it completely ridiculous that Beckett's decision was touted as her being a 'strong, independent' woman when back in S1 we were supposed to see Sorensen as a the bad guy for being the Fed stepping into cases & choosing career progression over his girlfriend.

[Nadine]

I'd have no problem if they revisited DC but it'd have to be realistic. I could see them easily incorporating the Feds into a case that is located in NYC - kind of like Need to Know. That way Beckett would be able to use the skills she did obtain in her training in DC, etc.

Edited October 26, 2014 by Nadine

[pepper]

I don't remember the DC episodes being so awful. I remember the summer of speculation about how awful they were going to be being excruciating, but the episodes themselves were meh. Not great, but certainly not Beckett-centric or with either character acting in a way that took me out of the story. Which is why I avoided anything Castle-related on the Internet this past summer. And probably why I don't see anything in the show right now that shocks me. Right down to Beckett losing her gun... again.

 

Her thought process leading up to the job offer was included in the latest book and again it all made sense to me, even though it was awkward and keeping it a secret - because it was awkward to deal with - ultimately caused pain. It showed a flaw in the character that I thought was in keeping with her history: self-sufficient, independent, ambitious and hard-working, with a history of regular rewards for that work. It would make sense that she'd find out if it was as good an offer as it seemed before even telling Castle. That decision never came across to me as character assassination by the writers. Character assassination, IMO came from a certain segment of the show's Internet fan base. Nobody I know who watches the show on TV or PVR thought it was a big deal.

[verdana]

 

I found it completely ridiculous that Beckett's decision was touted as her being a 'strong, independent' woman when back in S1 we were supposed to see Sorensen as a the bad guy for being the Fed stepping into cases & choosing career progression over his girlfriend.

The writers probably couldn't even remember who Sorensen was let alone what he did to Beckett. 

[KaveDweller]

Youthful mistakes are one thing but ditching Castle to become a Fed not only undermined their whole relationship but also her character.

 

But she never ditched Castle.  I've never gotten the logic that her taking the job meant she was going to end things with Castle.  She wanted the job, but she still clearly wanted to be with Castle too, that's why she was afraid to tell him about it - she thought he was going to tell her he wasn't interested in making it work if she took the job.  And if that was really the case then it wouldn't have said very much about their relationship.

 

Her acceptance of the proposal based on the fact she was taking the job successfully

 

That wasn't really my interpretation of it though.  They hadn't talked about their fight, and she wanted to clear the air and make sure he wasn't just trying to keep her there.

 

Beckett made no firm decisions at all during her time in DC that I could see, Castle resolved their living arrangements whilst she feebly wrings her hands at a total loss as to what she should do

 

I don't think she was at a loss for what to do, I think she didn't want to pressure Castle into moving to DC.  Which is pretty in character, it's like how she didn't actually ask him to wait for her in Rise or didn't want to initiate the "where are we going" talk at the end of S5.

 

There was one episode last season where Beckett referenced talking to some contacts in the Attorney General's office, I think it was the one with Castle's father.  It would be nice if they either make some future reference to her time in DC or reference Beckett getting promoted within the NYPD.  She's clearly ambitious and moved up the ranks pretty quickly there.  It seems odd she would then not want to advance above detective.

 

They never really explored this, but I think after finding out about Bracken, Beckett was able to put aside some of her issues with her mom's case, and that's what opened up her desire for more in her career.  Before (like with Sorenson), she wouldn't even consider leaving New York because it meant part of her was leaving her mom. 

[verdana]

There was one episode last season where Beckett referenced talking to some contacts in the Attorney General's office, I think it was the one with Castle's father.  It would be nice if they either make some future reference to her time in DC or reference Beckett getting promoted within the NYPD.  She's clearly ambitious and moved up the ranks pretty quickly there.  It seems odd she would then not want to advance above detective.

One reason may be they've never tackled this is because then it's not so easy to have her continuing to be on the street, busting criminals with her team if she's been promoted up the ladder and perhaps it becomes difficult to have Castle hanging casually around. Although I'm not sure how many rungs you go up before that would really become an issue. I agree that it looks rather strange that she's still happily plodding along being a detective and there's been no reason given as to why she hasn't taken any further police exams to better herself.

 

And why haven't her superiors pushed her? They make sure we know how amazing a cop she is, the rising star of the NYPD etc. In most organisations someone like Kate Beckett would have been promoted by now or at it would have been queried why she's happy to stay where she is, she's not some so-so beat cop. I feel they're missing out on an opportunity to focus on her career in a way that makes much more sense to me than what they ended up doing in the DC arc which felt forced and fake. It would seem a very natural thing for Kate to be invested in moving upwards in the NYPD given the length of time she's been in the job, how much she loves working there and her age. 

Edited October 27, 2014 by verdana

[KaveDweller]

One reason may be they've never tackled this is because then it's not so easy to have her continuing to be on the street, busting criminals with her team if she's been promoted up the ladder and perhaps it becomes difficult to have Castle hanging casually around.

 

Well yes, the fact that they need to continue to keep the show the way it is limits them a lot.

 

Last season in that stupid 70s episode, Castle said that Beckett was the highest ranking person in the precinct while Gates was away.  Is that realistic? Aren't there ranks between detective and captain?

[Nadine]

Well yes, the fact that they need to continue to keep the show the way it is limits them a lot.

 

Last season in that stupid 70s episode, Castle said that Beckett was the highest ranking person in the precinct while Gates was away.  Is that realistic? Aren't there ranks between detective and captain?

 

There's Sergeant and Lieutenant, but I guess if there's no Sergeant or Lieutenant at the precinct, then technically Beckett would be the highest ranking person (since if I remember reading correctly there's no Sgt or Lt for detectives).

Edited October 27, 2014 by Nadine

[pepper]

They never really explored this, but I think after finding out about Bracken, Beckett was able to put aside some of her issues with her mom's case, and that's what opened up her desire for more in her career.  Before (like with Sorenson), she wouldn't even consider leaving New York because it meant part of her was leaving her mom. 

 

Exactly. Not only that, Sorensen's transfer wasn't a one-time deal. FBI up-and-comers are supposedly transferred to multiple locations, so Beckett would be giving up her career in NYPD and her career as a fast-track detective in any city. That was in addition to having to walk away from her mother's case. There was no question that Castle would be forced to give up his career as a writer to move to DC. And given the proximity of DC to NY, he wouldn't have had to give up being a father or a son in any appreciable way. Alexis wouldn't be able to live with him (during the week, anyway) while she went to university, but arguably that's a plus.

 

So early-career Beckett not wanting to follow a boyfriend around the country and Castle needing to move to DC to support Beckett's career never struck me as equivocal. I'd like to think that was based on more than my growing dislike for Alexis!

[femmefan1946]

Alexis wouldn't be able to live with him (during the week, anyway) while she went to university, but arguably that's a plus.

 

I always told my daughter and her friends that choosing a university in another city was a very polite way to run away from home. (She went to Flinders University in Adelaide, Australia.)

[verdana]

There's Sergeant and Lieutenant, but I guess if there's no Sergeant or Lieutenant at the precinct, then technically Beckett would be the highest ranking person (since if I remember reading correctly there's no Sgt or Lt for detectives).

Well if taking the Sergeant's exam is the next one up for Beckett for promotion then they don't want her in that role as she would no longer be doing day to day detective work. But I could see if this was a real life situation she would be keen to aim for Captain eventually and Castle would have to restrict his "consultant" duties alongside Beckett to less hands on policing. He can't keep following Beckett around for so called "research purposes" forever. 

Edited October 27, 2014 by verdana

[oberon55]

Here's a comparison of excerpts of Beckett's conversation with Sorenson and the one with Castle. She should have known exactly how he would feel from personnel experience.

 

-----------------------------
Beckett & Sorenson

 

Beckett: That's why you left. Remember.

 

Sorenson: Boston was a great opportunity.

 

Beckett: I'm not saying it wasn't. I'm just saying it was a choice. A choice that didn't include me.

 

Sorenson: You could have come.

 

Beckett: And then done what? Join the Boston PD. And then you have to move to Phoenix and then Cleveland. And then you're back here. I mean we both know what that life is all about.

 

-----------------------------
Beckett & Castle

 

Beckett: This is a wonderful opportunity. It'll be a chance to do more.

 

Castle: Without me.

 

Beckett: Castle please don't do this. Please don't make this about us.

 

 

To me it is exactly the same thing. They were both being asked to uproot their lives to support their partners career. The thing that bothered me was the sneaking around all the while looking Castle in the eye & pretending everything was ok. This is not how an adult acts in a relationship. How could Castle ever really trust her again?

Edited October 27, 2014 by oberon55

[KaveDweller]

To me it is exactly the same thing. They were both being asked to uproot their lives to support their partners career. The thing that bothered me was the sneaking around all the while looking Castle in the eye & pretending everything was ok. This is not how an adult acts in a relationship. How could Castle ever really trust her again?

 

Because when he proposed he told her they needed to work out any future issues like this together, and she agreed.  They haven't kept any secrets from each other since then.  

 

Is he supposed to throw away their entire relationship because she mishandled one thing?

[oberon55]

Because when he proposed he told her they needed to work out any future issues like this together, and she agreed.  They haven't kept any secrets from each other since then.  

 

Is he supposed to throw away their entire relationship because she mishandled one thing?

 

See this is where being a liar & a sneak work against you. I'm not saying Castle would not want to believe her in the future. I'm saying that after finding out she could play him so effortlessly that a normal person would always carry a sliver of doubt whether they wanted to or not. Trust but verify should be Castle's motto. If I were him I'd be checking her coat pockets for ticket stubs every time she was gone for 3 or 4 hours just in case.

[KaveDweller]

Did she really play him so effortlessly though? He seemed to think her non-answer was weird in Watershed, he just didn't push it.  And again, I think if he understood why she lied about it and knew she was no longer worried about that, he wouldn't have to expect the same behavior.  I think that whole storyline served to move their relationship forward.  She lied because she was questioning their future.  After he proposed, that was no longer the case.  Because of that, she's been more open since then.  People learn/grow from their mistakes I don't think it's fair to always hold them accountable for what they did in the past.

 

People complain when Beckett has a sliver of doubt about Castle (who has also lied in the past), but think it's acceptable for Castle to doubt her? That seems like a double standard to me.

Edited October 27, 2014 by KaveDweller

[verdana]

Jim Adler is the writer tonight and he's tweeting it seems and he has this to say about the episode.

 

Jim Adler @jimadler  ·  1h 1 hour ago
as promised, I will tweet both the left and right coast feeds tonight!  And stay tuned for the last 90 sec for an OMG #Castle scene!

 

As with all things the writers tweet in an attempt to tease the fans I'll watch the episode and judge for myself if it's worthy of an OMG! 

[verdana]

Beckett: Castle please don't do this. Please don't make this about us.

That has to be the dumbest line to have Beckett come out with, Marlowe should hang his head in embarrassment. If her deciding to change her career, end his role as a consultant, uproot herself (and eventually presumably him) to another city is not about them as a couple then I'm lost as to where her brain is at - of course it's about them.  And what made that whole conversation in her apartment even more annoying was that up pretty much up until then her actions spoke volumes that Beckett considered herself in a serious relationship with Castle and wanted to share everything with him - then they have her come out with that little gem. 

 

This wasn't some guy she was casually screwing, he deserved to be treated with more respect and consideration no matter what her sudden insecurities. That was the problem for me with the writing back then, they never conveyed satisfactorily that she seemed to care about his feelings one bit. I wish they had so I could feel better about the whole story. Watershed made her seem self absorbed to such a high degree it was ridiculous and at the same time made Castle look like a pathetic doormat not to mention clueless about women and relationships.   

Edited October 27, 2014 by verdana

[Ticketyboo23]

That has to be the dumbest line to have Beckett come out with, Marlowe should hang his head in embarrassment. If her deciding to change her career, end his role as a consultant, uproot herself (and eventually presumably him) to another city is not about them as a couple then I'm lost as to where her brain is at - of course it's about them.  And what made that whole conversation in her apartment even more annoying was that up pretty much up until then her actions spoke volumes that Beckett considered herself in a serious relationship with Castle and wanted to share everything with him - then they have her come out with that little gem. 

 

This wasn't some guy she was casually screwing, he deserved to be treated with more respect and consideration no matter what her sudden insecurities. That was the problem for me with the writing back then, they never conveyed satisfactorily that she seemed to care about his feelings one bit. I wish they had so I could feel better about the whole story. Watershed made her seem self absorbed to such a high degree it was ridiculous and at the same time made Castle look like a pathetic doormat not to mention clueless about women and relationships.

Agree with you completely Verdana. Forget their relationship and everything else, when Beckett left the NYPD Castle had to essentially stop working there too. She completely upended his life & surely she didn't miss that he wasn't happy. She lied to him, gave him an ultimatum, made him unhappy for a job she didn't really enjoy & not once did she show any real gratitude. The PR spin from SK about a 'strong, independent woman' annoyed me no end (I'm not sure SK really believed it either). The writers obviously don't know what a strong independent woman is & went with selfish & self absorbed instead. I'm not interested in dysfunctional 'badass' Beckett- there are other shows which do that & do it better. Am I wrong in drawing parallels with Benson (SVU) here -where we are supposed to constantly admire her toughness & her 'issues' are so front & centre, it's almost how she introduces herself.......and the male lead left the show.

Whilst I don't see NF throwing hissy fits I could see him making it clear he was interested in any more seasons playing doormat & I wouldn't blame him. Hopefully we'll get a little more than the 'not extra'ordinary Beckett.

[verdana]

Andrew Bikichky @AndrewBikichky  ·  3h 3 hours ago

“@FredBC77: Happy #Castle day! What can u share w/ us? :)”

If you blink tonight, you might miss a little cameo ;)

 

[KaveDweller]

That has to be the dumbest line to have Beckett come out with, Marlowe should hang his head in embarrassment.

 

I will agree with that, that line was the one thing I thought Beckett was in the wrong about during that whole plot.  It was a really dumb thing to say and didn't fit with what she seemed to be angsting about in the rest of the episode.

 

She completely upended his life & surely she didn't miss that he wasn't happy. She lied to him, gave him an ultimatum, made him unhappy for a job she didn't really enjoy & not once did she show any real gratitude.

 

I have to be honest here....I feel like we are watching two completely different shows because I didn't see Beckett do a single one of these things.  Except lie, but I thought it was an understandable lie.

 

I also reject the idea that supporting his fiance's career makes a man a doormat.

[KaveDweller]

Chiming in to say I didn't think that was a bad line.
I think what she meant was that she didn't want Castle to see it as her leaving him...even though she would be.

 

My issue was more with the follow up of "This isn't about you, this is about me."  That was kind of harsh.  But like I said, that was my one issue with her behavior in that episode.

[Ticketyboo23]

Right. But my point is I think you were supposed to feel that way.

 

So it doesn't necessarily make it bad writing or a bad story point just because her behavior was shitty.

I can see the point about writers creating conflict & bad behaviour not being necessarily bad writing but it's the lack of follow through that makes it unpalatable. Bad writing is the notion that the behaviour was somehow justified or correct. Saying 'I'm sorry' at the swings is not enough if it's followed by 'before I accept your proposal know I'm taking a job that disrupts the life you are happy with & will make you unhappy, but I don't care as long as I get what I want.'. Bad writing is trying to feed us a character is 'extraordinary' by lining up multiple characters to (sometimes literally) go to great lengths to point it out. Bad writing is having this supposed strong independent woman revert to a teenage girl running to her friends & flirting with other men because her boyfriend gets involved with a computer game.

I've seen Castle grow as a character, take responsibility & at the same time the nuanced character of Beckett diminished to 'badass' and sometimes unlikeable in clumsy attempts to generate suspense & cliffhangers.

[pepper]

Right. But my point is I think you were supposed to feel that way.

 

So it doesn't necessarily make it bad writing or a bad story point just because her behavior was shitty.

 

I agree. Characters are allowed, or should be allowed, to have flaws and not deliver pollyanna-appropriate responses to every difficult situation. Then they work have a chance through it and learn how to communicate/behave better. And the audience appreciates the new openness because they know that for those characters it was learned the hard way. 

 

I almost hate to bring it up, but that was the fatal flaw of the douchebag arc. Unlike other moments when Castle has been insensitive or clueless, there was a sustained period of decisions that made him unlikeable but where there was no learning moment or obvious future payoff (but the Ferrari is now like a semen-stained couch and I doubt they can show it in polite company). Sure, there were the Beckett-haters who cheered Castle's behavior, but for me it was a writing failure in that it traded momentary dramatic impact for the loss of our ability to say "Castle would never deliberately hurt someone he cares about". And I really used to like thinking that about the character.

 

Whereas pillow talk can include a conversation about how much stronger they are together now that trust issues are a thing of the past and she can tell him anything blah blah blah, that's not so doable an entire story arc of acting out. And I know two people who stopped watching the show altogether after that arc. I just stopped buying DVDs. I like flawed characters. In fact I prefer Castle the jackass to Castle the comedian - which is why I was ok with Gates way sooner than most. I liked it when he completely mishandled her. And even when he acted like a twat at Alexis and Pi's apartment, it was the kind of jackass behavior that can move a relationship forward e.g. acceptance of Alexis's independence and successful exit from the nest. (Except no.) I disliked him at that moment, but I didn't think it was a writing failure.

[Ticketyboo23]

I wasn't a fan of Castle's behaviour but at least it was a reaction to feeling hurt knowing Beckett had lied. Compare that to his reaction to her lying about Washington. He walked away, figured it out & still proposed. Character growth. Beckett can't even trust that Castle would not willingly walk away from their wedding without good reason & it's all about how she has suffered. No growth.

[pepper]

I can see the point about writers creating conflict & bad behaviour not being necessarily bad writing but it's the lack of follow through that makes it unpalatable. Bad writing is the notion that the behaviour was somehow justified or correct. Saying 'I'm sorry' at the swings is not enough if it's followed by 'before I accept your proposal know I'm taking a job that disrupts the life you are happy with & will make you unhappy, but I don't care as long as I get what I want.'. Bad writing is trying to feed us a character is 'extraordinary' by lining up multiple characters to (sometimes literally) go to great lengths to point it out. Bad writing is having this supposed strong independent woman revert to a teenage girl running to her friends & flirting with other men because her boyfriend gets involved with a computer game.

It really is a mileage issue. Maybe because I work in an industry where relocations are relatively common for top performers in their 30's, but the idea that a relocation is absolutely going to make a partner unhappy just because their life is disrupted seems like a straw man argument that isn't really true to life. Castle is a writer who loves a conspiracy theory and whose primary inspiration for his main character would be moving with him to DC, the center of conspiracy theories. 

 

The idea that Beckett's lack of faith in the relationship was all because of one video game also is not the impression I came away with. My impression was of a stagnating relationship where her boyfriend seemed to be taking her for granted with the video game incident featured as an example of a trend. And yes, grown women and grown men, as well as teenage girls talk to their friends about relationships that seem to be losing their spark - especially when you're close to a situation and worry that you may be overreacting. Castle had a history that had not been discussed but it was quite possible that he loved the chase more than the day-to-day. So when another handsome, charming guy paid attention, she spent a few minutes thinking "what if" then came to her senses and pushed him away. I really didn't see that character development as bad writing. That stuff happens if you're not perfect. The plot of that episode, on the other hand... *shudder*

[pepper]

I wasn't a fan of Castle's behaviour but at least it was a reaction to feeling hurt knowing Beckett had lied. Compare that to his reaction to her lying about Washington. He walked away, figured it out & still proposed. Character growth. Beckett can't even trust that Castle would not willingly walk away from their wedding without good reason & it's all about how she has suffered. No growth.

I think there is a massive difference between not talking to your boyfriend about a new job until after you've been interviewed and  leaving someone at the altar, disappearing for two months, being assumed dead and then it becoming increasingly obvious that you participated in some ways in your disappearance. To me It wasn't that she didn't trust that he'd walk away with no good reason, it was that she was forced to realize that he walked away at all. The reason, no matter how compelling, is a way to deal with that awful fact. And I saw no indication that she believed he'd do it "without reason", on the contrary she reassured him that he must have had a good reason. But that didn't mean she could shut down her brain and not see that for whatever reason, he cooperated while she and his family grieved.

 

To go from not believing he wanted a relationship based on benign neglect, to having more faith than he does in his motivation for choosing never to give them an explanation for his disappearance... that's HUGE character growth and confidence in the relationship - to me, anyway. 

[Ticketyboo23]

It really is a mileage issue. Maybe because I work in an industry where relocations are relatively common for top performers in their 30's, but the idea that a relocation is absolutely going to make a partner unhappy just because their life is disrupted seems like a straw man argument that isn't really true to life. Castle is a writer who loves a conspiracy theory and whose primary inspiration for his main character would be moving with him to DC, the center of conspiracy theories. 

 

And yes, grown women and grown men, as well as teenage girls talk to their friends about relationships that seem to be losing their spark -So when another handsome, charming guy paid attention, she spent a few minutes thinking "what if" then came to her senses and pushed him away. I really didn't see that character development as bad writing. That stuff happens if you're not perfect.*

The idea that Castle wouldn't be disrupted by the move undermines the whole premise of the show. He was rich, successful, bored & blocked as a writer at the start & working with the NYPD became more than a bit of a diversion. Even when he was angry at Beckett on various occasions he still returned & it wasn't something he could have in DC therefore he was almost sacrificing his career, even if it was unpaid.

Perhaps the stagnating idea might have flown in any way at all if it hadn't been packaged with the 'we're just getting started' of Still. As for the video game I like to think the Beckett of early seasons would have called Lanie & thrown a 'don't wait up' as she headed out the door for drinks. Standing beside a bomb should have earned him plenty of brownies points but 5mins later; forgotten.

[Ticketyboo23]

I think there is a massive difference between not talking to your boyfriend about a new job until after you've been interviewed and  leaving someone at the altar, disappearing for two months, being assumed dead and then it becoming increasingly obvious that you participated in some ways in your disappearance. To me It wasn't that she didn't trust that he'd walk away with no good reason, it was that she was forced to realize that he walked away at all. The reason, no matter how compelling, is a way to deal with that awful fact. And I saw no indication that she believed he'd do it "without reason", on the contrary she reassured him that he must have had a good reason. But that didn't mean she could shut down her brain and not see that for whatever reason, he cooperated while she and his family grieved.

 

To go from not believing he wanted a relationship based on benign neglect, to having more faith than he does in his motivation for choosing never to give them an explanation for his disappearance... that's HUGE character growth and confidence in the relationship - to me, anyway.

The faith that he had good reason came at the end of Montreal after she had seen a video where he was desperate & scared. Where he was emphatic he did not choose to walk away. I'm talking Driven where she seemed quite willing to believe he chose to live in a tent for no apparent reason which is an entirely different thing.....especially as he somehow managed to come into contact with a tropical disease & neatly died in a bullet riddled dinghy. Not one single bit of sense in that entire scenario. That should have alarms bells ringing & doubt. Dude wakes up after that experience & not as much as a 'how do you feel?' before launching into interrogation.

[pepper]

The idea that Castle wouldn't be disrupted by the move undermines the whole premise of the show. He was rich, successful, bored & blocked as a writer at the start & working with the NYPD became more than a bit of a diversion. Even when he was angry at Beckett on various occasions he still returned & it wasn't something he could have in DC therefore he was almost sacrificing his career, even if it was unpaid.

 

So is she going to have to decline all promotions for the rest of her life and remain a detective in order to sustain Castle's writing career? And is he never going to do any other research apart from a never-ending NYPD ride-along? Because most writers do that to get a feel for structure, procedure, "cop talk" etc., not for permanent fodder for their books. And at this point Castle could teach seminars on NYPD procedure! But it brings me back to a conversation on the books thread where Castle as a writer is criticized for using thinly-disguised real cops as characters in his books. To me, his ride-along, far from being a real-life barrier to relocation, is actually an unrealistic conceit of the show - like more than 20 murders a year in Cabot Cove.

 

You're right, Castle stood on a bomb the week before, so the timeline was messed up on the narrative they tried to build of a stagnating relationship. But the timeline on that show is often messed up and it didn't stop me from suspending disbelief on Castle having to learn what it takes to sustain an adult relationship even though he's 40-ish. And, to me, it's the kind of thing that when you learn it, makes the person on that journey with you extremely special even if your learning curve is challenging to them and confusing to you at the time. I don't see any heroes and villains in that scenario. But it was a pretty weak episode in which to drop such a major relationship issue.

 

Driven where she seemed quite willing to believe he chose to live in a tent for no apparent reason which is an entirely different thing.....especially as he somehow managed to come into contact with a tropical disease & neatly died in a bullet riddled dinghy.

It was a dinghy that belonged on the property where the tent had been, where his presence was confirmed by a witness whose identity was backed up by the DMV and where his DNA and belongings were in the tent. Unless she stopped being a cop and turned into a lemming, the only questions would be *why* and for how long he was camping (perhaps hiding and in fear for his life and then later tracked down leading to an escape in the dinghy) not *whether* he was camping. At least until the seemingly overwhelming evidence started to fall apart. That criticism of Beckett for daring to believe the evidence of her eyes and the NYPD lab has always mystified me. 

Edited October 27, 2014 by pepper

[WendyCR72]

Okay, the Beckett versus Castle DC arc has been dissected more than once, and it seems to be getting a wee bit heated. So let's take a breath and move back to the present, please. Thank you!

[verdana]

 

I also reject the idea that supporting his fiance's career makes a man a doormat.

Normally I would agree with you but the way the writers played it with Castle sitting there looking depressed and beaten down at the swings it felt like she had just kicked him the balls at that point and he was letting her do it and coming back for yet more punishment. It was pitiful and despite lying and treating the upheaval to his life like it's like a total non issue she got a proposal out of it and then he agrees to follow her to DC when it seemed obvious to me she had already made that decision before speaking to Castle which took the sweetness out of it. She didn't deserve a proposal at that point. And worse they had him sending her the signal that her behaviour was okay because "its just who you are". If the writers thought that this was sublimely romantic in some way then they lost me completely, it's unhealthy and unbalanced. 

 

And I disagree with idea that Castle can write anywhere and that it simply didn't matter, that he could just up sticks and move to any place in the world wherever she was. Lots of writers have specific quirks and superstitions about their writing and need to write in a certain place, she was disrupting his life, his family, his career, cutting short his enjoyment of following her around which had become pretty much his job and she never seemed that bothered by any of that. Of course he couldn't follow her around forever but she doesn't give a second thought. I'm not saying she should have stopped in NY to keep him happy but at least have it look like she understood what sacrifices he would have to make along the way too. 

 

How can I feel sympathetic towards someone (man or woman) who doesn't seem to care about any of this but instead remains firmly focused on their own needs?  If they had even had one scene where it was obvious she was concerned about what this would mean to Castle and she recognized the issues for him to in supporting this change of career then it would have helped but they didn't. She got the ring, she got Castle and she got her job but how the writers went about that in no doubt wanting me to see Beckett as this modern, professional, go getting, strong, independent woman left a bad taste. 

 

[Ticketyboo23]

Unbelievable as it is it's the premise for the show. But you don't get DNA after lunch etc so for every procedural you need to suspend your disbelief. Kept seeing an SVU trailer where the judge asks Benson to foster a baby. Never. Going . To. Happen in real life. But lay aside the disbelief as the point was the move didn't mean Castle dropping a few quid on a DC pad. It was a major life upheaval for him & since Beckett is supposed to love him, she should have at least considered that & him at some point in her decision. It was clear in those episodes that he was unhappy but all the running was on his part. Had I been Castle's friend I would have hoped that he would wise up & ditch her.

In the end Castle proved he was the one who could sustain an adult relationship. He forgave the flirtation, he tried to show more appreciation of Beckett & made sacrifices to allow Beckett to pursue her career. Beckett however, hiding the job & lying showed she was the one who was struggling with a serious relationship.

So is she going to have to decline all promotions for the rest of her life and remain a detective in order to sustain Castle's writing career?To me, his ride-along, far from being a real-life barrier to relocation, is actually an unrealistic conceit of the show - like more than 20 murders a year in Cabot Cove.

You're right, Castle stood on a bomb the week before, so the timeline was messed up on the narrative they tried to build of a stagnating relationship. But the timeline on that show is often messed up and it didn't stop me from suspending disbelief on Castle having to learn what it takes to sustain an adult relationship even though he's 40-ish. And, to me, it's the kind of thing that when you learn it, makes the person on that journey with you extremely special even if your learning curve is challenging to them and confusing to you at the time. I don't see any heroes and villains in that scenario. But it was a pretty weak episode in which to drop such a major relationship issue.

Unbelievable as it is it's the premise for the show. But you don't get DNA after lunch etc so for every procedural you need to suspend your disbelief. Kept seeing an SVU trailer where the judge asks Benson to foster a baby. Never. Going . To. Happen in real life. But lay aside the disbelief as the point was the move didn't mean Castle dropping a few quid on a DC pad. It was a major life upheaval for him & since Beckett is supposed to love him, she should have at least considered that & him at some point in her decision. It was clear in those episodes that he was unhappy but all the running was on his part. Had I been Castle's friend I would have hoped that he would wise up & ditch her.

In the end Castle proved he was the one who could sustain an adult relationship. He forgave the flirtation, he tried to show more appreciation of Beckett & made sacrifices to allow Beckett to pursue her career. Beckett however, hiding the job & lying showed she was the one who was struggling with a serious relationship.

Oh yeah Cabot Cove (and more recently Midsomer). Best move somewhere safer.....like New York.

Edited October 27, 2014 by Ticketyboo23

[verdana]

Sorry Wendy I went and posted but didn't see you had said that in the meantime. If you want to delete it no problem.  I need to hit the refresh button more often. 

 

I wonder if we will get a promo and/or sneak peek of 7.06 straight after this episode airs? I know there's a two week break but I'm curious how they are going to promote this AU episode given the general assumption there will be a wedding in there somewhere.

 

I wonder if ABC are going to promote it like crazy or just tease with the odd promo or sneak?  

 

I know Castle isn't box office like Scandal etc but normally a wedding is big news for any TV show so I would assume they would want to do something. 

Edited October 27, 2014 by verdana

[WendyCR72]

It's fine; but let's let that be the end of it. Thanks!

[tljgator]

Wedding promo, per TV|Line (supposed to air tonight, I guess).

[Nadine]

At least all the hoopla has officially been confirmed now. LOL.

[verdana]

Thank God, tumblr can now explode and it will. 

 

And he does propose again to her at least this time she looks happier. 

 

When the teasers came out about the wild west episode ages ago I said I wanted to see Castle in cowboy gear including the hat - result! 

Screencap of the scene in 7.07 from the promo of Castle and Beckett on their honeymoon. 

And another showing the wedding ring, yet another one they have to keep track of.

Edited October 28, 2014 by verdana