Spoilers, Speculation & All Things Media!

[verdana]

Castle Vital Scenes

‏@BecklebeeCastle

#Castle 8x06 Sneak Peek #2 “Cool Boys"  Season  8 Episode 6 Martha Castle Alexis  Slaughter #CastleSeason8

 

[verdana]

Castle Vital Scenes

‏@BecklebeeCastle

#Castle 8x06 Sneak Peek #2 “Cool Boys"  Season  8 Episode 6 Martha Castle Alexis  Slaughter #CastleSeason8

 

[verdana]

Castle Photos: Rick's Anniversary Surprise, Kate Gets 'Steamed' at TV Line

 

But as TVLine noted to the show bosses, their definition of “exciting” might at this time differ from that of any viewers disenfranchised by the marrieds’ estrangement. To that, co-showrunner Alexi Hawley responded, “Here’s what were hoping: that when we get to a certain point in the season, which in theory could be the fall finale (airing Nov. 23), you could look back at the journey and appreciate it maybe a little more than you might have during it.”

 

Yeah well their definition of a lot of things doesn't match mine but glad TV Line is pointing that out. 

 

I don't want to have to wait 7 or 8 episodes and look back on what I've seen and may be like this story a little bit more, I want to be enjoying something whilst I'm watching it.  Who the hell wants to wait around for months for a pay off on a something with no guarantee it will even be worth a damn. I can't imagine any reveal that will make what I've already seen magically better. Jesus as someone in the comments section so rightly said these guys sound delusional. 

 

I'm not sure who they're trying to kid with this type or promotion but it's not working on me. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by verdana

[KaveDweller]

I did have a moment of silence for The Wig but then my annoyance kicked in when I realised that the scenes that use doubles will be so much more obvious now....

Or maybe it will just reveal that not every scene is with doubles like some people think....

[verdana]

And another thing looking at the picture on the launch gallery, I can't think of anything worse that having a confetti celebration in my office, the mess would be horrendous to get cleaned up. 

Castle‘s Captain Kate Beckett is scantily clad on the occasion of her first wedding anniversary — though probably not for the reasons one might suspect/hope, as seen in these photos from the fall’s antepenultimate episode.

 

I wasn't remotely expecting it to be anything to do with Caskett, it's undercover work although why the captain is spending her time undercover is another matter but anything to see Katic in a towel suits me. 

[verdana]

CASTLE: WHAT IS BECKETT THINKING? at TV Junkies by Christy Spratlin. 

[Chado]

Hey guys, I wrote this book. It's 1000 pages long.

 

The first 990 are absolutely terrible, but if you make it to the final 10 pages, you could potentially look back at the journey and appreciate it maybe a little more than you might have during it.

[oberon55]

 

But as TVLine noted to the show bosses, their definition of “exciting” might at this time differ from that of any viewers disenfranchised by the marrieds’ estrangement. To that, co-showrunner Alexi Hawley responded, “Here’s what were hoping: that when we get to a certain point in the season, which in theory could be the fall finale (airing Nov. 23), you could look back at the journey and appreciate it maybe a little more than you might have during it.”

 

Translation:

 

We are starting to realize we fucked up and are saying anything we can think of to keep people watching. We are almost but not quite sort of in theory hopefully promising a possible beginning of a resolution in the fall finale. You can trust us. So just keep watching no matter how bad it seems & we promise it will probably get better sooner or later.

[Chado]

Hey guys, I wrote this book. It's 1000 pages long.

 

The first 990 are absolutely terrible, but if you make it to the final 10 pages, you could potentially look back at the journey and appreciate it maybe a little more than you might have during it.

I forgot to add, it's fun too.

[madmaverick]

Well, it won't be long before Hawley finds out whether he's vindicated or been wrong all along. ;)

 

I really don't think it's any loss to not read interviews with showrunners over the course of a TV season.  We don't read interviews with authors halfway through a book, do we?  At least I don't, not till I've finished it.  Any insight that should be gleaned should be from the work itself.  There's so much in the media these days to either entice or put us off from a piece of work; the noise can take away from the purity and evaluation of the work in and of itself.

 

There's speculation that Castle knew all along what Beckett was up to, or that Caskett faked the separation together, but I don't really see the writers going down that path.  It would appear to invalidate all the emotional notes they tried (and to some, failed) to hit so far.  And I am not sure Castle is a show that can pull of that kind of deception with the viewers in a satisfactory way.  Even if the writers realise they need to retool the storyline asap to pacify many of the viewers, the best thing to do in my opinion would still be to write Caskett having a proper grown up conversation about what's happened.  Proper lessons being learned, forgiveness and trust being earned again before they can go forward as a married couple again.  

 

Robert Hanning ‏@RobHanning  
I'm certainly open to criticism, but can you at least watch the episode before telling me why you don't like it?

 

 

Robert Hanning added,
Syn-er-gy @synergy1135
@RobHanning Y would a couple that has broken up celebrate a wedding anniversary?Crumbs 4 fans? Was this your idea or another Hawley mistake?

 

 

I do have to agree with Hanning here though.  Although the idea of Caskett celebrating a wedding anniversary while separated may appear to be a strange choice on the face of it to many, I don't believe in judging something till I've actually seen it.  And I have to say, whatever the writers have in mind for that milestone, it's worth remembering that even Marlowe never seemed content to allow milestones to be fully happy occasions but had to mix it up with angst.  The proposal and the aborted wedding, for example.  I wouldn't be surprised if Hawley & TPW delivered the same.  

Edited November 6, 2015 by madmaverick

[Chado]

I really don't think it's any loss to not read interviews with showrunners over the course of a TV season.  We don't read interviews with authors halfway through a book, do we?  At least I don't, not till I've finished it.  Any insight that should be gleaned should be from the work itself.  There's so much in the media these days to either entice or put us off from a piece of work; the noise can take away from the purity and evaluation of the work in and of itself.

That's because TV and books are completely different. For one, a book cannot be critiqued by fans until it is finished, in its intended and final form. A TV show is ongoing, open to criticism, open to discussion, open to two way communication between showrunners (and/or media) and fans. The fans have a chance to respond and comment on the current direction. It's a much more active experience than a book if the fan chooses to involve themselves in it.

 

An individual may choose to ignore interviews, ignore spoilers, ignore speculation. But when the actual showrunner comments on the TV show, then it means something if the fan consumes that medium. Whether it's simply a clarification, reassurance, insight, tease, etc etc etc.

 

You are right, it's not a loss to ignore interviews. But if you read it, it does mean something, it does influence things. At the end of the day, It's the words from the person/s involved in the entire direction of the show. If the things you are reading terrify you, then the showrunners/writers have either failed in their execution of their product, or in their message being delivered.

 

I would tend to believe that both are failing now. The product is below par, and their words highlight how ignorant they are of that.

[madmaverick]

An individual may choose to ignore interviews, ignore spoilers, ignore speculation. But when the actual showrunner comments on the TV show, then it means something if the fan consumes that medium. Whether it's simply a clarification, reassurance, insight, tease, etc etc etc.

 

 

Hm... I think we differ here then.  Whether it be a showrunner, writer, actor commenting on their work, I may keep it in the back of my mind when viewing the work itself, but ultimately it's the characters on the page/screen as I interpret them that define the work for me.  Using the notorious GoT rape/not rape controversy as an example, my take on that scene was determined by my experience as a viewer at the time in the story.  Not by anything anyone else said afterwards to clarify the position.

 

But back to wondering what Beckett is thinking, the question posed by the article Verdana linked...

 

One of my concerns is that in the end, Beckett will still believe herself to have made the right decision and viewers (and poor Castle) are supposed to agree with that due to the Big Bad Threat imminently threatening their lives or something.  Lessons won't be learnt, amends won't need to be made, trust won't have to be re-earned, and they will go on to happily celebrate the end of their separation as if nothing happened. ;)  I think that would be a very damaging and unsatisfactory 'resolution' to the arc.  Going by the track record of Beckett basically written as right almost every time and not really being into apologies when she feels she is justified in her decisions/saving the world, I do fear that that's the path we're headed for.  And the writers have made similar misjudgments with the characters before, notably with Alexis and Castle during the Pi arc.  They've damaged Beckett's character with her choices this season and they would only damage it further if they show her unrepentant in the end. 

 

The real way to show characters and relationship growth through this mess is for Beckett to acknowledge that she made a huge mistake that could have jeopardised her entire marriage, and that that simply wasn't the way to do things in a marriage when faced with a crisis.  I don't need to see her prostrating herself before Castle or anything like that, but I need a real, honest acknowledgement from her that walking out on her marriage for the reasons she chose was not the right choice and she had no right to shut her husband out of her decision making process altogether.  And I don't want to see her throwing whatever Castle may have done during his disappearance in his face to justify her own choices here.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  If Castle needs to make separate apologies, that's on him.  Whether/how angry Castle may get when it all comes out may depend on how Beckett explains herself.  He's hurt no doubt, but I'm not sure being angry would be helpful in the situation even if it was a natural reaction for most.

 

I know some viewers find the "winning her back" narrative very problematic when Beckett's the one who left.  As I've said before, there are reasons why I understand someone like Castle would be pursuing that strategy even though it's not the obvious response for everyone in his position.  I have actually been wondering whether the writers chose that particular narrative for Castle's character because they know the majority of viewers are women, and somehow in a sexist way assume that women would prefer to watch a man wooing back his wife than the other way around?  Or because they think the story of Castle chasing Beckett is the story viewers fell in love with originally and so they want to repeat it?  Or Beckett's mostly been written as the one with the power in the relationship and so she had to be the one to be 'won over' yet again?  I did read a thought from a viewer who said that Beckett's the one trying to maintain the distance right now, so it made sense for Castle to be the one to try to close the distance.   That did make sense to me.  Whatever the reason, the writers always need to be mindful of writing a balanced relationship of equals.

Edited November 6, 2015 by madmaverick

[TWP]

Hey guys, I wrote this book. It's 1000 pages long.

 

The first 990 are absolutely terrible, but if you make it to the final 10 pages, you could potentially look back at the journey and appreciate it maybe a little more than you might have during it.

 

Exactly. 

 

The other version of this argument offered by "true" viewers is that the writers have to stretch their legs and do a storyline that they enjoy writing! It's all about their self-actualization and we viewers should be unselfish and support them!

 

Both those excuses work great for the indy film business.  However, TV shows are the filler that is inserted between commercials in the hope of increasing the number of people who see the ads.  You have to make that filler acceptable EVERY SINGLE week or people aren't coming and/or will leave.  Of course, when the viewership goes down even further, what's going to be blamed?  The Moonlighting Curse or whatever, not poor story line, poor writing, ruining of characters, etc.  Strangely enough these showrunners seem to fall up.  That is the biggest mystery to me.  They can reeeeeally destroy a story and then move on to do it again on another show. SMH.

Edited November 6, 2015 by TWP

[madmaverick]

Final few days to get a WWRCD shirt (or the Malcolm Reynolds shirt, should you prefer that) to support Charity:Water.  Whether you get the shirt or no, I think this cause is very worth supporting because it really doesn't get more basic than clean water, that many of us fortunate ones may take for granted.

 

natefillion: What Would Richard Castle Do? I'd like to think he would also clean up after the dog. Every shirt purchased goes to fund clean drinking water for less fortunate people thru charitywater.org -Every shirt also makes the wearer 37% cooler. https://represent.com/wwrcd

 

Why Luke doesn't let Castle wear t-shirts I'll never know... ;)

 

I do like how accountable this charity is with how they used the donations.  This is a list of water projects completed to date from Nathan's campaigns.  Pretty cool.

[TWP]

 

“Here’s what were hoping: that when we get to a certain point in the season, which in theory could be the fall finale (airing Nov. 23), you could look back at the journey and appreciate it maybe a little more than you might have during it

 

A good storyteller would have clued the viewing audience in to the mystery that would soon be revealed.  Showrunners would not have to explain a well-told story.

[Chado]

One of my concerns is that in the end, Beckett will still believe herself to have made the right decision and viewers (and poor Castle) are supposed to agree with that due to the Big Bad Threat imminently threatening their lives or something.  Lessons won't be learnt, amends won't need to be made, trust won't have to be re-earned, and they will go on to happily celebrate the end of their separation as if nothing happened. ;)  I think that would be a very damaging and unsatisfactory 'resolution' to the arc.  Going by the track record of Beckett basically written as right almost every time and not really being into apologies when she feels she is justified in her decisions/saving the world, I do fear that that's the path we're headed for.  And the writers have made similar misjudgments with the characters before, notably with Alexis and Castle during the Pi arc.  They've damaged Beckett's character with her choices this season and they would only damage it further if they show her unrepentant in the end. 

 

..................................

 

I know some viewers find the "winning her back" narrative very problematic when Beckett's the one who left.  As I've said before, there are reasons why I understand someone like Castle would be pursuing that strategy even though it's not the obvious response for everyone in his position.  I have actually been wondering whether the writers chose that particular narrative for Castle's character because they know the majority of viewers are women, and somehow in a sexist way assume that women would prefer to watch a man wooing back his wife than the other way around?  Or because they think the story of Castle chasing Beckett is the story viewers fell in love with originally and so they want to repeat it?  Or Beckett's mostly been written as the one with the power in the relationship and so she had to be the one to be 'won over' yet again?  I did read a thought from a viewer who said that Beckett's the one trying to maintain the distance right now, so it made sense for Castle to be the one to try to close the distance.   That did make sense to me.  Whatever the reason, the writers always need to be mindful of writing a balanced relationship of equals.

First paragraph = it's 100% what is going to happen. We will get the reunion, which will probably come off the back of 1 or both nearly dying, and that will sweep the actual issue under the rug. Beckett needs to actually apologize, she needs to actually explain why she won't run away again, why she won't be obsessed again at the expensive of everything else. Nothing in the shows history would suggest it will be handled any differently.

 

As for the 2nd paragraph/last paragraph. I think it's a lot of things really. I do think it's sexist in a way, but that's an easy 'excuse' to sweep the actuality of it. Castle 'lives' in her world, he's the butt of the joke, he's the character the show falls back to, to be the class clown when the show needs light moments, when it needs its humor. He is always chasing Beckett, their relationship is just naturally unbalanced.

 

Serious question, can anybody ever imagine Castle treating Beckett how she is treating him this season. Imagine Castle breaks up with her, with no reason. Imagine her 'trying to win him back', her trying to find signs that he loves her. You'd never see it, it will never happen. The show would never put Beckett in that situation. There is a lot of reasons why it wouldn't, but it's true. Castle is 'stuck' in her world, he can't leave it, not for any long duration anyway. That alone, makes their relationship unbalanced.

 

I was trying to think when there has been a time where Beckett got the espo/assposito treatment by the show. Where she was the one everybody was laughing at. I can't think of it. Castle gets made fun of, Espo has, Ryan certainly has. When has an episode in general or characters given her that sort of treatment? I can't think of a time. Marlowe realized that I think, it's the reason he tried to 'take her down a peg', he picked the worst possible way to do that (ruin the one and done ideal) but she needs to stop looking like a hero all the time, like she's the only one who can save the world or solve the case. She's protected. worshiped by some, but her flaws as a character made her interesting to me. I wish they'd show that properly and have lessons being learned. She is making a HUGE mistake, but at least show the growth, show her realizing she made a mistake, make her atone for it, make it sincere.

 

As for the whole 'Beckett is pulling away, so Castle is chasing' mantra/concept, it is kinda meaningless when it only pushes and pulls one way.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Chado

[verdana]

There's speculation that Castle knew all along what Beckett was up to, or that Caskett faked the separation together, but I don't really see the writers going down that path.  It would appear to invalidate all the emotional notes they tried (and to some, failed) to hit so far.  And I am not sure Castle is a show that can pull of that kind of deception with the viewers in a satisfactory way.  Even if the writers realise they need to retool the storyline asap to pacify many of the viewers, the best thing to do in my opinion would still be to write Caskett having a proper grown up conversation about what's happened.  Proper lessons being learned, forgiveness and trust being earned again before they can go forward as a married couple again.  

I've seen that suggestion doing the rounds that he's known all along but he's looked so completely clueless that I can't buy into the idea he's known about Beckett's super secret investigation. How do they explain his actions like apparently asking Slaughter for what appears to be advice on his marriage? That doesn't make any sense if he's already aware of what she's doing.

 

As for them both faking it that's even worse because that means they've been lying to their friends and family the whole time and I agree, the writers aren't subtle enough to pull that kind of deception off and make it look remotely convincing. It will come over like some desperate fix rather than something planned out. 

 

They've committed themselves to a particular path and making any rush changes will just make things worse not better. 

 

Regarding that tweet from Hanning, I can see both sides but I sympathise with the fan's query because that's the first thing I thought of when I read the synopsis, how can they celebrate this?  What would make it worthwhile is if they had some movement in the story due to them coming together to acknowledge this milestone - but I don't see that happening based on showrunner teases, so any enjoyment gained will once again be tarnished by the lack of any progress.  

Edited November 6, 2015 by verdana

[verdana]

I did read a thought from a viewer who said that Beckett's the one trying to maintain the distance right now, so it made sense for Castle to be the one to try to close the distance.   That did make sense to me.  Whatever the reason, the writers always need to be mindful of writing a balanced relationship of equals.

 

But she's not maintaining any distance, I see no genuine signs of struggle, if she was seriously worried about Castle and this Locksat threat she's ensure he stayed away we'd get none of these meet and greet ups.

 

I have actually been wondering whether the writers chose that particular narrative for Castle's character because they know the majority of viewers are women, and somehow in a sexist way assume that women would prefer to watch a man wooing back his wife than the other way around?  Or because they think the story of Castle chasing Beckett is the story viewers fell in love with originally and so they want to repeat it?  Or Beckett's mostly been written as the one with the power in the relationship and so she had to be the one to be 'won over' yet again?

You ask a lot of thought provoking questions madmaverick, like Chado I suspect it's a combination of factors.  What I've felt for a while now is that Beckett has the upper hand in their relationship to the detriment of their relationship for whatever reason and that seems to go hand in hand with the increased emphasis on her alpha female badassary and extraordinary heroic persona. That's been coupled with a dumbing down and general weakening of Castle as a character. I suspect that the writers have fallen into the trap of assuming to make a strong woman look even stronger you make the guy look weak and that's the worst thing they can do it makes both characters look bad.

 

I do believe there's something very traditional and safe for the audience in the "guy chases girl" scenario that seems pretty omnipresent in TV and movies even in this day and age, the fact he's chasing her constantly seems natural for the majority of the audience even if for the story it makes no logical sense.  I agree with Chado that if you swapped this scenario around it definitely couldn't work, Castle is really stuck in her world and that creates certain problems from an organic writing POV. 

[verdana]

The real way to show characters and relationship growth through this mess is for Beckett to acknowledge that she made a huge mistake that could have jeopardised her entire marriage, and that that simply wasn't the way to do things in a marriage when faced with a crisis.  I don't need to see her prostrating herself before Castle or anything like that, but I need a real, honest acknowledgement from her that walking out on her marriage for the reasons she chose was not the right choice and she had no right to shut her husband out of her decision making process altogether.  And I don't want to see her throwing whatever Castle may have done during his disappearance in his face to justify her own choices here.  Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

You set out perfectly what I want to see happen but I fear the showrunners are going to take the easy route and go for the superficial with a physical coming together which is enough to derail any serious discussion between them as to what's happened and an acknowledgement from Beckett that she understands the mistakes, realises they're always stronger as a unit and they can move on together. I expect very much the scenario you first suggested playing out, the writers cynically know what will appeal to the starved shippers after endless episodes of angst and very little physical contact between Caskett, nothing in what's happened so far leads me to believe the new showrunners despite all their bluster about "shaking" things up are any different in their modus operandi than Marlowe was when it comes to things like this. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by verdana

[verdana]

the best thing to do in my opinion would still be to write Caskett having a proper grown up conversation about what's happened.  Proper lessons being learned, forgiveness and trust being earned again before they can go forward as a married couple again.

 

Amen to all this.

 

I have to keep pinching myself the way they're being written each week that we're dealing with a twice married guy who has been around the block more than a few times in his mid forties and a woman in her mid thirties who seemingly still can't talk to each other about things that should come naturally to them at this stage in their relationship.  If they were tongue tied, naive, hormonal teenagers I might forgive them their emotional constipation and reluctance to deal with stuff but I can't at this point in their lives. 

[CastleSeason8]

In every single episode since 8 x 02 (except a brief moment in the jail cell) we have seen Castle behaving like a 12 yr old boy. Its nauseating, frustrating and a ploy to delay any development in this snail-paced split. Seems there is no end in sight. If the idea is to make KB look stronger, thats a fail. If its to bring back the "he'll chase her always" its only serving to make him look spineless. We are long overdue a scene where Castle acts like the mature man he more closely resembled during his "9 yr old on a sugar rush" stage. How sad is that.

[verdana]

Now here’s another thing to think about. In most marriages couples tell each other everything. They don’t lie or keep things from each other. They trust each other and depend on each other and that’s what makes their relationships stronger. Wouldn’t it have made a better story if Beckett had confided in Castle about everything and then they could have gone ahead and investigated Lockstat together? The strength of this show has always been Castle and Beckett working together–theory building, bouncing ideas off each other, and really just spending time together. That’s what brought us back every week.

Christy in her article nails it here, this is the essence of Castle and Beckett, that magical connection of them working together, to separate them is to severely handicap your storytelling opportunities and the fundamental appeal of the show. If they wanted to tell this particular story it would have been much better and more fulfilling and logical to have them tackle this new threat together. Contrived angst such as we've seen has no place in this relationship at this point. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by verdana

[KaveDweller]

I do believe there's something very traditional and safe for the audience in the "guy chases girl" scenario that seems pretty omnipresent in TV and movies even in this day and age, the fact he's chasing her constantly seems natural for the majority of the audience even if for the story it makes no logical sense.  I agree with Chado that if you swapped this scenario around it definitely couldn't work, Castle is really stuck in her world and that creates certain problems from an organic writing POV. 

 

I used to watch this soap opera where a female character (several of them actually) obsessively pursued a guy with another woman, no matter how many times she was rejected.  On the forum where I used to chat about the show, that character was called everything from pathetic to psycho stalker.

 

I think for this to work they have to show more of Beckett's point of view of the whole thing.  They've sort of shown that she's unhappy, but it should be more than just a couple shots of her looking sad. They also need to get back to Castle asking her what's wrong like he did in PhDead. It's dumb that he can't figure it out, but if you can buy that he can't, it makes sense for him to ask questions.  Then they could show Beckett wanting to tell him and being scared to.  Or show Beckett being distracted when people want to talk to her about cases because she has her mind on Locksat.

[verdana]

Spoiler Room: Scoop on Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., The Flash, Supernatural and more at EW

 

We're back to that word "fun" again. 

 

Any November sweeps scoop on Castle? — Mark
An upcoming outing will feature a bit of an undercover situation, according to showrunner Alexi Hawley — though he won’t reveal whether it involves Castle or Beckett. However, he does say that it won’t be the last time they do it. “We think it’s really fun to see that stuff going on, so you’ll definitely see that from time to time,” he says.

 

I can't see either of them going undercover TBH, she's married to a famous author and is well known in her own right as not only the muse for her husband's novels but due to her mother's case plus she's a police captain since when did they go undercover?  Castle well enough said. 

 

I guess it's too much to ask them BOTH going undercover together....

Edited November 6, 2015 by verdana

[verdana]

I think for this to work they have to show more of Beckett's point of view of the whole thing.  They've sort of shown that she's unhappy, but it should be more than just a couple shots of her looking sad. They also need to get back to Castle asking her what's wrong like he did in PhDead. It's dumb that he can't figure it out, but if you can buy that he can't, it makes sense for him to ask questions.  Then they could show Beckett wanting to tell him and being scared to.  Or show Beckett being distracted when people want to talk to her about cases because she has her mind on Locksat.

The writers have never served Beckett well in that department for some reason, they have her dad but he's rarely around, she has no other relatives close by and as for Lanie after a promising start they dropped that so called friendship. They briefly got it right with Dr Burke but that didn't last long either, Beckett has no sounding board or someone who can help relate her problems or struggles to the audience which would help enormously. Normally we would expect Castle to be that person but of course it can't happen. There are ways as you say of emphasizing her emotional struggles which are relatively easy to do and it baffles me why they're not doing a bit more of that. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by verdana

[KaveDweller]

The writers have never served Beckett well in that department for some reason, they have her dad but he's rarely around, she has no other relatives close by and as for Lanie after a promising start they dropped that so called friendship. They briefly got it right with Dr Burke but that didn't last long either, Beckett has no sounding board or someone who can help relate her problems or struggles to the audience which would help enormously. Normally we would expect Castle to be that person but of course it can't happen. There are ways as you say of emphasizing her emotional struggles which are relatively easy to do and it baffles me why they're not doing a bit more of that. 

 

The problem is that her character just isn't the kind of person who opens up easily.  So it would be unrealistic if she just blabs how she's feeling to anyone. They spent years getting her to a place where she opened up to Castle about stuff, which I thought was a really nice progression.  But it's hard to portray a closed off person like that on TV.

 

Isn't it ironic, as the showrunners and Castle say, that the thing that made Beckett fall in love with him is how they worked cases together and built theory together, so the first thing they do is break up the duo, so Castle now has to come up with sneaky, manipulative ways to work the cases with her? And they've also set up a situation where the mere fact that he works cases with her, puts his life in danger?

 

These guys are geniuses.

 

"Hey, is it okay that I walked out on the love of my life without giving him an explanation?"

 

"He's a grown-ass man. He should just understand without you telling him what's wrong."

 

Lanie's advice has gotten worse and worse over the years. I think it was okay before Caskett got together and Lanie was just telling her to just have some fun with the hot writer.  But once they were a real couple Lanie really dropped the ball on friendly advice.

 

They could have had her being supportive of Beckett without sounding like such an idiot. But if she and Beckett were really as close as we're supposed to think they are, being supportive would mean telling her (nicely even) that she's being an idiot. Or be worried herself about what the hell is wrong with Beckett to make her do this. Cause most people would be worried if their happily married best friend left her husband with no explanation to anyone.

Edited November 7, 2015 by KaveDweller

[femmefan1946]

They briefly got it right with Dr Burke but that didn't last long either, Beckett has no sounding board or someone who can help relate her problems or struggles to the audience which would help enormously.

 

She really needs some time with Dr. Burke.

At least long enough for him to renew her prescriptions.

[femmefan1946]

until the showrunners decide to listen to other voices besides their own.

 

On one opener for The Simpsons, Bart was writing on the blackboard, "The voices in your head are not your friends."

[turnitwayup]

More of Nathan's former coworkers on an upcoming ep.
 

NathanFillion: 22 years ago, I was 22 years old, and working my ass off with these two. Thanks for doing this, you guys. twitter.com/KassieDePaiva/…

KassieDePaiva: ONE LIFE TO LIVE is back!!!  Just kidding! Shooting #castle @NathanFillion @tucwatkins #oltl https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CTLIx3rUAAAF8eX.jpg

tucwatkins: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CTLb5dHUYAY0jSa.jpg

[verdana]

Chad Gomez Creasey @chadgcreasey

#Castle fans! Screened next Monday's ep and the return of Det. Slaughter is well-worth the wait thanks to @AlexiHawley and @AdamBaldwin!

Anna Grace Barlow ‏@therealagbarlow  13 hrs13 hours ago

Last day of work on #Castle! It's been an absolute honor to get to watch these wonderful people work. #MasterClass

https://twitter.com/therealagbarlow/status/662700342430187520

 

Christopher B. Duncan

With Stana Katic.

14 hrs · Edited

https://www.facebook.com/ChristopherB.Duncan4/photos/pcb.970519509681968/970519243015328

Fillionista ‏@TheCaskett  3 hrs3 hours ago

#BTS #Castle 810 with two handsome men... @NathanFillion & @TheChrisBDuncan

https://twitter.com/TheCaskett/status/662850822418509824

A lot of pictures for 8.10 floating around this week, nice pics of this guy with Stana and Nathan.

Edited November 7, 2015 by verdana

[verdana]

The problem is that her character just isn't the kind of person who opens up easily. So it would be unrealistic if she just blabs how she's feeling to anyone. They spent years getting her to a place where she opened up to Castle about stuff, which I thought was a really nice progression. But it's hard to portray a closed off person like that on TV.

I realise she finds it difficult so share openly but if they had developed the Lanie/Beckett friendship better or even had her continuing to see a shrink (which would tie in very well with this storyline) we could have talking to someone and it wouldn't seem OOC, as time has gone on she's relaxed and opened up a bit so it would no longer be odd to see her sharing more than she did at the start when she was emotionally closed off and distant refusing to speak to anyone.

 

They could have had her being supportive of Beckett without sounding like such an idiot. But if she and Beckett were really as close as we're supposed to think they are, being supportive would mean telling her (nicely even) that she's being an idiot. Or be worried herself about what the hell is wrong with Beckett to make her do this. Cause most people would be worried if their happily married best friend left her husband with no explanation to anyone.

The Lanie/Beckett interactions are so weird because it's like they're written by people who have no concept of what this kind of relationship should be like after all these years of supposed closeness, they hit the wrong notes with them every time, it's painful to watch these days any of their interactions when they move away from lividity. The way they have Lanie so blithely unconcerned about what is going on with her friend and her marriage is so bizarre, it's yet another example of the OOC characterisation they've employed to service the plot of non confrontation about the matter that everyone is forced to go through. 

Edited November 7, 2015 by verdana

[TWP]

I'm going to stick my neck out and say that Rick and Kate will get back together in some sense in episode 8. Hints have been made, such as Hawley speaking of the angst in 3,4,5,6,7, but leaving out 8. And at one point he said  or answered a question something like "assuming the couple get back together in 8" then this will happen. Unfortunately, I didn't save the first reference and can't find the second although I reread it only a couple days ago, but the info is somewhere in EW or TVLINE archives.

 

I know Hal said they wouldn't get back together by 8, but that was before the fans went nuclear. I know these showrunners are a lot of things, but "career suicidal" isn't one of them. I cannot imagine them going into a 2 month hiatus with no satisfying movement of the couple when fans and reviewers (other than TVline, chuckle) are sooooo unhappy. 

 

I suspect the shift will be from not being together to hiding their relationship, but not living together. Of course the credibility gap will still loom large, but it's TV which "unreals all the things", LOL, with a comedic gusto.

[Chado]

I don't see it personally. Yeah maybe, they'll sleep together here and there like they are FWB, but Beckett isn't going to move back home, she isn't going to be honest about everything. She's going to try and keep her distance from Castle. I really don't see much changing to be honest.

 

I think Castle will learn the truth about what she is doing but he won't learn it from her. The implication going into the hiatus will be that Castle is looking to work on the case too, probably independently of her. They aren't going to start increasing the scenes Beckett and Castle have with each other, so whatever it is, it has to be able to explain why Castle and Beckett are still mostly removed from each other.

 

In my opinion, two things will be 100% certain going into the hiatus. They won't be 'together' in a relationship still, and she will still be living with Vikram or wherever she is living now.

 

A kiss here, some off-screen sex there, none of that changes anything significantly. The only thing that properly moves things forward and brings them together, is if they start solving the same case and working on the same elements of it. Until then, they are separated.

[verdana]

I'm going to stick my neck out and say that Rick and Kate will get back together in some sense in episode 8. Hints have been made, such as Hawley speaking of the angst in 3,4,5,6,7, but leaving out 8. And at one point he said  or answered a question something like "assuming the couple get back together in 8" then this will happen. Unfortunately, I didn't save the first reference and can't find the second although I reread it only a couple days ago, but the info is somewhere in EW or TVLINE archives.

 

I know Hal said they wouldn't get back together by 8, but that was before the fans went nuclear. I know these showrunners are a lot of things, but "career suicidal" isn't one of them. I cannot imagine them going into a 2 month hiatus with no satisfying movement of the couple when fans and reviewers (other than TVline, chuckle) are sooooo unhappy. 

 

I suspect the shift will be from not being together to hiding their relationship, but not living together. Of course the credibility gap will still loom large, but it's TV which "unreals all the things", LOL, with a comedic gusto.

I believe Hal when she said they wouldn't be back together before Christmas, I don't see that their plan has changed TBH, they're not going to give fans more Caskett but they probably always knew at that point they were going to have to shift the story into a new phase. They're not stupid they know they can't carry on exactly as they're doing all season, the fans will get bored and frustrated. However, I can see the current amount of Caskett time will remain consistent throughout the season and based on what I'm seeing they also want to keep them apart as much as possible using the separation and involving other characters to achieve that. 

 

It was no surprise to see pictures showing their wedding anniversary celebration taking place in the precinct, that's exactly where you want to keep them to avoid Castle and Beckett having too many private moments where God forbid you might have to examine their relationship in more depth. 

 

It makes sense that the shift Hawley mentions is Rick discovering about Locksat but the last thing they want is to have them physically back together because that means more "at home" scenes and increased screentime for Caskett.  I'm somewhat dubious they'll go down the road of hiding their relationship from everyone and sneaking around in secret, that's almost turning the situation into a farce rather than the serious situation it's meant to be, it also means they'll be renewed pressure from fans to have more Caskett scenes.  I tend to agree with Chado that he finds out but not from Beckett and they leave it with the teaser that he'll confront her and they'll get back together when the show returns. That won't happen of course at least not in the way the fans are hoping. 

Edited November 7, 2015 by verdana

[VinceW]

I believe Hal when she said they wouldn't be back together before Christmas, I don't see that their plan has changed TBH, they're not going to give fans more Caskett but they probably always knew at that point they were going to have to shift the story into a new phase. They're not stupid they know they can't carry on exactly as they're doing all season, the fans will get bored and frustrated. However, I can see the current amount of Caskett time will remain consistent throughout the season and based on what I'm seeing they also want to keep them apart as much as possible using the separation and involving other characters to achieve that. 

 

It was no surprise to see pictures showing their wedding anniversary celebration taking place in the precinct, that's exactly where you want to keep them to avoid Castle and Beckett having too many private moments where God forbid you might have to examine their relationship in more depth. 

 

It makes sense that the shift Hawley mentions is Rick discovering about Locksat but the last thing they want is to have them physically back together because that means more "at home" scenes and increased screentime for Caskett.  I'm somewhat dubious they'll go down the road of hiding their relationship from everyone and sneaking around in secret, that's almost turning the situation into a farce rather than the serious situation it's meant to be, it also means they'll be renewed pressure from fans to have more Caskett scenes.  I tend to agree with Chado that he finds out but not from Beckett and they leave it with the teaser that he'll confront her and they'll get back together when the show returns. That won't happen of course at least not in the way the fans are hoping. 

The "shift" and the "promise" of things to come has to be more than Castle finding out about Loksat on his own and Beckett not knowing about it, but rather they find out together the danger and Beckett realizes they must work together on it.  Living together is not the issue with Beckett, but rather working the Loksat danger together is why she left. Once they reach an understanding about the specific danger, there is no reason to live apart unless that element is being forced on the story by Hawley for some strange personal reason. IMO. Otherwise, the writers would need to drag out them living apart for another 12 episodes which I think is just unrealistic if the network cares at all about keeping the audience. They are working together now in a bizarre way which the writers know they must do to keep people watching, but using a comedic premise to fill early episodes along with the 'win her back' strategy was just foolish and it makes the whole marriage situation look ridiculous if the intent of the producers is for the big bad story line to last the entire season. I just can't imagine that something definitive doesn't happen about Loksat during Feb sweeps, but maybe there are real BTS issues driving the whole season.

Edited November 7, 2015 by VinceW

[CastleSeason8]

ABOUT SP: You know after watching both sneak peeks Im not quite sure what to do about this episode. I was going to watch, thinking since it was a "stand alone" ep, we would get away from the angst and watch without that looming. What i saw just shocked me (not for the 1st time this season). Taking Slaughter mid arrest, from his friends?? was there no better way? and what about his wife, the Captain - might she have something to say about that? The scene in the office was terrible. I felt bad for Susan S - the only bright acting spot in that whole mess. Hmmm...guess I'll be missing another one. I'll be waiting patiently for ur comments after viewing.

Edited November 7, 2015 by CastleSeason8

[371012]

Spoiler Room: Scoop on Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., The Flash, Supernatural and more at EW

We're back to that word "fun" again.

I can't see either of them going undercover TBH, she's married to a famous author and is well known in her own right as not only the muse for her husband's novels but due to her mother's case plus she's a police captain since when did they go undercover? Castle well enough said.

I guess it's too much to ask them BOTH going undercover together....

Oops, was supposed to and DEFINITELY too much to ask them to go under covers...

[Thak]

 

In my opinion, two things will be 100% certain going into the hiatus. They won't be 'together' in a relationship still, and she will still be living with Vikram or wherever she is living now.

 

I agree.  My perception as of now is they regret putting them together and/or marrying them, and so they are backtracking.  Based on  everything since mid season 5, I agree they shouldn't have put them together, but they made their bed so.....

Edited November 7, 2015 by Thak

[verdana]

Once they reach an understanding about the specific danger, there is no reason to live apart unless that action is being forced on the story by Hawley for some strange personal reason. IMO.

 

 

I agree there's no logical reason to remain living separately but they'll think of some stupid excuse, they may not keep it going for another 12 episodes but I wouldn't be shocked if they're still apart about the time of the mid season two parter.  They may not have one this season but if they do I could see that causing another "shift" in the relationship with the Castle mythology kicking in remember about the same time if Hawley is to be believed. 

Edited November 7, 2015 by verdana

[KaveDweller]

In my opinion, two things will be 100% certain going into the hiatus. They won't be 'together' in a relationship still, and she will still be living with Vikram or wherever she is living now.

 

Why do you think she's living with Vikram? I haven't seen anything to indicate that. Just the fact that they've been meeting at the precinct and in cars suggest they're not.

 

But I agree they won't be fully back together by the mid-season finale. The best I'm hoping for is Castle finds out and they agree to work together but are still living apart either for show or for some other contrived reason. 

[TWP]

I didn't say they would be living together, only back together. Beckett will insist they remain physically apart. And I don't apply logic to her thought process because none has been applied to the story so far, so why now?

But if the couple truly remains apart and little more movement is made by hiatus, I believe that will be the end of Castle, the TV show. It will come back with fractional ratings. Thus, I don't think they're going to take the risk. The show defies logic, the network executives apply $$$logic.

But hey, here I am once more at my solo opinion table, where I get all the cookies, even if I'm wrong :-). And they are tasty!

[VinceW]

I agree there's no logical reason to remain living separately but they'll think of some stupid excuse, they may not keep it going for another 12 episodes but I wouldn't be shocked if they're still apart about the time of the mid season two parter.  They may not have one this season but if they do I could see that causing another "shift" in the relationship with the Castle mythology kicking in remember about the same time if Hawley is to be believed. 

Recall in an early season Hawley interview, he was asked about a future two-part episode and he said that there were no plans for one which is why I feel that the Loksat tracking issue will come into the forefront somehow as part of the Feb sweeps along with the investigation of the death of the AG assistant given that Beckett told Espo to keep it open for NYPD and not turn it over to the feds. I agree that Hawley may use the Castle disappearance to bring more strife to the relationship, but to keep them living apart for much longer just risks losing a huge number of already frustrated and impatient viewers.

I didn't say they would be living together, only back together. Beckett will insist they remain physically apart. And I don't apply logic to her thought process because none has been applied to the story so far, so why now?

But if the couple truly remains apart and little more movement is made by hiatus, I believe that will be the end of Castle, the TV show. It will come back with fractional ratings. Thus, I don't think they're going to take the risk. The show defies logic, the network executives apply $$$logic.

But hey, here I am once more at my solo opinion table, where I get all the cookies, even if I'm wrong :-). And they are tasty!

There with you and save me some cookies!!

[Thak]

 

I agree that Hawley may use the Castle disappearance to bring more strife to the relationship, but to keep them living apart for much longer just risks losing a huge number of already frustrated and impatient viewers.

 

Yes, I also believe Castle's disppearance will be used, it may even tie in with Locksat.

[CastleSeason8]

Yes, I also believe Castle's disppearance will be used, it may even tie in with Locksat.

I think so too. They said there will be some "cosmic" reason these two are together so i think these 2 storylines will connect some way. Should be interesting (and yes, Im being sarcastic)

[Chado]

Why do you think she's living with Vikram? I haven't seen anything to indicate that. Just the fact that they've been meeting at the precinct and in cars suggest they're not.

The Vikram thing is just me being sarcastic....since they don't think that detail is worth explaining to anybody still

[verdana]

I think so too. They said there will be some "cosmic" reason these two are together so i think these 2 storylines will connect some way. Should be interesting (and yes, Im being sarcastic)

As soon as Katic talked about the audience finding out the "cosmic" reasons Castle and Beckett have come together I immediately thought they would try to fuse the Castle mythology in with the Locksat investigation and do some kind of retcon of their pasts, piling more shit on top of an already huge stinking mess. Yet another bad misstep this season if it happens.

 

The Castle mythology is rotten to the core and from Hawley's vagueness when talking about it they don't have a clue where they're going with it, that's asking for trouble in expanding on a story you have no way of fixing. 

 

I don't know why they couldn't leave their history alone, I don't want there to be some "cosmic" link, they're meeting as they did was fine as it stood no need to mess with that but Hawley seems to love living in the past so I guess it's no surprise he wants to screw up what I already know and give me some new background that will almost certainly detract not add something beneficial to their story.

Edited November 8, 2015 by verdana

[verdana]

The Vikram thing is just me being sarcastic....since they don't think that detail is worth explaining to anybody still

It would help if we did know where she was living and what it looks like, have the place looking like some temporary crash pad and unwelcoming with a murder board or lots of paperwork, takeaway cartons littering the place.  Yet another opportunity wasted in showing the fans she's seriously looking into this instead of the occasional phone call or glance at a file which we get at the moment to signify she's "working her tail off" as Winter described it which isn't come over at all. 

[verdana]

Your Show Is Dead (or the Age of Denial in Broadcast TV) at THR (excerpt) 

Look no further than THR TV Team warrior Lesley Goldberg's piece on "How 'Trimmed' Became the New 'Canceled'" and you'll see the problem. In her piece, network heads and insiders talk about why the networks aren't canceling shows that were either DOA or DOSE — dead on second episode. Instead, they've been trimming episode orders.

 

All that does is delay both the obvious and the inevitable decision to cancel. That time will absolutely come, because pouring money down the drain, while a longtime network habit, isn't as acceptable down in accounting when most of — not just some of — the shows are ratings garbage fires.

 

Goldberg's story detailed the episode order trims on ABC's Blood and Oil, NBC's The Player and Truth Be Told, and Fox's Minority Report. The working theory, she reported, is that network execs think the new world order on ratings — monitoring viewer and demo growth over three, seven or 30 days — is a much more complicated formula than those age-old overnights of the past. The only problem here is that those execs are lying. Or in denial. Because, as stated above — they know.

 

This math is not hard math. It's not TV Industry New World Math that stumps computers. Numbers, to this day, still don't lie. They might not tell you what you want to hear — that your industry has a severely damaged foundation and the whole thing is framed in balsa wood — but they aren't deceptive. The patterns are pretty evident. What you once learned by tracking overnight ratings is now the same arc with the same conclusion once you punch in the three-, seven- or (fool yourself all you want) 30-day ratings: The show is dead.

 

In relative terms, nobody is watching. The demos are terrible. Small spikes in viewership are not something to cling on to, like little handles of hope. They do not change the narrative. The show is dead. It's underperforming for advertisers. It wasted your promotional budget. It's not adding new viewers week to week. There is no Lazarus-like moment coming. The show is dead.

 

Edited November 8, 2015 by verdana

[CastleSeason8]

Yes, i believe the show is dead - and has been dying a slow, painful death since 6 x 23. S8 has been the last, unfortunate gasp. Seems the fans (in the last few episodes) have lost what was left of that lovin' feeling. People certainly dont seem to be as invested and have given up. Myself included.

[femmefan1946]

It's underperforming for advertisers.

 

This is the real killer for network shows that depend on advertising. They are selling eyeballs.

To some extent, advertising as a basis for monetizing entertainment has been dying since the invention of the remote control. And I remember watching Jack Lemmon using a (4 channel!) remote in The Apartment, circa 1959.

Movies, concerts and theatre use a different method of making money. Pay as you go. Direct payment from the audience.

I know The Mindy Project and Community have already moved from broadcast to subscription. Are there others?

 

BTW- sometimes what a show needs is new advertisers. I wonder if one reason Buick has been such an obtrusive part of Castle recently is that the demographic skews older as does the Buick customer? Still no ads for Depends, stairlifts, or walkin bathtubs though.