Spoilers, Speculation & All Things Media!

[CheshireCat]

3 minutes ago, BellyLaughter said:

 

What a bitter ending to my time as a fan of a show that gave me such joy.

That's the part I can't reconcile with. Someone just posted on another board that they had watched "Till death do us part" and commented that the third time apparently wasn't the charm. And that's what's bothering me. That an unhappy end will to Castle and Beckett in whatever way will lead to that kind of thinking and one action has the power to ruin the entire show. I really don't care if there's a season 9 or not. I care about the happy ending for Castle and Beckett. That's all I'm asking. They can do a one-hour show of Fillion walking in and out of his office for S9 for all I care. Just no cliffhanger and implied death or split or whatever. Let her live, let them be happy.

[WendyCR72]

3 minutes ago, CheshireCat said:

Let her live

But do we know she dies? I will concede that a happy ending is probably not in the cards and it sucks for the 'shippers. But (asking honestly here) would that knowledge be a bit less hard if the character still leaves alive - even if C/B split?

[BellyLaughter]

Yep, we've been sold this narrative that they are each other's 'Always' 

 

Thus negating EVERYTHING that has been said and done in EIGHT seasons....all the heartfelt moments rendered null and void.  Great love story my backside.....

 

And don't get me started on how absolutely devastating it is for me to see how much this character now stands to lose after fighting so hard to get it back!  If anyone deserves a happy ending its Kate Beckett.  

 

In fact I am pretty insulted that I am expected to swallow that kind of disrespect to a storyline and character and just show up next season cause it's gonna be fun and/or different.....

 

Bravo ABC Bravo 

Edited May 9, 2016 by BellyLaughter

[CheshireCat]

3 minutes ago, WendyCR72 said:

But do we know she dies? I will concede that a happy ending is probably not in the cards and it sucks for the 'shippers. But (asking honestly here) would that knowledge be a bit less hard if the character still leaves alive - even if C/B split?

Not for me, that's why I added "let them be happy".

[BellyLaughter]

9 minutes ago, WendyCR72 said:

But do we know she dies? I will concede that a happy ending is probably not in the cards and it sucks for the 'shippers. But (asking honestly here) would that knowledge be a bit less hard if the character still leaves alive - even if C/B split?

We don't know for sure so I am just applying network tv decision making 101 to the situation?!?  I can't see they have any other option and whilst for many fans the idea that KB could be waiting in the shadows to return if the opportunity arises is a viable one I just can't see the network being in favour of that option....it ties their hands too much on storytelling options for poor widow Castle.

 

And in answer to your question - yes it would be. I probably still wouldn't watch but I'd keep one eye open.  

Edited May 9, 2016 by BellyLaughter

[rspad]

10 minutes ago, WendyCR72 said:

But do we know she dies? I will concede that a happy ending is probably not in the cards and it sucks for the 'shippers. But (asking honestly here) would that knowledge be a bit less hard if the character still leaves alive - even if C/B split?

That's what makes this a no-win for me.  A Beckett who walks away for Castle's safety (again!) or Witness Protection or some other such reason is potentially just as bad for me as the character's heroic death because both paths mean that the storytelling of the past 8 yrs has led to heartbreak.  (Although her being alive leaves the ever so slim possibility of a guest spot in any future season, but that is a long shot I wouldn't bet on.) 

While the shipper part of the series has been a big part of my enjoyment of the show, it goes beyond that to the dynamic of those two characters investigating together and playing off each other in those settings.  So...I guess I'm just going to dislike any ending other than an alive Beckett, a happily ever after Caskett and a S9 rebooted universe where all the players are the same, but act as if Beckett never existed.  What?  Perfect worlds don't exist?  Yeah, not gonna happen that way, but there you go.  :-)

[WendyCR72]

4 minutes ago, rspad said:

What?  Perfect worlds don't exist?

Lies! LIES!

[CheshireCat]

11 minutes ago, rspad said:

  Perfect worlds don't exist? 

Which is exactly why they need to exist in the fictional world, in my opinion!

[KaveDweller]

1 hour ago, rspad said:

a S9 rebooted universe where all the players are the same, but act as if Beckett never existed.  What?  Perfect worlds don't exist?  Yeah, not gonna happen that way, but there you go.  :-)

I kind of think this is what we'll get. Beckett will barely be mentioned next season, we'll just see Castle having fun solving cases without any sign that he's a man that lost the love of his life. Really sad way to go with the series.

What's even sadder is whenever I think of the show now I'll think of BTS drama instead of the actually characters/storylines that I liked.

Edited May 9, 2016 by KaveDweller

[CheshireCat]

Just now, SweetTooth said:

What if they just rename it Kidnapped! Then every week Castle can get kidnapped, and Ryan and Espo have to find him.

Thanks for the laugh! But it'll probably reach a point when they either don't want to find him anymore or the kidnappers don't want to kidnap him anymore because he'll make a joke out of everything. ;-)

[BellyLaughter]

15 minutes ago, SweetTooth said:

What if they just rename it Kidnapped! Then every week Castle can get kidnapped, and Ryan and Espo have to find him.

Instead of Where's Wally? they can call it Where's Castle?

[westwingfan]

3 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

Thank you. And yeah, the little "Fillione" thing is asinine. So, please use his proper name going forward here.

I've just been giving him the same respect that he has given his co-star by frequently referring to "Beckette" in his live tweeting, when he bothers to mention her at all. But I've already given up on the show and I'm finding the urge to post online is diminishing too as the realisation that the show I got hooked on is gone forever and I move on.

[rspad]

12 minutes ago, KaveDweller said:

I kind of think this is what we'll get. Beckett will barely be mentioned next season, we'll just see Castle having fun solving cases without any sign that he's a man that lost the love of his life. Really sad way to go with the series.

It is sad, but in my "perfect world" I literally meant a S9 where Beckett doesn't, and never has, existed.  Like some bizarro parallel universe.  That way there's none of the blatant disregard of her character while Castle is off having "fun" solving cases. We get the proper ending to S8 and then they can go off and do whatever they heck they want in S9. 

Like I said, never gonna happen.  If ABC is hell bent on continuing the series with so many of the same characters, I think a true spinoff/reboot like that are slim to none at this point.

[BellyLaughter]

1 minute ago, SweetTooth said:

It would need a wacky theme song and everyone getting caught doing something and then looking into the camera and smiling or mugging.

Like, Castle could be at his desk typing and look up and make a face. Ryan and Espo could be tiptoeing through an abandoned warehouse and suddenly look up and smile.

Perhaps it can be like the old Full House theme song. 

I think that would be asking way too much of ABC!  I mean imagine having to actually put thought and effort into renewing a story??!! I mean it's just easier to shit where you eat isn't it??  Pretty sure that's ABCs slogan!!

[CheshireCat]

5 minutes ago, rspad said:

It is sad, but in my "perfect world" I literally meant a S9 where Beckett doesn't, and never has, existed.  Like some bizarro parallel universe.  That way there's none of the blatant disregard of her character while Castle is off having "fun" solving cases. We get the proper ending to S8 and then they can go off and do whatever they heck they want in S9. 

 

Well, maybe someone can dig up that artifact again, so Castle can disappear off into an alternate universe in the first episode of S9.

[BellyLaughter]

2 minutes ago, CheshireCat said:

Well, maybe someone can dig up that artifact again, so Castle can disappear off into an alternate universe in the first episode of S9.

At this point THAT would be preferable over the alternative we all know (despite what we say) is coming....at least that way the humor won't leave a bad taste in the mouths of Beckett fans!

[rspad]

4 minutes ago, CheshireCat said:

Well, maybe someone can dig up that artifact again, so Castle can disappear off into an alternate universe in the first episode of S9.

Ha, exactly!!

[KaveDweller]

12 minutes ago, rspad said:

It is sad, but in my "perfect world" I literally meant a S9 where Beckett doesn't, and never has, existed.  Like some bizarro parallel universe.  That way there's none of the blatant disregard of her character while Castle is off having "fun" solving cases. We get the proper ending to S8 and then they can go off and do whatever they heck they want in S9. 

Like I said, never gonna happen.  If ABC is hell bent on continuing the series with so many of the same characters, I think a true spinoff/reboot like that are slim to none at this point.

No, it will never happen, but I can't imagine how they'll continue on without any major reset of the show. 

I'm just going to pretend that everything that happened in S8 and beyond is a parallel universe. Like really bad fan fiction that someone filmed and put on TV. The show has established that parallel universe's exist, so why not?

[BellyLaughter]

6 minutes ago, SweetTooth said:

I sense a Flash/Castle crossover. 

Awwww we don't wanna drag Flash down do we??

[BellyLaughter]

I am quite amazed reading Twitter posts and blog posts by fans who I consider to be pretty sensible and level headed about all of this where they still believe that cancellation is realistically an option.  

 

I guess the power of positive thought is a gift I don't possess but really the writings on the wall isn't it??

[TWP]

3 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

But do we know she dies? I will concede that a happy ending is probably not in the cards and it sucks for the 'shippers. But (asking honestly here) would that knowledge be a bit less hard if the character still leaves alive - even if C/B split?

People assume that if Castle is cancelled, showrunners would write a satisfying ending.  Look at HIMYM, Lost, the Sopranos. Series endings can be pretty disappointing. Given the showrunners' track records, I wouldn't trust them with a happy ending for Beckett, even with cancellation.

As far as I know, they have never explicitly said that the cancellation alternate ending would be happy, just that it wraps things up. Anybody ever hear them imply a happy ending?

[BellyLaughter]

Check out The Good Wife fans reaction to their ending.... 

 

I guess we need to be careful what we wish for!! 

[Sara2009]

19 minutes ago, BellyLaughter said:

Check out The Good Wife fans reaction to their ending.... 

 

I guess we need to be careful what we wish for!! 

I actually quite liked that ending, but I'm not surprised that many hated it.

[rspad]

24 minutes ago, TWP said:

People assume that if Castle is cancelled, showrunners would write a satisfying ending.  Look at HIMYM, Lost, the Sopranos. Series endings can be pretty disappointing. Given the showrunners' track records, I wouldn't trust them with a happy ending for Beckett, even with cancellation.

As far as I know, they have never explicitly said that the cancellation alternate ending would be happy, just that it wraps things up. Anybody ever hear them imply a happy ending?

Very true, there's never a guarantee a series will end on a high note, and I too don't recall them implying an ending would be happy. 

Having said that, I've done my best to give these showrunners the benefit of the doubt all season.  I went along with the separation storyline although I found their execution to be lacking to put it mildly.   If they don't have a cancellation ending that's happy, they're even more tone deaf than they've already been accused of being. 

[WendyCR72]

Funnily enough, the only shows I can recall with good finales are Law & Order (which even had to be re-edited into one since - after 20 years - NBC canceled it abruptly) and its offshoot, Law & Order: Criminal Intent with Bobby on more solid ground after therapy and happily going off on another case with Alex.

Maybe straight procedurals do have their pluses!

ETA: I forgot Friends. Everyone got closure and some form of a nice ending. Even if I thought Ross and Rachel was a toxic relationship by the show's end.

[verdana]

First off thanks Wendy for giving us all that leeway to go off speculating and gossiping about BTS events, because things off screen have been way more interesting than what's happening on it recently plus this thread would have been very quiet otherwise but I know it makes your job tougher.

4 hours ago, KaveDweller said:

What's even sadder is whenever I think of the show now I'll think of BTS drama instead of the actually characters/storylines that I liked.

Sadly this, that's why I wish the show had ended earlier not only due to the downturn in the quality of the writing but because all this wouldn't have kicked off. It's a bit like Moonlighting, I loved it then much later found out Cybill and Bruce hated each others guts and that's all I think about when anyone mentions the show - the various BTS problems that brought its downfall. 

I was thinking about watching The Good Wife but once again the issues there that have come up have put me off a bit which is unfortunate as it looks like a good show but when BTS issues are clearly affecting what I'm seeing it makes me nervous.  I want my storytelling dictated by the writers not because actor A won't work with actor B either at all or only for 10 minutes a week. 

Edited May 9, 2016 by verdana

[WendyCR72]

13 minutes ago, verdana said:

I was thinking about watching The Good Wife but once again the issues there that have come up have put me off a bit which is unfortunate as it looks like a good show but when BTS issues are clearly affecting what I'm seeing it puts me off.  I want my storytelling dictated by the writers not because actor A won't work with actor B either at all or only for 10 minutes a week. 

 

Elementary (a modern take on Sherlock Holmes and [Joan, yes a female here] Watson) is pretty good, @verdana, if you like shows like Castle was. Granted, they are strictly platonic, no romance, but it is a deep friendship and it gloriously seems to fly under the radar as far as off-screen exposure goes. No idea if Jonny Lee Miller and Lucy Liu like, hate, or tolerate each other, but that is (IMO) how it should be! Sometimes, not being a "cool" show has its pluses.

[verdana]

7 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

But do we know she dies? I will concede that a happy ending is probably not in the cards and it sucks for the 'shippers. But (asking honestly here) would that knowledge be a bit less hard if the character still leaves alive - even if C/B split?

Like rspad it's not any better, I already see their relationship as being dysfunctional with this latest separation and how it portrayed both characters but especially Beckett as very selfish and stupid. The writers in their ham fisted way undid all the good work that had been done in showing her emotional growth since her mother's death and meeting Castle. Having her run off again into hiding leaving her husband, friends and family behind would have me throwing up my hands finally in defeat and willing Castle to divorce her, save himself the ongoing grief of having a wife who apparently doesn't understand her wedding vows or the first thing about what being in a true partnership actually means.  If this was real life he would never find true happiness and stability with her she would need constant counselling and even then I doubt it would do much good as for them having kids that would be a disaster for everyone. 

I can't be rooting for these two when the writers are doing such a piss poor job of making them look relatable couple, they seem unable to portray them in a happy and healthy way, Castle and Beckett have been reduced to puppets being twisted out of shape almost on a weekly basis, there's more substance in their food take out cartons than in what I see on screen of their marriage.

The best option is that she dies because the alternatives are bound to be horribly written and that's worse for me to suffer than her being killed off. 

Edited May 9, 2016 by verdana

[verdana]

Thanks Wendy for the recommendation, ignorance is bliss at least when it comes to BTS issues on TV shows that much is certain.  The only thing I know about Jonny Lee Miller is he used to be married to Angelina Jolie.

[verdana]

What amuses me is that we're going to get Locksat dropped on us like a ton of bricks next week which makes it even worse, at least Marlowe managed a few episodes build up. 

If the villain turns out to be some anonymous bod completely out of left field it seals the deal that Hawley and Winter didn't have a clue what they're doing, they never did have any plan set out and they need to go back to writing school. 

It also tells me that under their stewardship the show is not in a good place, unless removing Beckett out the equation frees them up enough to rethink their attitude to writing for the show.   

[KaveDweller]

6 hours ago, TWP said:

People assume that if Castle is cancelled, showrunners would write a satisfying ending.  Look at HIMYM, Lost, the Sopranos. Series endings can be pretty disappointing. Given the showrunners' track records, I wouldn't trust them with a happy ending for Beckett, even with cancellation.

As far as I know, they have never explicitly said that the cancellation alternate ending would be happy, just that it wraps things up. Anybody ever hear them imply a happy ending?

I'm pretty sure they said satisfying. Which one would assume means happy, but these are people that thought a breakup was fun. So, who knows?

[Kromm]

8 hours ago, TWP said:

People assume that if Castle is cancelled, showrunners would write a satisfying ending.  Look at HIMYM, Lost, the Sopranos. Series endings can be pretty disappointing. 

Just as a momentary sidebar, I don't know if those are all equivalents. HIMYM was to virtually everyone massively disappointing, because it betrayed it's own premise. Lost was bad, but not quite to the same level, because I don't think it betrayed it's premise--it was just badly executed (and actually somewhat fated to be because they made the whole show up as they went along and never DID have a real exit plan). So rancid, but not as much as HIMYM. The Sopranos, although I know it upset many people, DID seem to stay true to itself. While the show had never featured anything specifically like that abrupt ending before, the whole notion that Tony led a life that could possibly end on a moment's notice fit with the whole show. 

I'll even brave massive disapproval and give the unpopular opinion that Seinfeld (one you didn't mention) was true to itself in it's finale, even if people were really upset because in a way they'd never truly understood the show, and what it was saying about those characters. It spent years illustrating that these were horrible people, who didn't deserve any kind of happy ending, and them being locked up was just the metaphor for that. At worst it was just a lazy way to do that rather than a truly clever one, but the message was on target.

Taking this back to Castle, we have to ask ourselves what the true (vs. anything spun by anyone now) original core message/premise was. I don't know if it was as simple as Castle and Beckett being in Twu Wuv, to snark about it a bit, but it did seem to be about how two opposites could form a greater performing whole. If the ending was about that? It would have been a satisfying ending. I think it's as simple as that. Castle had to grow up, Beckett had to (at least from the original vision of her) loosen up, and the only real ending the show really needed was one which vindicated that. If it had been done years ago (when it arguably should have been) it might have been them getting married. But even this season it could have been some variation of separating them and having them reunite for good to form the ending to prove the premise. Having Castle lose her puts the show into two potentially really stupid situations premisewise. Either they have to show he DID grow up but in the process betray the part of the notion that he needed her as his counterbalance, or they have to show that he DIDN'T grow up and have a wacky season next year where he totally reverts and makes her years with him seem useless.

Edited May 9, 2016 by Kromm

[TWP]

2 hours ago, KaveDweller said:

I'm pretty sure they said satisfying. Which one would assume means happy, but these are people that thought a breakup was fun. So, who knows?

They said they want to have gotten through the serialized stories, like Beckett's mom's murder, in a satisfying and compelling way. I still haven't found anything about a satisfying series ending. Tiring up lose ends satisfyingly does not necessarily imply a happy ending. Maybe Beckett dies no matter what?

http://deadline.com/2016/01/castle-showrunners-ending-season-8-cast-season-9-1201679423/

And honestly I don't see how they have time to even get through what they promised. 

[madmaverick]

Wendy, if I could hug your posts I would.  You expressed a lot of the frustrations I feel.

I'm just constantly taken aback by the way that so many fans full of self righteousness can believe they know events and people with a real certainty when they can actually have no actual knowledge of those events and people.  I would argue that's quite egotistical behaviour as well as close mindedness and prejudice at play.  These people rush to play judge, jury, executioner- and nothing less will do because the mob wants their pound of flesh from their designated villain and they will rake you over coals for it- even though their judgments are based on a whole lot of assumptions and often bias, and few facts interpreted in an objective way.  Even the few facts at hand are absent context to enable anyone to see the complete picture.  The absence of actual knowledge doesn't seem to bother a lot of people when they go ahead and engage in some truly malicious slander and personal attacks, and make serious and damaging accusations without evidence, which may be what I find most disturbing.  Do people just throw out words like 'sexist', 'bully', so easily without thinking what it means to accuse someone of that?  Just because they write something on the internet, they don't believe they need to take responsibility?  

The way some people easily believe what's said from questionable sources like tabloids and anon insiders just because it's on the internet is also disturbing.  It's like no critical thought is necessary.  I find it disconcerting when people say 'there's no smoke without fire' or think it must be true because something's been recycled in more than one tabloid.  Well, no, sometimes bullshit is just bullshit, even if it's reprinted over and over on the internet.  Bullshit rumours can take on lives of their own especially when helped along by gullible fans or fans with their own fan agenda.  People can be very disingenuous in how they mix a little bit of truth with a whole lot of lies to make you believe their story.  Trump is a case in point.  It's especially disconcerting when people choose to believe tabloids with anon 'sources' which smear people's reputations but casually dismiss the words of people who actually know those involved and have only ever spoken well of them, plenty of female and male colleagues included.  Not only is there a lack of critical thought and scrutiny about assumptions and allegations being thrown about, there's also widespread bias and selectivism when it comes to people's interpretation of people and events.  All too often the self-righteous fans only interpret things in ways that suit their own fan narrative; any pesky facts that get in the way of that are conveniently ignored.  Those fans aren't really interested in a reasoned, logical discussion; it's not rational, it's emotional.  They just want to rage against their villain of choice.

This kind of fan behaviour began long before news of Stana's exit.  Last year, I remember people were hurling pitchforks at Nathan for the delay in Stana's re-signing and holding him responsible for Stana's contract negotiations for some illogical reason.  Accusing him of sexism even then and not negotiating equal pay for her or something crazy like that.  According to Hal on this board, equal pay wasn't the issue.  To this day, there are no actual facts as to what the contentious issues were in Stana's re-signing, but at the time it didn't stop a raging mob from putting all the responsibility on someone other than the negotiating parties involved, which I found bewildering.  This year is an extension of that mentality.

Like I said, there are a hell of a lot of assumptions being made without question, which, I, personally, am not ready to make given the lack of actual knowledge of people and events.  There's a lot of assumptions about the amount of power Nathan allegedly has.  It would be logical to assume that he (and Stana) had a certain amount of power as no. 1 and 2 on the show.  But did that power extend to getting someone fired or getting someone hired back after the boss fired her?  I am doubtful.  Believe him or not, but Nathan's said more than once that many mistakenly think actors have more power than they actually do.  Just because he plays Castle doesn't mean he controls everything about Castle, the show.  Which is the position some fans have placed him in.  They hold him responsible for the P.I. arc, the non wedding, the separation, anything and everything, onscreen and offscreen, as if he's sole puppetmaster.  That's just not logical to me.  Again, believe him or not, he's said many times he's just the actor who says the lines written by others.  One of the writers was credited with the P.I. story idea.  Actors may offer suggestions but it's another thing to conclude they call the shots.

What's logical to me is that no matter what power Nathan or Stana has, it's the network that is everyone's boss.   They get to decide who works for them and they get to decide the direction of a show.  What would be logical to me is to look first at the relationship between employer and employee, ABC and Stana, and to the employer's needs, for reasons as to why she wasn't offered further employment, rather than to place all responsibility for that on a third party. Again, to this day, we have no insight into that relationship so I don't feel we can draw any conclusions given the absence of actual knowledge in that important aspect of the puzzle.

Nathan has been accused of sexism for allegedly not standing up for Stana, whatever that means.  First of all, that's another assumption.  No one actually knows what he or any other party did or did not do for Stana.  Maybe he took a day to reply about her exit because he was trying to do something about it, who knows?  That's a possibility as fair as any if people are making assumptions.  Some demanded he not re-sign unless Stana was asked back.  Which I thought was completely absurd and unfair.  If people were going to place the responsibility on a third party to make a stand about a colleague's dismissal (for unknown reasons), then it's only fair to also place responsibility on the person being dismissed to come out and make a stand about sexism if indeed she believed that was what her dismissal was about.  Naturally, neither has happened because people want to keep being employed in the business and because people have no obligations but to negotiate in good faith for themselves.

We've speculated about bts issues for years already, and to me personally, I do not feel we have any real answers because we simply have had little fact to go on and merely assumptions.  Certainly insufficient evidence to apportion responsibility if that's even fair and relevant.  What Nathan and Stana's personal relationship is is one thing, what their professional relationship is is another, and their respective relationships with the network is yet another.   We actually barely know anything about all three and definitely not enough to conclude what impact each had on the other, if any.  We don't really even know anything about their professional working styles.  People are only making assumptions about that and guessing at it based on a limited understanding of their personalities, which again, is only what we see in the public eye.  We have no idea even how they feel about this turn of events on Castle.  Stana's fans are raging and attacking other cast on her behalf, but do they even know how she feels on the subject?  I feel like the feelings and thoughts of those most directly affected by the show, cast and crew and writers, are almost dismissed as irrelevant by some fans in their crusade to get what they want, which is also not representative of all fans.

Basically, what I want to say is, have a care before you carry on with the mudslinging.  Don't forget they are people too.  People that you don't actually know, involved in events and contracts that you don't actually know anything about.  Please consider complete facts before making any judgments.  Be fair.  It may not even be necessary to be judgmental of anyone for their choices. 

Everyone will just believe what they want to believe, and behave as they see fit, but I feel better for having said my piece.

[Guest]

11 hours ago, SweetTooth said:

ABC: If it ain't broke, make sure you destroy it.

Literal LOL.  :)

[madmaverick]

As for the story onscreen, I've been a shipper from day 1, so of course I would love a happy ending for Castle and Beckett.  But say, if Beckett had died when that bomb went off in Still, I wouldn't think their love story was any less beautiful.  If Beckett had died in the line of duty one day, and it's always possible as a police officer, I wouldn't find their love story any less beautiful (and there's a touching fanfic with this storyline).  It doesn't negate their love story before to me, not at all.  If there's anyone who understands a loved one can be taken away in a second, it's Beckett.  But they lived their lives and embraced their love, and Beckett didn't miss out on her chance with Castle, so no regrets on that score.  Yes, I do still think it foolish of her to chase about Locksat and what she put her marriage through, but Beckett's made her choice and she has to live and die with the consequences.

That said, I still hope there can be some kind of Hail Mary and she makes it out alive and there's a happy reunion by way of a guest spot down the road.  One can hope.

[BlakesMomma]

38 minutes ago, madmaverick said:

Wendy, if I could hug your posts I would.  You expressed a lot of the frustrations I feel.

I'm just constantly taken aback by the way that so many fans full of self righteousness can believe they know events and people with a real certainty when they can actually have no actual knowledge of those events and people.  I would argue that's quite egotistical behaviour as well as close mindedness and prejudice at play.  These people rush to play judge, jury, executioner- and nothing less will do because the mob wants their pound of flesh from their designated villain and they will rake you over coals for it- even though their judgments are based on a whole lot of assumptions and often bias, and few facts interpreted in an objective way.  Even the few facts at hand are absent context to enable anyone to see the complete picture.  The absence of actual knowledge doesn't seem to bother a lot of people when they go ahead and engage in some truly malicious slander and personal attacks, and make serious and damaging accusations without evidence, which may be what I find most disturbing.  Do people just throw out words like 'sexist', 'bully', so easily without thinking what it means to accuse someone of that?  Just because they write something on the internet, they don't believe they need to take responsibility?  

The way some people easily believe what's said from questionable sources like tabloids and anon insiders just because it's on the internet is also disturbing.  It's like no critical thought is necessary.  I find it disconcerting when people say 'there's no smoke without fire' or think it must be true because something's been recycled in more than one tabloid.  Well, no, sometimes bullshit is just bullshit, even if it's reprinted over and over on the internet.  Bullshit rumours can take on lives of their own especially when helped along by gullible fans or fans with their own fan agenda.  People can be very disingenuous in how they mix a little bit of truth with a whole lot of lies to make you believe their story.  Trump is a case in point.  It's especially disconcerting when people choose to believe tabloids with anon 'sources' which smear people's reputations but casually dismiss the words of people who actually know those involved and have only ever spoken well of them, plenty of female and male colleagues included.  Not only is there a lack of critical thought and scrutiny about assumptions and allegations being thrown about, there's also widespread bias and selectivism when it comes to people's interpretation of people and events.  All too often the self-righteous fans only interpret things in ways that suit their own fan narrative; any pesky facts that get in the way of that are conveniently ignored.  Those fans aren't really interested in a reasoned, logical discussion; it's not rational, it's emotional.  They just want to rage against their villain of choice.

This kind of fan behaviour began long before news of Stana's exit.  Last year, I remember people were hurling pitchforks at Nathan for the delay in Stana's re-signing and holding him responsible for Stana's contract negotiations for some illogical reason.  Accusing him of sexism even then and not negotiating equal pay for her or something crazy like that.  According to Hal on this board, equal pay wasn't the issue.  To this day, there are no actual facts as to what the contentious issues were in Stana's re-signing, but at the time it didn't stop a raging mob from putting all the responsibility on someone other than the negotiating parties involved, which I found bewildering.  This year is an extension of that mentality.

Like I said, there are a hell of a lot of assumptions being made without question, which, I, personally, am not ready to make given the lack of actual knowledge of people and events.  There's a lot of assumptions about the amount of power Nathan allegedly has.  It would be logical to assume that he (and Stana) had a certain amount of power as no. 1 and 2 on the show.  But did that power extend to getting someone fired or getting someone hired back after the boss fired her?  I am doubtful.  Believe him or not, but Nathan's said more than once that many mistakenly think actors have more power than they actually do.  Just because he plays Castle doesn't mean he controls everything about Castle, the show.  Which is the position some fans have placed him in.  They hold him responsible for the P.I. arc, the non wedding, the separation, anything and everything, onscreen and offscreen, as if he's sole puppetmaster.  That's just not logical to me.  Again, believe him or not, he's said many times he's just the actor who says the lines written by others.  One of the writers was credited with the P.I. story idea.  Actors may offer suggestions but it's another thing to conclude they call the shots.

What's logical to me is that no matter what power Nathan or Stana has, it's the network that is everyone's boss.   They get to decide who works for them and they get to decide the direction of a show.  What would be logical to me is to look first at the relationship between employer and employee, ABC and Stana, and to the employer's needs, for reasons as to why she wasn't offered further employment, rather than to place all responsibility for that on a third party. Again, to this day, we have no insight into that relationship so I don't feel we can draw any conclusions given the absence of actual knowledge in that important aspect of the puzzle.

Nathan has been accused of sexism for allegedly not standing up for Stana, whatever that means.  First of all, that's another assumption.  No one actually knows what he or any other party did or did not do for Stana.  Maybe he took a day to reply about her exit because he was trying to do something about it, who knows?  That's a possibility as fair as any if people are making assumptions.  Some demanded he not re-sign unless Stana was asked back.  Which I thought was completely absurd and unfair.  If people were going to place the responsibility on a third party to make a stand about a colleague's dismissal (for unknown reasons), then it's only fair to also place responsibility on the person being dismissed to come out and make a stand about sexism if indeed she believed that was what her dismissal was about.  Naturally, neither has happened because people want to keep being employed in the business and because people have no obligations but to negotiate in good faith for themselves.

We've speculated about bts issues for years already, and to me personally, I do not feel we have any real answers because we simply have had little fact to go on and merely assumptions.  Certainly insufficient evidence to apportion responsibility if that's even fair and relevant.  What Nathan and Stana's personal relationship is is one thing, what their professional relationship is is another, and their respective relationships with the network is yet another.   We actually barely know anything about all three and definitely not enough to conclude what impact each had on the other, if any.  We don't really even know anything about their professional working styles.  People are only making assumptions about that and guessing at it based on a limited understanding of their personalities, which again, is only what we see in the public eye.  We have no idea even how they feel about this turn of events on Castle.  Stana's fans are raging and attacking other cast on her behalf, but do they even know how she feels on the subject?  I feel like the feelings and thoughts of those most directly affected by the show, cast and crew and writers, are almost dismissed as irrelevant by some fans in their crusade to get what they want, which is also not representative of all fans.

Basically, what I want to say is, have a care before you carry on with the mudslinging.  Don't forget they are people too.  People that you don't actually know, involved in events and contracts that you don't actually know anything about.  Please consider complete facts before making any judgments.  Be fair.  It may not even be necessary to be judgmental of anyone for their choices. 

Everyone will just believe what they want to believe, and behave as they see fit, but I feel better for having said my piece.

Sending hugs to both you and Wendy!  So well said!

[TWP]

35 minutes ago, madmaverick said:

Wendy, if I could hug your posts I would.  You expressed a lot of the frustrations I feel.

<snip>

Everyone will just believe what they want to believe, and behave as they see fit, but I feel better for having said my piece.

Nice piece it was, too.

When people tick you off on the internet, remember your last line here.  You can't in any way change people.  You can only change your ability to ignore or otherwise marginalize their statements.

13 minutes ago, madmaverick said:

As for the story onscreen, I've been a shipper from day 1, so of course I would love a happy ending for Castle and Beckett.  But say, if Beckett had died when that bomb went off in Still, I wouldn't think their love story was any less beautiful.  If Beckett had died in the line of duty one day, and it's always possible as a police officer, I wouldn't find their love story any less beautiful (and there's a touching fanfic with this storyline).  It doesn't negate their love story before to me, not at all.  If there's anyone who understands a loved one can be taken away in a second, it's Beckett.  But they lived their lives and embraced their love, and Beckett didn't miss out on her chance with Castle, so no regrets on that score.  Yes, I do still think it foolish of her to chase about Locksat and what she put her marriage through, but Beckett's made her choice and she has to live and die with the consequences.

That said, I still hope there can be some kind of Hail Mary and she makes it out alive and there's a happy reunion by way of a guest spot down the road.  One can hope.

Hail Mary.  Nathan does 13 episodes.  Stana does a guest spot down the road, leading to her doing an additional 9 with another 4 if they get picked up the next season.  The stars don't have to work together, they get lots of time off, nobody's fired and nobody dies! ;-).  Leave the romantic relationships for other cast members.

I should write for TV.  Marlowe, are you hiring ;-)?

[mledawn]

As the PTB send her off in this super classy manner, I can't even imagine Stana will come back for a guest spot unless they make it very much worth her time. Probably not even then.

[TWP]

2 minutes ago, mledawn said:

As the PTB send her off in this super classy manner, I can't even imagine Stana will come back for a guest spot unless they make it very much worth her time. Probably not even then.

We don't know how they really sent her off.  We only know what they told us, which could very well be a lie.

[Annec]

15 hours ago, BellyLaughter said:

Yep, we've been sold this narrative that they are each other's 'Always' 

 

Thus negating EVERYTHING that has been said and done in EIGHT seasons....all the heartfelt moments rendered null and void.  Great love story my backside.....

 

And don't get me started on how absolutely devastating it is for me to see how much this character now stands to lose after fighting so hard to get it back!  If anyone deserves a happy ending its Kate Beckett.  

 

In fact I am pretty insulted that I am expected to swallow that kind of disrespect to a storyline and character and just show up next season cause it's gonna be fun and/or different.....

 

Bravo ABC Bravo 

I really thought I could continue to watch old episodes and enjoy them.  The first five seasons of this show were amazing!  But, I was re-watching some of season 1 last night and I realized that I had a knot in my stomach just watching and knowing how it all is going to end. 

Beckett and Castle deserve a happy ending.  That Hawley (and I think Fillion, please don't argue with me on this, we will have to agree to disagree) couldn't see that and think that there is any more story to be told here breaks my heart.  Instead of coming to terms with the killing off of Beckett it has actually gotten harder to accept.  ABC has bungled this so badly it defies understanding.  I don't know if they realize what this is going to do to the syndication prospects of "Castle".  I have strongly encouraged others to start watching the show because I've enjoyed it so much.  Now I will have to discourage anyone who wants to start watching.  This entire episode just shows so much lack of consideration for their viewers. 

[BlakesMomma]

It wouldn't surprise me if Katic knew she wasn't being asked back 6 weeks ago when she posted on Instagram - "And so the adventure begins #FreeFall"

[TWP]

I have been enjoying reading some of the comments over at last year's renewal thread.  Interestingly, much of it is the same as this year's talk.  One of the items batted around was the 13 episode possibility.  Wish Hal was still here.  Ha.

I wonder a little if one of the many possible reasons for why they delayed the announcement was the notion that they are considering bringing the show back for a whole year.  Who knows? 

Link to the thread:

I think what people characterize as ABC bungling was somebody else leaking and ABC being blindsided, and not handling the blindside well. Yes, they bungled the blindside. But if they'd been responsible for the announcement without leaks, it may have worked better for them and the show.

I suspect NDA's will be different from here on out ;-).  No leaking.

[BlakesMomma]

5 minutes ago, TWP said:

 

I think what people characterize as ABC bungling was somebody else leaking and ABC being blindsided, and not handling the blindside well. Yes, they bungled the blindside. But if they'd been responsible for the announcement without leaks, it may have worked better for them and the show.

I suspect NDA's will be different from here on out ;-).  No leaking.

It is a bit coincidental that the one single interview Katic did for S8, right after she signed, was with the same Deadline author who broke the leaked news that Katic wasn't being asked back for a possible S9.  

[CheshireCat]

Well, someone on USA Today is apparently afraid that Castle might go bonkers if they don't change the scripts should the show be back. http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/columnist/criticscorner/2016/05/09/tv-tonight-castle-damien-season-finale/83884514/

[TWP]

I should have quit watching when Montgomery left. He was by far, one of my favorite characters on the show.  I've tried following Ruben, but the other shows he chooses are too angsty for me.  But he was great.  And his character was an African American that they turned from lovable father figure and precinct captain into bad cop/criminal, which could be deemed a bad AA stereotype.  Had they done this to Stana, the outcry about the demeaning of a woman would have been huge.  They replaced him with an AA woman who was also cut, again with no outcry. It speaks to the arbitrariness of outrage from TV fandoms.  I am pretty sure some people are convinced that they are standing on a principle.  But I think the principle is so arbitrarily applied that the only logical principle that remains is the love of Stana.  I find no fault with that.  I only wish people would admit that that's what they're really about.

And that's my soap box.

[Annec]

29 minutes ago, CheshireCat said:

Well, someone on USA Today is apparently afraid that Castle might go bonkers if they don't change the scripts should the show be back. http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/columnist/criticscorner/2016/05/09/tv-tonight-castle-damien-season-finale/83884514/

Spot on review.  I thought Castle's early forays into outlandish theories (ninja assassins, mob hit, spies, etc) were a lot of fun but this season they have gone overboard and are making Castle look silly.  In just the spring we've had the genie in a bottle, the creation of a superhero, and now the devil.  This points to the leveling influence of Beckett that will sorely be lacking in a new season.  We all know that Alexis won't say boo to her dad, she'll just look at him in that condescending way she has, Hayley will just blow him off like she does everyone, Ryan will encourage the idea and Espo will just walk away.  There will be no one to listen to his theory and poke holes in it the way Beckett did. 

Hawley really just seems to grab bits and pieces from previous episodes and "re-work" them.  Nothing truly creative is happening anymore. 

[verdana]

I was just coming to post that article, I couldn't agree more with Robert Bianco about Castle's character, they've taken the "childlike" aspects way too far and turned him into a buffoon who I can't imagine any woman remotely finding attractive enough to put up with for too long let alone marry!  The writers for S9 need to dial it back down and tell NF to rein in the eye popping, shrieking and squealing if they want this new show to float. The great thing about Castle's wild theories in the past is that you knew he didn't really believe in them and was doing it only to mess with Beckett's head but now it's like he really believes them and that's..dumb not funny.

I do worry what's going to happen without Beckett there, at least she provided some seriousness to balance out the increasing Castle tomfoolery. 

6 minutes ago, Annec said:

Nothing truly creative is happening anymore. 

God yes this, so true.  Hawley and Winter haven't had one genuinely creative idea between them all season.

[Annec]

30 minutes ago, verdana said:

The great thing about Castle's wild theories in the past is that you knew he didn't really believe in them and was doing it only to mess with Beckett's head but now it's like he really believes them and that's..dumb not funny.

 

In "undead Again" Ryan asks Castle if her really believes it was a zombie and Castle says "No, but what I do believe in is driving Beckett crazy".  That was the beginning of Castle and Beckett finding their way back to each other after Castle found out she'd been lying about remembering that he told her he loved her after the shooting. He used his wild theories to break down Beckett's defenses.  It was cute and attractive and made sense.  Now he's just silly.

Damn, this show was great.

[Thak]

35 minutes ago, TWP said:

I should have quit watching when Montgomery left. He was by far, one of my favorite characters on the show.  I've tried following Ruben, but the other shows he chooses are too angsty for me.  But he was great.  And his character was an African American that they turned from lovable father figure and precinct captain into bad cop/criminal, which could be deemed a bad AA stereotype.  Had they done this to Stana, the outcry about the demeaning of a woman would have been huge.  They replaced him with an AA woman who was also cut, again with no outcry. It speaks to the arbitrariness of outrage from TV fandoms.  I am pretty sure some people are convinced that they are standing on a principle.  But I think the principle is so arbitrarily applied that the only logical principle that remains is the love of Stana.  I find no fault with that.  I only wish people would admit that that's what they're really about.

And that's my soap box.

I get what you're saying about stereotypes and I agree.  This still doesn't change what they did to the Beckett/co-lead character over the last couple of seasons, and to be fair there has been outcry in regard to this.  Over the last couple of seasons I've read words like, "demeaning", "sexist", "misogyny", "dumbing down" etc...when discussing the treatment of the Beckett character.  So what I see here is not just a love of Stana, but a love of a popular female lead character on a tv show being mistreated.  Doesn't mean the other characters weren't mistreated as well, but to say it's only the love of Stana and people should just admit that's what they're really about is not at all accurate in my estimation.