S10.E21: Mr. Scratch

[Droogie]

One little (or not so little) thing that keeps nagging at me is that the father wouldn't have been able to overcome the suggestion to kill his son, bc you don't really get to reason with scopolamine. I'm glad they didn't go there -- they could've had the dad kill his wife or his mother or something and had the son see it, but parental instincts just would not have trumped the drug.

I liked that little guy. In pics MGG put on his IG, I really thought he was going to be a baby Spencer. And I briefly thought in his first scene that it was.

[zannej]

I agree that the paternal instinct overriding the drug was BS. I've seen people hooked on narcotics who robbed their own children just so they can get a fix. Recently a friend who has a broken arm and neck was robbed of $1200 worth of cellphones (that he was fixing up for people) by his father. Now he has to explain to the owners of the phones that they were stolen but he can't prove his father did it (but he knows he did because the father had been painting and the idiot got some paint inside the drawer on the empty cellphone cases). Granted, that is not the same as killing ones own child, but there is no magical parent button that makes parents immune to things for the benefit of their children.

 

So, I like to fanwank that it was the unsub who chose not to have the child killed. JJ could have been wrong. It's also possible that in his panic, the unsub killed himself to avoid further harm/abuse from Mr. Scratch. But I'm going to stick with the thought that the unsub chose to spare the child for whatever reason.

[Droogie]

Ah, fanwanking. It's the bomb. It's how I got through Season 9.

[Danielg342]

Perhaps CBS felt "The Call"- the only time in the series' history where a child was actually killed during an episode- was out of line and nixed the idea when it came up in this episode. There are still a lot of viewers who hate the idea of kids being harmed in any way, and, as a writer myself, I try to avoid stories with kids simply because I think using them is exploitative, a la, "if you want to have a cheap emotional response from the audience, victimize a kid".

 

Of course, I also think- this deep into the series- we should be past any qualms about using anyone as victims, including kids. Perhaps we should be spared actually seeing a mutilated child and of course it shouldn't be used too often, but I do think- to at least keep the audience honest- it shouldn't be too out of line to have a murdered child every and then. Stuff like that happens in reality, so it can't be ignored "too" much.

[zannej]

Perhaps CBS felt "The Call"- the only time in the series' history where a child was actually killed during an episode- was out of line and nixed the idea when it came up in this episode. There are still a lot of viewers who hate the idea of kids being harmed in any way, and, as a writer myself, I try to avoid stories with kids simply because I think using them is exploitative, a la, "if you want to have a cheap emotional response from the audience, victimize a kid".

 

Of course, I also think- this deep into the series- we should be past any qualms about using anyone as victims, including kids. Perhaps we should be spared actually seeing a mutilated child and of course it shouldn't be used too often, but I do think- to at least keep the audience honest- it shouldn't be too out of line to have a murdered child every and then. Stuff like that happens in reality, so it can't be ignored "too" much.

Yeah. I sort of suspect that CBS would not allow the child to be killed because it might be too upsetting to their sponsors or some of the viewers. For me, its not really an issue because I know it is fiction and that the child actor is fine. But I also recognize that children are killed in reality and I think that is what makes it more "real".

[Danielg342]

Yeah. I sort of suspect that CBS would not allow the child to be killed because it might be too upsetting to their sponsors or some of the viewers. For me, its not really an issue because I know it is fiction and that the child actor is fine. But I also recognize that children are killed in reality and I think that is what makes it more "real".

 

They could have a "season finale" or "Sweeps" type episode where the killer targets children- that kind of shock value is what drives those periods.

[Russet29]

I think a big reason I liked The Call is because the child died, and yes I'm aware of how bad that sounds. I just wasn't expecting it from a show that has become far too PC in recent years. It was nice to be surprised. The whole tone of that episode felt different and the ending, with the phone ringing and the parents just staring into space, was very effective.

[Droogie]

I already describe this episode as shocking and over-the-top. No idea what I'd call it if the dad had actually murdered his son. But I know I'd call it good television,

[Saje]

I never get tired of the romantic stuff. As long as it's REID romantic stuff. 

[secnarf]

 

From what I understand the writers have meetings and they sit around and discuss things, but I do think that there are some continuity issues where one hand doesn't know what the other is doing and things are missed. I think more than one writer sits around during the table read, but by that point, the next episode is already written and I don't know if the next writer is there to take notes. They really need a good script coordinator who can look at the continuity from one episode to the next and ensure that the following episodes don't contradict previous ones.

 

I never watched the Buffy show, but I think I'm glad I didn't from what I've heard about it.

I thought Buffy had great continuity - that's one thing Joss did quite well; things that happened in one episode were picked up on in others, and the episodes were far less "stand alone", with Joss there going over every single episode to make sure it made sense with everything else. Whereas with CM, I think a huge issue is that the episodes are too self-contained. You don't get any character growth and you can't have any conflict or anything when everything is "resolved" after 43 minutes. This doesn't even need to take the form of an episode-long arc or "big bad", but moreso in the interactions the characters have. People have commented that the team seems to just blandly get along with each other now; I think that is largely due to the contained nature of the episodes. The thing is, I'm not sure if this is done intentionally, or if the writers just don't talk to each other and nobody is there to really care about smaller arcs for the characters. Even if you take this episode specifically, with Hotch in the state he was in at the end, I wouldn't be at all surprised for everything to be back to normal at the beginning of the next episode. In fact, I'd be surprised if he *isn't* back to normal. However, on Buffy, I'd fully expect the opposite.

 

One little (or not so little) thing that keeps nagging at me is that the father wouldn't have been able to overcome the suggestion to kill his son, bc you don't really get to reason with scopolamine. I'm glad they didn't go there -- they could've had the dad kill his wife or his mother or something and had the son see it, but parental instincts just would not have trumped the drug.

I liked that little guy. In pics MGG put on his IG, I really thought he was going to be a baby Spencer. And I briefly thought in his first scene that it was.

 

Honestly, I'm not sure if I believe it or not. I have a hard time believing that scopolamine and whatever else was in there made all of them kill someone to begin with. One person killing someone, sure, but I'm not sure I buy that they would all have the same hallucination of something planted in their minds in early childhood. So, since I find the premise of them all killing someone while drugged to be questionable, I therefore find it easier to believe that the dad didn't kill his son.

 

As for paternal instincts, being under the influence of a hallucinogen is very very different from having an addiction. Part of the definition of an addiction is that it interferes with your relationships with others and you are spending significant amounts of time trying to obtain the addictive substance (or do the addictive activity). So while I have no trouble at all believing that a person with an addiction would steal from their kids - I know several people who have had their parents steal their life savings to feed their addictions - I don't see how that relates to a person's actions while they're under the influence of a drug. Especially when that drug is a hallucinogen - if you believe you're seeing something, you'll react accordingly, even if that something isn't real. In this case, these people thought they were being attacked and were trying to fight back to save themselves and/or their loved ones (at least, that's how the first guy described it). Really, the drug didn't make him kill his wife - the drug made him see something that wasn't there and he reacted to it. That is very different from someone neglecting or stealing from their kids because of an addiction. For all we know, while the dad was hallucinating, he never perceived the threat in a way that would lead him to hurt his child - and you can chalk that up to paternal instincts or a different childhood memory or whatever you want, I guess.

[Droogie]

It's just that scopolamine makes a person highly suggestible, and that one of its delivery mechanisms is as an inhalant. So given an appropriate dose, it wouldn't matter about a person's convictions; that person would do whatever they were told to do,

[secnarf]

Scopolamine can actually cause hallucinations at high enough doses. Fun fact, you can buy it over the counter as patches to put on your skin (to prevent motion sickness) and some people stick a ton of them on themselves to try and get high. Needless to say, it doesn't work as well as inhaling or injecting.
 

[needschocolate]

I know bad things happen in real life, but, personally, I don't want to have kids die on TV.  And if they have to die, then have it be off screen.  No killing dogs either, well, any animals, unless they are attacking someone.  I remember one episode where the unsub killed a dog.  It was a week after my dog died (cancer).  I found something else to watch.  

 

My fanwanking --- The father did try to kill his son, but since he thought he was killing Mr. Scratch, who is much taller than his son, he was stabbing too high and ended up killing himself.  

 

Even if he never got anywhere near his son, the boy was probably the one who found the body.  If CM makes it to season 25, there will be an episode where the son is the unsub.  He was so afraid of the bogeyman, then he finds his father in a pool of blood in the morning (or maybe in the middle of the night) - that has got to mess him up.

[MCatry]

 If CM makes it to season 25, there will be an episode where the son is the unsub.

CM season 25!

All I could think was an old JJ being even more bitchy to an older Reid, and Morgan finally letting go nature and growing a belly.

[Danielg342]

CM season 25!

All I could think was an old JJ being even more bitchy to an older Reid, and Morgan finally letting go nature and growing a belly.

...and Rossi trying to outrun UnSubs with a cane.

[SSAHotchner]

Perhaps CBS felt "The Call"- the only time in the series' history where a child was actually killed during an episode- was out of line and nixed the idea when it came up in this episode. There are still a lot of viewers who hate the idea of kids being harmed in any way, and, as a writer myself, I try to avoid stories with kids simply because I think using them is exploitative, a la, "if you want to have a cheap emotional response from the audience, victimize a kid".

 

Of course, I also think- this deep into the series- we should be past any qualms about using anyone as victims, including kids. Perhaps we should be spared actually seeing a mutilated child and of course it shouldn't be used too often, but I do think- to at least keep the audience honest- it shouldn't be too out of line to have a murdered child every and then. Stuff like that happens in reality, so it can't be ignored "too" much.

Well, there were children murdered in episodes before: The Fox, Psychodrama, Children of the Dark, Ashes and Dust, Amplification, A Shade of Gray, House on Fire....  But it is hard to watch, and I was glad they didn't kill the boy in this episode. When an episode is good overall, in my opinion, I'm willing to let a few plot holes slide, and that's how I felt about this one. When it's a piece of crap, I rip it to shreds. I thought the power outage thing was corny and cliché, but I let it slide because overall the episode not only held my interest, it scared me. I don't really like to be scared, but I was riveted to this episode, and I'm sure that part of it was the heavy team involvement. I wouldn't want this type of episode to be the norm, but once in awhile it's good to be spooked. I am far more interested in the repercussions of this unsub on the team, particularly Hotch, than a ridiculous story about Kate's niece, who has a rotten attitude and ought to know better, getting abducted. 

[zannej]

Funny thing, I have no problem with children dying on TV programs, but I can't stand it when animals die. The episode where the unsubs were killing cats as a ruse to get in and kill families was upsetting-- and in a later one "The Apprentice" when one of the unsubs was apparently killing puppies... I also hate it when horses die in movies. It's weird. But then, I like animals better than I like children.

 

I just imagined Rossi trying to chase an unsub while using a walker...

[normasm]

I can't stand the animals getting tortured, and the children, or the old folks, naw, can't hack that. Those of us in the middle, it's awful but we are supposed to deal with all of this. This is 21st century life. Awful, but there is rape, terrorism on a personal scale, stalking, gaslighting, sexual sadism. All of that is in our culture, but it means there needs to be people who fight against those evil things for our benefit.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Funny thing, I have no problem with children dying on TV programs, but I can't stand it when animals die.

 

Kinda-sorta related. Really.

 

In the movie John Wick, Keanu Reeves starts a brush-fire of violence to get to Alfie Allen's character after the latter kills his dog in the process of stealing his car. Allen is mostly known for playing Theon Greyjoy on Game of Thrones, except this time viewers were supposed to be rooting for him to die horribly. I guess that's another weird American standard.

[zannej]

 

Kinda-sorta related. Really.

 

In the movie John Wick, Keanu Reeves starts a brush-fire of violence to get to Alfie Allen's character after the latter kills his dog in the process of stealing his car. Allen is mostly known for playing Theon Greyjoy on Game of Thrones, except this time viewers were supposed to be rooting for him to die horribly. I guess that's another weird American standard.

That actually reminds me... I can't remember the name of the guy, but he later became a politician, IIRC. When he was a boy, he had a total jackass neighbor who ground up glass and fed it to the kid's dog. The dog died and the kid burned the guy's shed in retaliation-- but he still didn't feel it was enough. The dog-murdering-neighbor was a politician and had been consistently winning the elections. So the boy, when he was old enough, had a car and he drove out to the quarters and offered to drive the "negroes" to the polls so they could vote. Many of them had no means of getting to the voting place so they jumped at the chance .When they were exiting his vehicle, he informed them that the one jerk had murdered his dog. They pretty much all voted against that guy. So then the boy got to go to the neighbor's door and tell him that his black constituents had voted him out of office (apparently the neighbor was a supreme racist as well).

 

I'm trying to remember.. IIRC, children have been killed in an MGG directed episode before, but I don't think any animals were killed in them.

[Danielg342]

I'm trying to remember.. IIRC, children have been killed in an MGG directed episode before, but I don't think any animals were killed in them.

 

Mosley Lane?

 

Well, there were children murdered in episodes before: The Fox, Psychodrama, Children of the Dark, Ashes and Dust, Amplification, A Shade of Gray, House on Fire.... 

 

Perhaps I should clarify- whenever CM has had a "save the kid" episode, the kid was always saved...except for "The Call". Typically, though, "family annihilators" feature teens and pre-teens, and even in cases where the family had kids younger than 10, a good many of those kids still found a way to survive (I'm thinking of "Safe Haven"). Either that or the killer- like in "The Boogeyman" or "A Shade of Grey"- was a kid themselves.

 

Regardless, I do think the show goes out of its way to "spare" children, and "Mr. Scratch" was another example of that. Whether or not it's a good idea, I'll leave that as a matter of opinion.

 

Personally- and perhaps this'll be unpopular but I will say it anyway- but anything should be fair game- men, women, kids, animals, aliens, etc.- because those crimes exist in real life and CM is supposed to be about reality. What is shown on-screen is a different matter, and I think you leave the gore to the adults (and only what's needed for the story). At least when you have an adult actor they can consent to what's "being done" to them and are better able to mentally handle the scene, unlike a kid who might not truly understand what's happening.

[normasm]

Yep, Daniel, since I've been moaning in various spots on this board about TPTB not dealing with reality, I agree if they want to show reality, they need to show kids/women exploited, raped and killed every week, because it happens proportionally to the weaker members of society that they are prey. Women, children, and elderly are the victims of not just serial crime, but everyday brutality (and even bestiality). But on a TV weekly program that is defined by showing what Gideon called the "depths of depravity," there comes a point where showing the reality becomes desensitizing to a large part of the viewership. 

 

Show one child rape/murder really well and it chills, horrifies, makes your audience think, makes some people disturbed enough to act to prevent the real-life version. Show child rape/murder 3 out of 4 episodes, and people begin to become inured to the subject, it becomes "the rape of the week." This may be the rationale behind not depicting the real-life statistical demographic.

 

To your point about not showing it unless it's an adult, I really don't think it needs to be explicitly shown for 9 out of 10 of these cases to accomplish the show's goal, exploring how these crimes are solved through profiling.

[Danielg342]

Yep, Daniel, since I've been moaning in various spots on this board about TPTB not dealing with reality, I agree if they want to show reality, they need to show kids/women exploited, raped and killed every week, because it happens proportionally to the weaker members of society that they are prey. Women, children, and elderly are the victims of not just serial crime, but everyday brutality (and even bestiality). But on a TV weekly program that is defined by showing what Gideon called the "depths of depravity," there comes a point where showing the reality becomes desensitizing to a large part of the viewership.

Show one child rape/murder really well and it chills, horrifies, makes your audience think, makes some people disturbed enough to act to prevent the real-life version. Show child rape/murder 3 out of 4 episodes, and people begin to become inured to the subject, it becomes "the rape of the week." This may be the rationale behind not depicting the real-life statistical demographic.

To your point about not showing it unless it's an adult, I really don't think it needs to be explicitly shown for 9 out of 10 of these cases to accomplish the show's goal, exploring how these crimes are solved through profiling.

I'll reply in “The Bullpen”.

[WordFreak]

I finally got to see this episode, and my reaction boils down to, WTF?!, but in the best way possible. Loved this episode! While I don't think some aspects of the case would hold up under intense scrutiny, I thought this was effectively creepy and suspenseful.

 

MGG did an excellent job directing this one, and I loved the fact that Hotch was front and centre. He's been underused for far too long, but I thought TG nailed it with his performance here.

 

Loved that they couldn't rely on Garcia's magic supercomputer to solve everything, and Reid had a prominent role this time. Not too much JJ or Morgan either, but what was there was not annoying.

 

It will take a while for me to get the sound of Mr. Scratch appearing out of my mind - so creepy!

 

I also enjoyed that the ending was a bit ambiguous, in terms of what was real and what was a hallucination. My reading was that Hotch was still hallucinating when Peter Lewis gave him that weird smile while being placed in the police car. It seemed to me that Hotch only snapped out of the hallucination at the very end of the episode, when he said to Rossi, "This is what happened." Am I way off here, or did anyone else see it this way?

 

Regardless, I thought this was a really strong episode, and wish more of the episodes were this well put together.

 

[secnarf]

I didn't think the part where he was being placed in the police car was a hallucination - I thought Hotch killing him was the hallucination, but in reality, he was apprehended alive. The part where he is arrested wasn't from Hotch's POV, so I don't think it could be his hallucination. He was in another room entirely when that happened, wasn't he?

[WordFreak]

That's why I was confused I guess. You're right that the arrest scene wasn't from Hotch's POV - it was Morgan and JJ who arrested Lewis. However, it didn't seem to me like Hotch came out of his delusion until the very end, when he was ready to tell Rossi what happened. I might need to see it again to sort it out. At any rate, I liked the ambiguity of the ending, and that I'm still thinking about the episode now, unlike most where I've forgotten it almost immediately.

[Bookish Jen]

I never get tired of the romantic stuff. As long as it's REID romantic stuff. 

Well, with Erica Messer running the CM pop stand you'll have to make REID romantic stuff up yourself. According to Messer, Reid has all the romantic appeal of a lint-covered booger.

 

On-topic: I haven't had a chance to re-watch Mr. Scratch but probably will later this week. And beyond Matthew's skills as a director (his vision/voice is so distinct), I also can't praise Thomas Gibson's performance enough. He just blew me away; I hope he is remembered come Emmy time.

 

There is plenty of talk about crime victims from this episode and in general. I have a lot to say about this issue that reach thesis levels. I'm going to collect my thoughts, opinions and sadly, very personal experience and post them to The Bullpen thread in a day or so.

[Bookish Jen]

...and Rossi trying to outrun UnSubs with a cane.

 

Penelope "Baby Girl" has gone full-on "Baby Jane."

[Danielg342]

^ Mama Cobblepot?

[normasm]

Penelope "Baby Girl" has gone full-on "Baby Jane."

If you know the movie, there's a point at which poor Jane says, about someone she thought was a suitor (but was just an opportunist) who had walked out on her, "He hates meeeeeee….." which always tore me up. Garcia about Morgan at 55 and 58?

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Penelope "Baby Girl" has gone full-on "Baby Jane."

 

So if Garcia becomes Baby Jane, would JJ end up being her Blanche?

[normasm]

No, Hotch is Blanche. =>

[missmycat]

No, Hotch is Blanche. =>

Umm nope, Hotch would be Dorothy. OOPS my bad, You are obviously talking about a different Blanche(wink wink)

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Dude, Dorothy could so give her version of a Hotch-a-lanche. XD

[Bookish Jen]

Here I am, out in public, trying to stifle the giggles over the "Baby Jane" comments you are making. Baby Jane is one of the referral points my friends use when remarking on a woman wearing way too much make-up. For example:"I think she set her make-up gun to 'Baby Jane'."

[RollTheHardSix]

I just watched this because until today I never made it past the first couple of minutes every time I tried.

Shortly after they introduced the "a bunch of people were made to kill someone without remembering it" BS I always turned off.

Now, I've finally watched it and I have to say my opinion is pretty much diagonally opposed to most of you guys - I thought it was one of the weakest episodes in a long time and they have been pretty weak lately...

 

First the forcing a bunch of people to kill their loved ones without them knowing BS. Then the superhacker, math genuis hacks the BAU and makes their electronics explode BS. Then the NSA BS. Then the Hotch snoozefest (I thought it was boring and I knew that the shootings were a fantasy even though I hoped they weren't).

There was not one redeeming quality about this episode for me.

This is truly a YMMV. To me it has become abundantly clear now that MGG is no better than anyone else on the show (though not the worst either). How could he agree to direct this crap?

From brainwashing, to genuis hacking the BAU and making stuff explode to the NSA - I don't really have words for this. Well, it can only get better. I think I am now officially looking forward to whatever happens to Kate's niece whom I don't care about at all - because there's no way it can get worse.

(no offense to anyone who liked it, I just didn't - in case you didn't notice ;-) )

[StarBrand]

I checked out of CM from 2/3 through season 9 and all of 10. I didn't get to see this one until now.  Like most people here, I thought it was one of the creepiest stuff CM has done. It was weird all the way through, but the last 10 minutes went into mind-fuck territory.

 

Was it just me, or did the hallway scene where JJ and Morgan caught the unsub give a slight The Shining vibe?

[Saje]

It wasn't just you. Matthew loves Kubrick.

[ReidFan]

I never get tired of the romantic stuff. As long as it's REID romantic stuff. 

oh i like this idea :)

[ReidFan]

I was terrified. Watched this episode while tightly clutching my stuffed polar bear that I take along when I have to do something terrifying, like flying. Anyway, bless her poor little heart, Iceberg got a terrible workover.... I was yelling at Hotch "WAIT! WAIT for backup!" and of course he didn't listen to me. My husband, a cop who hates Criminal Minds (most police dramas actually "they're so not realistic!") was sitting across from me while it was on, rolling his eyes but keeping his disparaging comments to himself for the most part. And when That Scene occurred, I lost it. JJ is not the only one who emoted "Spence is down!" I was already beside myself in tears and then in quick succession Rossi and Morgan too... I'm a mess, Iceberg's a sodden mess and my husband says "You realise, of course, that that Hotch guy is imagining all this, right?"

 

*facepalm*

[MCatry]

Well, a funny thing just happened.

I was watching Mr. scratch on my living room, and since I was on my own all the three family dogs were with me.

I was paying extra-attention since the part where Reid is shot was coming, and the funniest thing happened right then.

When Reid was shot, my three dogs jumped out of their skins, and I just couldn't help but laughed.

But that also made me realised how good the editing was. If you can fool three dogs into believing that something really was happening, and not on tv, then you obviously did well.

And for the record, these three dogs watch tv with every single family member here, so they are used to movies, procedurals, documentaries, Sesame Street and whatever you may throw them. They handle everything by sleeping.

But tonight, they just woke up in fear of Mr. Scratch.

[Bookish Jen]

Sometimes CBS reruns of CM on Saturday nights, so I took a quick gander at CBS's website to see if Mr. Scratch is going to be shown. To me it's only fitting Mr. Scratch be shown on Halloween night considering how spooky and chilling it is, and Matthew being all woobie over Halloween.

 

Well, of course, Mr. Scratch is not being shown because we can't have nice things. Instead, 48 Hours (which seems like it's been for 48 years) is going to be shown in the timeslot CM reruns are often aired.

[FanOfDorks]

One of my fave episodes.  Sometimes I look at MGG and wonder how can someone so innocent lookin be so warped in the head lol.  

[Bookish Jen]

On 9/19/2016 at 5:17 PM, FanOfDorks said:

One of my fave episodes.  Sometimes I look at MGG and wonder how can someone so innocent lookin be so warped in the head lol.  

But warped in a good way, not in a "I have rotting corpses underneath the floorboards of my house...okay, maybe I do when it's Halloween."

[FanOfDorks]

On 22/09/2016 at 8:47 PM, Bookish Jen said:

But warped in a good way, not in a "I have rotting corpses underneath the floorboards of my house...okay, maybe I do when it's Halloween."

 

On 22/09/2016 at 8:47 PM, Bookish Jen said:

But warped in a good way, not in a "I have rotting corpses underneath the floorboards of my house...okay, maybe I do when it's Halloween."

Exactly lol.  Its one of my fave things about him lol

[senin]

Re-run of "Mr Scratch" today, at a time I'm able to watch (= daylight)

With other episodes, if I have already seen them a few times, I will only pay attention to the parts I really like. But Mr Scratch is different, everytime I watch it I am looking at every scene, listening to all the sounds... and I get scared at the right places, even if I know the end of the story!!

I have to say that the first time I saw it I didn't understand a lot of it, not being familiar with Satanic Ritual Abuse (I didn't know anything about it). 

I did some online research, and then a lot of things became easier to understand. 

Note: I have read the whole thread now, and also the interviews with MGG that someone linked before. In one of them Matthew speaks about directing TG, with a lot of respect and maybe admiration. It really hurt to read that now, knowing that it's never going to happen anymore on this show. 

[smoker]

1 hour ago, senin said:

Re-run of "Mr Scratch" today, at a time I'm able to watch (= daylight)

With other episodes, if I have already seen them a few times, I will only pay attention to the parts I really like. But Mr Scratch is different, everytime I watch it I am looking at every scene, listening to all the sounds... and I get scared at the right places, even if I know the end of the story!!

I have to say that the first time I saw it I didn't understand a lot of it, not being familiar with Satanic Ritual Abuse (I didn't know anything about it). 

I did some online research, and then a lot of things became easier to understand. 

Note: I have read the whole thread now, and also the interviews with MGG that someone linked before. In one of them Matthew speaks about directing TG, with a lot of respect and maybe admiration. It really hurt to read that now, knowing that it's never going to happen anymore on this show. 

Both of them did an amazing job in this episode!

P.S.: I remember when I wanted some continuity to Mr. Scratch's events. I would wish I had kept my mouth shut.

[Droogie]

Thomas Gibson really knocked it out of the park in that ep.  And MGG pulled such great performances out of everyone. 

TPTB were complete idiots not to pursue a follow-up to that storyline in S11. Now we'll never get it. :::kicks dirt:::

[FanOfDorks]

Ah but in the final episode of season 11 it is discovered the person behing Hotch's arrest and the faked calls is Mr Scratch himself.  So I suspect we will be seeing more of him and his hijinx in S12.  which can only mean *happy dance* MGG directing

[Hotchgirl18]

One of the best episodes of the season.