S08.E22: Crossfire

[MaryM47]

Additional random thoughts after time to think and watching bits of the finale again:

Martha's haircut is much more youthful than Alexis'

When they found fake Caleb's scratchings in the trunk, and the first 2 letters were RT, my first thought was that it referred to Stepmomma Rita

The paranoid part of me occasionally wondered during C/B scenes: actor or body double? Were those sweet smiles at the end to each other, or their stand-ins? 

“I could sleep for a week.” A favorite phrase of my Mother and Grandmother.

Castle was wearing a blue shirt during all the shenanigans, but had a dark red shirt on when they got back to the precinct. And Kate was still dressed the same. Huh?

The showrunners weren't completely clueless when it came to continuity - this last ep had a kidnapped Castle, a gunless Kate, and yet another bad guy breaking into the loft.  Life lesson learned - always tip your doorman so he doesn’t have to take bribes from baddies trying to get into your place. 

And seriously people, shoot first, ask questions later!

Sign me up for whatever NF’s been doing - he looks great! A little scruff and we’re talking first season hot here. 

Upon further watching, the moving from dead on the floor to 3 kids is rather jarring, although I did like hearing their parting words from the first ep, “it woulda been great.” And for the most part, it was. Thank you, show. 

[juliet73]

On 5/17/2016 at 10:49 PM, shapeshifter said:

I watched every episode and still have no idea what LokSat was. I don't even know what Caleb's deal was.
Is there a link to a good, concise explanation???

I've watched since Day 1 as well, and have no idea what LokSat was. Actually, since season 7, I've been confused. 

I wish the ending was totally the opposite. I would have preferred to have both Castle and Beckett die on the kitchen floor. The final minutes of the show would be the entire rest of the cast (Espo, Ryan, Martha, Hailey, Lainey, Alexis, Captain Gates, Jenny, the other ME, etc) mourning them at their graveside service.

[oakLeaf]

The ending sort of reminded me of American Dreamer (Jo Beth Williams and Tom Conti). The two leads (novelists) are in Mortal Peril, and then the next scene is a happily ever after. At least in AD, the couple is writing about their adventure up to the Mortal Peril section, and they're trying to figure out how to end the scene. One of them says, "why don't we just write what actually happened" and the other says "We can't write that!" And they never did tell the audience what happened.

[sinkwriter]

Okay, I've finally had the chance to watch the episode. (Actually, after all the  stuff in the media for the last few weeks and how the show might change and not have Stana if they get picked up again, I intentionally waited to watch the ep because I just couldn't deal with all that crap anymore. LOL.)

I pretty much echo everyone here and (surprise, surprise, not unlike my feelings about Bones as a series) I find myself longing for the magic of the first two seasons of Castle, and the characters and relationships and connections we saw and cherished back then. 

When I saw that final scene with the twins and the daughter and Castle and Beckett, I busted out laughing. Seriously. Complete laughter. Which is probably not what they were going for. But the scene was SO obviously tacked on as a "just in case" with no real forethought or true flow with the rest of the episode that it just seemed hilarious to me in the moment. I'm glad they have their happy ending, but wow, was that a weird way to veer off-course and end the series. Obviously the showrunners haven't done a great job these past seasons, but I do also blame the way the networks organize things (leaving the renewal or non-renewal answer for the very last minute) for how they had little time in the episode to add on a decent wrap-up scene or scenes to properly end the series. That was pretty pathetic of ABC to leave it for so late.

On the one hand, I think it would have been a mistake to kill off Beckett and then continue the series without her, given how the series started with his relationship with her. On the other hand, I think it would have been a hell of a daring thing to make such a choice and continue the series with Nathan (who I think can do some really fantastic things when he's given the right material -- as can Stana, of course). But I think if they were going to do such a thing at all it would have made more sense a few seasons ago when she was being so cavalier about diving into the fray and not caring about anything else but solving her mother's murder. She made some reckless, dangerous choices back then and was so laser-focused on that case, it might have made sense to see her taken down. It would have been horrible and I would have been pissed off at her choices, but it would have made sense. But to reinvent the show without her at season 9 just seems stupid. And even if they created the most amazing things for Nathan to do, it still wouldn't be the same show. 

For example, I loved when he forced that creepy IV guy to take a taste of his own medicine and tell the truth, and I loved when he started punching through the walls and climbing in to go help Beckett. In-Action Nathan makes for a very attractive Castle. I could see them building a series for him in which he is major action guy. In fact, in that moment, I found myself thinking back to his role on Firefly and wondering what might have been, if that series hadn't ended as early as it did. I wondered if we were getting a tiny glimpse into more of what Nathan could do if someone would give him that kind of role. I'd watch it. 

But that's not what the show Castle was made to be. The characters were built on a really beautiful balance of humor and drama, snark and seriousness. To switch gears and have it focus on Castle (instead of Castle and Beckett), and have it be more action-oriented instead of family and friends/colleagues and relationship oriented just changes the entire feel of the program. To do that in season 9 would have been pretty pointless to me. I would much rather have it end  now and allow all these talented actors to move on to interesting new projects. It's time. It's been time for a while now.

Quote

The best part was Nathan crying.  Damn, that broke my heart. 

Definitely. That scene was the best part of the episode. Which again makes me a little mad and sad for all the seasons the showrunners have wasted fucking around with these characters, when it's so clear that they're capable of THIS kind of drama and humor and heart. We as fans have known it all along. We saw it in Castle and in Beckett back in seasons 1 and 2. Why did they have to crumble on their premise? It's the same question I asked of Bones during their season 3 and at the horrific start of their season 4. I'm not sure I'll ever have a satisfying answer to that for either program. My heart just longs for what could have been, for all involved.

Edited May 22, 2016 by sinkwriter

[sinkwriter]

At this point, I just hope that everyone gets awesome new work to do elsewhere, because I like all the actors and would love to see them get great roles where they can really shine. 

[Sulador]

They both died. Empty loft. After that, they are in heaven with their new loft and three happy children. Feh.

[evesix]

Heaven has a "Seven Years Later" title card? Well okay then.

[madmaverick]

I get pondering the ambiguity if there hadn't been a "Seven Years Later" title card, but considering there was one, I don't really get it.  

[WendyCR72]

3 hours ago, madmaverick said:

I get pondering the ambiguity if there hadn't been a "Seven Years Later" title card, but considering there was one, I don't really get it.  

Just goes to show how sloppy it all was. But, yeah, they clearly (and inexplicably) lived happily ever after...

[sinkwriter]

The shift was just so abrupt! Still makes me laugh. (And roll my eyes a bit.) Very much not a fitting way to end a series. But I'll take it, I guess.

[KaveDweller]

Well apparently Nashville filmed an alternate ending, but decided not to use it because they are trying to get the show on another network. So it could be worse.

[Thomas Crown]

On May 28, 2016 at 3:08 PM, WendyCR72 said:

Just goes to show how sloppy it all was. But, yeah, they clearly (and inexplicably) lived happily ever after...

IMO, I don't think you can say that it's clear they lived happily ever after. Are we supposed to believe that the both Castle and Beckett look exactly the same "7 years later" and didn't age at all from their present day looks? To me, they sure didn't look like they aged in that montage at the end of the episode.  If you are going to flash forward 7 years in the future, at least have the characters look a bit older especially since they would be in their 40's with that 7 year leap. 

I also think the choice of "7 years later" from the writers is interesting.  Why not choose 5 years, or 6 years or even 10 years ?  But they chose 7 years instead. Since the show premiered in March of 2009, the choice of 7 years later would bring us to today in 2016. I see the ending of the episode as Castle "the writer" looking back on meeting Beckett in 2009, remembering their first exchanges and wondering what would have happened had Beckett originally excepted his invitation to diner.  Had she agreed right away then things would have turned out differently, i.e. they would have fallen love and got married much quicker.   Then "7 years later" in 2016 they would still be married but this time with kids living happily ever after instead of lying on the floor in the present day about to die. 

[WendyCR72]

20 minutes ago, Thomas Crown said:

IMO, I don't think you can say that it's clear they lived happily ever after

I think we can. If they were dead, no need for "7 years later". I think it is what it is, a tacked on, sloppy "happy ending", because TIIC were too arrogant to have plan A and plan B in place due to said arrogance.

As for not aging, behold the glory of TV timelines.

[BellyLaughter]

2 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

I think we can. If they were dead, no need for "7 years later". I think it is what it is, a tacked on, sloppy "happy ending", because TIIC were too arrogant to have plan A and plan B in place due to said arrogance.

As for not aging, behold the glory of TV timelines.

And awesome genetics! ;)

 

Thomas Crown - that is a really interesting take on that final scene!! First time I've seen it interpreted that way!  Would this bunch of writers come up with that level of interpretation as a possibility?? After this past season I highly doubt it!! Perhaps you should consider a career change - if you aren't already writing for a living!

Edited June 6, 2016 by BellyLaughter

[KaveDweller]

3 hours ago, Thomas Crown said:

IMO, I don't think you can say that it's clear they lived happily ever after. Are we supposed to believe that the both Castle and Beckett look exactly the same "7 years later" and didn't age at all from their present day looks? To me, they sure didn't look like they aged in that montage at the end of the episode.  If you are going to flash forward 7 years in the future, at least have the characters look a bit older especially since they would be in their 40's with that 7 year leap. 

I also think the choice of "7 years later" from the writers is interesting.  Why not choose 5 years, or 6 years or even 10 years ?  But they chose 7 years instead. Since the show premiered in March of 2009, the choice of 7 years later would bring us to today in 2016. I see the ending of the episode as Castle "the writer" looking back on meeting Beckett in 2009, remembering their first exchanges and wondering what would have happened had Beckett originally excepted his invitation to diner.  Had she agreed right away then things would have turned out differently, i.e. they would have fallen love and got married much quicker.   Then "7 years later" in 2016 they would still be married but this time with kids living happily ever after instead of lying on the floor in the present day about to die. 

It's been 7 years since Castle premiered, but it hasn't been 7 years on the show. At the end of seasons 3, 4, and 7, Castle or Beckett referred to meeting each other 3, 4, or 7 years ago. And Vikram said in this episode that he's been around for 9 months, and he showed up in an episode that took place a couple months after season 7 ended. So it has been 8 years for the characters. I think they picked seven years so it was enough time to have kids, but long enough to have the kids get too old.

I think it was supposed to be some kind of alternate universe/heaven they would have done something to indicate that. The "seven-years later" doesn't make sense if it was supposed to be anything but a happily-ever after. I also don't think the writers are smart enough to come up with anything that symbolic. They didn't think they'd really get cancelled and just filmed a tacked on ending so they had something happy. They likely put no thought into it whatsoever.

[femmefan1946]

Seven is a magic/lucky number in Western culture. And thirteen is another.

Like pricing your house for sale at $888,888.00 to attract the Chinese buyer. The bad luck number being four.

The choice may have been unconcious.

[John Potts]

I definitely had the impression that they had no idea who LokSat was until (maybe) three episodes ago.

The Good:

I did like that LokSat's involvement in the GDS was coincidental. It's good to have villains that have a hobby. Of course, that just goes to show that the number one attributes Big Bads have to have is excellent time management skills. He must have been a relatively successful CIA agent AND run a criminal enterprise* AND run the GDS. Does the guy ever sleep?

The Bad:

I know that in NY parking's a bitch, but I assume Rick does have a car. So in an emergency - he takes a taxi? It's not as if he couldn't get abducted from the parking garage (...again).

Kate - when you knock down the killer/torturer - keep an eye on them? I get the need to hug in the heat of the moment, but wait until you're in the back of a police car surrounded by friends you are not safe - you'd think she'd realise that by now.

The Stupid:

After coming to the realisation that Rick & Kate are safer together - they both decide to run off alone. And get caught by the bad guys.

So LokSat had Caskett in the back of his van and out of ammo. So he - lets them go so he can recapture them later?

On ‎5‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 5:20 AM, tankgirl73 said:

I spent 3/4 of the episode waiting for them to reveal that it was Vikram all along...

Or Hayley (or both)!

On ‎5‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 7:16 AM, MaryM47 said:

wasn’t that bad guy in galaxy quest

By Grabthar's Hammer, I knew I'd seen him somewhere before!

* I will resist the obvious joke here