Whatever Happened to the Old Haunt and Other Show Related Mysteries

[Samantha84]

New Photo of Stana in Greece. 

As far as season 7 premiere. I'm most looking forward to the reactions of Beckett, Martha, and Alexis. This angle will make or break this episode for me. We know Castle isn't dead so the drama comes from the reactions of his loved ones and how he will be rescued. If Marlowe gives the material to Stana, Susan, and Molly .. they will deliver it. 

[retrograde]

I saw this and came straight here. Way to leave a huge pile of shit behind for someone else to clean up. But maybe it's for the best. In fact, maybe he should have done this a season or two ago.

[Brit Babe]

Deadline.com article explains why I loved Season 2:

 

 

He was joined by Barry Schindel for the first episodes after the pilot in Season 1 and by another veteran, Rene Echevarria, who co-ran the show with him in Season 2.

 

I have watched a few shows he has been EP on and he knows to handle things.

[verdana]

 

ATS was alright, but to be honest, I wished they'd gone with more romance than comedy the morning after, and some meaningful pillow talk after such a turning point.  And we got our first interrupted kiss.  Who knew it'd be the first of a very many?

 

3XK and Target were good dramatic episodes, and his first parters were usually better than AM's second parters.

 

LOL, indeed.  Maybe it's a good thing Amann's not on twitter heh.

 

I do like AFS but yeah the morning after scene gave you a signal of what was to come for this couple....but I still loved it and the scene in her apartment when he came to apologise and she suggested they go for another round. It showed some much needed desire between them and Rick wasn't fixated on suggesting they play a board game he actually wanted to have sex with her. 

 

If Amann's got any sense he'll stay off twitter.  

Okay now for my daily dilemma on this board, does this belong on the Castle hiatus thread or Castle in the media thread or both?

 

Terri has tweeted what I presume is the list of writers for next season.

 

Terri Edda Miller @TerriEdda  ·  3h

#Castle @AndrewWMarlowe @RobHanning @jimadler @DaraCreasey @chadgcreasey @Afrostbite23 David Amann TP Winter Christine Roum @ajohns366 & Me!

 

 

 

Can't believe that Christine Roum has still survived, I've disliked almost every one of her episodes due to how poorly the characters come over doing stupid things. 

Amanda Johns is a newbie I'm sure here's what's she done.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2295126/

Edited June 17, 2014 by verdana

[KaveDweller]

Amanda Johns is a newbie I'm sure here's what's she done.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2295126/

 

She hasn't done very much actual writing has she?  I mean, she may be great but that's a pretty thin resume, especially in the last couple of years. That's not necessarily an insult, just an observation.

 

It's possible Marlowe may be involved with Castle now, but he knows he won't have time halfway through the season when a new pilot or whatever may get filmed. So, he handed over the reigns to be prepared for that.

 

I wouldn't mind seeing an interview with Amann.  Since I don't trust anything Marlowe says.

[VinceW]

It's possible Marlowe may be involved with Castle now, but he knows he won't have time halfway through the season when a new pilot or whatever may get filmed. So, he handed over the reigns to be prepared for that.

Why would a show runner be willing to tick off the fans as AWM did for the finale? What show runner in his right mind is willing to go with a story that he knows will alienate or chase off fans? That makes no sense. In addition, his post finale comments were crazy talk and apparently ABC came to the same conclusion as well.  After that finale, they needed to shake things up and they've done something I never thought would happen. I don't believe the media PR bullshit about him concentrating on developing other shows for ABC. Marlowe was forced out. Why would ABC bother with changing show runners now if all that would accomplish is keeping the exact same vision and direction that they had with Marlowe? The answer is that ABC wouldn't and neither would any other network in the world do something such as that. This is not some sort of bait and switch where Marlowe is made to appear to step down and someone else is said to be in charge when really it is still Marlowe. Never going to happen as that would be a huge egg on the face PR nightmare for the network once it came out.  Marlowe is no longer going to have a say in how the stories are going to play out on the show going forward despite everything else to the contrary. IMO.

[McManda]

Why would a show runner be willing to tick off the fans as AWM did for the finale? What show runner in his right mind is willing to go with a story that he knows will alienate or chase off fans?

 

Simple answer is because for whatever reason (cockiness, sheer stupidity, complete unawarness, whatever), he didn't think he was going to alienate or chase off fans. (Time will tell if it does. Personally, I think most people will be back to see if he can "fix" it.)

 

I don't think it's any grand conspiracy. I think Marlowe thinks that something better or bigger or fresher or more interesting is around the corner and he wants to be freer if it materalizes. He'll continue to work on Castle until it does (if it hasn't already) and takes off.

[GeorgieNY]

So, looking at Terri's writers tweet, it looks like Elizabeth Beall has left as well? Does anyone know if she has a new gig?

Also, any speculation on new directors- I know Terlesky will have left a big hole in the directing staff.

[VinceW]

I don't think it's any grand conspiracy

There is no conspiracy. He will not be back to fix anything. Marlowe did the one thing that is never forgiven and that is blatantly lie to his audience. In the post interviews, he made it worse by gloating about it.  There was no coming back from that. In the finale, he broke the trust that must exist between a show and its viewers. He led the audience believe something (wedding) would happen. However, he had no intention on delivering the promised outcome. Marlowe is no longer going to have a say in how the stories are going to play out on the show going forward despite what you might think. 

[turnitwayup]

 

So, looking at Terri's writers tweet, it looks like Elizabeth Beall has left as well? Does anyone know if she has a new gig?

 

Nothing new on her imdb page, but I realized she wrote enjoyable s1-3 eps, clunkers in s4-5 and not bad in s6. I would rather kept her over Christine.

 

 

Amanda Johns is a newbie I'm sure here's what's she done.

 

I did watched Harry's Law but the quirkyness of the 1st season with an office in a shoe store and helping out the local community was changed into more like Boston Legal. It seems that she wrote during the 2nd season. Reading the synopsis for her eps and I don't recall them. Show isn't on netflix streaming so I can't even tell if her eps were good either. Maybe she'll surprise us and give us good eps for Castle.

[VinceW]

That couldn't be more false. He didn't get kicked off the show because some fans weren't happy or because of any interview he gave.

I don't think I said those were the reasons. It is a trust issue. Who knows what role Marlowe will play with the show (my assumption is very little), but you do not bring in a new guy to lead the show....only to listen to the previous one about the direction of it . I hope Amann has free reign from episode 1 of the new season.

Edited June 18, 2014 by VinceW

[Cyranetta]

 

McManda: he didn't think he was going to alienate or chase off fans

 

And from what I remember, when they were alienated, the attitude seemed to be that it was the fans' fault, which just added fuel to the fire (and ire) .

[tvchick]

I'm not interested in scandal.  I want change.  Marlowe and company have been tone deaf for ages and I can only hope that Amann will understand that.

[halaciHU]

Just when I finally decided to quit for good, they do this with me. :) I stopped commenting on TWOP a good year ago because I felt that we are touching the same topics but those are always on a worse level and that this is not some kind of mistake from the creators, that's exactly waht AM wanted to show, so there are no hope it would change. Then this happens...

 

Regarding his departure, it's true that it's quite common that somebody is promoted from the second row when the showrunner leaves, and it also happens frequently that a showrunner leaves. But if it happens on his own decision, while the gods are pleased with him, it happens during the upfronts - not after the summer break and after two weeks of work on the new season. And those showrunners are leaving their shows for another one, either because they have more running shows, or like Kevin Williamson who was asked to take over the newbee "Stalker" on CBS on the same day. A showrunner never leaves a running milk cow show for hazy unspecified other projects on their own. (It was so typical to AM's half baked storytelling that even in his own story he was inconsistent: he told in the same interview that he wanted more time, became too tired and that he would participate on the same level in Castle plus will do other projects, LOL.)

 

It is also seems very unlikely that Amman would accept a post where he is only a marionett - except maybe if he was told that this is going to be the final season and then he will get his own fully fledged seat in one of the new shows for the 2015-16 season. Otherwise it would be a creative suicide to him: being stucked for indefinte time into a seat where the successes are accounted to somebody else and only the failures would be his.

 

I don't think Marlowe was sacked solely because of the finale and mainly not because of his smug interviews and the fans' reactions to those. IMHO he was sacked because the show made an alarming downturn in the second half of S6, then he miscalculated the effects of the finale and most importantly he couldn't come up with any convincing idea about S7 after the first two weeks, when the team should have laid down the main course of the season and define what will be in the premiere. Both the timing of the announcment and Stana's last interview point to this direction. She was always very enthusiastic about what could happen in the show. Not in the hyperbolic way like TJ or PJJ, but had tried to imagine where they could go, what they could show? I have never ever heard her saying that "ok guys do what you want, I hope I will be able to add something to it." Never ever heard her saying that she doesn't even know what to wish to see. It is quite obvious that at the end of last season nobody had the slightest idea about what they will do in S7.

 

I'm not sure what to expect from Amman except that he isn't Marlowe. 3XK was an excellent episode, but for example Discipline was a shamefully illogical hackfest. None of his episodes are on my top 10 list. It is also quite sure that ABC doesn't want big changes, they just want to keep the audience instead of watch them leaving. So I don't think he would have a huge empty field to play, but there are some things which could definitely improve my "user experience" with the show and which are well inside of these limits.

 

- I'd like to see dialogues between everybody about everything. Stop the "we see them privately only if it can be case related" approach. I don't even wish own sidestories (Pi was a good lesson to think about what you wish for), just talks. Different opinions, banters, chances to round up the one dimensional secondary characters. And I want it to happen between everybody. If I hear again such an idiotism like that Beckett doesn't have any relation with Alexis after one and a half year, just because Hacklowe didn't show them together, I quit. (This would require good writers of course, which I'm not sure how capable the present staff is.)

 

- I want a rebalanced Castle/Beckett. Beckett needs to be pegged down (but not in that character killer way, for God's sake!!!), or more precisely must not be superwomanized, but what I want to see even more is Castle being appreciated. Not in a "you are an idiot, but I love you" way, but really. Being a guy who can win and can be likeable in the meantime. In the beginning he had friends from everywhere, not because he was famous, but because he was a likeable person and he was perceptive. The Castle of the last seasons was as likeable as five year old on an an extremely loud tantrum and was as perceptive as a dead fish.

 

- I'd like to see real feelings of love, tenderness and passion instead of the placard style declarations and theatrics with blood stained love letters. I'm not talking about hot bed scenes (YMMV, but unfortunately NF isn't convincing to me in his present form to wish him being undressed beside Stana), but passion doesn't equal with graphic sex. I'd like to see signs that these two person can not stop wondering about how lucky they are that the other one wants right them. These are two great actors, let them play more subtle tunes, instead of always instructing them to play crescendo con molto forte. To me the most - in fact the only - memorable moment between them in S6 was when Beckett had adjusted Castle's vest, before he went into the bank in Number One Fan, and how she unconsciously touched the ring on her neck. That told me more about her feelings than those overacted, wide-eyed testimonies and heavily anvilicious love declarations.

 

- I wish to see improved cases. Not super accuracy, not perfection, but stop insulting me with nonsensical and illogical tropes which throw me out of the story in an instant. If they spend 30 minutes of a 40 minute episode on an investigation, then bring up at least their B game (if the A is to much to demand) and don't settle with a ridiculous twist, hoping that nobody is interested in it anyhow. No more calls to untraceable burner phones, no more working laser pistols, no more busted alibi by a suddenly mentioned rear door.

 

- My secret (and impossible) wish is that if they can't cope with something, don't do it. Castle was decided to be a classic, syndicate-targeted procedural, aimed to be light. From the last year statistics it was clear that this is what its present audience expects and wants - the two "big", "mythology" episodes both reached series lows. I'm not happy that they turned the show into this, but if they did, then be honest and do this. If dealing with the consequences of the previous episode can not fit into the scheme, then don't write conflicts which have consequences which should be dealt with. To me the final nail to the coffin in S6 wasn't the finale - it just proved that I was right before. Veritas was the last straw, when I learned that they had been investigating Bracken for six weeks - and there was not a single sign of it. I'm talking not only about the acts of following somebody, hiding, sniping - I'm talking about the emotional toll. I can't care about their trouble if the show doesn't care about it either. 

Edited June 19, 2014 by halaciHU

[Boojum]

have never ever heard her saying that "ok guys do what you want, I hope I will be able to add something to it." Never ever heard her saying that she doesn't even know what to wish to see.

 

 

LOL. Strikes me as the way Nathan's been giving interviews for a couple of years now at least.

[verdana]

Great post halaci and I'd like to see all those things happen although it's probably too late, if they haven't figured out what they're doing wrong by now seems to me they never will.  But may be Amann will understand what's needed to keep viewers watching the show whilst they wait for the pay off to they really want.

 

With Marlowe I got the distinct impression he'd lost sight of how to provide that in an entertaining way and instead seemed to actively enjoy teasing and stretching things to breaking point and then worse rubbing it in with arrogant interviews that merely confirmed his enjoyment with providing the frustration factor more than anything else and worse backed up by increasingly tone deaf storytelling. Over the last few seasons he seemed to lose the ability to balance out the requirement to give fans what they need but not quite what they want without pissing them off so much they start to tune out because people generally hate being obviously screwed around.

 

And in his attempts to string things out he ended up damaging the characters along the way which only made it worse. 

Edited June 21, 2014 by verdana

[verdana]

- I want a rebalanced Castle/Beckett. Beckett needs to be pegged down (but not in that character killer way, for God's sake!!!), or more precisely must not be superwomanized, but what I want to see even more is Castle being appreciated. Not in a "you are an idiot, but I love you" way, but really. Being a guy who can win and can be likeable in the meantime. In the beginning he had friends from everywhere, not because he was famous, but because he was a likeable person and he was perceptive. The Castle of the last seasons was as likeable as five year old on an an extremely loud tantrum and was as perceptive as a dead fish.

I don't know why they decided to make Castle annoying, the number of the times they've had him say or do something that has had me gnashing my teeth in frustration over the last few seasons.  I often dread hearing what's going to come out of his mouth next it's presumably meant to make me laugh or think it's cute/sweet but often has the opposite effect. It's like they've lost sight of the (old) character completely plus he gets treated like a doormat by everyone which make it worse. During the rare moments he does try to stick up for himself he promptly gets told he's in the wrong or has the rug pulled out from under him. This of course is played for laughs, not sure what's funny about it. 

 

Marlowe's solution to the imbalance in their relationship just made Beckett look beyond stupid. It also proved how out of touch he is that he thought this would be the quick fix needed but ended up damaging her character for some fans.

[GeorgieNY]

@DaraCreasey: Know what's cool? Working on a season of TV you'd really enjoy watching as a viewer. #Castle #season7 #itscoming #amikillingyouyet?

I don't know if we are considering tweets "media"- so I am putting this here...also don't know how you guys quote tweets in the pretty way (I'm on an iPad) but found this one. I wonder of Dara liked the finale. I know she was a big fan girl before being hired for the show. I know she also may just really want to keep her job. ;-)

[halaciHU]

Thank you verdana - I don't think these things will happen either, it was just a list of opportunities which could be done even now without kicking up the show's established structure. I also believe that while these things wouldn't be rejected by the present, solely Caskett-moment oriented audience either, so these aren't something with an audience trade off.

 

Regarding how much AM had lost sight on the characters, I must admit that even though I dislike it very much, it worked well for the show as a product. It sounds ridiculous now but IMHO originally these characters were really complex ones. It was believable that their decisions and acts were defined by multiple "power vectors" at the same time. Now in any scene there is only one vector, one aspect of the character. Which is nice, but then ten minutes or two episodes later there is another aspect, showing to the opposite direction and there are no sign that the character has any inner conflict about it. I know to most fans it means the complexity - to me it means only clumsy writing. However it is perfectly fit into the show's present, simplified approach of characterization. It's like the writers would work from a twisted thesaurus where complex = hackneyed, childlike = imbecile, passion = (no, I don't think it has even a bad reference in their book). 

[verdana]

Veritas was the last straw, when I learned that they had been investigating Bracken for six weeks - and there was not a single sign of it. I'm talking not only about the acts of following somebody, hiding, sniping - I'm talking about the emotional toll. I can't care about their trouble if the show doesn't care about it either. 

That reveal summed up for me what's so wrong with how they go about things. We should have been seeing hints of this going on, felt the gradual stress and tension building up behind the scenes but instead it's dealt with in a casual one liner.  Fans identify with the characters because of what they're emotionally going through being told about it is not the same thing. 

[verdana]

@DaraCreasey: Know what's cool? Working on a season of TV you'd really enjoy watching as a viewer. #Castle #season7 #itscoming #amikillingyouyet?

I don't know if we are considering tweets "media"- so I am putting this here...also don't know how you guys quote tweets in the pretty way (I'm on an iPad) but found this one. I wonder of Dara liked the finale. I know she was a big fan girl before being hired for the show. I know she also may just really want to keep her job. ;-)

I seem to recall seeing a tweet from one of the Creaseys praising MilMar for the finale before it aired, they either genuinely thought it was truly wonderful writing or they believe in sucking up to their bosses at all times just to make sure they stay in a job. By the tone of their rather obsequious tweets to Marlowe and Miller in the past I sense it could be a case of the latter.

 

I find those kind of tweets teasing about how wonderful things are going to be annoying now, the writers have a lot to make up for after that finale and a generally uneven season of often lazy storytelling, they need to put their efforts into showing me how great it is on screen rather than tweeting me about it.

[KaveDweller]

That reveal summed up for me what's so wrong with how they go about things. We should have been seeing hints of this going on, felt the gradual stress and tension building up behind the scenes but instead it's dealt with in a casual one liner.  Fans identify with the characters because of what they're emotionally going through being told about it is not the same thing. 

 

I know they say they keep things self-contained so it works in syndication, but if you watch any sitcom that is syndicated (Friends, Big Bang Theory, Seinfeld) there are always ongoing storylines and references to things that happened in a recent episode. They can easily keep the case self-contained but have small threads that aren't.  I would have loved to see Caskett talk about deciding to watch Simmons or something.  Or something more subtle like seeing them come home from following him when they get a call for a case.  Having it not mentioned makes it looks like the writers added it at the last minute (even though I don't think they did).

 

I seem to recall seeing a tweet from one of the Creaseys praising MilMar for the finale before it aired, they either genuinely thought it was truly wonderful writing or they believe in sucking up to their bosses at all times just to make sure they stay in a job. By the tone of their rather obsequious tweets to Marlowe and Miller in the past I sense it could be a case of the latter.

 

I tend to ignore those tweets, because what the hell are they supposed to say: "Man, I hate my job.Season 7 is going to suck."   I think they are asked to Tweet to stir up interest.  They are basically just another kind of promo/ad for the show.

[halaciHU]

I know they say they keep things self-contained so it works in syndication, but if you watch any sitcom that is syndicated (Friends, Big Bang Theory, Seinfeld) there are always ongoing storylines and references to things that happened in a recent episode.

 

What annoyed me to no end with this is that it was the typical example how weekly plot driven was the whole storytelling. Previously in the season the Beckett/Alexis episode was built on the premise that Beckett has no connection with Alexis, just because we haven't seen it on screen. It was a BS, considering the number of times during which they needed to form some kind of bond (first and formost during Castle's birthday prank), but that is one legitimite approach of how one tells a story, if they didn't show it, it didn't happen. But if this is the case than they can't come back and say that "yes, up till now if we didn't show important things those hadn't happened, but now you should accept that these extremely important things had happened, even though we showed ninjas and 70s pranks instead of them".

[McManda]

I tend to ignore those tweets, because what the hell are they supposed to say: "Man, I hate my job.Season 7 is going to suck."   I think they are asked to Tweet to stir up interest.  They are basically just another kind of promo/ad for the show.

 

And even if they aren't specifically asked, it's in their best interest to stir up interest for the show. More interest = they have a job. Besides, wif they tweet right it might be goodwill to all the people that are still angry about the finale.

 

So yes, all they're going to say is "so excited! here's a tease" even if they think it's beyond stupid.

 

Previously in the season the Beckett/Alexis episode was built on the premise that Beckett has no connection with Alexis, just because we haven't seen it on screen.

 

What point is that? I can't remember.

 

Honestly, I hold a different view - if we didn't see it, it's because it wasn't relevant at the time. That doesn't mean it won't become relevant (in which case, we'll find out) or that it didn't happen, just that it didn't impact the story when it happened.

[Cyranetta]

 

halaciHU: What annoyed me to no end with this is that it was the typical example how weekly plot driven was the whole storytelling.

 

I think that applies even within single episodes. I just rewatched the S3 commentary on the initial episode, and it was mentioned that they deliberately looked for stories for Castle's family that reflected the theme of the A story to the strength of both. They seem to have stopped doing that, and I for one miss it.

[verdana]

 

Honestly, I hold a different view - if we didn't see it, it's because it wasn't relevant at the time. That doesn't mean it won't become relevant (in which case, we'll find out) or that it didn't happen, just that it didn't impact the story when it happened.

What the writers don't consider relevant at the time are things when you do find out about them could add enormously to the storytelling each week. Their six week investigation of Bracken being a case in point. The writers decide it's immaterial for us to see the ongoing investigation which revolves around her previously all important mother's case? The one Beckett had very recently got tortured over and almost lost her life (again). That sounds pretty important to me and yet I find out about it in a clunky line of dialogue at the last minute when they have to quickly shoehorn it in to explain what's now going on. Informing me after the event lacks impact. Too many important things on this show happen off screen that should be on it. 

[verdana]

I know they say they keep things self-contained so it works in syndication, but if you watch any sitcom that is syndicated (Friends, Big Bang Theory, Seinfeld) there are always ongoing storylines and references to things that happened in a recent episode. They can easily keep the case self-contained but have small threads that aren't.  I would have loved to see Caskett talk about deciding to watch Simmons or something.  Or something more subtle like seeing them come home from following him when they get a call for a case.  Having it not mentioned makes it looks like the writers added it at the last minute (even though I don't think they did).

I've never understood why this is used as an excuse for the lack of continuity on Castle. Marlowe seems determined to have self contained episodes wherever possible but it's such a shame they continue to adhere to this principle when they don't need to. Fans are sophisticated and smart enough to hang around and figure out what's going in if they like a show enough, they're not going to switch off just because they saw one little thing that confused them. Well I wouldn't. If I like a show I'll go back and watch all the past episodes in a marathon so I'm up to speed. Or you can always go and read up about it quickly to start with or ask someone.

 

Does Marlowe really think that fans have such a short attention span that they'll immediately switch over because their poor little brains can't cope with some extra information not necessarily tied to that week's case? I'm not asking Marlowe to give me numerous huge multi-story arcs all of a sudden just stop being afraid of carrying on the odd thing into further episodes, it can add immeasurably to your story and character development. The investigation into Bracken is one of them obviously and on a lighter note you could have also had her moving in tackled the same way this season with one decent discussion (instead of the stupid fuss over the lion picture) and then taken it from there with things appearing in his flat over time along with the odd line or two as they dealt with selling her apartment etc.  That's probably another thing I'll find out happened off screen next season.  

[halaciHU]

What point is that? I can't remember.

 

Sorry, my mistake - in my memory I mixed what AM told about the episode (that while Beckett knows where she is with Castle, she doesn't know where she is with Alexis) with what was said in the episode (that she feels like a third wheel when she is with them). I went back to check it - it was a long time ago when I saw an episode multiple times and knew what happened in them by heart.

[halaciHU]

I tend to ignore those tweets, because what the hell are they supposed to say: "Man, I hate my job.Season 7 is going to suck."   I think they are asked to Tweet to stir up interest.  They are basically just another kind of promo/ad for the show.

 

Precisely. The actively tweeting part of the fandom is very loud and very hyperbolic at the same time. All episode is the best, epic, they tweet every day that they can't wait for September, for the next week, for the evening, etc. (Note: I follow severaly other shows as well and the positive response and expectations are not Castle's speciality, only the level of antics.) Serving them with the same style of fodder is the best interest of the show, so if they find somebody from the staff who is willing to participate, then they do it.

[madmaverick]

Welcome back, halaci.  Hope you stick around.

 

An egregious example of the writers not bringing in relevant story points into the storytelling was in Significant Others (episode where Meredith returned) when Beckett was not made aware of Meredith cheating on Castle once upon a time.  The audience may have found out that fact way back in S1, but how on earth did they deem it not relevant to the story for Beckett to find out in this episode, or any other?  Just because the audience already knew, it wasn't important for Beckett to know also or were we supposed to assume that Beckett already found out in offscreen privacy land (but not about Castle's previously nonexistent walls? ;)).  

 

What's been frustrating is how writers continuously miss out on the obviously interesting (e.g. story about Castle's past marriages, new Alexis/Beckett relationship, income/lifestyle disparity; emotional aftermath post near death experiences etc.) and obviously satisfying (passion, sex, intimacy) bits of storytelling.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure these things out; it's just a romantic comedy/drama so the relevant storytelling would seem pretty obvious!  It's just a matter of whether those facets can be delved into skilfully, with wit and humour and charm and depth.  But more often than not, the interesting issues aren't even brought up on the show in a meaningful way.  Castle, even when it was at its best, was never a challenging show to watch.  It was supposed to be dessert after dinner. It was never meant to be challenging in a way where you can't figure out characters' motives, personalities etc.  But somehow the show has become challenging to watch and not in a fun way as the writing quality declined and characterisation got more bizarre and inconsistent at times (this was not the characters becoming more 'complex'!). This show is not Breaking Bad and we're not supposed to dislike characters more as the show goes on. ;)

 

I'm just not a big fan of strictly episode contained storytelling.  May work better with comedy, but with drama, I find that there's less urgency to the storytelling, less depth to the characters that way.  Much prefer serialised storytelling.  But even with Castle's procedural format, they've got to work much harder to make it less formulaic.    

 

The 'teasing' tweets from AM & Co. tend to annoy more than excite me.  Maybe because the actual reality of his episodes have proved to be disappointing.   Maybe it's because the "I know something you don't know" schtick has never worked for me. ;)  And rarely is there any real information to be discerned anyway.  I get that twitter is used as a PR tool but I wish it came across as more genuine rather than permanent cheerleading, and legitimate criticisms could be responded to from time to time.  But it's their twitter so they can obviously tweet what they like.

 

If 723 =?, then 623 = ???????!!!!!!!! ;)

Edited June 22, 2014 by madmaverick

[KaveDweller]

Honestly, I hold a different view - if we didn't see it, it's because it wasn't relevant at the time. That doesn't mean it won't become relevant (in which case, we'll find out) or that it didn't happen, just that it didn't impact the story when it happened.

 

I agree, I don't buy into the idea that if we didn't see it it didn't happen.  We rarely see Alexis and Beckett interact, but I don't think that means they have never talked to each other.  I don't even think that conversation Beckett had with Lanie in that death penalty episode means that. In that episode where Beckett convinced Alexis to move back home, it seemed pretty clear that they had some interaction.

 

I would certainly have enjoyed seeing some of those scenes, and I think it is a mistake not to show them.  But, I will also say that I'm glad we don't see everything that supposedly happens in the Castle-universe.  I like being able to fill in the blanks in my head and getting to imagine certain interactions. 

 

But Castle would definitely benefit in showing more of these personal, non-case related scenes.  The thing about Beckett not finding out about Meredith cheating in Significant Others is a great example.

[mledawn]

And yes just because we don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

The audience is always being told by TPTB that canon is canon. If we didn't see it - it didn't happen. Deleted scene? Not canon - didn't happen.

 

But now sometimes we're just supposed to accept that things happened, we just didn't see any of it? No.

 

Showrunners can't have it both ways - they need to pick a stance.

[McManda]

The audience is always being told by TPTB that canon is canon. If we didn't see it - it didn't happen. Deleted scene? Not canon - didn't happen.

 

But now sometimes we're just supposed to accept that things happened, we just didn't see any of it? No.

 

Showrunners can't have it both ways - they need to pick a stance.

 

I take deleted scenes as, this might have happened, just not like that. I think the best example is of the deleted scene from Knockdown where Castle meets Beckett's dad and he tells the story of how Beckett doesn't back down and refused a nightlight because she wanted to stare down the dark. It was deleted, so it didn't happen. But that doesn't mean Castle doesn't get that story - he just gets it later, in a scene we saw in Knockout.

 

So if something is deleted, that doesn't necessarily mean it didn't happen. It's not canon because the very definition of canon is something that was seen or heard about onscreeen, but that doesn't mean it's not logical that it couldn't have happened. For example, we don't see Beckett and Alexis interacting on a regular basis, but what we do see later - that Beckett and Alexis seem to have a familiar relationship and are comfortable meeting without Castle present and have no problems with physical affection like hugs - lets us make the assumption that they've been cultivating a relaitonship we haven't seen.

[TWP]

I am glad that we don't see some things, like the Bracken investigation that apparently went on for 6 weeks.  I didn't actually watch Veritas because I hate that storyline so much.  But I'm thrilled that the investigation didn't permeate the episodes I did watch.  I really have to wonder if Marlowe was told that he needed to wrap up the Mombatross in one episode?  Who knows.

 

It also occurred to me that the season finale may have been....not a dream...but a prank.  So many things went wrong, to a ridiculous point.  Revenge for Lives of Others? I'll have to go back and watch and see if it's possible.

[KaveDweller]

The audience is always being told by TPTB that canon is canon. If we didn't see it - it didn't happen. Deleted scene? Not canon - didn't happen.

 

But now sometimes we're just supposed to accept that things happened, we just didn't see any of it? No.

 

Showrunners can't have it both ways - they need to pick a stance.

 

I'm going to be honest....I don't care what the TPTB say or what the definition of canon is.  I actually haven't seen an interview with Marlowe where he said if we didn't see it it didn't happen.  But that still doesn't change my stance.  I watch the show and I interrupt it the way I see it.  It doesn't matter what they intended to do, it matters how it comes across to me (or to other viewers, who may have different interpretations).

 

Obviously things happen that we don't see.  We only see about 1000 minutes of scenes that cover a year.  We didn't see Castle and Beckett select a wedding venue, but they did.  We don't see them having sex, but they do.  We don't even see all of their investigations, but they always close the case.  There's lots of stuff that gets implied and it's up to the viewers to fill in the blanks of exactly how it went down.  All shows are like that. And sometimes the writers chose to skip the interesting parts, but that doesn't mean they haven't happened in the Castle universe.

 

Now that doesn't mean that we can decide Castle and Beckett use their spare time training to join a circus or something crazy like that.  But Beckett/Alexis talking or Caskett planning their wedding, etc, I think we have to accept that we don't see everything that happens.  Isn't that how TV works?

[halaciHU]

I am glad that we don't see some things, like the Bracken investigation that apparently went on for 6 weeks.  I didn't actually watch Veritas because I hate that storyline so much.  But I'm thrilled that the investigation didn't permeate the episodes I did watch. 

 

Just because they had already scr**d up with the arc of that story it doesn't mean that the concept of showing an important story arc is bad. It was a badly told story, but it didn't make it better that they pretended as if something like this don't have an impact on their daily life. That's why I said above that my wish is that if they couldn't tell it right, then do not write big drama.

 

 

Obviously things happen that we don't see.  We only see about 1000 minutes of scenes that cover a year.  ... There's lots of stuff that gets implied and it's up to the viewers to fill in the blanks of exactly how it went down.  All shows are like that. And sometimes the writers chose to skip the interesting parts, but that doesn't mean they haven't happened in the Castle universe.

 

Now that doesn't mean that we can decide Castle and Beckett use their spare time training to join a circus or something crazy like that.  But Beckett/Alexis talking or Caskett planning their wedding, etc, I think we have to accept that we don't see everything that happens.  Isn't that how TV works?

 

IMHO yes and no. Obviously it's true that every shows skip parts of a 7/24 life. It is also common that it requires our imagination to fill out the interludes and it's competely OK. But this happens in a way that we assume what those people should do, how they would behave in those times when we didn't see them and IMHO the writers should keep that in mind when they write something. So as much as we can't decide that they are spending their spare time to join a circus, the writers can't come up with something like that either.

 

In my mind it also applies to things what should happen in the interludes. The baby episode eg. was very false to me because it happened too late. Castle has a grown up daughter, technically he could be a granddad by now. Beckett is in the last third of the timeframe when a first child is "due". It is a common opinion that women want to have children in a marriage. So bringing this topic up one and a half year after they decided that they are "always" was simply forced. Talking about whether having a family of their own or not is a topic what no sane couple postpones half a year after the proposal.

 

The other problem with not seeing any of those moments is not about the canon, it's about our involvement. As we don't see anything from it, I can't be related to their problem. Beckett complains to Laine that "all the time" she feels like a third wheel - it's completely out of the blue, we haven't seen any sign of it. (Either as a scene or at least as a hint between her and Castle.) But I don't even have time to think about it, how could it affect their relationship, because for the end of the episode in a blink it is solved.

 

I know this is absolutley in the YMMV category, but I can't care less about the SuperPowerfulMegaVillains (be it Bracken, 3XK or God save us from another one) - because of the premise of the show I can't be afraid for the life of our DD's and the cases are usually built on so many plotholes that I can't enjoy them as a suspense either. But the small "home affair" struggles, those could be interesting, this show is about the people in the end isn't it? The problem with Marlowe was that even when he turned to this (the Pi affair) he went for the Big Drama again and used the only tool he knows (the "they don't talk" prank), while Castle would have required more of a Gilmore Girls style.

Edited June 23, 2014 by halaciHU

[femmefan1946]

.  But somehow the show has become challenging to watch and not in a fun way as the writing quality declined and characterisation got more bizarre and inconsistent at times

So so true.

I often feel that new writers come in without having at the very least reviewed the DVDs (They're on eBay people!) and that the show doesn't have a Bible to keep track of story and character points.

 

Ah well, when I want intimacy (and chuckles) I can wander over to fanfiction.net and read 17,600 stories based on the series, most in English and many darn good. (check out pollylyn, for example).

https://www.fanfiction.net/tv/Castle/

[verdana]

For example, we don't see Beckett and Alexis interacting on a regular basis, but what we do see later - that Beckett and Alexis seem to have a familiar relationship and are comfortable meeting without Castle present and have no problems with physical affection like hugs - lets us make the assumption that they've been cultivating a relaitonship we haven't seen.

But cultivating a relationship that we hardly ever get to see is such a waste. I've got to imagine they have this nice little relationship going on when it should have been developed on the show bearing in mind Beckett's about to become a member of that family which has been shown to be in the past so close and unique as a unit. The relationship between Kate and Alexis (and her father) would have been far more interesting to see developed than watching them haplessly trying to organise their wedding that never was. 

 

The issue of Meredith which mad maverick bought up absolutely should have been dealt with properly, they even wrote an episode around her for crying out loud but still didn't have the inclination to put in in. Even Marlowe has mentioned that a few times about his previous marriage and Beckett needing to know (Stana too) so why doesn't it happen?

 

All the big moments for this couple the writers have managed screw up on since they got together. Honeymoon period - watching them get to know each other in those early heady stages - didn't really see it the writers were so busy trying to keep them at arms length. Proposal - lousy and depressing it looked like they were breaking up!  Pre wedding - no real in depth discussion about anything to do with their future as a couple just endless wedding planning culminating with a tear stained bride, ruined wedding day and Castle's car burning in a ditch instead as a pay off. 

 

There is so much interesting storytelling that goes begging on this show and is seemingly left up to fans imaginations. No wonder the fanfic is so active, it has to be to fill in the huge blanks in the storytelling the writers feel free for fans to assume happens, yet their relationship is the cornerstone of the show not the COTW or anything else. 

Edited June 23, 2014 by verdana

[verdana]

 

It also occurred to me that the season finale may have been....not a dream...but a prank.  So many things went wrong, to a ridiculous point.  Revenge for Lives of Others? I'll have to go back and watch and see if it's possible.

If it's some giant pay back for TLOO then Castle is a total douchebag and it will prove to me the writers really are determined to shit all over his character.

 

Although I heard that suggested prior to the finale which fans thought would explain the marriage to Rogan etc based on the sneak peeks at the time but really? What guy who truly loves a woman thinks that having her believe she was once married to her ex con artist boyfriend and then caps it all by having her believe he died in car crash funny? I know I wouldn't be holding my sides with laughter after the reveal, I'd be wondering what kind of childish sick bastard I was about to marry.

 

There's a difference between deciding on some elaborate ruse for a surprise birthday party and roping in family and friends to allowing your bride to run around after her scumbag ex lover for no good reason, seeing her obviously very distraught and ruining her big day to the man she loves for kicks. 

Edited June 23, 2014 by verdana

[halaciHU]

But cultivating a relationship that we hardly ever get to see is such a waste. I've got to imagine they have this nice little relationship going on when it should have been developed on the show bearing in mind Beckett's about to become a member of that family which has been shown to be in the past so close and unique as a unit. The relationship between Kate and Alexis (and her father) would have been far more interesting to see developed than watching them haplessly trying to organise their wedding that never was. 

....

There is so much interesting storytelling that goes begging on this show and is seemingly left up to fans imaginations. No wonder the fanfic is so active, it has to be to fill in the huge blanks in the storytelling the writers feel free for fans to assume happens, yet their relationship is the cornerstone of the show not the COTW or anything else. 

 

IMHO the problem is that the formula what Marlowe follows works only if the viewer remains on the superficial level. The show is probably the last real procedural on air now. They told many times that the old series, like Nick and Nora inspired them, so they follow the traditions of the crime shows from 20-30 years ago. No change, no story, just the same old rinse-dry-repeat. It tells a lot when your lead actress says that one of the best part of the show is that you can skip a few episodes and won't miss anything...

 

I agree, watching how Beckett finds her place in the everyday life of a close-knit family would have been way more interesting (and sweet and funny) than just hear one sentence here and there acknowledging that the writers didn't completely forgotten the other members. It's Marlowe's huge mistake that life can be interesting only if they have to run the gauntlet of some intergalactic threat and that these two people are interesting only in the WTWT way.

 

There was a very telling freudian slip in the Valkyrie about how he sees his heroes. When Castle was kicked off and sent home, Beckett tried to console him and told that it's not a big deal, at least they would have things to talk about at home, then Castle reply was that they wouldn't have as it's classified - and they stayed at that. As if there are nothing else important or interesting is in their relationship, only if he can follow her on the cases. I so much expected Beckett to say something about that is she interesting only as a cop? I sensed that the clumsy, checklist style of introduction of their private life in the second half of S6 was the fruit of this, that in reality Marlowe himself doesn't see anything interesting in these two people beside the cop and her tagalong aspect.

If it's some giant pay back for TLOO then Castle is a total douchebag and it will prove to me the writers really are determined to shit all over his character.

 

100% agreed. I saw those opinion before the episode and I told that if he is willing to risk the unfettered joy of his beloved woman on the most important day of her life only to even a prank than this is a man I don't want Kate Beckett to be married to, he is a complete asshole. (and so much about his character development and being more mature.)

 

BTW TLOO was one example of the "one vector" writing I mentioned before. Marlowe was so enamored with his copy-paste idea that it didn't came down to him how OOC is that Beckett thought it funny that the person who loved her should watch her being stabbed to death. Joanna Beckett's memory was probably on holiday during this...

[mledawn]

Obviously things happen off screen - the show isn't "24: Castle" after all - but if the audience is expected to make assumptions about major character development, or storylines, then to me that is unfair and poor management of the show. As verdana mentions, it's a complete waste, which is a shame.

[verdana]

There was a very telling freudian slip in the Valkyrie about how he sees his heroes. When Castle was kicked off and sent home, Beckett tried to console him and told that it's not a big deal, at least they would have things to talk about at home, then Castle reply was that they wouldn't have as it's classified - and they stayed at that. As if there are nothing else important or interesting is in their relationship, only if he can follow her on the cases. I so much expected Beckett to say something about that is she interesting only as a cop? I sensed that the clumsy, checklist style of introduction of their private life in the second half of S6 was the fruit of this, that in reality Marlowe himself doesn't see anything interesting in these two people beside the cop and her tagalong aspect.

 

There are so many areas to explore with this couple now they're together, pity there's such a lack of imagination from the showrunner down in that writers room. When Kate was fired they almost immediately got her back with the NYPD so you never got a chance to see Beckett kicking her heels rattling around the loft not knowing what to do with herself whilst Castle at that point was still at the precinct. That would have been an interesting to see the change in their dynamic, I realise they couldn't have done it for very many episodes but they never gave it a chance.

 

When they weren't together it made sense to keep their lives revolving more around precinct/COTW matters but when Marlowe took the decision to get them together why did he fail to realise that it was important to show them interacting outside the precinct like any normal couple and not have their development constantly chained to the COTW? Given that I don't think the cases are that wonderful any more so the potential is reduced to get something truly satisfying which develops Castle and Beckett as more genuinely complex and layered characters. Fans aren't asking to turn the show into a soap opera but there's no real balance to things everything  has to revolve around the COTW for Marlowe otherwise it's plain that he deems it surplus to requirements and that's a shame. 

Edited June 24, 2014 by verdana

[KaveDweller]

So bringing this topic up one and a half year after they decided that they are "always" was simply forced. Talking about whether having a family of their own or not is a topic what no sane couple postpones half a year after the proposal.

 

Well, I agree they should have had that conversation earlier.  But I got the sense that they already HAD talked about it and we didn't see it.  Kate referred to "when it's our baby," and it sounded like it wasn't a question of whether they would.  Castle reacted to it like it wasn't a new thing. Which is annoying because it's an important thing to talk about.

 

Beckett complains to Laine that "all the time" she feels like a third wheel - it's completely out of the blue, we haven't seen any sign of it

 

I don't think she said she felt like a third wheel "all the time."  She said she was worried that she was alwaysgoing to feel like she was on the outside looking in on their relationship, because they are so close.  I think that's a pretty natural concern for someone marrying a single parent, and it came up in Like Father, Like Daughter because Castle was spending time with Alexis on the case.  So while I think it would have been nice to get more Alexis/Beckett scenes in the past two seasons, that conversation actually seemed pretty realistic and natural to me.

 

but if the audience is expected to make assumptions about major character development, or storylines, then to me that is unfair and poor management of the show.

 

I do agree that it's poor management of the show, and I think the writers have made a lot of poor choices in what they choose to show.  But I guess I just disagree about which things are assumptions and which are implied. Or maybe about what's "major."

 

Marlowe was so enamored with his copy-paste idea that it didn't came down to him how OOC is that Beckett thought it funny that the person who loved her should watch her being stabbed to death.

 

I don't think she thought that part was funny.  She thought that he'd enjoy the whole idea of investigating a murder, but she never laughed at him for being worried about the stabbing or anything like that.

[Sonik Tooth]

IMHO the problem is that the formula what Marlowe follows works only if the viewer remains on the superficial level. The show is probably the last real procedural on air now. They told many times that the old series, like Nick and Nora inspired them, so they follow the traditions of the crime shows from 20-30 years ago. No change, no story, just the same old rinse-dry-repeat. It tells a lot when your lead actress says that one of the best part of the show is that you can skip a few episodes and won't miss anything...

I was wondering about the same thing, the formula and the superficial level that also doesn’t allow much continuity or profoundness. And I have been asking myself if it is a specification not only made by Marlowe but also by the network. As it is, they found a nice niche in the market for both, first broadcast on ABC and syndication. Despite all the criticism, why change a format that obviously worked so far? Regarding the numbers, even this season wasn’t bad. Castle dropped in numbers (ratings, viewership) in the second half but not significantly worse than other shows on the same network, at least based on numbers that are available to the public.

 

But I think they are slowly reaching their limit with the entertainment factor and also with the barely left "credibility" of the show’s own premise (future episode: He’s my famous husband, a mystery writer, he ”works” with me every day, we don’t need space, we catch killers together! And probably I’m either very rich or out of work sooner or later because he’s not really trained, just immensely lucky…And, did you know I was unknowingly married for 15 years?).

 

So yeah, if they aren’t working on the premise, I would like to see a little more balance between life at the precinct and life out of the precinct. Or more character interactions at the precinct which aren’t solely based on the COTW, or ..and the list goes on and on, but I’m somehow tired like Marlowe :-)

[MDL]

There is an article indicating that Marlow is (sort of) stepping down,  leaving Terri to run  "Castle".

Not sure what to make of it, so here's a link

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/556696/20140624/castle-season-7-air-spoilers-stana-katic.htm

Edited June 24, 2014 by MDL

[TWP]

There is an article indicating that Marlow is (sort of) stepping down,  leaving Terri to run  "Castle".

Not sure what to make of it, so here's a link

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/556696/20140624/castle-season-7-air-spoilers-stana-katic.htm

Actually, David Amann is taking over, not Terri.  Your article states this also.  The story is true and we have a thread here about it.

[TWP]

If it's some giant pay back for TLOO then Castle is a total douchebag and it will prove to me the writers really are determined to shit all over his character.

 

Although I heard that suggested prior to the finale which fans thought would explain the marriage to Rogan etc based on the sneak peeks at the time but really? What guy who truly loves a woman thinks that having her believe she was once married to her ex con artist boyfriend and then caps it all by having her believe he died in car crash funny? I know I wouldn't be holding my sides with laughter after the reveal, I'd be wondering what kind of childish sick bastard I was about to marry.

 

There's a difference between deciding on some elaborate ruse for a surprise birthday party and roping in family and friends to allowing your bride to run around after her scumbag ex lover for no good reason, seeing her obviously very distraught and ruining her big day to the man she loves for kicks. 

 

 

But remember that after waiting 4 long years to get together, this is a guy who would rather beat Beckett at Scrabble than have sex with her, so anything is possible.  But I concur that making it all a "dream" is better to the fans.

Edited June 24, 2014 by TVWithPity

[verdana]

Damn so looks like no scruff for Castle in 7.01 

Nathan Fillion @NathanFillion  ·  2h
“@slicks6pack: Loving the scruff @NathanFillion #FacialHair #goodness”

Oops. Shaved.

 

[verdana]

But remember that after waiting 4 long years to get together, this is a guy who would rather beat Beckett at Scrabble than have sex with her, so anything is possible.  But I concur that making it all a "dream" is better to the fans.

True anything is possible. And that's another thing, I never want to see Castle turn down sex or appear even remotely reluctant with Beckett ever again, I don't care if in real life you don't always feel in the mood! I'm sick of Castle being constantly this passive almost asexual presence when it comes to their relationship. It's happened too many times now for it to be a fluke. I can't decide if the writers think it's genuinely funny for some strange reason or because he was seen as the aggressor in their relationship during the four years of WTWT and she was more reluctant they decided to "balance" things up in their usual cack-handed way by turning the tables and it's Beckett making all the running. Whatever the reason I find it off putting and weird that he's acting like this. 

[halaciHU]

Well, I agree they should have had that conversation earlier.  But I got the sense that they already HAD talked about it and we didn't see it.  Kate referred to "when it's our baby," and it sounded like it wasn't a question of whether they would.  Castle reacted to it like it wasn't a new thing. Which is annoying because it's an important thing to talk about.

 

I had just the opposite, that they had never talked about it, that's why she instantly backpedalled when she saw that this is an important thing to Castle.

 

I don't think she said she felt like a third wheel "all the time."  She said she was worried that she was alwaysgoing to feel like she was on the outside looking in on their relationship, because they are so close.

 

 

Now here comes back the "what we saw" problem. If previously it was expected and accepted that I assume that they have already talked about eg. the babies, then let me assume as well that spending together the Christmas, organizing a secret bday plot for her father, living in and caring about her when she was sick should have given an ample amount of feeling about how close or far they (I mean Beckett and the Castles) are. It simply can not work in a way that the writers want to define at every scene how much of the previous blanks I'm allowed to imagine.

 

I don't think she thought that part was funny.  She thought that he'd enjoy the whole idea of investigating a murder, but she never laughed at him for being worried about the stabbing or anything like that.

 

As it was written she thought that the whole prank (with all parts, including the stabbing) would be a good fun. Again, if I'm entitled to assume things, I assume that Beckett would have never been part of a prank which scenery hits so close to home. "Hey Alexis, wouldn't be such a great ending that he sees me being stabbed and he can't help just needs to watch it? Then he would maybe try to limp over here, scared to death that he would find me dead, just like my mother was found in a pool of blood?" Hello, is there anybody out there who thought this over? Unfortunately I can't stop watching them as persons with real emotions, and those aren't stop at the "cut" shout. To me it was a very narrow sighted writing, AM&Co simply forgot (or sacrificed) the backstory of their main character just for a plot joke.

 

Note: To me Castle's instant happiness was also OOC. He had already held her and saw her dying in his arms. Nobody tells me that it didn't came back to him at that moment and that was not a prank, but probably the most terrifying moment of his life. Having just relived it I seriously doubt that anybody with deeper feelings than a teaspoon would find it so wonderful and cheerful.

Edited June 24, 2014 by halaciHU