Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › TV Programming › Castle Season 4
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Castle Season 4 - Page 2

post #31 of 111
12/5/11 at 11:01pm
That was a good one.
Reply
post #32 of 111
12/6/11 at 10:31am
Beckett: They both want to be together, but neither wants to admit to it.
Castle: Ugh, why do people do that to themselves?
Beckett: Maybe they just don’t see it.
Castle: How could they not, it’s soooo obvious.

laugh.gif
Reply
post #33 of 111
12/6/11 at 7:32pm

Really enjoyed this one all the way through. And there were some genuine surprises, too, the kind that many procedurals don't incorporate into their stories that kept it interesting from beginning to end.

Reply
post #34 of 111
12/7/11 at 9:20am
I liked the episode but thought there was a huge hole in the explanation at the end.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
If raising tigers is legal in Texas, why don't the wealthy customers just fly there to pick up their purchases?
Reply
post #35 of 111
12/7/11 at 9:32am
I thought the same thing.
Reply
post #36 of 111
12/7/11 at 2:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Lloyd View Post

I liked the episode but thought there was a huge hole in the explanation at the end. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
If raising tigers is legal in Texas, why don't the wealthy customers just fly there to pick up their purchases?
Because federal law governs interstate commerce, and federal law bans raising tigers. Unless the tigers are remaining in Texas, it's still illegal.
Reply
post #37 of 111
12/7/11 at 4:45pm
You would think Mexico would be a far better option for shipping then NY.
Reply
post #38 of 111
12/7/11 at 6:23pm
This ep is getting pretty universal praise across the net, but I just didn't like it. I guess the case of the week was just a little weird. Plus, I've seen the Saw thing multiple times on TV (and I think that was just the number of times Smallville went to that well!). For Beckett and Castle thrown together with the possibility of dying together, I prefer the one where they were in the freezer.
Reply
post #39 of 111
12/8/11 at 5:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Lenhardt View Post

the scene with the woman in the cage where she starts smiling after they move in too close, is one of the more unnerving images I've had introduced into my brain in a while.
That was Deborah Van Valkenburgh, the brunette sister in Too Close For Comfort (after debuting as the female lead in the film The Warriors).
Reply
post #40 of 111
12/8/11 at 7:46pm
I've never seen any of the Saw movies.

That lady was One of Ted Knight's daughters on Too Close For Comfort?!confused.gif Wow! I didn't recognize her at all. I remember watching Too Close For Comfort back in the day. She was scary in the cage.
Reply
post #41 of 111
12/9/11 at 8:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Lenhardt View Post

Because federal law governs interstate commerce, and federal law bans raising tigers. Unless the tigers are remaining in Texas, it's still illegal.

I think it would be easier to simply smuggle a tiger out of Texas.
Reply
post #42 of 111
12/9/11 at 11:03am
ABC orders additional episode of Castle, bringing episode count to 23
Reply
post #43 of 111
12/9/11 at 2:10pm
Stupid question, may be just semantics, but just popped in my head: when a network "orders" an episode, is it like they are placing an order or giving an order? "I order you to make one more!" or "I'd like one more episode of Castle, please?" Again, doesn't matter and is stupid, but just wondering.
Reply
post #44 of 111
12/9/11 at 3:24pm
^ That's sort of like making a distinction between whether a customer at a deli places an order for an additional sub or gives an order for and additional sub. The proprietor could theoretically deny service, but why would they turn down the chance to make more money?

An additional episode means more money up front for the studio, and more money down the line in residuals and syndication. It's win-win for everybody. In the case of Castle, it's made by ABC Studios, the network's in-house production arm. So it's more like the owner of the deli asking his employee at the counter to make him an extra sub.
Reply
post #45 of 111
12/10/11 at 8:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg_S_H View Post

Stupid question, may be just semantics, but just popped in my head: when a network "orders" an episode, is it like they are placing an order or giving an order? "I order you to make one more!" or "I'd like one more episode of Castle, please?" Again, doesn't matter and is stupid, but just wondering.

As explained in the previous post, they're saying 'if you make another episode, we'll pay you for it and put it on the air.'
Reply
post #46 of 111
12/10/11 at 8:08pm
Yeah, just a fun question. Thanks. "Thank you, sir. May I have another?" smile.gif
Reply
post #47 of 111
1/16/12 at 11:15pm
They're really playing up the "All the President's Men" conspiracy angle. I hope the ultimate solution is worth all of the build up.
Reply
post #48 of 111
1/16/12 at 11:27pm
I thought it was interesting they decided to put all the weight of knowing about a conspiracy on Castle. With a plot like this, they couldn't possibly resolve it till the series ends, or else the series ends.

I also have to wonder, though highly unlikely, that Captain Gates might know something. Like she's in on it. She doesn't want Castle there.

On the other hand, maybe they'll pull an Alias and expose the conspiracy and reset the series. Though I'm just supposing.
Reply
post #49 of 111
1/17/12 at 6:49am

The mayor didn't feel particularly mayoral to me, and certainly not a govenor or presidential candidate. I was OK with the captain this episode. She actually gave Beckett good advice.

 

Reply
post #50 of 111
1/18/12 at 3:43pm
I'm a week behind, but the last one I saw (with the trio of knucklehead ladies' men) had to have had a reference to Pan Am. Ryan says, "Didn't they used to have flight attendants doing spy work?" and then the flight attendant in the episode happened to be named Collette. Seems a little too close for coincidence.
Reply
post #51 of 111
1/21/12 at 8:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg_S_H View Post

I'm a week behind, but the last one I saw (with the trio of knucklehead ladies' men) had to have had a reference to Pan Am. Ryan says, "Didn't they used to have flight attendants doing spy work?" and then the flight attendant in the episode happened to be named Collette. Seems a little too close for coincidence.


I thought it was a good jab;  ABC pours tons of money and marketing into something like Pan Am, which basically flopped.. and yet, Castle came in with minimal network support, no big ad campaign, and here four years later it has a stable to growing ratings base

Reply
post #52 of 111
1/21/12 at 9:33am
I hope Pan Am survives. I thought the reference was some cross promotion to help Pan Am.
Reply
post #53 of 111
1/21/12 at 11:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelson Au View Post

I hope Pan Am survives. I thought the reference was some cross promotion to help Pan Am.


Maybe.   I think the decision was already made on PanAm.   It's sinking ratings don't help, no matter what other shows may want.

Reply
post #54 of 111
2/7/12 at 8:11am
That was a fun Castle investigating a case from 1947. It took me a second to realize that was Chad Everett guest starring! Wow! Haven't seen him in a long time.

This episode goes down that long tradition of shows like Moonlighting and Magnum that recall cases from the past with our heros playing parts from that era.
Reply
post #55 of 111
2/7/12 at 9:43am
Damn, that cast pulls off period look well.
Reply
post #56 of 111
2/7/12 at 1:41pm

Loved the episode, and the guest cast with Mark Pellegrino, Chad Everett, and Patrick Cassidy fit in beautifully (not to mention making excellent use of all the regulars).

 

I loved Castle's trying to get Ryan to do an Irish accent to match his daydream. Hilarious.

Reply
post #57 of 111
2/15/12 at 2:39am
Was this week's start of the 2-parter a backdoor pilot of sorts for Jennifer Beal's character?
Reply
post #58 of 111
2/15/12 at 5:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Sun View Post

Was this week's start of the 2-parter a backdoor pilot of sorts for Jennifer Beal's character?



It certainly could have been, but I haven't read anything to that effect.

 

Reply
post #59 of 111
2/15/12 at 6:42am
ABC uses these over the top episodes to test actors they're considering building shows around. Season 1 had an episode for Dana Delaney, Season 2 had one for Adrian Pasdar, this season has one for Jennifer Beals.
Reply
post #60 of 111
2/15/12 at 8:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Lenhardt View Post

ABC uses these over the top episodes to test actors they're considering building shows around. Season 1 had an episode for Dana Delaney, Season 2 had one for Adrian Pasdar, this season has one for Jennifer Beals.


Then they should just bring back Chicago Code ;)

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: TV Programming
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › TV Programming › Castle Season 4