Castle (TV series)/Headscratchers: Difference between revisions
Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.8.6
m (update links) |
(Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.8.6) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 25:
* I know this show is excused by [[Rule of Cool]] / [[Rule of Funny]], but couldn't they have thrown in a mention of Castle being a former detective or something?
** At first, he got to stay because of [[Screw the Rules, I Have Connections]].
{{quote|
** After about half a season, Beckett simply likes having him around, not to mention he's a pretty useful consultant. Despite lacking training in criminal profiling or detective work he's decent at both because he thinks like a murderer for a living and has an eye for "plot holes".
*** Pretty much - its not like it's really out of the question for police departments to have outside consultants helping out. Sure, maybe some of them are questionable (psychics), but hey, ultimately, they want to solve murders and such and if someone is helping them out and has a really really good success rate at it, why -wouldn't- they keep them around? Not to mention, as a professional writer writing about their very own police department, it's good PR.
*** Not to mention that he's proven a pretty good consultant, a source of good connections in various cases, and willing to spend his own dime to help the department, whether it is to solve a crime or get them a new espresso machine - and he does all this free of charge. The department has a pretty good deal, all things considered. Usually consultants expect to be paid.
** As a troper in the WMG section pointed out, the premise of ''Castle'' isn't that different from the real-life TV show ''[[
*** Or embedded reporters for the military. Even, to an extent, any and all movies described by the [[Backed by the Pentagon]] trope.
** Beckett's pretty clearly a special detective. She's been mentored by Montgomery for most of her career and is in charge of two other detectives, leading serious investigations. Her strength is in dogged pursuit. Castle? He's an outside the box thinker. As [[The Usual Suspects|Verbal Kint]] put it, "To a cop the explanation is never that complicated. It's always simple. There's no mystery to the street, no arch criminal behind it all. If you got a dead body and you think his brother did it, you're gonna find out you're right." Castle's all about mystery and arch criminals. Thus he's the perfect foil for a dogged, by the book cop. She thinks literally, he laterally. Plus, they're totally hot for each other.
Line 50:
*** There's also the question of why she had it in the first place? Do NYPD detectives carry them all the time, just in case? There was no reason to suspect anything nuclear up to that point.
*** I dunno if they're standard issue for the NYPD -- although post-9/11 and given the increased concerns about dirty-bombs, I wouldn't be entirely surprised to learn that the NYPD was willing to issue them to their officers -- but you can get a pocket geiger counter around the place if you really want one (apparently they go for about $300.00 for the lower-end models), and I wouldn't put it past Beckett to be [[Crazy Prepared]] to such a degree.
**** Alternatively, hers, which IIRC was given to her by the NYPD as a part of her equipment and could be calibrated at a lower setting to get police out of the way when there's even a ''chance'' of radiation poisoning. It could be a less accurate model used only as a warning device.
== Castle shooting the perp in the Season 3 premier. ==
Line 77:
== The Superhero Episode ==
* A few problems with the scene where Castle is assembling bits and pieces of famous costumes. One, why does he automatically assume a high collar means Black Panther? Two, many of those heroes aren't mild-mannered. Stark's a playboy, T'challa's a head of state, and Deadpool doesn't even have a secret identity, or a mild one. Three, why does he automatically associate Deadpool with swords? Four, not all of those heroes are driven by the loss of a family member, especially not Deadpool. And finally, five, why does a yellow belt make him think Iron Man instead of, say, Batman or Deadpool?
** One, Three and Five: He's using them partly because Disney owns Marvel Comics and ABC and is probably more interested in cross-promoting their own product rather than the Distinguished Competition's, and because they're all perfectly acceptable and valid illustrations for the points he's trying to make -- Black Panther ''does'' have a high collar, Deadpool ''does'' frequently use swords, Classic Iron Man ''did'' have that kind of belt. They're also examples that a comic book collector is likely to have heard of and follow, whereas a layperson -- although they may have heard of them -- is probably not going to be that familiar with (while still being fairly reasonably well known characters for the benefit of the audience, both the detectives in-universe and the TV viewers). Lots of superheroes have yellow belts and costumes, but let's face it, only a dedicated comic book fan is going to fashion a belt on a superhero costume after a type of costume that Iron Man hasn't worn in forty-odd years or so, or base his costume's collar on Black Panther; your average layperson will more likely go for the classic 'cape-and-domino-mask' style thing. Castle also may only collect Marvel Comics personally and find it easier to draw on examples from his collection (or just geekily decided on a Marvel Comics 'theme' for his presentation -- let's face it, this is Richard Castle we're talking about). And ultimately, they do accurately demonstrate the point he's trying to make at that moment -- that the real superhero is probably an avid superhero comic reader -- so while he probably could have chosen equally valid alternative examples, does it really matter that he chose these ones?
** Two: the mild-mannered thing doesn't refer solely to the costume or the heroes who inspired said costume; Castle's clearly riffing on the classic Clark Kent-style 'bold superhero = mild-mannered secret identity' archetype (as much for the purposes of humour as serious profiling). {{spoiler|It's also worth noting he's arguably wrong anyway, since the cop who is the ''actual'' superhero doesn't seem that mild-mannered.}} Plus, let's face it, law of averages comes into play here; it's psychologically a bit more likely that the superhero actually ''is'' a quiet everyday person living out a power fantasy behind a mask and doing things they wouldn't have to courage to do in their 'normal' lives rather than, say, a flamboyant arms dealer, a world leader or a mutant genetically disfigured by his own healing power; the first two generally don't need superheroic secret identities to live out their power fantasies and the third is, well, let's say short on the ground.
** Four: Similarly to two, Castle's just generalising and riffing on the classic archetype to construct a workable theory -- not all superheroes are driven by the death of a father figure or loved one, true, but a fairly high percentage are (certainly, enough to make it a fairly common theme in superhero works), and it's a lot more likely as a 'real life' inspiration for a superhero who actually does go around kicking the crap out of criminals in real life than, say, being grossly mutated by a super-healing ability that rapidly accelerated cancerous growths in his body or getting shrapnel embedded in his heart and having a life-crisis after building a suit of armour to house his replacement artificial heart.
Line 90:
== T-shirt in "Heroes & Villains" ==
* [http://tvpix.net/castle/screencaps/displayimage.php?album=2&pid=3172#top_display_media The guy at the comic shop wears a blue t-shirt with an asymmetrical, circle-based design on it.]{{Dead link}} I think it has something to do with Marvel, possibly the Avengers, but I'm not sure. What is it?
** It looks like [https://web.archive.org/web/20120615161649/http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Avengers-Logo-And-Teaser-Site-Launched-19816.html the Avengers logo.]
== Safe deposit box in "Cops & Robbers" ==
* The use of the safe deposit box in Cops and Robbers really bugged me. Using the priest as a [[Secret Keeper]] and intermediary makes sense, he's trustworthy and the grandmother already went to the church. Given that though why bother with the safe deposit box at all? It would seem much simpler just to have him pass the letters to the grandmother after ceremonies and then destroy them once she has read them (the grandmother could even become a volunteer helper, giving her an excuse to stay after the service).
** The letters and photos are pretty much the last links the grandmother has with her daughter and grandson, and vice versa; she probably doesn't ''want'' to destroy them, they have strong sentimental value for her. Since it's too dangerous to keep them around her apartment since that's the first place her son-in-law would look, and since she already has access to the safe-deposit box beforehand, why not use it as a storage place? It's reasonably easy for both to access, and let's be honest; they probably weren't expecting the son-in-law to go to the lengths he did to access them.
* I have one from the same episode: how exactly did the villain come to the conclusion that the letters are in the deposit box? It doesn't seem like he knew about the priest, since it would have been infinitely easier to jump him and take the letters from him when he'd go to deposit them. It seems kind of random for him to go "Of course, she must be receiving letters from my wife, which is delivered to the deposit box by some third party, which she picks up later".
** He tracked where the grandmother was going.
*** And he had bugged the lady's apartment.
* The priest seemed to give up the address pretty easily. Basically, Beckett just said "The old lady's been murdered" and the priest told her what she needed to know. He didn't try to confirm if what she said was true. For all he knew, they could just have been impersonating cops and came up with a story to get the address out of him.
** We don't see it (the scene is briefly blocked by an establishing shot of the priest's office door), but presumably Beckett displayed her badge and credentials when identifying herself as a police officer, and they both seem very sincere about the danger the mother and son are in; he doesn't really have any reason to doubt they are who they say they are, and the nature of the job means that priests in general don't tend to be the most untrusting of people. In any case, if they're telling the truth the mother and son are in immediate danger, if not they're still several hours away so he assumes he has a bit of time to confirm the story he's been told and Beckett's credentials and warn them if necessary; under the circumstances he probably thought it was a risk worth taking.
Line 110:
*** He may also be trying to prevent the same mistake he made with his thief contact. Could also be that he knows he can't abuse his contacts with the CIA because he might compromise them or become a nuisance.
{{worksubpagefooter}}
[[Category:Live Action TV/Headscratchers]]
__NOTOC__
| |||