?

Log in

 
 
12 March 2009 @ 02:55 am
'Castle' -- Sooooooooo frickin' ADORABLE!!!!!!!  
I know it's gotten some lukewarm reviews, but damn, I absolutely adored Castle! Everything about it was just peachy-keen adorable. Loved, loved, loved it!!!

First of all, Nathan Fillion is just so scrumptiously adorable. (I know, I know, I keep using the word "adorable," but I can't help it, everything about this show was just adorable.) He was all crinkly-eyed, and cute. A flash of wit and humor, but we were also shown (not told) that he's a good guy -- his relationship with his daughter -- more on that later -- was not cutesy, over-the-top, but also not neglible enough to be there just for show. In addition, the fact that his mother is living with them, and how their relationship is presented, it gives you hints that he has a great heart. His character was cocky, but really not arrogant, I don't think. At least not to me. He was someone who loves writing when it's fun, and loves knowing all the ins and outs of his chosen genre. And really DOES know his stuff. Not just the medical/murder stuff, but also in how well he reads people. That was cool.

Stana Katic as Det. Kate Beckett didn't impress me in the long preview I saw a month or so back, but I found her utterly (yup, here it comes again) adorable. She was sharp, and no-nonsense but not caricature-ly so. She felt real to me. She's a good actress and is quite striking, but not in an unrealistic for a cop way. I really liked her. As for her and Fillion together!? Wonderful chemistry. I rewound several small moments between them, some adorable, some heated. They are just so on. Great chemistry, great connection. I'm sold on wanting them together already after one episode. Heck, I was there after their second scene.

Now, the daughter ... I do not get this recent thing in television with having a single, divorced father but it's shown up in Shark, Californication -- more THAT later -- and Lie To Me. It's probably in others that I've never watched too. I don't get it, but at least here, I liked his daughter and the flow of their relationship was sweet without being sickly, and dsyfunctionally realistic considering Rick Castle, his clearly contentious-the-love-is-so-gone relationship with his ex-wife, and of course, his floozy, boozy mom.

Also ...

- The murder wasn't some big whudonit, but I think it's going to be more like Moonlighting's cases were ... they were just there to hang the relationship upon. Works for me.

- Ooh, and I loved that Stephen J. Cannell and James Patterson (I thought those were the names I thought they were in the credits!!) had cameos as famous mystery writers in the poker scene, hah! That was great.

- Squee!! Rob Bowman (of The X-Files fame) is an executive producer and directed this episode. Double squee!!!!

- I loved that Beckett was a fan of Castle's work, and it wasn't the tired cliche of her being dragged kicking and rolling her eyes to read his books.

- One small nitpick. The first thing I noticed about Det. Beckett was her dark red lipstick. In the very next scene when Beckett comments on her lack of a love life, a female co-worker tells her she could start by wearing lipstick. Just a small thing, and her lips were noticably in non-bright-lipstick glory throughout the rest of the show. ::shrugs::

Finally, it's been mentioned that this is supposedly some rip-off of Californication. To that I say: Bullshit. They are both writers. They both have a daughter. They both star sci-fi famous, over-the-top charismatic actors. That's it. That's the extent of the comparision. At least based on the first episode.

Hank Moody is a self-loathing asshole who is still in love with his ex-wife and dealing with major psychological issues that manifest themselves in an insane sex life. Rick Castle is a laughing rascal with a healthy dose of self-awareness who briefly has a writing block because he was no longer in love with his signature character. That "issue" is handled by the end of the show. Californication is a psychological dramedy about this intensely complex man and his life and the ups and downs and how he copes. Castle is a light-hearted mystery/romantic comedy between a writer and a cop.

Personally, despite my decade-plus deep, deep love for David Duchovny, I couldn't stand more than two episodes of Californication; I lasted a half an hour into the first episode and the next one based on Duchovny alone. I couldn't watch it any more, not even for him. This show? I already adore and hope it only gets better from here on out. So, I'm sure the ratings suck and I'll lose yet another show I adore. *sigh*

ETA: Just checked the ratings. They were dismal. Double sigh. Of course.

Of course.
 
 
 
Giorgia: malismyherotazza_di_jo on March 12th, 2009 10:14 am (UTC)
ratings: they were dismal

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! Why, America, why? I so wish I counted for the ratings...

I LOVED IT TOO! I'd been told not to bother with it, as it was supposedly ripping off Californication, Bones AND The X-Files, but I did anyway, because, y'know, NATHAN FILLION. And aside from Bones, which I've never seen, I didn't notice any ripping-off!

I loved the chemistry and the banter between Castle and Beckett, between Castle and all the characters, really. Every single one of the main characters looks interesting and makes me want to watch more. I needed something light-hearted like this, but at the same time it's not silly or overdone, and in both Castle and Beckett I saw something deeper and angstier to be explored later.

Maybe it's got abysmal ratings because this is the kind of publicity it's been getting?
Arabian: What's not to Love? (Logan)arabian on March 12th, 2009 10:23 am (UTC)
Well, there's still hoping ratings-wise. It did have a HUGE drop off from DwtS, but it also got the best ratings anything in that time slot on ABC has in while and came second only to CSI:Miami. If it stabilizes fairly well next week, ita could be okay. I hope so because I loved it so.

I didn't even think of Bones, but that's the way Bones ripped off the opposites-partners from The X-Files -- which, you know, has only been done a GAJILLION TIMES elsewhere.
I loved the chemistry and the banter between Castle and Beckett
I really, really, really did too.
I needed something light-hearted like this, but at the same time it's not silly or overdone, and in both Castle and Beckett I saw something deeper and angstier to be explored later.
YES! That scene in the interrogation room was wonderfully layered, thanks mostly to the connection and chemistry that's already there between the actors.
Giorgia: malismyherotazza_di_jo on March 12th, 2009 10:37 am (UTC)
Oh, there were so many layers I couldn't help gleefully clapping my hands at the prospect of them being peeled off one by one in the future!

Castle really touched something in Beckett in the interrogation room, and she touched something in him when she rebuffed him after they caught the killer. He's so used to women throwing themselves at him because of his fame, he's bored with it all, and here's a woman who's a genuine fan of his, and yet rejects him, treats him like a normal person, calls him on his bullshit. I could see the sparks flying!!

Also, this is the kind of Joss Whedon-ish dialogue that I was hoping to see in Dollhouse, and has sadly been really lacking...
little perv princesschunkeymonkey81 on March 12th, 2009 11:02 am (UTC)
I loved it too! Of course the ratings were terrible and abc will cancel it ....figures. I should just give up on that channel, especially after canceling Pushing Daisies. *sigh*
Arabian: Sheldon & Pennyarabian on March 12th, 2009 07:36 pm (UTC)
Well, as bad as the ratings could be looked at, if they only drop a little bit next week and then stabilize, the show has a shot. I hope so because I loved it so.
hiddeneloisehiddeneloise on March 12th, 2009 02:18 pm (UTC)
I liked it, too! Sure it was predictable, but it's not the mysteries that's the back-bone of this show. It's the characters, and I liked them all! :) Californication my ass. Every person on that show made me gag. Every person on this one made me smile. :)
Arabian: Feelings Journalarabian on March 12th, 2009 07:38 pm (UTC)
Exactly!! Yes, the mystery was predictable, but clearly this show is about the characters and relationships -- NOT about the mysteries. And with such engaging characters and intriguing relationships, that's fine with me.
Mia: Mal_Miamusing_mia on March 12th, 2009 04:00 pm (UTC)
I had to come down on someone who compared it to Californication. She acted as if everyone watched that show and would see some similarities. Umm...no. Sorry sweetheart. Never seen it. Don't care. Bye-bye.

This show would succeed on Nathan's charm alone, but I was thrilled to see there was chemistry between Castle and Beckett. I think we saw the same preview about a month ago. There was nothing there, and it worried me greatly. No more. They had chemistry and I could see them pairing them sooner rather than later.

This show has great potential. I believe ABC will stick with it. It had 3 million less viewers than CSI: Shades. That's huge. Everything in that slot usually gets trounced. If ABC can stick with According to Jim, they can stick with Castle.

Edited at 2009-03-12 04:01 pm (UTC)
Arabian: Summerarabian on March 12th, 2009 07:40 pm (UTC)
I just can't fathom someone comparing this to Californication even if you HAVE seen the show. Anyone who does so is completely grasping at straws, and why one would do so is beyond me. They have completely different sensiblities as shows.
This show would succeed on Nathan's charm alone, but I was thrilled to see there was chemistry between Castle and Beckett. I think we saw the same preview about a month ago. There was nothing there, and it worried me greatly. No more. They had chemistry and I could see them pairing them sooner rather than later.
Yup, you responded to my post about that preview and we had the exact same fears. Woohoo! to them having no merit.

My hope re: ratings, is that it after falling a bit next week (which is inevitable) it stabilizes at about 10 million. That should keep it safe.
Ashley Rae: TGAAG_Johnny_Happy Danceloves_bitch1301 on March 12th, 2009 04:02 pm (UTC)
Couldn't agree more about Castle. The pacing was fantastic. I was surprised at how much they had got done in the first ten minutes. Nathan was perfect, but I expected as much. Now for the chemistry with the daughter, the scene in the hallway were he's pushing/dragging her was (to use your word) adorable and gave their relationship a more realistic touch. I just afraid that since I like it, it's doomed to be canceled.
Arabianarabian on March 12th, 2009 07:41 pm (UTC)
Yup, the pacing was fantastic. The whole show just worked so well. When my only comment of complaint was a throw-away line because of too much makeup in one scene? The show is doing good.

Hopefully, ratings don't fall that badly. It seems that people who DID watch it really liked it, so maybe word-of-mouth will be great?
WeHo M.afrocurl on March 12th, 2009 09:34 pm (UTC)
I have a feeling that despite how much I loved it, it's going to get canned because the ratings won't be good at all.

But it was precious.
Arabian: TVarabian on March 12th, 2009 11:07 pm (UTC)
I'm still trying to hope that next week it won't drop drastically, and then will hold steadily. The bashes of it seemed to be based on people who DIDN'T see it, everyone who has seems to have loved it.
Irrelirrel on March 13th, 2009 12:41 am (UTC)
I ADORED it too (probably more that I should have). I hope it doesn't get cancelled!
Arabian: Sheldon & Pennyarabian on March 13th, 2009 01:52 am (UTC)
Well, I am feeling a bit more hope because I think the bad buzz and ratings-not-so-hot came more from assumptions about it. Most people who've watched it seemed to have really liked it, so maybe it will shape up okay, ratings-wise.
False gods are just as good, y'know.: liz lemon is workin' itshionthekid on March 13th, 2009 02:48 am (UTC)
I really liked it, and I like Bones, so Boreanaz ripping it on EW.com today kinda irritated me; it is Bones-like, but Bones is X-Files-like, as are a bunch of other shows. And Bones (Brennen, the main character) was a forensic anthropologist first, then a writer, whereas Castle is only a writer, technically =/ Anyway, I hope it at least gets to finish it's episode order on ABC, not fade away online ::sigh; continues crossing fingers for Dollhouse as well::
Arabian: TVarabian on March 13th, 2009 03:20 am (UTC)
Ugh, there's a reason I've never really liked Boreanaz and this is it. I mean, come on!!! Bones being a writer is really such a small part of the show. The straight-laced partner/fun-wheeling partner is old school and has been done a thousand times. Bones does NOT have ownership of that. Whatever.
(Anonymous) on March 13th, 2009 06:22 pm (UTC)
Sorry to say I didn't care for the show at all. I think that Bones and Californication are much better. And, so is David B and David Duchovny as actors. It is a rip off of those two shows in MHO. Once was enough for me.
Arabianarabian on March 13th, 2009 06:58 pm (UTC)
Fair enough. I adore David, but I think that Nathan Fillion is a better actor than both combined. To each their own, I couldn't watch Californication after two episodes and stopped watching Bones in the middle of last season.

It is in NO WAY a rip-off of those two shows, unless you're going to say that Californication is a rip-off of every single show that has ever featured a writer and is a psychological study of a self-loathing man who can't find happiness. Or if you believe that Bones is the first show ever to feature opposites attract, law-enforcement partner. A big, fat, stinking NO! to both.

And you are?
(Anonymous) on March 13th, 2009 09:06 pm (UTC)
Well, yes, you're right. IT really is to each their own. I think Duchovny has done some wonderful acting on Californication. He deserved his Globe win last year and his nominations this time for the show. Californication got better with each episode. And Duchovny's range is grown immensely. He goes from comedy to drama in a split second and is amazing. As far as David B, well, I always did enjoy him but not as much as David. But quite a few critics have made mention of the rip off of those two shows. David is much more subtle in his acting then Nathan. To me he looked as though he was trying a little to hard. OK, maybe I need to give it a few more times to make up my mind.
Arabian: David Duchovnyarabian on March 13th, 2009 09:14 pm (UTC)
I never said that Duchovney DIDN'T deserve his wins/nominations -- and I'm still pissed that he didn't win an Emmy for The X-Files. I never said he wasn't a wonderful actor, I love Duchovny. I love his subtle choices and I think he has an amazing ability to bring a viewer into his own emotions. Boreanaz? Eh, he's okay.

However, I've seen Fillion in everything he's ever done (okay, except for Slither) and I think he's amazing as well in subtle arenas. The only reason I think he's better than Duchovny is that some of Duchovny's bigger moments tend to fall flat now and then, I've never seen Fillion's do so. But for me, it's not a pissing contest between the two actors. I think they are both wonderful, both charismatic and are two of my all-time favorite actors. I really don't like pitting one against the other. If I had to, I'd say that Fillion is the better actor, but Duchovny is better-looking, and a smidgeon more charismatic. But that's my take. I really do love them both, I just happen to like Fillion's cuurent show so much more than Duchovny's.

As for trying too hard in Castle, I believe very much that that was *the character.* Clearly, Castle has some demons, some unhappiness in his life but he's supposed to be this larger-than-life, fun guy. However, I saw in little, subtle moments that he is more and that "trying too hard" was the character trying to be who he is supposed to be. That was obvious to me because of the quieter moments with Beckett and with his daughter. The moment when he first saw the actual live dead body was a wonderful play of subtlety because it was quick, but you saw that the effect of actually seeing a real dead person shook him, and it was a callback to his earlier, snarky comment about not wanting the bodies, just the picture.

And again, you are?

Edited at 2009-03-13 09:15 pm (UTC)