RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,720
Posts: 5,214,779
Members: 24,211
Currently online: 776
Newest member: dmhp32


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > TV & Media

TV & Media Non-Trek television, movies, books, music, etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 24 2013, 04:43 AM   #16
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

intrinsical wrote: View Post
You're right, but I also see in Beckett's character the need to take on bigger challenges and that's what DC offers her.
See, but that's just what I think is out of character. The Kate Beckett I've known for five years would be offended at the suggestion that solving individual murders and helping the victims' families get closure is in any way "small." She would insist that it's a vitally important job, as important as anything else.

I mean, Beckett is basically Batman. She suffered a childhood tragedy that compelled her to fight for the victims of crime. Now, okay, maybe Batman did join the Justice League and occasionally battles alien invaders and space gods and immortal cavemen, but there's no way he'd give up patrolling the streets of Gotham and saving ordinary citizens from street-level crime because it wasn't a big enough challenge to suit his career ambitions. Because what he does is not about himself; it's about the people he's fighting for. And Beckett is the same way, at least when she's written in character.


DC is also a much better setting for the overarching story of her mother's murder. She is more likely to find something to take down senator whatshisname in DC.
And I'm rarely as invested in this show's overarching story arcs as I am in the weekly mystery-solving and character interplay. So that's not a direction I'd be eager to see the show go in.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 09:15 AM   #17
TimmyWl
Commodore
 
Location: Honolulu Hawaii
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

I thought it was a good episode. It was very dramatic and less about the humor. I liked how Castle reached his limits of how he can participate in a case and ultimately suffered from it. I think the episode focused on the main heart of the story - that of Castle and Beckett.

I do agree with the other posters that the weekly mysteries in NYC appeals to me more than the national security crimes in DC.
TimmyWl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 10:38 AM   #18
intrinsical
Fleet Captain
 
intrinsical's Avatar
 
Location: Singapore
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

Christopher wrote: View Post
intrinsical wrote: View Post
You're right, but I also see in Beckett's character the need to take on bigger challenges and that's what DC offers her.
See, but that's just what I think is out of character. The Kate Beckett I've known for five years would be offended at the suggestion that solving individual murders and helping the victims' families get closure is in any way "small." She would insist that it's a vitally important job, as important as anything else.

I mean, Beckett is basically Batman. She suffered a childhood tragedy that compelled her to fight for the victims of crime. Now, okay, maybe Batman did join the Justice League and occasionally battles alien invaders and space gods and immortal cavemen, but there's no way he'd give up patrolling the streets of Gotham and saving ordinary citizens from street-level crime because it wasn't a big enough challenge to suit his career ambitions. Because what he does is not about himself; it's about the people he's fighting for. And Beckett is the same way, at least when she's written in character.
If she were only interested in helping victims, she could have easily chosen to be a counselor, psychologist, nurse or doctor. I'm saying she not only loves helping the victims of crime. Just like Castle, she also gets a rush out of solving challenging crimes. Both character traits are complementary and necessary to make her the best homicide detective in New York.

In this instance, her need to solve puzzling crimes drove her to work in DC for the attorney general's office. It doesn't mean she doesn't care about the victims anymore. She still continues to care and it showed in the episode. She looked at the girlfriend as a victim and and that drove her to dig deeper when her colleagues were ready to close the case.

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Meanwhile, Castle faces every writer's worst nightmare: a potential son-in-law who thinks spelling stifles creativity.

The horror, the horror . . . ..
I guess its your personal horror?

Strangely enough as someone who has been trained in linguistics, I'm not turned off by bad spelling. I view it more as an evolution of the language.
__________________
USS Sentinel, Luna Class (STO)
intrinsical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 04:00 AM   #19
Kitty Worrier
Rear Admiral
 
Kitty Worrier's Avatar
 
Location: Oregon
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

Christopher wrote: View Post
I said last season that this sudden desire for a national-security career was out of character for her, that she's always been defined as someone whose life's mission is to speak for the victims of crime. Solving murders one by one, fighting for the individual, is more her style than focusing on big-picture stuff.
I have to agree, I never thought this DC/Feds storyline made sense, based on who Kate has been through out the series.

If she had been transferred to another station, or promoted and transferred, I would have gotten that, but this DC thing feels like a forced plot point.
Kitty Worrier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 04:39 PM   #20
Kirby
Rear Admiral
 
Kirby's Avatar
 
Location: Alt: 5280
View Kirby's Twitter Profile
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

^^ The people on the Federal team in DC are all listed as guest stars, so hopefully this will be a short arc and Kate can go back to the precinct in New York.
__________________
Henderson!!!!
Kirby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 05:40 PM   #21
Nick Ryder
Fleet Captain
 
Nick Ryder's Avatar
 
Location: Milwaukee, WI Da Brew City
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

I think either a) Beckett will leave on her own or b) she brings Castle in to help like he's always helped her in the past and that doesn't fly with her superiors who wonder 'this woman can't work without her writer boyfriend' and she's basically let go. or c) She works for them sort of as a 'reserve' agent or something and goes back to NYPD.

I really don't think they'd do anything to potentially kill Castle this isn't a JJ Abrams show.
__________________
"Here you are in the club with your bottle full of Bud, you got grillz you got bling, but playa you don't know a thing..." Alice Cooper - Disco Bloodbath Boogie Fever
Nick Ryder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 07:51 PM   #22
FPAlpha
Rear Admiral
 
FPAlpha's Avatar
 
Location: Mannheim, Germany
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

Loved the answer to the proposal and how it was done.. so much fun but a few moments later it all seemed brushed asides to focus on her new career

Well.. i guess her Fed career won't last for long. She'll be long gone back to NYC before sweeps because she either misses the smaller scale of her cases, her friends/colleagues or something else.

She got what she wanted.. she gave it a shot, found out it's not what she wanted and it's all good. Castle forcing her to stay in some way would have been disastrous but once she got it out of her system they can return to business as usual and prepare for the wedding.
__________________
"A control freak like you with something you can't control? No no.. that's gonna be more fun than shark week!" Det. Javier Esposito
FPAlpha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 02:57 AM   #23
Forbin
Admiral
 
Forbin's Avatar
 
Location: I said out, dammit!
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

Couple of...pics... I just found...



Forbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 02:16 PM   #24
Forbin
Admiral
 
Forbin's Avatar
 
Location: I said out, dammit!
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

intrinsical wrote: View Post
Strangely enough as someone who has been trained in linguistics, I'm not turned off by bad spelling. I view it more as an evolution of the language.
Well, there's evolution, and there's evil mutant monsters that should never have existed. Like "irregardless," or "prejudism", or using an apostrophe to pluralize.


Forbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 02:19 PM   #25
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

On the other hand, even dictionaries have given up and begun accepting "literally" as a synonym for "the exact opposite of literally."
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 04:31 PM   #26
Forbin
Admiral
 
Forbin's Avatar
 
Location: I said out, dammit!
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

That literally makes my head explode.
Irregardless.
Forbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 05:02 PM   #27
Savage Dragon
TheSeeker
 
Savage Dragon's Avatar
 
Location: New York, NY
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

Watched it last night and liked it quite a bit. It really felt like a throwback to some of their earlier adventures.
Savage Dragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 28 2013, 11:03 AM   #28
Chilli
Commodore
 
Chilli's Avatar
 
Location: Vienna, Austria
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

intrinsical wrote: View Post
Strangely enough as someone who has been trained in linguistics, I'm not turned off by bad spelling. I view it more as an evolution of the language.
Esp. when it comes to English, though, it really doesn't make sense to meter the evolution of the language by looking at *spelling*, considering spoken English, no matter how proper, has already evolved several hundred years beyond written English. In the 21st century, it doesn't really matter how modern/innovative your brand of English is: spelling rules will be a completely arbitrary set of rules that everybody has to learn. If somebody hasn't learned them, the implication for me is that said person just isn't that big on learning.

So there's a definite contrast here between non-standard grammatical constructions ("President Bush graciously invited Michelle and I."), non-standard use of words ("My head literally exploded."), and non-standard pronunciations ("'ello, my dear!") on the one hand, and non-standard spellings on the other. Grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation are always on the move, English spelling rules haven't budged in centuries.
Chilli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 28 2013, 11:01 PM   #29
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

intrinsical wrote: View Post

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Meanwhile, Castle faces every writer's worst nightmare: a potential son-in-law who thinks spelling stifles creativity.

The horror, the horror . . . ..
I guess its your personal horror?

Strangely enough as someone who has been trained in linguistics, I'm not turned off by bad spelling. I view it more as an evolution of the language.
Ah, but Castle is not a linguist, he's a professional writer.

Trust me, as someone who has spent much of his adult life editing and proofreading manuscripts and page proofs . . . we take spelling very seriously.

It's an occupational hazard. I cringe if I find a misspelled word in a restaurant menu. (Don't get me started on "sweat and sour soup.") And have been known to keep myself awake in meetings by proofreading copy . . . .

And whatever writer wrote that line clearly knew how much it would rankle Castle!
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com

Last edited by Greg Cox; September 28 2013 at 11:59 PM.
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 29 2013, 01:14 AM   #30
Chilli
Commodore
 
Chilli's Avatar
 
Location: Vienna, Austria
Re: Castle - Season 6 Discussion & Spoilers

I teach linguistics at university, and I can guarantee that my department would not hire anyone that cannot spell.

Professional linguists and other lovers of language *will* often be at loggerheads over what it means, for example, when President Obama says "President Bush graciously invited Michelle and I" in a speech (authentic example: that actually upset my mother). "Amateur lovers" might proclaim such things as signs of the coming apocalypse, while professional linguists will say "meh, languages change", and point out that this particular change to English grammar was somewhere between predictable and inevitable. (Which is not to say that we might not cringe a bit inside when hearing people use grammatical constructions that're gaining foothold, but that are not part of our individual grammars.) Non-professional lovers of language looks at such changes and cite them as proof that their beloved language is in disrepair, and that it has decayed from an older, more pure state. Linguists will point out that as long as there's been literacy, there've been people believing just this.

(I can enthusiastically recommend "The Unfolding of Language" by Guy Deutscher to anyone interested in this subject matter. One chapter's dedicated to such beliefs: he gives a quote stating that today's English is completely decayed, a shadow of its former glory .. and then goes and finds what lovers of English were saying about English in those alleged glory days: the very same thing. He successfully goes back centuries like this.)

But, not everything that applies to languages applies to *language norms*, as the Standard Englishes are. Language norms aren't supposed to perfectly match people's vernaculars (and incidentally, the older they get, the further they move away from how people actually speak). They're nothing but, shall we say, agreements between a large group of people as to how one renders an acceptable middle ground between vernaculars in writing. If someone cannot, or will not, comply with such an "agreement", the message isn't a good one.





In summation: In my opinion, intrinsical took a valid lesson from his linguistics training, but applied it where it shouldn't be applied. You can be a linguist, and still get annoyed when people mix up "there", "they're" and "their". (They're pronounced the same by *all* English speakers. Spelling them all the same doesn't make your English more evolved, it just shows that you're unaware of the underlying difference between them.)
Chilli is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.