ABC’s ‘Castle’ Recovers From Shaky Season 4 Premiere
by S.T. Karnick**Spoilers ahead**
Monday night’s episode of the ABC crime series “Castle,” the second of its fourth season, signified a return to the show’s winning, quirky formula after the near-stumble of its season premiere. I’ve praised “Castle” in the past, and though its third season’s finale gave cause for worry, the series’ most recent episodes provide an object lesson in entertainment programming, especially for genre writers.
For those who haven’t seen the series, “Castle” is a semi-comic police procedural about a bestselling mystery author, Richard Castle, who finds himself partnered up with a beautiful female police detective in Manhattan, Kate Beckett, to help solve crimes. The implausible premise is no impediment to enjoying the show, as its stars Nathan Fillion and Stana Katic are both a delight to watch as the central characters; their skill as performers is evident and easy to appreciate.
In addition, and even more importantly, the gaudy premise matches the show’s narrative style; it is a throwback to the great tradition of American surrealistic mysteries of the 1930s and ’40s. That’s a very important—and, alas, currently underappreciated—trend in mystery fiction exemplified by the writings of Ellery Queen (the truest master off the form), Fredric Brown, Anthony Boucher, Craig Rice, Hake Talbot, Joel Townsley Rogers, Herbert Brean, and the other great master of the form, John Dickson Carr (and these writers all owe a debt of gratitude to the earlier British crime fiction of G. K. Chesterton, the American Jacques Futrelle, and a few others).
What these and their contemporaries excelled at was creating a sense of wonder, building a fantastic situation that has an inexorable logic of its own. In their way, they conveyed a sense of American life as a realm of astonishing possibilities ultimately grounded in common sense, logic and morality. It’s a form of fiction I enjoy greatly and which I think has much to recommend it.
“Castle” exists in that tradition. A typical episode will begin with a bizarre murder, then progress to the investigation of a series of quirky or downright bizarre suspects, witnesses, and clues while the two lead characters work out matters from their personal lives and their powerful but largely unspoken attraction to each other. It’s great fun, although the events of the show are serious and often have important implications.
Last season’s finale cliffhanger, however, went in a more overtly suspenseful and dark direction, ending with Beckett shot by a sniper as she spoke at her former boss’s funeral. It was much more like an episode of “24″ than “Castle” viewers would expect. And this season’s opening episode was much darker in tone than the usual. As Beckett recovered from her grave injuries and the detectives investigate the attempt on her life, she and most of the other major characters were upset with Castle for various reasons. He, too, was down in the dumps, concerned that failing to declare his love for Beckett could have made a difference in their lives.
All of this angst came off as very 1950s-Ellery Queen in approach, but that decade, alas, was not a good one for Queen.
Although the cliffhanger episode and the season opener were interesting and quite watchable, neither played to the show’s strengths. Fortunately, last night’s episode marks a solid return to the program’s basic formula. The murders are committed by a costumed superhero who carries a samurai sword with which he cleaves a would-be rapist literally in half, from head to, well, groin.
That may sound very modern (in its spectacular grossness), but in fact it’s the kind of thing one often finds in novels by Queen, S. S. Van Diane, and others. It’s crazy but just barely possible, enough to keep you from throwing the book at the wall (for me, at least). And the scenes surrounding the murder in this “Castle” episode are handled without excessive gore– in fact, rather comically, as a morgue sequence shows two adjacent body bags holding the two halves of the body.
Castle and his daughter also work out their problems, which had left her bitter towards him in the previous week’s episode. The episode also includes some interesting background information on the world of comic book fiction, fizzy dialogue between Castle and Beckett, and several goofy suspects with weird personalities and nutty motives.
In addition, it is revealed—though not to Castle—that Beckett was indeed still conscious when he told her he loved her as she lay presumably dying at the end of the previous season’s cliffhanger episode. It’s a very good plot development which holds promise for much irony and emotional dueling in future episodes.
So, what’s the lesson here for genre writers and admirers alike? It’s all right to wander outside the boundaries once in a while, but the boundaries are there for a reason: because the conventions of any particular genre work. They come into being, after all, because people literally buy the narratives that take on that form. And I would posit that people like these narrative conventions because they speak the truth to them in a pleasing way.
“Castle” does this too—and that, I believe, is what makes it both popular and deserving of its success.







Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
44 Comments
All season four needs is a visit from Our Mrs. Reynolds. Maybe even the same drugged lipstick trick would trap Beckett into an unplanned admission of her own.
Whoah. Good Bible.
I'm going to that special hell.
All Firefly references increase Hip by a factor of 10.
Season Four needs more than Mrs. Reynolds.
What would happen if Badger showed up?
Or Inara Sara made an appointment?
Or Jayne Cobb played poker – with some grenades?
Enjoyed Castle from the beginning. Nathan Filion put my butt in the seat but the show kept my attention. Snappy dialogue, just odd enough and love the interplay between Castle and Becket.
Castle got dark last season during the terrorist story so they do color outside the genre lines on occasion.
Wow, I don't disagree with Karnick, but I do with those viewers who tuned out for the season premier because last season's finale was too serious for them; they missed an excellent episode that did a lot to further the arcs of both characters. I loved both episodes. I agree that, if Castle went "all serious, all the time" or became wholly grim and gritty, that would kill the show. But, as an occasional switch-up in tone when they have to deal with the long-term story gives the show some needed depth. I think they do a great job.
Any film lovers of world cinema can check out my weekly recommendations here as well… http://www.examiner.com/foreign-films-in-san-dieg...
Too me, Castle is a guilty pleasure. It is true, the mysteries being solved are quirky and in the tradition of the 40's genre mystery/crime stories. But this is ABC 21st century weekly drama. As such, the series hinges on the chemistry between the characters, specifically the two leads. Yes, this is a classic situation where they really have feelings for each other, but as soon as they get together, the premise of the show is gone and it has jumped the shark. In this instance, the show it most recently reminds me of is J.A.G. and the relationship of Harm and Mac. Unfortunately, it is a hard premise to sustain over the long haul. Writers love cliff hangers and story arcs that can be milked. The storyline of the murder of Beckett's mother is getting a bit old, much like "Red John" on the "Mentalist." One of the leaders being gravely wounded was merely a lazy writer's device. Hopefully, the show will now remain on track.
And they couldn't get an audience for that episode? Fox really needs to learn how to advertise.
Just 10? Dang, I depend on at least two orders of magnitude.
I disagree that the season finale wasn't good. It was quite honestly, everything a season finale should be and clearly the best season finale of last season. The shooting of beckitt was clearly an add-on, but the rest of the episode was near perfect in it's construction and script.
Viewers are not so shallow as to want one dimensional quirkiness all the time, and we realise that sometimes in life, things get serious, especially when things become personal.
Sounds like a fun show…I'll give this a shot as I also love the funny-mystery-ness of Psyche.
Are you trying to make a grown man cry?
How about if Col. John Casey shows up for a special assignment. I'm sort of in mourning (or withdrawal). I only have four more back episodes of season 2 of Chuck. After that I've only got the truncated last season to look forward to. Sob.
I don't get it. Visually, the Becket character is pretty sweet looking but chemistry wise, she's cardboard. How they cast her as NYC woman detective is beyond me as well.
Tracy and Hepburn they ain't.
Good point about keeping the leads apart. So in order to keep the show going without wearing out the chemistry, I think they need to open up the characters in other directions. The poker game was a good device. How about more use of the secondary characters? A couple of story arcs for the two other detectives. Maybe even an episode for the daughter or his mother. And come up with a comedy episode or even a dream episode. If they want this show to go for more than one more year (which maybe they shouldn't) they've got to get creative. Oh and of course, more Firefly references.
Its so great to be able to discuss with other fans. I was thinking the first episode was a bit dark, and I am getting tired of their milking the mother-murder-mystery too often and too long. I was most offended, though, by the lame, trite, overdone, derivitive, lazy writer device of having a beloved boss replaced by an antagonistic horses's butt–a woman who insists on being called 'sir'. Did someone leave a script from the mentalist in the copy machine?
Second episode was back on track for the light tasty snack of entertainment I like about the show. I think they are asking too much of katic by asking us to see her as a dark tortured soul–or maybe the writers are unable to do it, much as they can't find anything original to do with a new boss. The fact that characters have to keep saying how tough she is shows the weakness.
Also, the writers have exceeded my entertainment threshold for the out of sync lover's thing. Much like the show chuck, you can only go to the almost-consumated but interrupted well so many times before it gets tiresome.
Nathan Fillion can do no wrong. Still flyin'.
that might work, but it would remain to be seen whether or not those actors and their characters would be compelling enough. It seems like they were set up in a way to make them strictly supporting foils, and I do think most people are really tuning in to see "will they or won't they finally get together" knowing full well they can't. We can expect some false alarms, maybe a "dream" sequence and other typical devices. They probably will continue to have side relationships to make the other jealous, while the audience knows that ultimately won't work out.
In the end, I think the only way to extend the show is good writing and good stories. For a while, J.A.G. kind of kept them apart and let them each have their own stories rather than work as "partners." Bringing in a new character probably won't work becuase this really is a Beckett and Castle show. As soon as they know the series is ending (whenever that may be), they will set up a finale that puts the two together
I like the occassional dark episode because it gives depth to the story and plays well against the lighter, comic aspects.
I really like this show. It's one of the few I want to watch live instead of recording and watching it later.
Well then the only honest thing to do is end the show with our heroes ending up together or apart. Honestly these situation dramas typically outlast their welcome. They should go out on top and recast the lead in a new series (something timeless, classic and filled with big damn heroes).
I think Nathan's next show should cast him as a bad guy (at least somewhat evil). That might be fun.
Chuck returns on Friday, October 7th—–hang in there!
And they blew it when they did the terrorist storyline, too……back to the Roz Russell/Cary Grant of the 21st century, thankfully.
He did evil well on Buffy the Vampire Slayer—I's watch him in anything:).
I'm like a man in the desert crawling the last few feet to the oasis.
We've enjoyed Castle since the beginning. The one-liners are invariably fun: "He was half the man he was? He had a split personality?"
Speaking of Ellery Queen…
The fine TV version from the mid-70s – the one starring Jim Hutton as Ellery Queen and David Wayne as Inspector Richard Queen – is finally out on DVD. Get it.
My favorite was still their "X-files episode" — especially the part where he spoke Chinese, Beckett asked where he'd learned it and he said "Some TV show I used to love." I about fell out of my chair laughing at that little in-joke.
More hollywood crap, and filion is a big lib. i'll pass.
Recycled mush!
If it stars Nathan Fillion, I don't watch it.
John Casey and the 4th Greta.
I was exhausted the night of the season opener and didn't watch it. Did see the superhero episode and last night. I've taken to calling the show "Model Cop" because Beckett is such a fox. That being said, the show is a hoot. and on eof the better incarnations of "law enforcement consultant partner" genre we've seen so much of the last couple of years. Entirely implausible, but fun. Some of them have been forgettable like the execrable Liar. Castle, Bones and The Mentalist all hit the stride. I still can't square in my head a cop going into a dangerous situation backed up by an unarmed, untrained, sometimes chickeny looking partner. Bones was pretty badass when she produced her S&W 500, Castle beat the snot out of that guy last season and Jane killed the Red John guy.
For the most part the darker episodes support the season spanning storylines that add an underlying structure. I also feel that the Gates character is a very strong foil for both Beckett and Castle's characters, something that was lacking under Montgomery.
Almost all of them are libs. My rule is if they can keep me from knowing their politics I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Nathan seems to stay amiable with no preaching. I can live with that.
I'm hoping for a few more of those in this last season. Would really love to see Kaylee show up. Miss her.
The premise of this show, a crime writer getting involved in crime fighting, reminds me a lot of "Murder She Wrote" with Angela Landsbury from back in the early 1980's.
My only must see network TV show now a days is Sons of Anarchy.
My parents watch Castle, and I've seen it out of order. Seemed fairly good and I was interested in maybe picking up DVD releases. One of my army buddies complained about the terrorism arc before I saw it; and well, when I did I understood. What they had those Army guys doing was exactly what the same buddy (and another deployed to Iraq at the same time) told me repeatedly about the foreign insurgents in Iraq doing. They lost me after that one.
Can't blame you. That one ticked me off too. Stupid PC writers.
I love Castle, Chuck and Psyche! I can't wait for "the boys"to come back on the air. they are so silly. Love it.
NOOOO! Evil is not good.
I watded a bit of Dr. Horrible's Sing Along Blog the other day. The boy can sing, too!
I think that we have to give H'wood credit where deserved. And yet still remember that it IS H'wood. If they take a Left turn now and again, shouldn't we expect it and not be surprised / offended / etc? I love Castle. And I think they have managed the whole star-crossed thing pretty well…
Agreed!
You must be logged in to post a comment.