Comments | 206_bones: Castle boss to Bones execs: Booth and Brennan need to hook up NOW

klutzy_girl in 206_bones

Castle boss to Bones execs: Booth and Brennan need to hook up NOW

Apr 18, 2011 19:30

As creator and exec producer of ABC’s Castle, Andrew W. Marlowe has spent a whole lot of the last three years keeping his title character and Beckett apart, and wondering how long that can go on. One thing he does know: He’d be getting pretty anxious right about now if he were Bones‘ Hart Hanson and the couple in question was Booth and Brennan.

“ ( Read more... )

other shows: castle, episodes: spoilers s6

Comments 58

_beka April 18 2011, 23:36:29 UTC

This gives me hope that I wont have to wait too long ( and by long i mean 4 or more years) for Castle and Beckett get together!

crazyboothsocks April 18 2011, 23:40:16 UTC

This is the difference with Castle Versus Bones ( ... )

pink_flame_87 April 19 2011, 13:25:26 UTC

I will always consider Bones my first love but I agree with most of your points, especially as Bones has gone on. Season 1 of Bones I cared equally about the cases, character back stories, and the Booth/Brennan romance. At this point I almost never care about the cases at all. I care about the other characters (usually Hodgins/Angela and Sweets) and I care about Booth and Brennan getting together. On the other hand three seasons in to Castle and as much as I love Castle/Beckett, I still love trying to figure out the cases. I could see Castle/Beckett getting together and it changing the way I watch the show a lot less than the same happening with Booth/Brennan.

ama_blue April 18 2011, 23:43:16 UTC

I love Castle, no doubt about that. But Andrew Marlowe should mind his own business.

queenmidas April 19 2011, 00:01:11 UTC

A+. This was my first thought. As much as HH drives me crazy sometimes, you would never see him telling other showrunners what they should or should not do.

ama_blue April 19 2011, 00:30:24 UTC

Yeah, even if Marlowe makes a good point, I think it's just bad form to promote your own show by casting another show in a negative light. When you consider the fact that part of the reason Castle probably got picked up in the first place was due to the fact that the premise was similar to Bones, whose success would have made Castle a more appealing prospect to ABC, it just seems a not-so-polite thing to do.

biba79 April 19 2011, 00:53:08 UTC

Yes exactly. Let's not forget that half of Castle's ideas are a carbon copy of Bones. So really, he shouldn't be talking about HH at all.

Thread 24

fantasy_notes April 19 2011, 00:08:59 UTC

Although Andrew shouldnt be telling HH what to do its probably true that Booth & Bones need to get together. If HH wont listen to us (his fans) at least maybe he will listen to Marlowe.

Btw if the storyline of castle continues to be this good then maybe i'd be willing to wait longer for castle & beckett together! :) But im waiting for BB to get together.. it feels like eternity :P

B & B get together now please!! Yeah and Castle & Beckett should get together soon too! Im in love with them both ♥

wagrobanite April 19 2011, 00:12:51 UTC

I know I'm in the minority but I don't want either show to do that.. Not to mention, it's a show killer. I can't remember off the top of my head but there have been several shows that have been canceled the season after the two main characters got romantic. I honestly don't understand why people want it. Can't a man and woman work together and not get romantic? UG it bugs me

ok off soapbox now... back my regularly scheduled research on bibliomaniacs.

fearlesst15 April 19 2011, 00:24:11 UTC

They can. I don't watch it religiously but I'm pretty sure Stabler and Benson have never been an item on SVU. The issue with Bones is they have flaunted that they should be together from the start. You can't have that going on and then not put them together. It's one thing to make tension and have it be there, like with Benson and Stabler, but know that they should never be a couple because that just isn't what they were meant to be... but to have them keep coming so close to being a couple, to have them have coma sex, to have them almost have sex the first time they worked together only to back out due to timing ( ... )

wagrobanite April 19 2011, 00:43:34 UTC

I don't watch it religiously but I'm pretty sure Stabler and Benson have never been an item on SVU. The issue with Bones is they have flaunted that they should be together from the start
No they haven't and they're in their 12th or 13th season and have had the tension there... so I don't understand why Bones is different?

fearlesst15 April 19 2011, 01:21:36 UTC

Because Bones has had all these characters, main and guest, saying how Booth and Brennan are destined to be together. Signs here and there pointing to them ending up together and being something more than "just partners" where as SVU has had the same tension Bones has had but minus those signs and characters constantly saying they belong together ( ... )

Thread 10