Comments | bones_ga: Summer of Serial Killers re-watch

tempertemper in bones_ga

Summer of Serial Killers re-watch - WEEK 7 DISCUSSION!

Jul 21, 2011 17:24

( Read more... )

episode discussion (rewatch), ep: 6.11 bullet in the brain, re-watch

Comments 51

Discussion goes here for: Broadsky's motives tempertemper July 21 2011, 16:25:31 UTC

How much of Broadsky's choice to target Taffet was due to him wanting to get Booth involved versus truly believing she was the best target for his vigilante mission?

Re: Discussion goes here for: Broadsky's motives ravenclawwit July 21 2011, 16:54:54 UTC

I think he would have chosen her anyways. Taffet was the perfect target for him, irregardless of Booth's connection to her. She was a high profile criminal, with a lot of public vitriol against her. I think that was part of it for him. He liked the attention and for people to see him as "the right hand of God". I think Booth's involvement with her was kind of like the cherry on the sundae for him, but not the absolute deciding factor in his choice to target her.

Re: Discussion goes here for: Broadsky's motives a_mistletoe July 21 2011, 18:28:15 UTC

I think she was a good target if you're going to start a righteous kill campaign, but things in the way the story panned out suggested to me that Booth was higher up Broadsky's list of 'collateral damage' than just the cherry on the sundae.

Why else would he lease the plot of land in Booth's name? Surely it was to make it between the two of them as Booth suggested. The way he threw down the gauntlet at their confrontation suggested he is playing with Booth to see how far he can push him. The exploding caravan may have destroyed evidence, but it also showed Booth that Broadsky was just as dangerous outside the law as he was when he was training snipers or working for HRT in Texas, if he was in any doubt.

So, yes. Taffet was a good morally ambiguous choice, but she wasn't the only target. Broadsky uses people to get him to where he wants to be: not only the right hand of God but God himself.

Re: Discussion goes here for: Broadsky's motives ravenclawwit July 21 2011, 19:03:56 UTC

If that is the case, I have to wonder why. Why would he have this singular fixation on Booth? Why not any other person he once served with? The show never indicated that they had any particular history with one another other than having served together. I'm sure Broadsky served with a lot of people, so why fixate on Booth? That's why I'm not really sold on the idea that this was all about Booth. If that's what the writer's wanted us to think they needed to do a little better in showing us why.

Thread 5

Discussion goes here for: James Kent tempertemper July 21 2011, 16:26:17 UTC

How deeply do you believe James Kent was involved with Broadsky during Taffet's killing?

Re: Discussion goes here for: James Kent ravenclawwit July 21 2011, 16:58:52 UTC

I see no evidence that he was more deeply involved than he said. I think like he said that he responded to Broadsky's offer and paid the money. Broadsky isn't really the type to have an accomplice.

Re: Discussion goes here for: James Kent a_mistletoe July 21 2011, 18:32:34 UTC

I agree. As I said above, Broadsky uses people, but he doesn't connect to them otherwise. Kent was looking for a sure justice for his sons deaths, but did not seek out Broadsky. Bones often makes a big deal of entitlement, but at heart Kent was a good man and showed shock at how far Broadsky was prepared to go. I'm sure he would not sign on for that.

Discussion goes here for: Sweets tempertemper July 21 2011, 16:26:51 UTC

Do you believe it was in character for Sweets to be so deeply affected by Taffet's remarks?

Re: Discussion goes here for: Sweets ravenclawwit July 21 2011, 17:01:21 UTC

He was suffering from PTSD. It can bring up a lot of insecurities, even ones not related to the trauma at hand. I also think there is a big part of Sweets that is insecure about his abilities and worth, probably stemming from his childhood.

Re: Discussion goes here for: Sweets a_mistletoe July 21 2011, 18:45:46 UTC

I don't think Sweets has been up close and personal to someone being killed like that before. He reacted in a similar way in The Bones on the Blue Line although the death was more about bad luck then. Daisy said of him He's very sensitive, not inured to death and mortality and he thought that the man's death was a message to him. He does the same here, wondering if he were the target. It is quite an immature response and it takes the most mature person he knows, Caroline, to snap him out of it.

Often, Sweets projects, usually onto Booth and Brennan and I think he has too idealistic an outlook to be a really successful psychologist. That comes with life experience and he hasn't had enough.

Discussion goes here for: Caroline tempertemper July 21 2011, 16:27:29 UTC

Was Caroline telling the truth about her own reaction in her discussion with Sweets or telling him something to get him back on his shrinky horse?

Re: Discussion goes here for: Caroline ravenclawwit July 21 2011, 17:03:56 UTC

I don't think she'd be the type of person to lie about something like that (which would make her a bit creepy tbh) and she seemed pretty genuinely upset. Also I believe she genuinely cares about Sweets, just like everyone else on the Jeffersonian team, and I don't think she'd do anything merely to "get him back on his shrinky horse".

Discussion goes here for: The Denial in the List tempertemper July 21 2011, 16:28:02 UTC

Why did Booth not put Broadsky on the suspect list when he narrowed it down to snipers?

Re: Discussion goes here for: The Denial in the List ravenclawwit July 21 2011, 17:06:15 UTC

I'm not sure. Obviously he didn't believe that Broadsky could do something like this. Clearly he was way wrong which struck me as odd. Usually Booth is a pretty excellent judge of character.

Re: Discussion goes here for: The Denial in the List a_mistletoe July 21 2011, 18:52:17 UTC

I got the impression he thought he was dead, or at least well off the radar. Also, it seemed to me that Army!Booth would find it hard to question Broadsky's integrity when he had been trained by him (or did I mishear that Broadsky trained them all). I think it would hit too close to home at a time when Booth was already feeling off balance thanks to his recent experiences in Afghanistan and Hannah's presence.