Exclusive: Body Of Proof Boss Explains Cast Shake-Up, Reveals New Players to Be Added

ABC’s Body Of Proof is undergoing a rather extreme makeover in its third season — but one that is designed to give the show’s storytelling a jolt and not trim overhead.

In fact, on the heels of the three announced cast cutsNicholas Bishop (who plays Peter), John Carrol Lynch (Bud) and Sonja Sohn (Sam) — showrunner Matt Gross says that two new characters will join the mix.

The first, Det. Tommy Sullivan, is a former love interest of Megan’s who transfers to Philadelphia to win her back. The sexy cop will give his strong-willed ex a flirty hard time as they work together to solve cases. The second newbie, Det. Adam Schaeffer, is a smart (and smart-mouthed) rookie who routinely gets ahead of himself, and that will cause him a bit of trouble.

Here, Gross — along with executive producers Christopher Murphey and [former 24 executive producer] Evan Katz — details for TVLine why and how the Dana Delany-fronted procedural is being retooled.

TVLINE | For starters, I understand that what’s going on here is not about shaving dollars.
MATTHEW GROSS | No, not at all. We were fortunate enough to get a Season 3 of our show, and in trying to bring more eyeballs to our show, we wanted to change some of the dynamic and create new characters. And that’s the purpose for all of this. Also, we just brought on Evan Katz as one of the heads of the “three-headed hydra” — that’s what we refer to ourselves as.
EVAN KATZ | A very nice hydra by the way. It’s sort of a creative reboot of the show with the goal of being more dynamic, higher stakes, everything that we can do to amp up the stakes of each episode –
GROSS – and create promotable opportunities for our storytelling.

TVLINE | I was going to say that given all the show’s strengths, casting-wise and plotting-wise, for a couple of seasons now it has  failed to really “pop” out there.
KATZ It has a core audience, which is a beautiful thing, and we’re going to try to reinvigorate a little bit, remain true to the audience, but give people satisfaction and engagement on more levels. Toward the end of the second season, I was not here, but these guys started to tell slightly higher-stake stories, and that’ll continue. On a character basis, and I think this is the interesting thing that’s got all of us excited, we’re going to give her a male co-lead. [Someone] is going to come back into her life, a stormy relationship from her 20s.

TVLINE | That’s the detective, Tommy Sullivan?
KATZ | Det. Tommy Sullivan. [Megan's] strength is that she can run over pretty much everybody. But she can’t run over this guy. And it will enable us to really see what it’s like when she gets flustered.
GROSS | The show is a very interesting hybrid. It’s murders solved through a medical point of view, but by the same token, it has a strong procedural, police track as well. So by giving Megan Hunt an interpersonal relationship from the past, it gives us a stronger point of view coming from that angle.
CHRISTOPHER MURPHEY | And it gives subtext and tension in their relationship that’s integrated into their investigation. So we just see it as making their personal and professional dynamic more compelling.

TVLINE | And the other new character, Det. Adam Schaeffer, what’s he going to bring to the mix?
MURPHEY | Youth. A different perspective. Energy. Our lead, Tommy, is coming from New York. Adam is a born-and-bred Philadelphian, his father’s a big defense attorney. So he has a perspective; his joining the police force was kind of a rebellion against his father, but it’s not that he’s some do-gooder. It’s that for every defense attorney out there in the world who bends the rules, we need a cop who knows how to bend the rules the other way and get away with it.
GROSS | He knows the system from the inside out.
MURPHEY | Yeah. He’ll be something of an operator. So again, really we do need two cops on the police side of the investigation, just for practical purposes, but we also feel like these are two dynamic characters we can get a lot out of.
GROSS | Adam is a guy who thinks that he knows it all. He’s wise beyond his years, but doesn’t have the experience to back it up. And he might get himself in some trouble along the way for running his mouth off.

TVLINE | Are you saying whether this means that Peter died in the Season 2 finale?
GROSS | You’re going to have to see the opening episode. [Laughs] You have to make your own conclusion.

TVLINE | How did you get the word out to John, Sonja and Nick about what was going on?
GROSS |  Well you know, these are very difficult conversations to have, because we really enjoy collaborating with them as artists and have gotten to know them personally over the years. But truth be told, we were taking the show in a different direction. Some of those characters sort of had played out and other characters would be marginalized with these new dynamics. Nothing they did wrong at all, it’s just we’re taking the show in a different direction.

TVLINE | I can totally see your point. Because although you spent two seasons trying to build a simmering “thing” there with Megan and Peter, why not just bring in a character who already had that combustible relationship in the past and revisit that?
KATZ | It’s a way to jump-start that relationship, and that’s exciting.
MURPHEY | It was also difficult for the role of Peter to have that kind of relationship with Dr. Hunt when he’s subordinate to her.
KATZ | He worked for her. She’s a very strong character. Dana is very strong in her persona. It makes her a great character, and really fun to watch but sort of impossible for a man who works under her to have a relationship with her.
GROSS | We took a lot of time to think about this at great length, lots of discussion, really thinking about every character, their interpersonal dynamic, how they fit together. This is ultimately where we came out. And we’ve been given this tremendous opportunity to get a season 3 and we want to raise up our demo numbers and we also want to make the show engaging at a different capacity.

Comments are monitored, so don’t go off topic, don’t frakkin’ curse and don’t bore us with how much your coworker’s sister-in-law makes per hour. Talk smart about TV!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

174 Comments
  1. Cheryl says:

    They totally revamped “Harry’s Law” and took the best of it out and made it just like any other show and it died…I see the same thing happening with “Body of Proof”…too bad.

    • This completely! Oh well, there mistake to make I guess!

      • I’ve seen this happen with other shows that the networks are looking for an excuse to get rid of; but have enough fans to raise an outcry against cancellation. They change the cast, move the show around the schedule; and once enough people give up…

      • Rob says:

        as long as Jeri Ryan’s on board Im there…underated actress

    • Kvivik says:

      I’m not upset about losing John Carroll Lynch’s Bud, or Sonja Sohn’s Sam as I always thought it was stupid that the medical examiner would always work with the same two cops. But I am ticked about losing Peter! GRRRR!
      And what does this new love interest mean for Aiden (Jamie Bamber)? I liked their dynamic!

      • Lisa says:

        I agree, don’t really care about the Bud or Sam characters. but I’m sad about losing Peter. He and Megan worked well together.

        • Lv says:

          I always liked the dynamics between Peter and Meghan. I don’t understand the reasoning
          Behind this. I truly enjoy this show as it seems more realistic to what I deal with in Pathology
          Unlike CSI. Do not cancel this show!

      • Liz says:

        Jamie Bamber is a lead in David E. Kelley’s pilot “Monday Mornings” which just got picked up by TNT. Even if BoP wanted to continue that storyline, there’s a chance they couldn’t get him back anyway.

      • ravie says:

        I like Jamie Bamber but didn’t like him for Megan. Come on, to make her a cougar!? He looked too young and too “tradesman like” to suit her, IMO. I loved him in Law & Order UK though.

      • Frank Supiot says:

        In the real world police do not transfer from one municipality to another as seniority exists. Why does TV do this stupid event? Body of Proof isn’t the first.

      • Martin Ross says:

        Bud and Sonya, along with Curtis, kept the show from wallowing in soapy dopiness and Megan’s Quincylike ego. I wonder now if we’re going to get yet another silly googoofest like Rizzoli and Isles is becoming.

        • Helene says:

          Martin Ross: Please do not dishout Rizzoli & Isles…Many many people love this show. And also, what do you mean by : googoofest?

    • George says:

      Fox did a horrible revamp of Human Target season 2. They brought in this hack producer Matthew Miller from Chuck. Basically tried to make thing that worked on Chuck work on Human Target. Didn’t have the decency to wrap up season 1 Old Man story arc.

      This show has drastically lost a lot of it’s audience in season 2. Its going to take a Big promotion and wide critical praise to get a whole new audience to sample. This show is a by the number procedural not a complex crime drama. Critical praise is just not going to happen.

      • Ben says:

        Yeah, shake ups are often a shame. I agree completely on Harry’s Law (although there was precedent for that, Boston Legal chopped and changed fine). Human Target for some reason hasn’t had season 2 hit my shores yet, but season one was fine the way it was. Can’t easily see Body of Proof surviving a big changeup – but you never know, it depends if it can create a better product that apulls in new viewers or not.

      • Watson77 says:

        Agree on Human Target, went from a Bond mini movie to predictable will they or won’t they between lead and millionaire female boss.

      • ravie says:

        I hated what they did to Human Target. By bringing in Ilsa Pouchi (the character) they killed the show. They made the lead (I keep forgetting his name even though I love him; he’s the same guy in Harry’s Law); they made him a follower instead of a leader. He was doing everything Ilsa said and lost his manhood. Killed the show. And made me lose out on my Jackie Earle Hayley and Chi McBride. Anyhow, wrong place to rant. I do feel that the Body of Proof change is a good one though.

    • Shaun says:

      They pulling a Special Victims Unit on this show.Peter was the confidant and now wth is gonna happen?It was already weird with her going all CSI Miami on suspects.

    • zoot says:

      Wish they got rid of Dr. Kate, (Jeri ryan)..she is boring. WHen they had the conflict with the ex husband, it was sorta interesting, but now just the two strong, intelligent, attractive women is kind of dull. I liked Peter and Bud and Sam…the detectives added some fun. Maybe Peter is expendable..his character really didn’t have a purpose, but I liked him. Oh well..just like others have said. It seems like a desperate attempt to revamp the show and it is going to tank.

    • ravie says:

      I agree with you on Harry’s Law. I liked it the way it first was, with Bethany Snow and the shoe store and the bad guys who would come into the store/law firm. It became Boston Legal or The Practice when it was revamped. I liked those shows but felt I was going backward, not forward.

      With Body of Proof I can understand the need for the change. Peter’s character cannot have a relationship with Megan, he’s too subordinate to her. And while I liked the two detectives, I didn’t feel they added enough to the show. Megan was always solving the crimes, so I kinda wondered, what was their purpose?

      In this case therefore, I think change is good. I’m sorry for Nicholas Bishop (Peter) who is out of a job, and Sohn (the other detective has already found another role I understand), but I think this is for the best. I would like to see more of Megan’s ex-husband though. Love him.

      • Maria says:

        It was Brittany Snow not Bethany she was great in fever pitch ….I agree she brought a sense of fun in an otherwise dreary show…..

    • liza Tish says:

      I think the revamp is a great idea! Let’s see Megan get unraveled. She’s much more complex than she appears. The dynamics need to amp up for her especially so she can show us who is really is. This will effect everyone and could be very exciting. Don’t give up hope! : )

    • AJ says:

      Agreed. The Bud, Sam and Peter characters were some of my favorites. Great casting. Loved the character dynamics and performance. Now, Body of Proof is going to degenerate into a carbon copy of every other procedural drama out there. Such a waste of good talent. I’ve been a huge fan of this show since the beginning. I’m going to have to pass on this season.

    • Taylor says:

      I agree, removing one character is enough to shake things up. Three is suicidal. I mean there was too much going on in the story and now it’s all getting cut short. For the first time, I’m not looking forward to the new season.

      • Len says:

        I just don’t understand how these bigwigs cannot just leave a good thing alone…I’ll miss Peter. He was so distraught in losing Dani from that virus/bacteria hysteria from last season…I dunno really if I wanna stick around this season either.

        • Stephie says:

          Peter should not have been with Dani in the first place. I never liked their match. He knew the other guy liked her and yet he went with her. And you could see he knew they were wrong for each other in the first place; he had his own doubts. Nevertheless, while I am sort of sorry to see him go, I was also worried at first that they’d pair him with Megan, because that match to me would also have been unsuitable. I like Bud and the female detective, but I always found it a waste of time when Megan solved all the crimes anyway; what was/is the point of them being there? To bring on a new detective doesn’t make any sense. It’s better to have a crime investigator around (like Peter) who could help Megan, but to have actual detectives is pointless to the show, IMHO..

    • Sandra says:

      exactly bring back the old Harry’s law!!!

    • JG says:

      You are sooooooo right on with this comment!

  2. Leah says:

    So, basically, they’re trying to turn this into a mixture of Bones and Castle with the whole will-they-won’t-they in the workplace with murderes and science.

    • SpikenalabamaCheryl says:

      Yeah, and it doesn’t work on those shows!!

      • Lex says:

        Yes it definitely doesn’t work, that’s why Castle’s on its fifth season and Bones its ninth

        • Annie says:

          LOL – word, Lex. I don’t care for Bones but you can’t deny it’s got a strong audience appeal factor. Castle – well, nobody better say a word against Nathan Fillion or anything he’s in, is all I’m saying.

          • Leah says:

            I’m not saying it won’t work. If new viewers find the show, they could be all for it. But as a viewer since the begining, I’m not a fan of it. I liked having a lighter procedural without the will-they-won’t-they stuff. There’s enough of that with Bones and Castle.

        • M says:

          You have to hand it to them though. They finally figured out that the easiest way to gain wide viewership and build dedication is to add shipping to the mix. Wondering what will happen to the lead couple does bring viewers back week after week, even if the “A” plots aren’t as strong, hense why Bones made it to an eighth season when the murder plots kind of died after the fifth. For the record, I actually liked the second season of Human Target a lot more than the first.

        • ravie says:

          hahaha. Good one Lex. But I hope you will have the last laugh though, because those changes with Bones and Castle have only come in the last season of both. So the coming seasons will tell how people really react to the changes.

    • CJ says:

      That’s actually what the show already was, except as they said in the story, they had difficulty developing a story with Megan and Peter because of their work relationship. There’s no question that was an intended story; every episode for most of the run of the show had scenes in which Peter and Megan were flirting with each other. Depending on whom they cast for the new characters, it might be a good move for the show. Plus I’m sure Nicholas Bishop and Sonja Sohn won’t have any difficulty finding new gigs, and John Carroll Lynch already has one.

      • Kath says:

        Since just about every ABC show has a relationship between the male boss and the female subordinate, from Grey’s Anatomy to Rookie Blue, I don’t see why they couldn’t do one show with the female boss a the male subordinate.

        • nerdiest says:

          Exactly!

        • Darla says:

          Because the men can’t write it. These types of changes usually kill the show. They could have added the 2 new detectives, kept the other detectives, kept Peter, and just changed the writing plots. Instead-they are trying to weaken Dr. Hunt but playing off the same two detectives like they did with the ones they are replacing. Peter was Dr. Hunt’s opposite strength. They had different but equal strengths that could have played for a strong couple relationship instead of making the female weaker.

          • Bill Bruce says:

            I agree Darla. Have the 2 new Detectives work in every 3rd episode, or whatever. Have Sam and Bud there the others. Same with Peter, maybe he could have worked on certain cases and not on all? And have the ex husband back in the mix and the landscaping bf could still mix in at times. because it shouldn’t be Megan right back with the old bf. The younger guy(landscaper) was a relief for here. And yes the Detectives and Peter had to come up with some answers on cases, they aren’t all dumb, or they wouldn’t have these jobs.

          • ravie says:

            ” And yes the Detectives and Peter had to come up with some answers on cases, they aren’t all dumb, or they wouldn’t have these jobs.” Bill I understand what you say, and while I agree that the detectives should come up with answers, the show’s focus is about a forensic specialist who solves crimes, something like “Quincy”. So maybe it might have been better to lose the detectives altogether. Because having any around so much, does make them look dumb when they’re not solving any crimes. They become just figureheads, and therefore expendable.

  3. This doesn’t sound like something I want to watch. I enjoyed this show for what it was, not what they’re trying to make it. It will surely suffer. I’ll give it one episode but non of this sounds appealing and it’s very sad that they chose to make the cuts/choices they did.

  4. Alia says:

    Jump the shark Body of Proof.

  5. AJ says:

    The show was better when it was simply a ripoff of everything Patricia Cornwell has ever written.

  6. Mel says:

    Wow, that’s insulting to all the fans who wanted Peter and Megan together. I’m done.

    • AJ says:

      Never really understood why people get so bent out of shape about fictional characters lol. Nor have I had any interest in shows with the constant “will they, won’t they” bs. Not interesting.

      • thanks for your interest says:

        Never really understood why people get so bent out of shape about fictional characters getting together or not.

      • nerdiest says:

        Great work on being a superior person! I’ve never really understood why people take the time to make comments on people who get bent out of shape about fictional characters. But you know. I’m simply above all that-not interesting.

      • ravie says:

        I agree AJ. I hate when people always expect the male and female characters to get together. Look at Law & Order: SVU. Meloni and Mariska didn’t get together and that show has been running for ages, with no one asking for them to be together. He’s married and people are happy with that. I don’t like how in Bones and Castle the leads have gotten together. It’s taken away from the story for me, and the plots are being sacrificed, IMO.

    • Poppy says:

      I agree but it’s not just that. This is disrespectful and insulting to every fan who invested their time into this show over 2 seasons and got attached to these characters just to be told “Hey, we’re done with them. Too bad if you disagree.”. There is no way I’m ever going to watch another episode of this show. I sincerely regret I ever fell in love with it in the first place and I really want my time back.

      • Mel says:

        I agree. Suddenly revamping it after we accepted what it was? You can’t do that. I feel really sorry for the ones who got booted. I was so happy that the season ended with Megan and Peter, even though he got injured, and this just ruined it for me. And I had grown to love Bud and Megan’s banter, too.

        • Poppy says:

          I know. The show was great the way it was. Basically Nic, Sonja and John got fired because these guys don’t know how to write for them. It amazes me to no end that Gross and friends seem to think that the majority of fans is just going to be okay with that.
          I loved the dynamic between Bud and Megan and I also agree about Megan and Peter. The last 2 minutes of the finale harbored so much potential for good story telling in S3. I was so looking forward to seeing how Megan and Peter would deal with the fallout of what happened and how it would affect/change their relationship.

      • sam says:

        I’m sorry but do you guys not get it, it needs to increase its demos in 18-49 or there will be no season 4, you were lucky that ABC gave it another season — even though it has high total viewers but on the low side of the demo. People in your workplace do not stay forever do they? And correct me if I’m wrong but this show is about dana delany, I don’t see how you can not watch this show where she is central to the story and say you are done with it because of the supporting players.

        • Poppy says:

          I do actually get that. However, do you really think that instead of creating better, more interesting story lines for the existing characters these two cliché-ridden new ones described up there are going to help garner higher demo numbers?! Yeah right. For some reason I don’t see that happening.
          As for your second point, are you really telling me that as long as the star of the show is on board, nobody should give a crap about the rest of the cast because they’re not at all important for the show as a whole? Hm, interesting. Let’s apply this idea to a different show like for example Bones. If Hart Hanson decided tomorrow to fire everyone but Emily Deschanel from Bones – because, you know, the show is about Bones after all – and replace them with a new supporting cast because he feels the old characters have run their course, I’m sure that would go over extremely well with the fans. Are you kidding me?! I mean, if all you care about in a show is the main character, then I guess I can’t argue with that. As for me though, I watched Body of Proof, not the Dana Delany show. The producers have happened to cut the part of the supporting cast I got really attached to. I loved the dynamic Megan had with them and without them BoP is no longer a show I’m interested in watching. What’s so hard to understand about that?

      • susan boyce says:

        agree with every word.

  7. Michael Barnes says:

    Awful news. I watched the show becuase I liked what it was and the characters. I don’t want to watch bunch of new people in storylines that sound like a bunch of other shows. I wont be back for season three.

  8. Seriously, the show could have survived without the two cops. It would have sucked, but it could have survived. Without Peter though . . . Grrr! Hey you wanna keep core fans at this point, here is an idea. Get back to the case on Megan’s father which was all but ignored in season 2!

    • Kvivik says:

      Totally agree! Surely Megan can find a judge to sign the exhumation order. Why she asked her mother, I have no idea.

  9. sladewilson says:

    Well I’m done. The show didn’t need a total revamp – just a slight retooling of purpose and you would’ve been fine. Here we go again with taking a good show and making it worse…

  10. Michele says:

    Can understand the 2 cops being written out….but not the character of Peter! No way! He’s been a main character since Day 1 of this show and truly one of my favorites. (and I’m sure many others) At least keep him around on a part-time basis in the show…he’s a core character and part of a superb cast. Don’t break-up this cast like this!!

  11. Boiler says:

    Loved this show. These guys sound like idiots with what they are doing. Its like they are throwing stuff to see what sticks. The one new character they should have added is Luke Perry’s. Oh well I’ll still give it a shot because of Dana Delany. One question TVLine did not ask….did the viewers want this??

    • tarc says:

      LOL! They aren’t idiots – I’m sure that ‘protected negotiaion’ that preceeded their renewal was contingent on ‘shaking things up’. If they were renewed by the skin of their teeth, who wouldn’t see the benefit of trying a bit of a revamp; upside = another season of work for everyone, downside = same as doing nothing (if not early cancellation). People can whine all they want, but it’s Delaney’s vehicle, and her relationship with her mom and daughter (and Jeri Ryan’s character) is the core of the show as far as I’m concerned. I like everyone else, but they played Peter out as far as anyone cared, and as we got to know more about him, it was more and more clear that he was never going to be Megan’s type. Plus, I think we got to see some of the actor’s limitations in that last story arc, and if that’s the direction that they are going, it might be a good idea to explore other opportunities.

      • Shaun says:

        ha,that’s why they basically ignored her daughter for 2/3 of the season?

        • Temperence says:

          Megan’s daughter was on the show more than that, but that’s not much of a point since the show really is primarily focused on her *job*. Having her mom lose the election and giving Lacey diabetes were clearly moves to strengthen the role of her homelife in the show. And, to be clear, I didn’t say that the show was focused on her family, but that the core relationships that worked (or that resonated well) were between the ladies of the show (sans the female cop, but adding Bud).

    • Karrie says:

      They never ask the “hard” questions!

  12. This is the third season they’ve changed Body of Proof. If you remember, the first season Dana Delaney was an intolerable bitch, the second she was made tolerable and now in the third season – she’s becoming lovable. If they don’t know, after three seasons, what this show is about — I don’t know why I should watch.

  13. Hope says:

    At least they will not put Kate and Megan together or move anywhere in that direction. Seriously, their bickering at each other for fan-service became so silly and unnecessary lately. Not cute!

  14. Elaine says:

    I”m looking forward to a revamped show. I never felt the Peter/Megan relationship thing at all… I never felt there were any real sparks there. Frankly, though, I’d prefer a show where the two freaking leads DON”T get into a relationship…. that IS possible ya know, writers/producer! Be that as it may, the show was sadly lacking in “hot men” (Jamie B being the exception, but it sounds like he’s gone anyway, damn it). I agree with the person who said it doesn’t make sense they’re always working with the same two cops… would be nice to mix them up………. have, say, 4 pairs of police partners who come and go depending on whether the crime is in “their” area or not. Anyway, I”ll give it a try next season as I like the relationship with Megan and 7 or 9 (ha) and I like the black M.E. (though the white, skinny, one who tries to be funny all the time is really irritating.. I watch in spite of him). Good luck next season BoP.

    • Martin Ross says:

      Love the idea of the rotating cops — kinda like what they did on Mannix back in the 70s (yep, old dude here) or, come to think of it, CSI Vegas. The rotating interns work well on Bones.

  15. GeoDiva says:

    Please, please, please get rid of her Mother & Lacey. We don’t need them!

  16. Mel Cain says:

    Really, do we dump characters just so that producers can remain employed? That’s my guess. And probably not smart producers at that! These characters have been in my home for two years – and fictional or not – I’m going to miss them. I bought into the characters and the stories and have enjoyed watching good, solid acting. Now the producers feel that they need to mix things up a bit. Give me strength… this is just code for job justification. I’ll be surprised if this show makes it through season 3!

  17. JC says:

    Urrghh. Well, I couldn’t care less about Peter (good riddance), but I’m NOT happy about Bud and Sam being dumped for these two new characters. When I thought they were just cutting costs, that was one thing, but this is aggravating. Adam in particular looks like the kind of character I despise. And I was hoping that the one bright side of the cast cuts would be Kate getting more to do – now I’m not so hopeful. Oh well.

  18. tahina says:

    Revamp not always synonym of success..many shows have failed, like the above ex in Harry’s Law, fixing what it isnt yet broken..,:( and I did’nt want Peter to die, this sucks!

  19. Poppy says:

    Let’s for a second ignore the fact that I’ve hardly ever felt this disrespected as a fan and summarize: basically these people feel they’ve written half their characters into corners they lack the creative skills to get them out of. So they come up with this brilliant plan to simply dump them (and the actors who invested two seasons of hard work into them) and invent a couple cliché-ridden new ones instead?! Sure. Fine. Whatever. Somebody hold me…I can’t handle the fail.

  20. Joy says:

    I never bothered about the will they wont they idea. Not all shows need that. I liked the way Peter worked with Megan. I enjoyed the show and the cast as it was.
    I’m another that thinks, if it ‘aint broke, don’t fix it.
    I don’t know if I’ll watch or not. Depends on what is on against it.

  21. arial2 says:

    I liked the non-business relationship between Megan and Jamie Bamber’s character and will miss it, but understand it’s difficult (expensive) to show such separated scenes in a one-hour series. I know his appearances were never intended to be more than an arc, plus, I’m guessing Jamie Bamber was not an inexpensive guest star. I love the show, so I’ll wait and see how things go, though I will miss all three departing actors.

  22. Amy says:

    TV Line are right, this show has been missing something from the start. People want to be wowed or shown something new, and this show is just BORING. And they do that thing where they have unrealistic and confusing jumps to the end of the crime solving. Like Criminal Minds is 40 mins long, so much stuff is packed into one ep and it never feels like too much, never a stupid jump that you cant follow and theres also some character development. Its obvious that the crimes need to be more chilling and engaging and there needs to be some sex, its cliche but this show has nothing else going for it. I’m purely watching because I like the actors. not for the writing.

  23. tvdiva says:

    I really think it is due to budget cuts. It is easier to cut cast to stay within budget than it is to cut crew. Plus all three actors are seasoned professionals – great character actors that can pick up work in TV or films.

  24. Bill Olson says:

    I am terribly disappointed in the changes. I will have to consider whether I will watch it again.

  25. And why a hot detective? I thought Peter was pretty hot.

    • Kim says:

      I thought peter was pretty hot too kinda reminds Ben mckenzie

    • ravie says:

      Nah. I don’t find Peter was hot at all. I think he has a pot belly for one so young. lol. And when he went and got involved with the trainee forensic girl, that sent a wrong message to me. #1, he knew that the other guy was interested in her and he still pushed himself on her anyway, and #2, I felt she was too young for him, and he pushed himself on her anyway. I didn’t like that. So I was turned off of him.

      • Bill Bruce says:

        I thought Dani,(trainee forensic girl) was pushing herself onto Peter. Also she thought Ethan, (the other guy ) was more like a high school crush on her. And he couldn’t express him self right. She wasn’t his type and was after Peter because he resisted and was more grown up(,manly) to her< a challenge. But her being killed off was strange. I thought it would have made Megan and Peter closer, but it kinda drove a wedge in between. But sure it may have never worked between Peter and Megan but that early tension in season 1 was good.

        • ravie says:

          Maybe Dani was pushing herself on Peter. Somehow I cant remember it that way. I remember her being focused on being a trainee and doing her job, and Peter (and Egan) showing interest. I never liked them together somehow. I always felt that there was not a real relationship to be had there at all. Then they came and killed her off! Maybe they realised the same thing too, that there was no chemistry, or not the right chemistry.

          • Bill Bruce says:

            Maybe it was a little of both. But I thought at first he resisted her. Ethan got mad, he thought Peter knew he liked her and went after her.

    • Steven Fox says:

      Pretty hot? Sometimes I would miss his lines because just looking at him made my heart race!

  26. Jenny says:

    While I like this show, it’s not must see TV for me. I would usually watch it a few days after it aired and it was near the bottom of my viewing list. I feel bad for the actors that were let go but it needed a shakeup if they want to avoid cancellation. It needed some new life somehow. Bud and Sam never clicked with me but I grew to like them enough. Peter was never, IMO, a romantic interest for Megan. Too much of an age difference even though Delaney looks younger than she is. I just never felt it. I think Megan’s back story would be interesting if the writing gets better. I like the daughter and mother interaction but I think it should remain in the background. I’m sorry ABC didn’t find a spot for it in the fall schedule. By the time they roll it out, many people may already have forgotten about it.

  27. Gemini says:

    Not happy about these changes at all. Liked the show and the characters interaction with each other. Really liked Peter. Liked everything about the show. As someone pointed out previously having the will they or won’t they has already been overdone–B ones and Castle. It tends to change the show and not in a good way. Like to watch the older Bones and stopped watching Castle. Will watch the season opener but somehow I don’t think it will pull me in to continue to watch it… :-(

  28. ChrisGa says:

    Very sad to see Bishop go and to a lesser extent Lynch but at the end of the day I watch the show because I love Dana Delany and these cast changes won’t change that. I’ll continue to watch because she’s one of the best actresses to ever hit the medium and I frankly TV is the lesser for not having her showcased on a weekly basis( I say the same thing about Julia Louis-Dreyfus; thankfully, HBO remedied that with Veep).

  29. Haley says:

    Paul Lee (President of ABC) said he wanted to heighten the stakes of things and shake up BOP. Apparently this is what that means. As much as I love the entire cast, I’ve come around to the idea. I was really upset when I first heard the news, but I’m trusting the writers. One of them tweeted that everything will make sense in the premiere. As much as I hate that these characters are leaving, I’m still looking forward to season 3. We fought so hard for it and I’m going to watch every episode. All of you that are angry about this should at least give the show a chance. You did love it once.

  30. darcywilson says:

    Why couldn’t they introduce these new cops, but keep Peter and just not go “there” with him and Megan?
    I totally understand chopping the cops, but Peter just makes no sense, they could’ve just not tried to put him and Megan in a relationship!

    • catbean says:

      I agree. Peter didn’t have to be a love interest for Meagan to stay on the show. I loved his character and his friendship with Meagan. And even his interactions with Lacey made her character more tolerable. I’m really doubting I’ll be sticking with this show because of this and I don’t say that lightly. I am really dedicated to the shows I watch but losing Nicolas Bishop is a great loss. Very disappointed.

      • Temperence says:

        I dunno… I liked him really well at first, but as they gave him more plotline outside of his interaction with Megan, he seemed to work less and less well. I’m not sure if it was the writing, or his choices as an actor, but he simply got less interesting and less dimensional, and I don’t thikn the actor navigated the ‘big plot’ scenes terribly well. If that’s the direction the show is going, then he wasn’t going to be an asset. The role just kind of fell apart as we watched, so I’m not surprised that he’s going.

        • ravie says:

          I agree. I sort of lost respect for him after he took up with that young girl. It’s not like he’s hot like Jeffrey Nordling, Megan’s ex who I think is really hot! He’s sort of mediocre so to link him up with that hot young chick was like an affront. He lost my respect and my interest. It’s not his fault obviously; it’s where the writers went with his storyline, but I don’t think it was a good one. I did hope that in the coming season they’d explore his adoption situation, but alas it is not to be. I’m one who really won’t miss his character, to be honest.

          • DeeDee says:

            Remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I love Nicholas Bishop and think he is much hotter than Jeffrey Nordling. I am sick of Nordling showing up as the ex of every divorcee on the the network.

  31. Kath says:

    The show does have a core audience, but many of us watch for either the Peter/Megan relationship or John Carroll Lynch and Sonja Sohn. This news is not making me want to tune in.

    If they had to get rid of some characters, I wish they would have got rid of Megan’s daughter and mother. Both those characters drag the show down.

    • ravie says:

      Peter/Megan relationship? I hope you don’t mean in a romantic way, cause I never saw that coming or anticipated that. I do like their friendship, but the show could do without that. Peter had other things going on that I didn’t particularly care for, like his pursuing of that relationship with that young forensic girl. Sorry about what happened to her but can’t say that I would have missed their relationship. It had annoyed me.

      • Steven Fox says:

        Agreed… They wouldn’t have had a chance as a couple, but platonically, I expected to see a friendship that grew increasingly to be very deep and understanding… not something that would have come too easy for either of them with most other people.

  32. Sheldon W. says:

    Maybe Bishop, Lynch and Sophn didn’t have their options picked up because the EPs wanted to go into a direction.

    All I know is that, going into a third season, Sohn, Lynch and Bishop would be getting raises. As new guys, Sullivan and Schaeffer will be getting consoderably less.

    Make of that what you wil…

  33. Ethel says:

    I like this show and will give it another chance but will miss Lynch. He is great in anything he is in. Kind of wish they would have gotten rid of the white morgue assistant(Evan?) and kept Peter.Watching the last couple of episodes, I had a feeling he was leaving just due to the story arc being played. I could not see Peter and Megan becoming a romantic couple, he was more of her conscience, or a big brother to her. I agree with others and hope this show has not been ruined the way Human target and Harry’s Law were. Wonder if Mark Valley could find his way to Philadelphia!!

  34. So sad to hear this news. I can’t believe they ended up killing Peter off. I watched this show for 2 seasons being consumed by the flirtation between Megan & Peter. He finally saves her life & what better story line as to bring two people together. I will no longer watch this program. Wasted 2 years on this show. I will also be changing channels.

    • Body of Proof has spent 2 seasons establishing great characters. Now all they needed to do was write some conflict and spark between the characters that America has grown to love (11 million +viewers). I think they have made a mistake. Use what characters they already had and write some GREAT episodes, and keep the ball rolling. I just think they’re gonna fail in so many changes. They could’ve just taken this show to the next level but instead they’re gonna get a huge backlash from the viewers that already tune in.

  35. jackie says:

    Lame. Enough said.

  36. Kim says:

    Stupid getting rid of Peter!! Going to be the kiss of death to this show!! You could see the chemistry between the two of them big time then you hooked him up with that young girl. So stupid way to ruin this show bring Peter back the chemistry of the cast was why I petitioned so hard if I knew this was coming I would have just let ABC axe it!! So disappointing

  37. Rusty says:

    It’s interesting to read an interview so full bull poop. When they killed off Peters girl friend with the lame epidemic story, that was they end off me watching the show. I can only hope that they now have Dana to start acting her age. A ME wearing 4 inch stiletto heels at work??? Come on! Dana is 56 and Joanna Cassidy who plays her mother is 67. Both are attractive and talented actress’s. But trying to pull off that Dana is in early 40′s, just never tracked. I agree, with several, get rid of the daughter, her acting is terrible. Dana’s character is so unbelievable. She needs to be taken down a few notches.
    I’ll watch the first new episode just to see how they close out Peter, Bud and Sam. But this show just got regulated to the, if absolutely nothing else is on, even wrestling, I might watch it, but then a good book is better.

  38. Becki Faye says:

    I’ll tune in next season mainly because I’m loyal to the show, but I’m not at all happy with these changes. All three characters they cut were important to the chemistry on it and unfortunately bringing in these newcomers doesn’t go very far in making up for losing them.

  39. Casey says:

    Why can’t ABC be honest and admit they want to only air cheap reality TV garbage? They should have cut Jeri Ryan to save money and kept Peter and Bud!

  40. Tom says:

    It’s interesting how some shows get chance after chance to find the right mix while others get about three episodes then get the ax. Body of Proof has always been one of those shows that has never been able to get things quite right. It’s watchable, but not great. For me, this show has always been something that kicks around on the DVR until there’s nothing else to watch or space starts to fill up and I just delete it. I was kind of glad it was renewed, but I wouldn’t have been heartbroken if it didn’t make it.

    I really doubt that trying to change this show into Castle or Bones is going to be successful, but we’ll see. I thought season 2 was much weaker than season 1 (which was mediocre). I think the show needs something but I’m skeptical that these cast changes will make things better. I’ll probably give it a chance in the fall — it pretty much depends on what’s airing opposite it.

  41. MaryAnn says:

    I would far rather they had gotten rid of Jeri Ryan, Windell Middlebrooks and the character of Megan’s mother than the three they let go. And they didn’t need a new cast — they needed new writers who could make the cast they have shine.

  42. Abbey88 says:

    Horrid changes. RIP Body of Proof. (Hey Megan…lose the false eyelashes, they are absurdly unprofessional on a physician, not to mention completely distracting.)

  43. Ram510 says:

    This is good news! I wouldn’t compare this to the disaster season 2 of Harry’s Law. All 3 of those character were awful especially Sam. They tried to make Peter the “Casanova” type and he just didn’t fit. To me he would seem better fit to play a “dad” role on a ABC Family drama. Bud was ok when we found out about his personal life, but that was only a couple times. They made the right cuts and I’m actually excited now for the new season

  44. Kenny Moorhouse says:

    Not happy that Peter is going – he could have survived the knife injury and continued to assist Megan – even if they cool it and the new cop stepped on his love interest. Looks like he needs to die from his injury for us fans to get closure, otherwise retiring him on his injury or just him leaving his post as a result of that finale incident won’t really wash with us. Please please please reconsider. Make him recover and return to his post please please please please please please.

  45. I think if the heads of the show had written the characters with better back stories and given them each some juicy conflict then they would’ve needed to make such drastic changes to save the show. The show was good the way it was (not the best) but it had so much potential and to me it looks like the heads of the show didn’t know how to manage such a huge cast of fantastic equally amazing actors. It was fantastic one week then completely weak the next. So inconsistent. And did anyone even realise some of the shows didn’t even follow story lines from week to week? I think i remember one where Lacy (megan’s daughter) worked with Peter on a school project and then the next week or week after Megan introduced Lacy to Peter… And they didn’t even know each other… BAD direction for the show.
    LAST THOUGHTS,, why bother trying to save a sinking ship?? they should’ve pulled the show and just started a new spin off show.

  46. Greenie says:

    “creative reboot”? *GROAN* also “…sort of impossible for a man who works under her to have a relationship with her.” ‘a man who works under her’? REALLY? *laughing so hard I am CRYING* I will really miss the guy who plays Peter, I just enjoyed his whole approach – even his looks, he looked really lived-in and like he had a good story to tell. Not too Hollywood.

  47. nitemar says:

    They should get rid of everyone else, including Megan, then start a totally new show.

  48. tvnewsplus says:

    My only question is why it needed to be so drastic. One minute they are there and the next their not. I am happy Jeri Ryan stays put.

  49. jj says:

    I was rooting for BOF to get renewed. Was happy it got renewed although a little disappointed with the 13 episodes. Now I wish I hadn’t. No doubt in my mind there will be no Season 4.

  50. Boiler says:

    Interesting comments from some of you about how bad the show is and its numbers. First why did you watch it if you didn’t like it?? Second this show has had very good total numbers and is one of ABC’s best over seas performers. I guess they didn’t hit the “valued” demographic which is stupid since that isn’t a valid one anymore anyway. The country is getting older. Maybe TVLine can do something around that??!! I liked the show as it was and hope these guys who purport to know what they are doing really do!!