Castle and Bones are the Same Exact Show, Conan O'Brien Alleges (Video)

Conan O’Brien watches a lot of television — which may or may not explain why he thinks Castle and Bones are one and the same.

The veteran dramas were just two of Conan‘s many small-screen targets Wednesday, in a segment that found the TBS late-night host providing apt (and not-so-apt) descriptions for a few of television’s long-serving hits.

Sure, his dig at NCIS‘ allegedly older audience lacks originality, but is his comparison of Guy Fieri to ISIS really that far off? You decide!

Watch “What Conan’s Watching” above, then sound off in the comments and let us know which synopses you find all-too-true or false.

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

48 Comments
  1. kmw says:

    Very funny. although I like the other show comparisons better.

  2. Remembertables says:

    It’s not! Castle is a copy and turned in a stupid fantasy show, Bones is more intelligent, more articulated, a deeper show.

    • David4 says:

      How is Bones ‘deep’?

    • Tica says:

      Castle is a better show!!!

    • Well, this is the weirdest show rivalry I’ve ever seen. I watch both shows. They’re good shows, but they aren’t great shows and they never were. Castle has better leads, Bones has a better supporting cast. Castle is better with creating unique cases of the week, Bones is really creative with their dead bodies. Both shows force drama at inopportune moments that no one is happy with (Booth’s gambling lies, Beckett moving out). I always wonder why both shows have such fervent fanbases when they’re basically the instant ramen noodles of TV shows. Cheap, quick, easy and tasty enough on occasion, even if what you really want is a nice steak.

      • LIly says:

        Castle has better leads? You say that like it’s a fact. it’s not. Personally, I have never been able to ship Castle and Beckett romantically, I just don’t see that between them. What castle has is less quirky characters, while Booth and Brennan are very quirky, especially Brennan, which could make them less likeable for the general public, but that doesn’t make them ‘better’. The mere fact that David and Emily have a really strong friendship off the set and get on really well together adds Bones something that Castle doesn’t have. I’m not saying which show is better, I have my opinion on that of course, but I’m not looking to start a fight, but you can’t say which leads are better like it’s a fact.

        • I can if people are able to distinguish what an opinion is on their own. I don’t know much about how the actors are in real life, but as characters, Booth and Brennan can be pretty annoying. Booth is a temperamental, Republican blowhard with misplaced loyalty/obedience towards the government. Brennan is a coldly analytical, socially inept, condescending, arrogant narcissist. Part of the fun in the show is seeing these two opposites buck into each other, but that doesn’t mean I have to like either of them. With Castle, the two leads are just bursting with charisma, intelligence and they have much better chemistry together. If you don’t agree, fine, vote for someone else in the Internet Comments Section Awards.

          • LIly says:

            like I sad, Castle has less quirky characters, thus less “problematic” for the general public, I think that’s what they call it on the internet. I’ve always seen more chemistry between Booth and Brennan, however let’s agree that that’s subjective. To each their own.Can’t be turned into a fact.

          • One person’s idea of quirky is another’s version of obnoxious. I prefer to get my quirk on with Crazy Ex-Girlfriend or Jane The Virgin.

          • anon says:

            And you just ignore all Booth & Brennan’s good points to drag them, yet ignore all Kate & Richards flaws to elevate them….

            whatever….give me a man any day that has fought for his country, who would die for his friends & family in a heartbeat – B&B couple who have been beaten and broken many times and are still standing & united & together in love.

            You keep on watching Castle through your biased eyes and I’ll keep watching & loving my flawed & very human Bones leads. OK.

          • Heh, okay dude, I’ll bite. Brennan is a crazy smart world class leader in her field and Booth is an expert marksman and an effective FBI agent on and off the field. But while these traits can influence their personality, their strengths are more plot/detail oriented and tell less about their character than their day to day interactions. Don’t give me that martyr crap about serving his country. First of all, no, he didn’t, he’s fiction and served his country just as much as Randy Quaid in Independence Day, second of all, he constantly has to question his beliefs because of numerous cases where the supposed good soldier, good cop, good whatever person he happens to relate to ends up being a corrupt person that abused their power and murdered when they got caught.
            .
            While Rick can be buffoonish, nerdy and scheming and Kate can be brash and singularly focused to the point she becomes cold and pushes away the people she cares about most, these flaws make them considerably more human than the Bones leads. Booth and Brennan never feel like real people. Brennan is like a robot and Booth is like an angrier, more attractive version of Donald Trump. If it wasn’t for Hodgins and the interns, I would have stopped watching a long time ago. They had an out at the end of last season. A good out. Not a masterpiece, but a good note to end on before these sour lawsuits popped up. I’ll watch both shows to the end and I don’t care if you prefer one over the other for whatever stupid reasons. I started watching because both leading men came from astronomically superior Joss Whedon shows and I really hope both of them do something more interesting with their careers afterwards.

          • anon says:

            “First of all, no, he didn’t, he’s fiction and served his country just as much as Randy Quaid in Independence Day,”

            And everything else you hate on Booth & Brennan is fiction too…..you see the fly in your logic?

            So I say that Booth served and it gets relegated to fiction but you can get to bang on about their faults and its not fiction? Mmmm OK.

            Within the show Booth went to several wars, he served his country it isn’t any less fiction than Kate being a cop.

          • anon, the difference is that you’re using something that happened off-screen before the show started as a defense for what we’re seeing now. That’s like saying Walter White was an interesting character because of all those years he spent in as an unappreciated high school teacher or that Captain Picard’s life as an aristocratic French child is worth exploring. No. Backstory is supposed to inform the present, not make up for it.

          • anon says:

            No, we saw Booth at war in flashbacks in S4 and when he went to Afghanistan in S6 in realtime – these events occurred onscreen

            Again fly in your logic

          • Oh, war flashbacks? Now that you mention it, that means they should give this show all the awards. Booth isn’t just an angry stupid jerk, he’s a war hero and a role model for children because they showed him killing people in one episode in a flashback. You’re just being pedantic now. Am I supposed to apologize for having the typical amount of enthusiasm most people have for the show? Are you happy they made Zack a murderer? You don’t think it’s hilarious that there was a Booth is missing storyline after there was a Castle is missing storyline last year and at the same time a Beckett is missing storyline? To each their own.

        • Mary says:

          For me it´s a fact that Castle has better leads, in terms of acting skills. IMO, both N.F. and S.K. are better actors than D.B. and E.D.
          As for romantically, I also find C/B more believebly than B/B – probably because, like you said, when I look at them I can only think of friendship:)

      • Jake says:

        Exactly, couldn’t have said it better. I watch both and don’t get the rivalry either. Neither is the greatest show on TV, and both have gone downhill with bad plotlines.

      • abz says:

        I wonder too. I can’t believe sometimes how obsessed people are with them.
        He isn’t wrong though. I’ve been watching both shows and the similarities are undeniable. Neither show is quality television. They’re just cookie cutter. Seriously, I actually put them on sometimes while I do laundry because I know I don’t need to pay much attention because every episode almost feels the same. And don’t get me started on some of the supporting characters of both shows. They range from annoying to extremely dull. Both shows have their entertaining moments, but for me neither show is that great anymore.
        In the end, if there are people who still enjoy it then fine, whatever. I don’t need to call for it to be cancelled and take it away from them. But I can’t deny how frustrating it can be seeing aging shows like these get renewed season after season, while a show like Person of Interest is given a shortened season or The Leftovers is renewed for only a third and final season? I just finished the first season of The Leftovers and am about to start the second and it was superb. The acting, the emotion. Justin Theroux. (seriously how wasn’t he or the show nominated today?). I was so bummed to hear the news today about its renewal/cancellation.

    • Pearl Healy says:

      I love bones. I love castle although both can be silly ,and both serious they are both one of a kind. People can get to fed up with the same old same old. I dread bones coming to an end i won’t be able to manage without my weekly fix. David Boreanaz and Emily Deschanel are perfect together. And o can’t imagine life without them.

      • Lyn says:

        Apples to oranges. Castle is a rejigged Thin Man. Bones is a teachable forensic show with several strong female regulars. IMO Bones has the potential to inspire girls to go for the sciences in higher education. I don’t actually care for Booth & Bones and watch for the rest of the cast. As for Castle, I’ve been getting tired of the silly man-child that is Rick and wish they would let him grow up a bit. Here too, the supporting cast is more interesting to me.

    • Mary says:

      “More deeper show”? Yeah, right, in what universe?! And it´s a copy of Crossing Jordan, so zero for originality. And, just to be clear, I´m a Bones fan – but doesn´t mean I can´t see clear:)

    • S says:

      Sweetie, I hate to break it to you, Bones is a copy of many things that came before it. Castle can’t copy Bones. They’re called tropes for a reason.

  3. anon says:

    Conan needs to get his eyes tested…

  4. Livus48 says:

    That is totaly wrong in so many way……Can’t even be compared…….

    • Stacey says:

      Very similar in so many ways, down to show structure and sometimes storylines. Although one can say BONES has done it’s lead duo which they only put together finally because the lead actress got pregnant and they decided to write in the pregnancy much better than the way Castle is treating it’s lead duo this season. The only difference between Bones and Castle is that Castle started off silly and offbeat in Season One, and then went deadly serious. And BONES started off dead serious with a side of silly, but now blends both silly and serious but more on the side of silly majority of the time where Castle goes most of the time serious to detriment to characters and stories. Bones does it’s supporting cast much better than Castle does… And this is from someone who watches BOTH, and loves both!

      • Liz says:

        Hmm, that’s interesting – I’ve never seen anyone say that Castle is serious most of the time. If anything, the bulk of criticism seems to stem from the fact that the show is so stuck on being silly that it’s sometimes to the detriment of the storylines that require a bit more drama.
        .
        Although, to this whole thing, I say: to each their own!

      • LIly says:

        You know, it’s not really true that they put Booth and Brennan together ONLY because of the pregnancy. Hart wanted them to get together much sooner but Fox didn’t think it’s a good idea. So that got postponed. But at the beginning of S6, Hart knew Booth and Brennan would get together, the only difference is the pregnancy… so they had to speed up things, without it, I imagine S7 would probably look like S5 of Castle (in a Bones style of course), but they would be together anyway.

        • Stacey says:

          True, but I remember at the time while the storyline looked like it was headed there especially once Hannah departed the scene and Booth and Brennan had that episode in the Blizzard where they acknowledge the obvious, but still I remember if hadn’t been for Emily’s pregnancy. They might slept together in the finale or a episode close to it, but it wasn’t clear whether they would have gotten together for real. They might have continued to dance around it. And dealt with how sex changed their dynamic… But Emily’s pregnancy allowed for a new story to open, and for them to put them together if they wanted to write in the pregnancy. I think they were destined for sex that season, but not guaranteed coupledom.

          • LIly says:

            Well, I have to disagree with that. I mean, they hadn’t been dancing around that for 6 years to just have sex for it to not lead anywhere (at least for some time). I believe it would take some time for them to get used to it all and work things out. But after everything they had been through, with all their history (Booth’s “I knew right from the beginning” etc, and Brennan’s long journey to give a serious relationship a chance.. I mean, if it weren’t for Hannah, Brennan seriously looked like she would have told Booth they she wants to give them a chance at the beginning of S6, but then he told her about Hannah so that didn’t happen, maybe not, but I swear I saw something in her face..) so I honestly don’t believe that once these two would finally discovered how it is like when they are “together”, that they wouldn’t absolutely go for it. I think Hart even said that if it weren’t for the pregnancy, they would be discovering what “being together means” or something like that, I don’t remember his words precisely, but they still would be together in their own way.

      • Joey says:

        The biggest difference in these two shows is the quality of the writers and runners. Bones has been pretty good 11 seasons worth. Castle this season is falling way off, just look at the ratings. The cooking show that took Castle time slot got better ratings than Castle fall finale in the 18-49 group. The big bold move that castle runners made( the split) is the cause for most of the problems, and it still goes on. The runners stated the split let them go places they could not go before, no thanksgiving and Christmas episodes and a good shot a being cancelled. The writers and runners of Bones might care about the fans a bit more. Now for the big elephant in the room, the baby, bones writers worked it out, Castle show runner Hawley said he does not know how they could make that work. That is the difference in quality of the writers and runners. Just maybe before this show gets canceled the show runners will give the 77% of the fans that wanted a baby Castle that.

  5. David4 says:

    This is why he’s no longer on a real channel.

  6. LIly says:

    Oh my god, please, don’t. Let’s not create a war between Bones and Castle. I beg you! Castle fans prefers Castle. Bones fans prefers Bones. Both shows are good, to each their own.

  7. dancmh says:

    Bones is WAY WAY WAY more obnoxious.

  8. colig says:

    conan is an unwatchable imbecile who has never been funny.

  9. Bob says:

    Well Bones leads get along with each other while castles dosent anymore

    • Pat says:

      Exactly. Bones peeps just do what they are supposed to do. It’s called professionalism. We can’t see this in Castle for a long time.

  10. Debbie says:

    Can’t believe I sat through a 30 second commercial to watch that clip.

  11. ndixit says:

    What amuses me about the ‘old’ NCIS dig is that it still gets better demo numbers in its 13th year than all new shows get! I mean the last NCIS ep scored a 2.2 or 2.1, I don’t remember and the hottest show of the fall, Blindspot, scored a 1.9 in its last ep.

  12. shadester says:

    Castle is funny and interesting. Bones is boring and needs to be cancelled.

  13. Lyn says:

    The greatest similarity is that each actor playing the title character has packed on the pounds. ED has had two children. NF has no excuse.

    • Really? says:

      Please post a picture of yourself, so we all may comment on how YOU should look–it appears you feel you are some expert on how and why people are gaining weight. I take it you are thin and extremely fit? I’ll wait for your picture…….

  14. Carrie says:

    Conan O’Brien is still on TV?