Fall TV Preview

Castle Season 8 Without Beckett Would Have Been 'Fundamentally Different,' Says New Showrunner

Castle Season 8 No Beckett

As TVLine wondered in our most recent 20-ish Questions column: Had Castle‘s Stana Katic not re-signed for Season 8 (as she did barely a week ago), what would the ABC drama possibly have looked like moving forward?

As luck would have it, we had opportunity to pose that very question to Alexi Hawley, who is returning to Castle as co-showrunner, alongside fellow series vet Terence Paul Winter.

“There’s always a Plan B,” Hawley said when asked if there was in place a means to abruptly write out Detective Kate Beckett, who as Season 7 closed was pondering both her professional (a run for state senate?) and personal futures. “But it would’ve been a fundamentally different show, and that would’ve been quite a mountain to climb.”

Acknowledging the obvious — that the Rick Castle/Kate Beckett relationship “is very much at the center of the show” — Hawley, whose Castle resume includes a Seasons 2 through 4 run as a producer, opening with a stint as executive story editor, said with a laugh, “I’m thrilled not to have to come up with a show that doesn’t include Stana. That’s a high-wire act.”

As for what he and Winter do have on tap for Season 8, as they replace showrunner David Amann (who himself succeeded series creator Andrew W. Marlowe a year ago), Hawley said, “It’s very, very early days,” especially given that he’s still “closing up shop” on Fox’s recently cancelled The Following (where he served as co-showrunner).

“At this point, we haven’t even sat down and talked about it yet,” he said. “Fundamentally, Beckett and Castle’s relationship has room to have movement in it. So for me — and I can’t speak for Terence — we’re just excited to go in there and see what the future holds.

“ABC just really wants to tell good stories,” Hawley noted. “And I think there’s still a lot of great stories to be told.” (With reporting by Kim Roots)

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

151 Comments
  1. Lena says:

    It would have been a totally different show … It’s not Castle without Beckett.

  2. Len says:

    as long as the future story does not have her running for office, because she would get EVISCERATED with negative campaigning by her opponents.

    she was MARRIED for 15years..and didn’t know it..they’d paint her as a brainless bimbo. and due to that, she was a serial cheater on said husband,
    cheated on her taxes for 15 years (filing as single and not as married filing separately)
    was accused of murder, was a wanted felon by police when she fled custody,
    she got FIRED from her job at the FBI due to leaking classified information to the press,
    her ex-husband- that she did not know she was married to- is an ex-con,
    etc…
    her current husband was accused of murder,
    he escaped from police custody, was wanted and was wanted for that as well,
    disappeared for 3 month of their wedding day
    has close personal friendships to known organized crime figures
    is a notorious- albeit former- playboy, etc.

    her opponents would have a FIELD DAY.

    so give it 1 MAYBE 2 episodes of thinking about it and then,,,say NO, not running

    • Gern Blanston says:

      Wow. You’ve thought way too much about this.

      • Len says:

        Those were just off of the top of my head thoughts about what a political run would look like IRL. i mean they COULD have fixed that previous married fiasco with 5 lines of dialogue in 6×23 (when they met with the lawyer- stolen ID= it was not HER that got married but the fastest way she could have married castle was to get that nofault divorce anyway)

        i am a fan, and YES i hated 6×23’s one and done messup of kate, but we got what we got and to pursue a political career with that sort of…baggage…should get taken off the table fast.

        as for fun stories, yes i want episodes like seasons 2-4,,,just with them married, so a bit more romance, touching and kissing..

        • David4 says:

          It’s New York, people would have went ‘ehh’ and moved on.

          It’s not like she is an anti gay priest who was looking for sex on a gay hook up app or something.

        • m3rcnate says:

          Lol i completely agree with you but to play DevilsAdvocate, i think potentially public knowledge (or at least they could make it so when running) is they both diffused a NUCLEAR bomb in the middle of downtown NYC, saving millions of lives. Harder to prove but they also stopped WWIII from starting, and a bunch of other stuff that are so insanely good that it could shock people how amazing she is.
          .
          But yeah you are right, while writing the show the writers probably dont notice it but when you look back, the plots and story arcs all listed like that make the show seem like a soap opera. I mean the show started off with her just a pretty detective who’s mother was murdered and Castle was a popular mystery novel writer who didnt know his dad and had witnesses a murder as a child in the woods. Now looking back at everything they have done… yeah lol, neither of them would be allowed within 100 yards of a police station unless under arrest. They have done more than Jack Bauer on 24 lol.

      • OC Guy says:

        And has way too much time on his hands.

    • Jess says:

      But Richard Castle lives in New York City with his wife Senator Kate Beckett and their three children.

    • SO says:

      Len, this is a TV show & have had many different writers. Name one person who is perfect! I sometimes forget things previously said or done, don’t you? As long as it’s enjoyed, that’s the main thing. With the variety of episodes, there is always someone who won’t like certain ones. You just can’t usually please everyone all the time.

    • DL says:

      It’s television! Castle’s entire premise is implausible. Silly to think of it in real world terms.

    • KCC says:

      People get elected with a lot of baggage, especially to a locally elected office. That stuff wouldn’t matter much unless she ran for a state wide or national office. The really problem would be Beckett’s unwillingness to compromise. Unless they change her character, she’s guaranteed to fail or at less be very unhappy. I don’t really want to see either of those scenarios.

      • Beckstle says:

        As a person who lives in NYC, I can say that even the darn city council elections have newspapers going through a candidate’s personal history with a fine-toothed comb, the state senate elections – even more so. This would absolutely come up.

        What’s really dumb is that this political vetting didn’t turn up that 15-year marriage to a criminal element. That’s now the NYPD, the U.S attorney general’s office/FBI and the state whatever party’s political political machine missing something that was supposedly plain as day when she filed for her marriage license.

        From a point of logic it’s more likely that the information that came up in 6×23 was planted by the people who kidnapped Castle – in order to separate him from Kate and make him easier to abduct. That would explain why Beckett thought what happened in Vegas didn’t count – it didn’t – and why major background checks before and after have never found it.

        This isn’t over thinking things – it’s just thinking. That story in 6×23 has never made sense. Even the idea of Castle following Beckett around, as implausible as it is, has a logical explanation given: his friendship with the major got him special privileges. That’s been a consistent story – to the point that the major was forced to abandon his dream of being governor by the people who wanted Castle to continue following Beckett around. As it stands now, the Beckett 1st marriage story doesn’t add up and it’s annoying. They should just have it come out that it wasn’t true and erase that whole 6×23 mess.

        • CastleBuzz says:

          This is exactly why 6×23 did not bother me when it was first shown. I assumed the ludicrous marriage was faked and that Beckett’s and Castle’s enemies had gotten Rogan to cooperate. Then when Rick was kidnapped, I fully anticipated that would be revealed during the resolution of his disappearance. I waited patiently at first, then increasingly impatiently throughout season 7 for this to be explained and wrapped into the larger conspiracy of why Castle had to be kidnapped on their wedding day. Instead we got the ridiculous Sleeper episode. I hope it’s the Sleeper mess that’s erased in season 8 and the new show runners figure out how to “fix” 6×23 and explain it all in a simple, clear way that does not involve the CIA and terrorists, but does relate back to what we know about these characters and their existing enemies.

          • Beckstle says:

            Good luck with that. It’s obvious they never had a real story for the kidnapping – it was just a ploy to break up the wedding and they planned to figure out what happened along the way. Marlowe’s comments after 6×23 aired were very clear that the 1st wedding idea was meant to stick. Plus if it had been his intention that it was faked, then he would have thrown that into “Sleeper” as well. The only way to clean it up the mess is to nullify the first marriage of Beckett. That unbelievable marriage license thing is what sets everything off. While there isn’t a simple, clear way to fix that whole train wreck – at least the subsequent events don’t all occur because of ridiculous coincidence. Then the character remains solid and storylines won’t keep tripping over this nonsensical plot move. However, trying to fix everything else is asking the new showrunners to explain both Sleeper and 6×23….That’s way too much – and a waste of time. A quick mention in one case – maybe they have to talk to a CIA agent for something – reveals Beckett was never married – there’s a “wow” moment, and it’s done. Fixing everything else is at least one or two episodes. The other events of Rick’s kidnapping don’t mess with character traits or cannon much – it’s just a very stupid and implausible story to have put everyone through, one in which they screwed up Beckett’s storyline to do.

    • Dr. says:

      Wired, too much dumb stuff!

    • tv fan says:

      you forgot about his dad being a-spy who was supposed to have killed three guards! and ties with the mobsters, which got him into trouble-kicked out of the 12th! everything would be out in the open and then see the reall core characters

    • Not much difference between Hillary Clinton and Kate Beckett running for office.

  3. Heidi says:

    If ABC wanted to tell good stories, they should have kept Forever. Just sayin’.

  4. c-mo says:

    I’m so happy we won’t have to climb that hill along with Alexi and TPW!

  5. James says:

    This is a complete waste of a story with no substance.

    • lkh says:

      Kinda agree. Talked to a guy (the new show runner) and he had nothing to say. :[ At least there’s no question mark this time :]

      • Just one thing says:

        Beyond stating the obvious, I think this confirms that Katic was actually very close to walking – for whatever reason(s). And that’s worth pondering, even if it will soon be in the rear view mirror of TV news. :-)

        • lkh says:

          I dunno. Perhaps, but there’s something there we’ll probably never know. She may have been close to leaving, but there’s something else…maybe how the negotiations were handled. I don’t want to put this whole thing on her.

          • Just one thing says:

            That’s the thing… the fact that she was close to walking away doesn’t necessarily make her the bad guy. And for precisely the reason you state: we don’t know what went on or how it was handled.
            .
            There are only a select few things that would have been unreasonable of her to request, and I doubt she made those (i.e. more money than Fillion, a lead role in the next Marvel flick, two-day work weeks, etc.).

          • lkh says:

            JOT-I guess when I said I didn’t want to put the whole thing on her I wasn’t really talking about blame per se, I really meant that her signing on the dotted line might not have been the whole story–and really I haven’t a clue.

        • CastleBuzz says:

          It’s more interesting to ponder that Nathan Fillion was willing to continue the show without Stana Katic. What does that say?

          • Just one thing says:

            Eh, I don’t know if it’s worth worrying about that anymore. But I feel you.

          • Jake says:

            He’s not married to her in real life, they are two different people with their own careers. Why would Fillion have to stop working because Katic couldn’t negotiate the deal she wanted?

          • CastleBuzz says:

            Reply to Jake: Just saying that if ABC was willing to go ahead with renewing Castle with Nathan alone of the two leads, then that means he had more power. If he really cared about the show (as it’s been presented for seven years now) and had Stana’s back, he could have used some of that influence to help get her an acceptable deal sooner. It’s very possible, though I think improbable, that he may have tried to help with her negotiations. I’m certainly not saying he had to “give up his job.”

          • carbono says:

            Lol!! 2 years ago a bunch of stanatics lambasted Fillion for skipping a day of work in an attempt to get a 4 day work week. Oh!! He’s screwing over the crew!! Now he signs a contract ensuring that the crew still have jobs for another year & he’s the bad guy for willing to go on without Stana!! Do you hypocrites EVER think before you speak??!! As I keep saying I love Stana too but cripes does she have the most idiotic & petty fans! I’d imagine if she’s as saintly as some of you people seem to think she is, she’s probably quite embarrassed by you guys.

          • CastleBuzz says:

            Carbono: if you think for a second that NF signed in order to ensure the crew had jobs, you’re the idiotic fan. He signed because he had no other realistic options and got a contract that met his demands, whatever they were. And he had every right to do so. It’s also obvious to me that he was willing to head a reconceived show without SK. And that too is well within his right. Just not particularly conducive IMO to a happy set next season.

  6. Liz says:

    Well I wouldn’t watch Castle without Beckett, that’s for sure.

    • John NYC says:

      I watch a lot of shows that don’t have the Beckett character so I’d give it a chance as I like the other actors.

      Would the creators rise to the challenge? That’s part of what would be interesting to see. Maybe. maybe not.

      • Just one thing says:

        Your argument (?) always makes me laugh. Like, it literally makes no sense.
        .
        Many people wouldn’t watch Bones without Booth. Many people wouldn’t watch Supernatural without Sam. Many people won’t watch Grey’s Anatomy without Derek.
        .
        Please try to use your logic on them. See how far it gets you.

        • thisismenow says:

          I agree and I’d like to point out death blows do happen when a major character is removed. On in particular is when Corey died and they had to remove the character on Glee. The show took a death blow and I think it spent a season and a half in the fractions.

        • John NYC says:

          Point being it would be a different show, acknowledged, one that could be judged on its merits. Just like any other show that doesn’t have Beckett in the script.

          • lkh says:

            you need to stop… I watch the news and it doesn’t have Beckett in it, I watch the weather report and, guess what, no Beckett, I watch the Padres and, well, yes, she does play right field–anyway, of course the character is part of the ‘Castle’ series. I’m going to have to jump in and explore/fault your logical (illogical?) musings.

          • Just one thing says:

            LOL

          • John NYC says:

            Hey stating the obvious is just what it takes at times eh?

          • CastleBuzz says:

            It would be a different show and therefore should not have proceeded with the same name. Castle, the show, doesn’t merely have “Beckett in the script.” She is central to the story, the premise, the whole thing. Without her, Castle — the show and the man — would just be empty shells.

          • KCC says:

            John NYC-I agree with you. While it might be the exception, some shows have continued to thrived after a major character leaves. Cheers after Diane left is a perfect example. The show was based on Sam and Diane as romantic leads. No way that could survive without Diane. Guess again. They brought in Rebecca and the show continued to succeed for several more seasons. Of course for every Cheers there are dozens other shows that fail, but it could have been done. We’ll never know now and I’m thankful we won’t, but I would have given it a chance without Beckett. All it would take is a willingness to keep an open mind and allow the “new” show develop as you would for a brand new show without a history.

      • Alex says:

        “I watch a lot of show without Beckett character” uh ?? So am I but that doesn’t meen I would want to watch Castle without her.

        • John NYC says:

          And no one would likely force you to.

          I’d have been interested to see what they came up with. The cast is one I like and the characters ones I’m fond of. So a small risk as I see it.

          • DarkDefender says:

            I agree, John NYC.
            .
            While I love the Caskett dynamic and I am super glad we don’t have to see a Castle without Beckett.. I too would have tuned in to see what they did with it and would have stayed if it was done well.

    • Cassie says:

      I watch Castle because of Beckett, it would not only be a different show, it would be a show not worthy of my precious time.

  7. Nayme says:

    I love this show please keep up the good work. May God bless you for this really great show.

  8. Jess says:

    Castle season 8 without Beckett would have been ‘a train wreck,’ says any loyal fan.

    • Kristine says:

      Sadly, the show is already a train wreck. I hope that they can shape it up for season 8 or I’ll be gone after few episodes. I’d rather watch the older seasons (1-5) in syndication.

  9. Kim R says:

    I wish they could make the whole “mystery writer has to thwart terrorist attack” go away. Not my favorite plot development. :)

    • Lizo says:

      Same. I mean, at least it had a sort of believable resolution, but the show shouldn’t have taken that route to make a season-long arch.

  10. Johanna says:

    How I pictured the show without Stana. Beckett is murdered in the premiere and then Castle goes on a season long (13 episode) arc to find her killer. Easy.

    • Maryann says:

      Yes, that would work, but it would be a much darker show and it would likely have to be the final season because all the shippers would bail.

  11. dman6015 says:

    It would have been an early cancellation of Season 8, because NO ONE would watch Castle without Beckett. Period.

    • John NYC says:

      I would.

      • Fran says:

        I would to. It would be different for sure, but I also enjoy all the other characters on the show so I’d still give it a go. Sorry you’re getting flak.

        • John NYC says:

          Thanks. A fine collection of actors in roles that they have grown into with a creative team that has entertained us with some good stuff: what’s the risk in seeing what they could produce absent one of their, certainly, previously central characters?

          Better bet than some newbie show with unknown leads, unheard of writers with some lightly pitched “new” concept. How are there no comments on this. IMHO. Other’s mileage varies. Which is what keeps those 500 channels humming.

          The flack? Not my first time in the interwebs. 😋

          • John NYC says:

            Autocorrect strikes again. Lol

            So: that others have a different viewpoint? That’s what all those channels are for.

  12. Just one thing says:

    So, is this finally enough evidence to quell the conspiracy theories that Stana Katic signed weeks ago and ABC (and the press) kept it underwraps?
    .
    I have my theories, of course, but am still very curious to know what held things up.

    • Jim Jimmison says:

      This is no evidence of that at all. Stana could easily have given tact agreement before leaving for her wedding that all things being equal, she would come back. I can easily see that ABC, in the absence of something in the storyline finale for the fandom to obsess about, would ask to hold off the announcement to get another bite of the publicity cherry after the announcement of Nathan’s return. I’m more intersted to hear why Andrew Marlowe wrote that lovely final episode in such a potentially final way? Was it because he and David Amann planned to leave and didn’t know who would carry on – if anyone? That episode must have been written two to three months ago. Seriously, they weren’t talking about season eight possibilities with ABC and didn’t know the way things were blowing by Jan-Feb? What would Paul Lee say he wanted it around for years yet if the network was teetering?
      Here’s a different conspiracy theory for you: not through the whole year do I recall Stana mentioning David Amann’s name, or referring to his work on the show. Indeed near the end of the season she (perhaps pointedly) posted an older pic of herself with Rob Bowman and Andrew Marlowe, the two production people on the show she seemingly admires most. The actual showrunner at that point was apparently not in her thoughts.
      If she was doubtful of her return, it could easily have been because she didn’t like the way Mr Amann allowed a dumbed-down Castle and made Beckett horribly insecure. Confirmation that the new showrunners would presumably give the show some back-to-basics return to the scintillating storytelling and great characterisations of the first three or four seasons was perhaps all the news she needed? Her tweet seemed to suggest that (though with the language used, I’m not even sure she actually wrote it, but had her agents do it for her).
      I’m certainly looking forward to less silliness in eight, though the last couple of seasons have had some outstanding episodes along the way.
      Oh, and by the way: I reckon no political career for Beckett – yet. She’ll choose the precinct, make captain and the family will be back together like always.
      Though perhaps Penny Johnson Jerald might start to feel a bit worried…

      • CastleBuzz says:

        Unless you’re willing to believe that Marlowe, Miller, Katic, and everyone else who claimed they didn’t know what was going on are liars, you have to assume Season 8 was in doubt until after the finale was written and probably even filmed. We’re not likely to ever know what really happened and when it happened. Still, I agree that Jim Jim’s “theory” may have some substance to it.

        • Just one thing says:

          I think there absolutely could be truth to Jim’s theory. I just don’t think anyone was all that confident about the show’s future, or how things would shake out.
          .
          But I’m all for fellow speculators joining in. It’s interesting now, but like I said, will soon be a non-issue moving forward.

  13. kmw says:

    Castle would not last very long without her . I know some shows have gone on without their original lead or leads( Cheers went along just fine without ShellyLong and SVU went on without Cristopher Meloni to a lesser degree of success) but in this case the show is heavily dependent on Nathan Fillion and Stana Katic’s chemistry. Like Bones if you took EITHER one away the show wouldn’t last. I also think it is far too soon to ask what they have in store, they haven’t had the chance to get settled yet.

    • Maria says:

      I agree with this. But I thought Cheers was just “okay” without Shelley Long. Sam and Diane were all kinds of wonderfully messed up together.

    • Matt says:

      Ya the whole show really is castle and Becketts story without one it’s stupid castles not like ncis Greys where the story revolves around soany characters

  14. K says:

    Castle would have sunk without Beckett/Stana. Nothing makes me happier then Alexi joining Winter as producer

  15. Patricia Jacobs says:

    Without Beckett, there simply is no ‘Castle.’

  16. Ethel says:

    Would like to see more of Ryan and Espo as it is getting tiresome them showing up on cue with vital information. They need to do more. And what happened to the chief for most of the season?

  17. Matthew Weber says:

    It wouldn’t have been possible, really. The show is based on the premise of a writer following his muse. If the muse is gone, they just have a show about a writer. This show is so great because of three things. First the excellent character progression (the difference between s1 Beckett and s7 Beckett is almost startling). Two, the great pillar episodes (setup/countdown, 47 seconds, etc), and third, the chemistry between the two leads. Take one of the leads away, and it just wouldn’t work. They’d have to come up with a new premise.

  18. lame says:

    I really wish Winter/Hawley well. They are being asked to right a sinking vessel. I would like to see them make a bold move, like a change to a 24 style comprehensive story, using 12 complete episode. It wouldn’t matter if Beckett becomes a senator, a 12 episode thriller is just as good. A good complete story trumps everything.

    • Just one thing says:

      I think they’re better off than Amann was this time last year.
      .
      The pieces will likely never all fit together perfectly, but I still think ABC had a hand in, or at least had some indirect influence over, how season six ended.
      .
      I think Marlowe knew he was on his way out in March 2014, that ABC had given them an ultimatum of some kind to up the ante, raise the stakes in a major way, whatever… and I think they told him they wanted to see creative changes for the following season. ABC probably promised them that things would be handled delicately, with respect to their development deal.
      .
      I think Marlowe and Miller negotiated their way back into some form of creative control by playing Shonda Ball with the series finale.
      .
      Enter The Wedding That Wasn’t, which not only shocked and annoyed fans, but also probably Katic, who was already doing her season-ending maudlin thing, but who likely knew (along with the rest of the cast/crew) that Marlowe and Miller weren’t gonna be the main captains if the show was renewed for Season 7.
      .
      So, following the Season 6 finale, Amann was left to placate Katic over the summer, placate the fans and reporters in interviews, placate the network when they deigned to pay attention, AND placate Marlowe and Miller, who were still hovering in the wings throughout his new tenure.
      .
      At the end of the day, I think Katic is still incredibly loyal to Marlowe and Miller. And regardless of what she may have thought or said behind closed doors about the show’s progress, I think she might have been perturbed by the notion of Marlowe and Miller’s baby being taken away from them — twice. And, not being a writer or grip, but actually #2 on the call sheet, she actually had the luxury of expressing that concern.
      .
      I still think ABC pressed for “The Season of Castle,” for whatever reason and to whatever end that’s now probably moot.
      .
      I also think it was time for a new creative regime. Without Katic, Winter/Hawley probably still would’ve made Castle smart and entertaining. But with all the current players on the field, there’s a shot at ending the series on a high note.

      • CastleBuzz says:

        Reply to JOT’s comment: “Without Katic, Winter/Hawley probably still would’ve made Castle smart and entertaining.” …… They might have succeeded in creating a show that did not resemble the Castle of the past seven years. To do that, though, they would have had to bridge a huge gap without Beckett as well as change the character of Castle drastically. Whatever they did to get rid of Beckett would have affected Castle so much that all the lightness of his character would have been gone, all the child-like qualities, all the humor, and all the laughter. Imagine the episode of Driven going on for half a season without Castle being found, only reverse the roles. Dark doesn’t even begin to describe the tone of the resulting show.

        • Just one thing says:

          That totally would have been the logical route to take Castle’s trajectory as a character arc, but there’s no guarantee they would’ve gone that route.
          .
          Castle plays a certain role on ABC’s slate as a specific genre hybrid. I don’t know if ABC would have necessarily wanted to go ultra dark. They have plenty other shows that toe that line.
          .
          Thankfully we will never have to know! :-)

  19. Mery says:

    No Castle without Beckett i ‘m.so happy she signed it would be the end of my favorite show

  20. T says:

    The most refreshing thing about the comments from Alexi Hawley is that he spoke in clear, to the point English. No “mythology”, no “fun”, no “complicated”. The show sounds better already.

  21. JImN says:

    Plan B was to collect unemployment.

  22. Luli says:

    I like him as the new co showrunner. He has written some of my favorite episodes, and was part of what I think were Castle’s strongest seasons (and my fav one, season 4). Excited for what’s coming next.

  23. Jennifer says:

    The show would never ever be the same and would not survive without Stana playing Beckett. She is just as important to the story line then Nathan is. I’m really glad that she resigned for season 8 because I really thought the last episode of this season was going to be my last. I would have to watch the reruns on TNT and get out my complete Castle series on DVD. So lucky like the writer said he doesn’t have to go down that road just yet. I’m also wondering since ABC wants Castle to go on for a few more years and both Stana and Nathan only signed on for 1 year how will the writers prepare for that ending. They need to start thinking about it because season 8 could possibly be the last one. Anyways that’s a year away, I can’t wait until September to see the whole gang together again.

  24. OC Guy says:

    The name of the show is after all, is Castle – It would have been interesting to see what they could have done with it.

    • Cassie says:

      That argument stopped being relevant one episode into season one.

      • CastleBuzz says:

        Absolutely, Cassie. I’d even make a case for earlier than that — the first scene of Stana Katic’s Beckett approaching the crime scene was enough to capture me!

    • Jim says:

      I’ll never understand the ” it’s called castle” line that some people make.

      Greys anatomy is not actually about her body parts. Bones is not just about a stack of bones. So why do some people make it so literal?! Haha sorry I just don’t get it. How do you watch a show that’s about the relationship of 2 people without 1 person? Huh…

      If the show was about castle because ” it’s called castle” uhm the what’s the use of all other characters? Just watch 42 minutes of staring at Nates face! I’m sorry but I think those who say that they’ll watch just Castle are his under aged fangirls and fanboys…not adults who appreaciate good written stories. Also I’d assume you’re under aged because of the childlike sentence “the name of the show is Castle”. Only an child can’t see how silly and unfounded this statement is.

      • Fran says:

        Hmm, I think your assumption that only children would watch the show if it was just Castle is what is silly and unfounded. What does that even mean? Im an adult and I’d be willing to give the show a chance. It wouldn’t be the same and would probably have to undergo a complete overhaul, but Id give it a go. Would I like it? Probably not. But I would give them a chance to see what they could do. And to be honest, the statement “The name of the show is Castle” isnt unfounded because, well… It is the name of the show. Obviously the show isn’t just about Castle and depends primarily on the relationship of both Castle AND Beckett, but come on. And I enjoy well-written shows too. But save for a few episodes, Castle hasn’t been smartly written for some time. We’ll aee of they can get back to that this season. Sorry, I just don’t see the need to be insulting to someone who has a different way of looking at things.

        • KCC says:

          I agree with everything you said. As much as people might identify with Beckett, everything is from Castle’s perspective. All the characters are in Castle’s world. It’s his family we see regularly. Except for the occasional scene of Beckett with her father, she has no family and the only reason he’s ever included is to talk about her relationship with Castle. While we get to see Castle playing poker with friends and talk to many people outside the police department, Beckett does not seem to know anyone she does not work with unless they’re involved with the current case she’s working on. Beckett had other romantic interests throughout the series but we rarely got to see her with them. Josh seemed to be her most serious romantic relationship on the show, outside of Castle, but we never saw them together unless Castle was there (yes, I remember they were in bed once, but Castle was on the phone). The show could have been called Scrambled Eggs but it still would be about Castle. Beckett is just the major force in his life at this point.

          • Cassie says:

            Castle is the narrator, Beckett is the muse, the show revolves around Beckett and Castle is telling her story. Take one of them out of the equation and you have a different show.

          • KCC says:

            Cassie: It could be the same show “Castle” but with a different muse. He had others inspire him before Beckett. She’s wasn’t the first, why should she be the last? If Beckett were to die or divorce him (he is kind of an ass sometimes), should Castle give up writing? It’s a good thing Stana Katic re-signed. I think I’d be in the minority of continuing to watch it without Beckett.

          • Cassie says:

            Women aren’t fungible, KCC

          • CastleBuzz says:

            Thank you, Cassie! Great word, fungible…Yes, KCC, the POV of the show is from Castle’s perspective. As Cassie says, he is the narrator. He can’t know what’s going on in her life if he is not there to see it, hence her “life” away from him hardly exists. At least that’s how it was for the first few seasons, at which time it might have been possible to “exchange” muses. However, since they have been together, the show revolves around the two of them. Any exchange now would only serve to prove Rick Castle to be the shallow, self-centered playboy-type he seemed to be at the beginning of Season 1. There is no “just” about Beckett being the major force in his life.”

          • KCC says:

            Cassie: fungible is a great word, but I said Castle would get a new muse, not a new woman. Castle’s writing mystery novels not love stories. He could be inspired to write mysteries by someone else and not degrade the memory of Beckett.

  25. Lou says:

    Nah, it wouldn’t have worked. The show is dependent on both, as it is about both. Without Beckett, what happens to the writer and his muse concept, also there’s be no interesting chemistry for fans to be hooked, no sexy saucy fun banter for us to laugh at…nah…wouldn’t work at all. Abc and the writers know this. This show isn’t an ensemble show like Greys, which showcases a lot of the other characters. Castle is a 2 lead show, I love the secondary cast but they are secondary. 70% of the show is abt castle and becketts interaction and growth.

    I’d say the only folks who would’ve watched may be Fillion fans, and that would be less than half of the current viewership…I’m going by firefly numbers. There’s a reason that was cancelled…lite viewership. And that is exactly what would happen if Katic didn’t return. Castle fans who watch for the premise would bail…obviously. It’s a different story. Fillion fans would watch anything with him…so abc could do a short season and get some money before canceling. Thank god Katic signed. I only hope that Fillion and Katic stick to their comments on ending on a high. Season 8 should be its last. End well.

  26. JImN says:

    The truth, nobody anywhere had a clue what to do with the show if Katic didn’t sign. They’d have had to rename it “Sponge Rick Square Pants.” To close?

    • Just one thing says:

      I think they would’ve figured it out. The show must go on.
      .
      They probably would’ve stunt-cast the hell out of nearly every episode with a Female Guest Star of the Week, and an occasional dude, mostly Friends of Fillion, and all funded by a fraction of Katic’s would-be salary.
      .
      Many fans would have gone ape. Many others would have stayed for the Captain. Most would’ve probably just silently tuned out.

    • CastleBuzz says:

      LOL over “Sponge Rick Square Pants.” Bottom line is that neither the Castle character could have gone it alone nor the actor who plays him.

  27. CastleBuzz says:

    I find it interesting that if indeed ABC and the new show runners were willing to go with a Plan B if Stana did not re-sign, then it means Nathan Fillion was too when he re-signed. So the original outcry from some parts of the fandom that Nathan was “throwing Stana under the bus” appear to be true. Unlike in Bones, where the leads have negotiated together for years now, having recognized the need for both their characters to make the show whole, Nathan may have been quite content to go it alone. If that’s the case, the new show runners just won’t have problems turning the show around, they may have some problems with turning their titular star around.

    • John NYC says:

      ?

      Sort of a stretch. Continuing with a job after a fellow employee leaves for their own reasons is hardly “throwing under a bus” that other employee. They freely choose to leave and others make different choices. Jobs being hard to come by choosing to stay employed seems a legitimate choice, even while another chooses differently for their own reasons if they were to do so.
      Had Stana left for her own private reasons, everyone else in the production is expected to walk away from their job? Odd linkage.

    • Jane says:

      Hhm so I guess NF doesnt walk the talk then…isn’t he the one that always said caskett is the engine of the show? So why go at it alone? When you know the show is about caskett? For money? He isn’t that desperate is he? Because doing the show that’s about something that will no longer exist ( caskett) is taking a huge leap and will probably end in cancelation. Why stoop so low like that? He should favour quality not just big bucks…He can get other jobs, he’s got joss whedon wrapped around his finger…he could easily have a job. He doesn’t need this job. Very strange revelation indeed. Unless of course this article is pure bull. Oh well, don’t care. Just glad we get both. Wouldn’t have bothered watching plan B frankly. No caskett no deal for me:) cheers all. Enjoy the summer.

      • DarkDefender says:

        Sure, I see your point..
        But consider this: NF waits to sign in solidarity with SK. She gets married off grid and waits to see where the show may go creatively before she decides. In the meantime, Amann is tanking and not coming back, he puts SK in doubt for signing and they have AWM/TEM step in to pen “Hollander’s Woods” which plays out like a satisfying SERIES finale.
        What keeps ABC from saying… F it! We are tired of waiting for SK to decide and we don’t have NF under contract… We need to secure our schedule (even though we like to be one of the last networks to announce our renewals) and let’s take a chance on “Forever”?
        I don’t know.. I loved Forever, but if I had to choose, I’d take Castle every time.

        • DarkDefender says:

          And NF signing gave SK time to think what she wanted and still have a show to come back to… Is my point.

  28. Glad to see the show is back for season eight, and Stana Katic is staying with the Castle show.

  29. Marten says:

    Everything I have read says Castle’s drop in ratings was due to the leadership and writing. The drop in ratings has been, like any other show, due to the marriage of the two main characters. When the tension of back and forth disappears, viewers lose interest. I don’t know why, but it has happened repeatedly. I liked Forever too.

  30. Please, just some believable writing, not ripoffs of stuff…

  31. Catherine Behr says:

    I agree more to write, look at past successful shows like Hart to Hart.

  32. Holly says:

    It would have worked if they had established from the get go that this show was about Castle, but it was always established that the show is about Castle shadowing Beckett, castle building a partnership with Beckett, castle falling in love with Beckett. So no, to suddenly take that away, no it won’t work. If Stana had left in season 1 maybe it would be possible to salvage without her…but now?? After 7 years of viewers cheering on caskett, watching their magic…suddenly no magic? No, people would eventually stop tuning in. You can’t build a magical love story for 7 years then bam oh sorry no more love story…now just watch this one guy crack jokes. Ludicrous.

  33. Jake says:

    Meh – all the writers would have to do is say that the plastic surgeon who worked with 3XK and kidnapped Beckett early this season and who she ended up killing was not really dead somehow. She kidnaps Beckett again and this time succeeds in changing Beckett’s appearance The cops break in, kill the surgeon for real this time, but Beckett’s appearance is now changed permanently. Voila, problem solved, Beckett can now be played by another actress!
    And don’t say that’s any worse than the lame wedding episode….

  34. Earl Kemp says:

    Write her out, reason being, what made the show so enjoyable was their REAL love affair and that is now over. What happened? Nathan & Stana won’t comment but a person can see that element is missing. It breaks my heart but if you research them you will find “the couple that should”. Look at pervious episodes, look at her eyes, you see love. Then in 706 observe them and what appears in them as she fights back her own tears, “I wish” is what I saw. The passion on camera is no longer there and that made the program.

  35. Bob Backus says:

    Oh bad news, the one who co-ran The Following now will run Castle? I guess I’ll expect many repetitive story lines like in the first season of The Following (the only season I could stomach) where some one gets captured/kidnapped, tries to escape, almost succeeds in escaping only to get re-captured. Not very creative.

    • Just one thing says:

      I don’t believe Hawley was in a showrunning capacity during the Following’s first season. IMDB has him credited as a supervising producer.

  36. Lois Layne says:

    Yes it would have been a different show but there is allways the possibility that it would have been a better show.

  37. mary kowalczyk says:

    I feel that having her run for US senate is a strange move we all saw how well the FBI storyline went. If they do have her run I just hope that it’s as real as politics can get and not some snowball, powder puff stuff. I’m saying go dark but not to dark make it hard on her to try and over come some negativity that will come her way. I have a strange feeling that when the new season opens up this fall that she’ll decided not to run after all there will be a murder case that she’ll try to help with and come to realize that being a detective is something she’s meant to do.

  38. CK says:

    I think they should have her be a captain and then, if they must, go for the senate arc. Because it would work better for the stories and them being together. Yes, Doyle told them about a book jacket that said Castle lived in New York with his wife Senator Beckett, but who knows what future was changed by other events. Let’s just hope for some great stories, none of the avoidance that was part of seasons 2-4 (generally speaking)

  39. Tom says:

    Who are we kidding, if ABC didn’t know Stana was going to come back, they would have axed the show. They got rid of the problems and got her to stay. There isn’t a show without her.

  40. aph1976 says:

    I think the TPTB knew that Stana Katic would sign a new contract but they might have been worried that she wouldn’t be in every episode because then they would have had to find ways to write Beckett out

  41. Shiloh says:

    I totally agree, of course. And, much as I thoroughly enjoy “Castle,” if Stana had not re-signed, I would’ve skipped next year. Glad she did, then. :) Also, I actually really liked this past season. I thought the show runner who stepped in did a great job. Only around three episodes the whole season were lackluster. The rest were “Castle” at its best–a nice, diverting hour of television. I’m curious to see how the new ‘runners impact the series. I liked the darker edge and the Caskett was great this season. Glad this series got renewed too. Thanks for this article, Matt.

  42. Ed Silva says:

    We are so happy that Stania resigned for another year. We have this show faithfully since day one, and seriously would hate to see her leave. The show would not be any where near as good.

  43. lame says:

    LOL, all the good will expressed here brings tears to my eyes and a pain to my butt. Look, 6.23 killed the magic, all we can hope for is a good steady storyline without the soap opera histrionics that have appeared in the recent passed. Hopefully more steady and more focused than season 7.

  44. QC Digger says:

    The name of the show is Castle…..Not, Castle and Beckett.

  45. Merry says:

    I agree with a lot of the people below that Forever should not have been cancelled. It had great stories and the characters had a spark together. Maybe Tuesday night wasn’t the best time slot. It was up against a top show. I would watch Forever and go on demand and to watch the other show later. Forever needs to come back!

  46. Pauline says:

    If Beckett leaves the show so will I. It wouldn’t be the same without her. Give her the money she deserves. Why mess with a good thing?

  47. Mary says:

    When does show return for viewing

  48. tsevca says:

    I´m sorry, but what is the point of this article? We didn´t find out how would it look like as promised. Only that it wouldn´t be the same – like that isn´t obvious.

  49. cw Gilbert says:

    I heard that beckett is going to divorse castle later on this season, is this true?

  50. cw Gilbert says:

    heard that Beckett is going to devorce castle later on this season, is this true?