Criminal Minds?

[Fl_Gulfer]

WOW? I just watched the 2 shows from Wed. Nite and the end just blew me away. Did I miss something or was the final sceen expected?
Was that the season finally? It didn't say in the guide.

[betts4]

I watched it last night and rewatched the ending three times. I didn't realize there were two episodes. My tivo didn't pick that up for some reason.

And yes, Wow.

Was there word that he wanted off the show?

[bareyb]

They didn't show him actually get shot, so you don't really know what happened. He could be wounded or he might have ducked or he could be dead... My first reaction was "he must be off the show" but I haven't read anything confirming that. Someone will come along who knows the scoop I'm sure. ;)

[marksman]

that was an unexpected ending to a very disturbing pair of episodes.. Very well done though.

Does anyone know how that guy was that shot him? Clearly he had some history. I was talking to someone about this show a few days ago and I remarked that it is very well done, but it is very disturbing. The season finale was the most disturbing one yet.

Even if he is leaving the show, I am glad they could keep a lid on it for that ending, but we will see. It seemed like they were heading towards the possibility of Derek wanting to leave. Of course they always have cliff hangers on this show, but again, really unexpected turn at the end.

Normally I might be upset by that, but everything before it was so well done that it actually did not seem insulting.

[bareyb]

that was an unexpected ending to a very disturbing pair of episodes.. Very well done though.


Yeah. No kidding! That was a particularly dark one... I've liked this show since the beginning. One of the few "new" shows I got hooked on that is doing well in the ratings. It wasn't sure how well it would do when Mandy Patinkin left so unexpectedly after the first season, but Joe Montegna is doing a great job in his place. It's one of the few "Cop Shows" I still have an SP to. :up:

[Jesda]

I find it odd that the guy had a mask when he was lurking, especially since his victim supposedly knew him.

[dthmj]

Who the guy is:


He was in a previous episode this season. There was a serial killer that would take an item off of his last victim and put it on the current victim. He stopped for like 10 years when a previous FBI guy made a deal with him. He tried to get Hotch to make a deal with him but he wouldn't. I remember the guy escaping at the end of the episode. He wore that mask as well.

[NatasNJ]

Who the guy is:


It was C Thomas Howell or whatever his name is.. (Ponyboy)

[Jon J]

Has the show been renewed for next year?

[Llwellyn]

Has the show been renewed for next year?

According to Futon Critic, it is renewed for a fifth season and running in its usual Wednesday 9PM timeslot.

[Havana Brown]

I haven't watched them (cause you know, I have Tivo) and came into this thread thinking it was a general discussion since there's no OAD date on here. :mad:

[Fl_Gulfer]

I haven't watched them (cause you know, I have Tivo) and came into this thread thinking it was a general discussion since there's no OAD date on here. :mad:

All you had to do was read my first post and stop reading, I didn't say anything that happened on the show.

[dimented]

All you had to do was read my first post and stop reading, I didn't say anything that happened on the show.

I see....so it is her fault, not the thread starters? :rolleyes:

[Peter000]

It's actually anyone's fault who posted untagged spoilers.

All of this discussion really should be in a episode specific thread with an air date.

[dswallow]

I see....so it is her fault, not the thread starters? :rolleyes:

Why would you place any "blame" whatsoever on the thread starter for this?

There's NOTHING wrong with the thread title or the comments posted by the person starting this thread.

If you're going to whine about spoilers, at least have the decency to roll your eyes at the people who actually posted spoilers without spoiler tags. The thread starter isn't one of them.

[dimented]

Why would you place any "blame" whatsoever on the thread starter for this?

There's NOTHING wrong with the thread title or the comments posted by the person starting this thread.

If you're going to whine about spoilers, at least have the decency to roll your eyes at the people who actually posted spoilers without spoiler tags. The thread starter isn't one of them.

Well. I wasn't whining about anything. Just pointing out that his putting fault on Havana was unfair since he started a thread that clearly is against the policy on how episode threads are to be started. There for I place blame squarely on him.

[NatasNJ]

I used spoiler tags...

NOT IT!


This forum has been on FIRE this week. Love it. Brings back old times...

[dswallow]

Well. I wasn't whining about anything. Just pointing out that his putting fault on Havana was unfair since he started a thread that clearly is against the policy on how episode threads are to be started. There for I place blame squarely on him.
That's the policy for official episode threads; this simply isn't an official episode thread.

[dimented]

That's the policy for official episode threads; this simply isn't an official episode thread.

That is the point. It should have been. He was talking about a specific episode and titled it in such a way that it looked like a generic conversation about the show.

Look. All I am saying is it is not Havana Brown's fault and should not be pushed back on her.

Quit trying make up something to argue about.

[dswallow]

All I am saying is it is not Havana Brown's fault and should be pushed back on her.

Shouldn't.

[YCantAngieRead]

So...I missed the episode due to conflicts...
Who got shot?

[Peter000]

So...I missed the episode due to conflicts...
Who got shot?

Hotchner.

[Jesda]

Christ. This forum is full of babies. Just talk about the damn show and stop whining. The end scene doesn't relate to the rest of the AWESOME episode anyway.

[astrohip]

Why would you place any "blame" whatsoever on the thread starter for this?

There's NOTHING wrong with the thread title or the comments posted by the person starting this thread.

If you're going to whine about spoilers, at least have the decency to roll your eyes at the people who actually posted spoilers without spoiler tags. The thread starter isn't one of them.
Disagree. The original post is clearly about the final episode(s). Whether it reveals spoilers or not is immaterial. It *only* refers to a specific episode, and should have said so in the Subject Line.

This is not to say that subsequent posts may or may not have compounded the error, but there should be no disputing that the OP is clearly wrong.

[Rob Helmerichs]

Disagree. The original post is clearly about the final episode(s). Whether it reveals spoilers or not is immaterial. It *only* refers to a specific episode, and should have said so in the Subject Line.

This is not to say that subsequent posts may or may not have compounded the error, but there should be no disputing that the OP is clearly wrong.
I have no problem with any of that.

But he misspelled "finale," and for that I cannot forgive him.

:D

[bareyb]

Hotchner.

We think... We don't KNOW... It's the big "cliffhanger" this season. ;)

[super dave]

Last season they blew up a Suburban and the cliffhanger was who died? They went after him again, now it's is he dead?

[marksman]

Sorry, I don't care what anyone says. If you opened this thread and got past the first post thinking it was some generic thread about Criminal Minds the day after the season finale aired.. I don't know what to tell you.

the whole first post made it clear the thread was a discussion about the two final episodes.

Anyone who didn't get that has to live life and their own peril, and I am glad I did not use spoiler threads, because it was wholly unneccessary.

Should the OP have used the proper format to denote an episode discussion. Absolutely, but it is obvious from the OP what the intent of the thread was.

Anyone who had not seen the final episode but chose to proceed anyway has nobody to blame but themselves.

The thread was started to discuss two episodes of the show. The OP made a bad title, but that is the extent of it.

Nobody should had to or should have used spoilers to talk about the last two episodes in this thread.

Thanks to all the people who ruined a potentially decent discussion about the season ending of a very good show with this nonsense that is not even legitimate.

Why couldn't you all just spoiler this off topic discussion that is not even on topic for the thread.

In Fact I will do just that.

[Llwellyn]

...

It just simply comes down to respect for the other posters by following the established rules of the forum. The rules and guidelines in a public forum apply to all of us to ensure it is enjoyed by all. Are you right in that sometimes it gets blown out of proportion? Yes... but deliberately skirting posting rules then saying "you should have known better than to read the post anyway" is kind of like line jumping or standing left on an escalator. :D

[JFriday]

Garcia survived a gunshot to the chest, I don't think anyone dies.

[bicker]

I haven't, and won't, subscribe to this thread, because we stopped watching Criminal Minds after #411 (http://www.thefutoncritic.com/listings.aspx?id=20081125cbs04) Normal, due to tuner conflicts. It just so happens that they haven't rerun #412 (http://www.thefutoncritic.com/listings.aspx?id=20090519cbs02) and up yet... so the TiVo will probably record those episodes over the summer. However, doing the math, there aren't enough weeks to rerun all of the episodes we missed, so I suspect they'll skip at least one, and probably more.

My questions are, assuming we decide to pick Criminal Minds back up, (1) Do you think it was worth it?, and (2) Assuming they skip some episodes, do you think we'll have a problem with missing continuity? (We cannot pick shows up off websites or Hulu or anything like that, because my wife is hearing impaired.)

Please reply by PM, if you're so inclined (since that's the only way I'll see your advice :)). Thanks!

[ADG]

I have no problem with any of that.

But he misspelled "finale," and for that I cannot forgive him.

:D

Christ. This forum is full of babies. Just talk about the damn show and stop whining. The end scene doesn't relate to the rest of the AWESOME episode anyway.

+1 & +1 :up: :D

[marksman]

I haven't, and won't, subscribe to this thread, because we stopped watching Criminal Minds after #411 (http://www.thefutoncritic.com/listings.aspx?id=20081125cbs04) Normal, due to tuner conflicts. It just so happens that they haven't rerun #412 (http://www.thefutoncritic.com/listings.aspx?id=20090519cbs02) and up yet... so the TiVo will probably record those episodes over the summer. However, doing the math, there aren't enough weeks to rerun all of the episodes we missed, so I suspect they'll skip at least one, and probably more.

My questions are, assuming we decide to pick Criminal Minds back up, (1) Do you think it was worth it?, and (2) Assuming they skip some episodes, do you think we'll have a problem with missing continuity? (We cannot pick shows up off websites or Hulu or anything like that, because my wife is hearing impaired.)

Please reply by PM, if you're so inclined (since that's the only way I'll see your advice :)). Thanks!

Shouldn't be a problem. Really not that much in specific story arcs to miss this year. More of it would really just relate to backgrounds of specific characters, which might influence how you see their actions in the future... but not to the point you would likely be missing anything.

[marksman]

It just simply comes down to respect for the other posters by following the established rules of the forum. The rules and guidelines in a public forum apply to all of us to ensure it is enjoyed by all. Are you right in that sometimes it gets blown out of proportion? Yes... but deliberately skirting posting rules then saying "you should have known better than to read the post anyway" is kind of like line jumping or standing left on an escalator. :D

I didn't deliberately skirt any posting rules. I read a thread that was about a specific episode and posted about it, without using stupid spoiler tags.

I still don't think that is a violation of the intent of the rules.

The has to be an underlying base level of common sense in any formation of rules. I think having a first post specifically address a specific episode of a tv show includes that. Especially since threads that do not want to have spoilers in them specifically say "*NO SPOILERS*" in the thread title.

[Rob Helmerichs]

The has to be an underlying base level of common sense in any formation of rules.
You'd think, being here as long as you have, you'd know better... :D

[lew]

I didn't deliberately skirt any posting rules. I read a thread that was about a specific episode and posted about it, without using stupid spoiler tags.

I still don't think that is a violation of the intent of the rules.

The has to be an underlying base level of common sense in any formation of rules. I think having a first post specifically address a specific episode of a tv show includes that. Especially since threads that do not want to have spoilers in them specifically say "*NO SPOILERS*" in the thread title.

+1

[dswallow]

You'd think, being here as long as you have, you'd know better... :D

They don't make a number big enough to put after a plus sign for this one.

[dswallow]

I'm torn really -- I'm not enjoying the show much. I don't really much like most of the major characters. I sort of just watch out of habit. If they do indeed actually kill one of them off, maybe it'll improve with a new cast member.

[Jesda]

I think Thomas Gibson was going to be removed last season until Mandy Patinkin quit, which is why they setup the story about his wife leaving. Maybe he's finally getting his exit.

He's not a very good actor.

[Bulldog7]

I think Thomas Gibson was going to be removed last season until Mandy Patinkin quit, which is why they setup the story about his wife leaving. Maybe he's finally getting his exit.

He's not a very good actor.

I would disagree, he plays the part well.
The character is not very exciting, that's all, IMHO.
But I actually do like him better in a comedy like
Dharma and Greg....

[Jesda]

In a comedy he does a good job of playing the straight man to a wacky sidekick, but in this, I find him to be overbearingly serious, enough to seem too fake.

[Philosofy]

I've always found that if someone can do comedy, they can do drama. But the reverse isn't true. I think Gibson does a good job in the role, but the actor may have made too many demands.

[Rob Helmerichs]

I would disagree, he plays the part well.
The character is not very exciting, that's all, IMHO.
Yeah, I think they kind of made a mistake by designing the character as a second banana, and then moving him into the lead (not the show's lead, but the team's lead) when Patinkin bailed. The character was a lot better as a foil for Patinkin than as the team leader, but by then his bland, colorless qualities were well-enough established that they probably couldn't do much. Have him suddenly because charismatic and interesting out of the blue?

They probably went for story logic (he was the obvious choice to take over the team) over Hollywood logic (dynamically, Mantegna would make a much more interesting leader, or else have Hutch suddenly become interesting), for which I guess I commend them but this example shows why so often Hollywood logic trumps real logic.
I think Gibson does a good job in the role, but the actor may have made too many demands.
My instant thought was, "Ooh, carbonite!" :D

[lew]

My memory is he was technically the lead when Patkin was still with the show.




Yeah, I think they kind of made a mistake by designing the character as a second banana, and then moving him into the lead (not the show's lead, but the team's lead) when Patinkin bailed. The character was a lot better as a foil for Patinkin than as the team leader, but by then his bland, colorless qualities were well-enough established that they probably couldn't do much. Have him suddenly because charismatic and interesting out of the blue?

They probably went for story logic (he was the obvious choice to take over the team) over Hollywood logic (dynamically, Mantegna would make a much more interesting leader, or else have Hutch suddenly become interesting), for which I guess I commend them but this example shows why so often Hollywood logic trumps real logic.

My instant thought was, "Ooh, carbonite!" :D

[Rob Helmerichs]

My memory is he was technically the lead when Patkin was still with the show.
Yeah, now that you mention it that's how they set it up at the beginning, but Gideon always seemed to be in charge. Hotch was clearly the second banana in reality.

[dswallow]

Yeah, now that you mention it that's how they set it up at the beginning, but Gideon always seemed to be in charge. Hotch was clearly the second banana in reality.

Back then, Hotch always seemed like the bureaucrat/administrator of the team; not necessarily "in charge" of it, but sort of a parallel set of responsibilities to the investigative team.

[jeff125va]

Back then, Hotch always seemed like the bureaucrat/administrator of the team; not necessarily "in charge" of it, but sort of a parallel set of responsibilities to the investigative team.
Yeah, I think he had the same office, so presumably the same title. I think Gideon and Rossi both just have more expertise and experience than Hotch, but for whatever reason he's their boss.

I opened this thread last week before I had seen the episode but I stopped after the first post, and fortunately forgot all about it while watching the show on Monday. Although I had a bad feeling when they showed him coming into his apartment like that. Normally they just fade to black while he (or whomever we see last) is still at the office.

[bootsy]

Sorry, I don't care what anyone says. If you opened this thread and got past the first post thinking it was some generic thread about Criminal Minds the day after the season finale aired.. I don't know what to tell you.

the whole first post made it clear the thread was a discussion about the two final episodes.

Anyone who didn't get that has to live life and their own peril, and I am glad I did not use spoiler threads, because it was wholly unneccessary.

Should the OP have used the proper format to denote an episode discussion. Absolutely, but it is obvious from the OP what the intent of the thread was.

Anyone who had not seen the final episode but chose to proceed anyway has nobody to blame but themselves.

The thread was started to discuss two episodes of the show. The OP made a bad title, but that is the extent of it.

Nobody should had to or should have used spoilers to talk about the last two episodes in this thread.

Thanks to all the people who ruined a potentially decent discussion about the season ending of a very good show with this nonsense that is not even legitimate.

Why couldn't you all just spoiler this off topic discussion that is not even on topic for the thread.

In Fact I will do just that.


One of the best posts ever.