CASTLE Producer Laurie Zaks Talks Castle-Beckett and That Pesky MOONLIGHTING Curse - Give Me My Remote : Give Me My Remote

CASTLE Producer Laurie Zaks Talks Castle-Beckett and That Pesky MOONLIGHTING Curse

August 9, 2010 by  

CASTLE executive producer Laurie Zaks learned a valuable lesson after the show’s second season finale aired — everyone has an opinion about what’s going down with Castle and Beckett.

“There was an extremely rabid reaction from the fans from the season finale,” Zaks says in the video below. “There was a situation where I went to see my nose doctor — I had a sinus infection — and before he would even look at me, it was, ‘Why did you do that? How did you do that? I don’t understand! How did he go with his ex-wife, he doesn’t even like his ex-wife!’ And I was like, ‘It’s a TV show. We had to.’ I said, ‘Nobody would be talking about it if we just had them ride off into the sunset.'”

So, yeah, Castle and Beckett did not ride off into the sunset when season 2 ended, but where are they when season 3 starts?

“There’s going to be a lot of playing the subtext in the first episode,” Zaks says. “I don’t want to give too much away, but Beckett is tough and Beckett is a cop, but she’s still a girl. And I think you’ll be surprised, too, when we see a little bit into Castle’s emotional feelings and how he dealt [with the events of the finale]. And I think there’s going to be some surprising insight from Alexis…into how to deal with the current situation.”

Watch the video below for more on the “current situation” and whether or not the CASTLE writers think Castle and Beckett could be an on-off couple? Also, do they think that MOONLIGHTING curse is real?

Check it out…

How about you?

Do you think current shows should beware of the MOONLIGHTING experience?

Follow @GMMRTV, @korbigirl and @MarisaRoffman on Twitter, and Facebook too, for all your up-to-the-minute TV news and commentary.

Stay up to date on all of GMMR’s exclusive videos by subscribing to our new YouTube Channel – GiveMeMyRemote TV

Filed under #1 featured, Castle


10 Responses to “CASTLE Producer Laurie Zaks Talks Castle-Beckett and That Pesky MOONLIGHTING Curse”

  1. Bruce_F on August 9th, 2010 9:34 pm

    I have no problem with the way season 2 ended, except for Castle choosing to spend the summer with his ex-wife. I can understand if Castle didn’t want to spend the summer in The Hamptons by himself. If that’s the way he feels, then he certainly has options in that department. It’s the choosing to take an ex-wife that I don’t find believable, especially considering what we’ve seen of Castle’s interactions with both ex-wives.

  2. nancy Eddy on August 9th, 2010 10:50 pm

    The Moonlighting curse should be tossed into the deepest, darkest hole they can find! Viewers today can handle characters getting together— esp if the writers and actors of a show are good — and they are for this show!


  3. Kath on August 9th, 2010 11:18 pm

    Great, great interview!! 😀

  4. Kcat10 on August 10th, 2010 1:32 am

    I agree completely with Laurie Zaks. She’s 100% correct. And when Nathan Fillion said that if Castle and Beckett get together too soon, the show will be over, he was exactly right. I want Castle to last many years, and I trust Nathan. His years of experience as a consummate performer means he knows what it takes to make a series work.

    The cast and crew are stunningly gifted. It is evident that they pour every ounce of their hearts and souls into making this show the most excellent series on television today. They have given us two incredible seasons so far, and I know they will thrill us with even greater twists and turns of depth and complexity in season three. I just know that wherever they take Castle and Beckett in their dance-journey, it’s gonna be amazing.

    Thank you Nathan, and Laurie, and Terri Edda, and Andrew Marlowe, and all involved in creating Castle. Your commitment to excellence is evident in every viewing, and as I said to you at Paley, we love you for it! I can’t wait to see what you have in store for us come September!

  5. ACP on August 10th, 2010 8:27 am

    Great interview! But the idea of the Ross/Rachel off and on thing with Castle and Beckett made me twitch. I’d rather shove a rusty fork in my eye than watch them do that.

    I’m hoping Castle does last many years like she indicates! But they have new competition this year and a new guy in charge at ABC – all of the crazy spoilers doesn’t make it seem like they’re treading very carefully. Hopefully it works out for the show in any case.

  6. Olddarth on August 10th, 2010 8:37 am

    Keeping romantic leads on shows apart is soooooo old school. Right up there with having normally intelligent characters carrying the stupid stick to advance the plot or lie to uphold one.

    Story telling is a creative venture. It would be refreshing if more shows would be creative.

  7. Bruce_F on August 10th, 2010 3:10 pm

    As an aside from my counterpoint above, I’d just like to say that I do appreciate interviews like this. I’ve seen so many SDCC interviews with the same people asking the same questions over and over again in 60 second fragments. Interviews like this, where interesting, original questions are asked to someone who is easy to converse with and is knowledgeable about the show is so much better than asking Katic or Fillion about their character’s will-they-won’t-they relationship for the millionth time.

    You have my sincere thanks. More interviews like this one, please! 🙂

  8. Kate on August 11th, 2010 9:17 pm

    The idea thatLaurie Zaks thinks that House did it well sends horrors through me. Other than the fanatical Huddy shippers, most people disliked the end and many the whole relationship. House/Cuddy is the least authentic relationship on television and it have been a huge turn-off of the entire show for many viewers. At least Castle/Beckett has been an intelligent relationship. So far.

    But I’m counting on Castle to take the bad taste of House out of my mouth. This doesn’t give me any reassurance.

    There seems to be an idea among show people that putting the couple together is a show-killer. What I’ve found more is that keeping them apart for too long is waht kills the show. I know many people who used to love Bones but now don’t care because by now Booth and Bones are too stupid to be together. Remington Steele is another one. By the time the writers finally put the couple together, the audience doesn”t care any more.

    Moonlighting died because of bad writing to keep the couple apart after they got together, not because they did. The next time somone says The Moonlighting Curse, they need to be beaten over the head with it.

    I want a show where adults act like adults and not idiots or adolescents. The Thin Man and Hart To Hart, not Friends or Moonlighting.

  9. Kate on August 11th, 2010 9:20 pm

    Just to add —
    for me, it’s season 3. If the couple isn’t together within 3 seasons, I lose interest in the relationship because if they haven’t figured it out by then, they’re too stupid to be with each other. I may not lose interest in the show but I do lose interest in the relationship.

  10. Maria on December 13th, 2010 2:22 pm

    I agree with what Nathan and creatives say that if the Castle- Beckett come together too soon, it will all end…But season 2 ended with a high climax point of their relationship and now, in season 3, its just nothing at all..Aleast either of them should have kept the track active…Both Castle and Kate have moved to partners and they are happy. How can they go back to square one..?? What happened to 1st and 2nd season…?? Its the 3rd season. If they initiate or continue the romantic track, it wouldn’t be early…Atleast Castle/Beckett should reaffirm their feelings…