Leftfield said:

First, he's such a personable, gracious, nice guy, what a nice interview.

This is the second time I've heard his stand on the "will they, won't they" stated as his opinion or as a difference in opinions.  Is an effort being made to make a distinction between his opinion and the opinion of the show runners, so that we know the TPTB don't feel the same way?  Is he trying to take it down a notch?  Is his stand on the matter softening a little?  I can't decide what to make of it.  

Lastly, I have to disagree with Nathan.  I don't like to see people fail over and over again.  I like to see them try, and try, and try again until they get what they want.  To never give up.  The struggle isn't worth it if you don't get the payoff.  

 

---

He's just spent too much time working with Joss Whedon, is all. It's coloured his perceptions of what entertaining television should be. Don't get me wrong, I like Joss's stuff well enough, but man, he loves to put his characters through the wringer, often without any successful pay off.

That sort of thing is fine for a teenage focused show like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, or for a show about a bunch of misfits on the edge of civilisation, like Firefly, but Castle is a different animal. It's thoroughly adult in its portrayal of people, lives and relationships, and it should continue to be so.

I do think he's taking care to ensure people know he is just voicing his opinion, which is reassuring. He thinks one thing, Stana thinks the other, but it's all down to what Andrew Marlowe thinks, and I'm fairly confident that he believes putting them together won't kill the show, if it's done right.

Admin said:

He spent 15 episodes in 2 tv shows, one 45 minute web series that was filmed in a matter of days oh… and that one movie – working with Joss Whedon, it's really not "too much" in the context of his career and life experience. I suspect Nathan had opinions way before he worked with any one person.

---

I was being more than a little tongue in cheek there, in case it didn't come across.

Deb, I certainly didn't intend to be rude.  It's an affectation I picked up from working at my school.  I don't know if it's a cultural thing (our population is mainly Central American immigrants and some from Mexico) or if it's something that arose because too many of the staff members share the same first names (we have more than one Mary, a lot of Ana's, Miguel's, Norma's, you name it), so when we are mentioning another teacher or staff member, we use the surname to cut down on the confusion.

I'll try to be more "aware" of the context, next time. 

Admin said:

Deb, it's industry standard for people to be referred to by their last name only you'll find it in all the media.  While I find it hard to write formal articles and use last name only.. it's just the way it's done (here in Aust too) so I don't think it's really a sign of discrespect, just the way it is in a lot of industries like media… and cops for example!

---

Admin– you are very right about the use of surnames in the media, and with law enforcement. It also happens in the military (My dad and uncle served in the Navy and Marines, respectively, and I remember their friends from those days would use their surname instead of their first name when talking to them).

There can be times when the use of the surname ends up being a sign of affection!  My aunt used to call her husband by their last name, "Harp" rather than use his first name "Fred".  I asked her about it and she told me when she first met him, he told her his name was 'Bill'; apparently, he thought my aunt would "pester" him at work following their date (because of COURSE she would be totally in love with him at the end of the date, don't you know and would start calling him at all hours.  lol ). 

When she found out the next day that he lied about his name, she knew she could never let him live it down (should they start an actual relationship), so she decided she would only use his last name from then on.  Eventually, it stopped being a teasing reminder of how full of himself he was and became a true term of endearment.