halaci said:

Well I wrote this small "love letter" into another post, but as this article has got an own one it has its place here:

Nathan is very good – but he is what he is. All of his moves,

gestures are familiar from Firefly. It's not a complaint, I loved that

show, and I love his acting – just the thrill of surprise is missing.

Stana

on the other hand came from the complete nowhere to me. Each and every

second when she is on the screen is like a new gift, she has so many

faces. That small trembling in her voice in the "Go back to your

Hamptons…", that almost invisible smile, almost just a twinkle in her

eyes when Castle run away for for Chloé's purse, not to speak of the

many moments of the past seasons, she is an ACTRESS, with all capitals. I

wish those two movies be in the theaters soon because want to see them.

I don't dare to say that there are no other so talented couple presently on screen, I'm not seeing to much TV beside Castle so I don't know. But that they are among the top, it's for sure.

Agreed! Yes! The trend is broken, halaci.

When I made 3 avatars from all the prior episodes this summer, my main problem was to not make 3 avatars of Stana all the time. What helped me was that while the acting was superb showing so much emotion, it's often so subtle that it wasn't given justice in such a small picture that the avatar is. Same with episode 301, I wanted to capture Becketts smile at the intervening universe. Ended up with coffee and elephant.

Nathan has mostly played Castle with broader strokes, going for the fun stuff, but when Castle is serious Nathan shows he can be subtle too.

It often strikes me how subtle Nathan's acting is. The strange thing is that it always surprises me, and for the heck of me I don't know why. it's not as if I compare it to his previous work as I haven't seen any of it, not even Firefly for which he's 'famous'. Is that sacrilege or not?   

Stana's acting to me is often more obvious (if that's the correct word to use) and I don't mean that in a disparaging way. Or should I say more in your face, again nothing wrong with that but you tend to forget to look at what Nathan is doing or not doing which I think is often more difficult. Or is it because Stana is getting more screen time that some have the idea that Nathan's acting isn't up to par? Just one tiny scene comes to mind, the way Castle is looking at Beckett at the murder board, it completely slipped by me when I saw 'A deadly affair' for the first time, it's only on second viewing that it stuck by me.  I must admit, I often have that experience with his acting, it's only when seeing the same episode again that I discover what he's doing/not doing. Subliminally I must have seen it but it didn't get to the forefront of my conscious mind whereas Stana's acting immediately does that. Which to me makes Nathan's acting more appealing, you really have to look for it if that makes any kind of sense. Camerawise, she really draws the attention to her, even more so than Nathan, which perhaps also in part explains why her acting is more in the forefront of our minds.     

I think that if there were such an imbalance in acting, the show would've fallen flat a long time ago. You play off of each other and if there's nothing to play off on, your performance isn't going to be as good as well. Mind you I'm not an actor but I think the better your opponent is, the better your own acting is going to be. So, for Stana to give such a sterling performance, she needs not only the material to work with but Nathan to be up to par too. She isn't playing in a vacuum.