The case this week was not particularly obvious - there were SO many suspects, and so many motives that I could not be sure where the guilt would lie. Usually, I commend shows when this occurs, but I think I did not particularly care about the murder. Regardless of it having been given the proper time to develop and a respectable amount of focus, it didn't really matter to me who had murdered the dentist or why.
I suppose the writers were hoping that the prospect of the dentist being a gay football player, and possible having brought down the wrath of some fellow footballer whose testosterone level hit the ceiling over an ass slap, was enough to grab my attention. Maybe it worked for others, but not for me. The most likely reason for this? I've noticed that while Bones may bring up the possibilities of a controversial murder, they never actually go through with it. The murder of the Amish boy was not by a member of his community; the murder of the video gamer was not by an autistic boy.
Not to say that Bones (Emily Deschanel) and Booth (David Boreanaz) did not get to have some great character development as Booth refused ignore the fact that his brother was in love with a former call girl while Bones insisted that he had always told her love was more important than the rest.
But what are your thoughts? Was last week's episode of Bones interesting enough for you? Or do you wish they all had the level of intrigue of last week's JFK conspiracy?
No comments:
Post a Comment