Bones has become such a terrific show! Anyone who hasn't given it a chance yet needs to do so immediately! It's one of the few shows currently on TV that I still watch. Most others have lost my interest.

Valentyn | May 30, 18:45 CET

I really enjoy Bones. It makes me wonder why, at one time, I owuld complain that there was nothing good on TV. I was just unawares, I suppose.

I'm still heart-broken over the finale of Season 3. I can't put myself to believe it, that it could wrap up after that. In fact, I had a dream about Zack that there was more to it, and the case wasn't really solved.

*cries*

korkster | May 30, 19:16 CET

Yeah,I'm still upset about the season finale too.

Buffyfantic | May 30, 19:18 CET

I missed the Finale but having read the gist of it
I will not watch anymore. And I will have the pleasure
of making my "vote" count for a little bit extra since
I was just selected as a Nielsen household.

JDL | May 30, 19:36 CET

I was slow to come on board on Bones, but the second season was really entertaining, so I've been watching fairly regularly since. I have come to enjoy the characters' interactions. But the finale this season really put me off the series.

palehorse | May 30, 19:48 CET

I like Bones and I am curious to see how next season goes. I'm sorry to see that some were turned off by the last episode, especially the ones who are proud to "vote" them into lower ratings and possibly get them cancelled in the future, but hey, I guess they asked for it. Meanwhile, I'm really happy to see Reaper on the list, that show just keeps getting better.

luvspike | May 30, 19:56 CET

Mental note: JDL is a Nielsen household. So now we know who to fuss at when our new favorite shows get cancelled for low ratings. Whew! Finally an actual person we can charge at with rotten tomatoes and pitch forks.

skeezycheeses | May 30, 20:22 CET

I didn't like the resolution to the Gormagon murder whatsoever, but I still love the show and will be back for Season 4. I'll probably watch it on Monday's this summer as well, just because there won't be anything else on.

Wyndam-Pryce | May 30, 21:08 CET

I wasn't really put off by the ending. You have to admit, you could see it coming. Anything else would have seemed farfetched, but this made sense. And I'm sure, had there been more of an actual season, there would have been more related mysteries. I was more worried after the ending of the penultimate episode! That was a nice twist.

Valentyn | May 30, 21:14 CET

I read the rest of the list, and a lot of these shows have smaller viewerships than Firefly did. Kind of depressing, because most of these might survive...

TDBrown | May 30, 21:22 CET

'Bones' is a successful show in its third season that attracts something like nine million viewers per episode. Is it really a "hidden" gem?

[ edited by alien lanes on 2008-05-30 18:46 ]

alien lanes | May 30, 21:46 CET

Did anyone notice how EW called Reaper the guy's BtVS? Since when is BtVS a chick show? Hmmm... *grumble*

Wait, so is Bones worth getting on DVD and getting addicted to? Does the finale really ruin everything? That's why I haven't bothered with Heroes on DVD; apparently it kind of sucks after S1.

BandofBuggered | May 30, 21:48 CET

I hope Bones continues to thrive.

And, I agree with you Valentyn, that I knew what to expect. I was just hoping it didn't. And then it looked like it wouldn't, and then did anyway. That's what killed me. In a way, it's good because they really got to jerk my heart out and stop on it repeatedly... in some worlds (like Joss worlds) one wouldn't expect less than that.

Which one was the penultimate episode? I was a late bloomer into Bones and watch Season 1, 2, and Season 3 simultaneously (through TNT & FOX & Fox repeats). The story is a bit jumbled, but I am in the act of acquiring Season 1 (already have Season 2) to get my facts straight.

*waits imaptiently for August's release of Season 3*

korkster | May 30, 21:48 CET

I only just started watching Bones as this season ended. I was actually pretty impressed, I had just assumed it was a CSI/L&O type procedural "body of the week" show, but its got some pretty solid character work in there. Plus, John Francis Daley and David. Huge plusses. I've actually already made a note to try to go back and catch up on the series the this summer.

Nolan | May 30, 21:48 CET

The finale didn't surprise or bother me either. But then I mostly watch for Booth and Bones anyway. Their characters carry the show.

hacksaway | May 30, 21:51 CET

BandofBuggered, you and I seem to be on the same wavelength for things, and I think my recommendation would suit well for you.

Bones is definately worth it. It has that subtleness of character development that you don't get from other "procedurals"; it definately leans more towards Joss-like than CSI-like, for sure. But, while that humanity is going on, they have to solve real cases... kind of like a monster of the week, but Bones is more successful with this aspect because they do make mistakes, every death is unique, and they haven't "topped" themselves yet.

Season 1 was strong. Season 2 (just watched) was even better and you really get to savor the characters, like relishing fresh bread right out of the bakery. Season 3 had even more twists and turns, a couple of hiccups from the strike (wonder how that'll play out in DVD), but the last 3 episodes I watched were good. I had to miss a couple due to engagements, but since it's basically a case a week (besides the Gorgamon mystery) it was easy to jump back in and get my heart stomped on.

****Highly recommended****

korkster | May 30, 21:56 CET

Ah, thank you kindly, korkster, for your recommendation. It's always fun to be on a wavelength with someone; it means that when it makes a sudden dip, you have something to cushion the fall. :)

I'm always looking for new shows to dive into, but one of the most important things for me is characterization. Of which Bones apparently has plenty, yay!

And of course, DB is another perk. (Did that come out slightly wrong? Just me, then. Notice I'll do musing before editing.)

Very excited for something new to pass the long summer hours! *Looks at bank account to see how soon I can afford the DVDs, winces slightly, then decides, ah, what the hell--this is what youth is for.*

BandofBuggered | May 30, 22:08 CET

Nice review korkster! What you say about it is very true. It never felt like CSI to me.

The penultimate episode I was referring to was "Wannabe in the Weeds", the one about the singer who is killed, and his stalker.

Valentyn | May 30, 22:12 CET

I didn't care for the season finale either, but I think much of it can be blamed on the strike; it's not quite fair to revoke your Nielsen vote based solely on the finale if you liked the show up until then.

My husband watches the show because he reads Kathy Reich's books. I began watching for David, and stayed for the character interplay; the murder mysteries I find less satisfying.

pillboxed | May 30, 22:37 CET

The final really was completely OOC. I was a bit dumbstruck at the end since there was no reason at all to lead to that conclusion. I have to suspect the storyline is not over. But I have to say I love Tempe Brennan, "I don't know what that means!"

But anyone note that also on their list of hidden treasures is the show I think was the best of the last few years: In Treatment. And they nailed the performance of Mia Wasikowska as Sophie. I was completely transfixed by In Treatment; I did not miss an episode for 9 straight weeks and that was with an episode every weekday night during that time. And the Sophie storyline was simply astonishing. It rarely gets this good on TV. And I could not stop worrying about what was happening with Sophie. Her final episode was as powerful as just about anything I've seen on TV these past few years. I wish I could say more, but it comes out on DVD in Spetember and it would be great not to know what happens.

Dana5140 | May 30, 22:52 CET

I like Bones a lot, though I am not in love with it. I was not put off by the finale either. I will be very sorry if they do not revisit and further that particular storyline, since it certainly seems like it will affect everyone for a long time in the future, but I will not stop watching if they do not.

IMO hearing about a plot does not do justice to an episode of well-done television. Watch the episode, if it does the show in for you, okay, but there is so much in the exicution of anything that one should give it a chance.

newcj | May 30, 23:07 CET

I still love the show and will be watching next season.It wasn't so much that it was Zack that bothered meitself but that their was no build up to it.Granted a lot of that was due to the writers strike.From what I've read,the decision for it to be Zack came after the strike was over and they went back to writing.

I think the Zack reveal would of worked better if their was more of a build up over the course of the season.For example,if they played with the idea of him having post traumatic stress syndrome from his time in Iraq as playing a part in it.I think they really needed to extend the Gorgomon storyline into next season if they really wanted to go in this direction with Zack.It felt like a rush job to wrap it up and they needed a quick sacrificial lamb who would be a shock and went with Zack.

Buffyfantic | May 30, 23:09 CET

Valentyn, I'm curious how you saw it coming? I can never predict these things. Were there specific eps where Zack was portrayed as susceptible to this sort of thing, or that he was morally ambivalent?

While the finale made me sad, it didn't disappoint. I hope that season 4 delves into how this could happen; I hope they don't just proceed as if it *hadn't* happened.

[ edited by zeitgeist on 2008-06-01 04:39 ]

ohbejoyful | May 30, 23:41 CET

The first half of S1 of Bones was a little weak, so fair warning to new fans. I almost stopped watching it after the first 3 episodes, but then later on I caught "The Man in the Bear" and the Christmas episode and I was hooked, lined, and sinkered. It was painful but at the same time oddly enjoyable.

cabri | May 31, 00:44 CET

I started watching at the beginning for Boreanaz, and I finally stopped during S2. While I like the chemistry of the two leads, the plots are awful and the secondary characters I found excruciating. Worst of all, it's treacly. Every episode ends with a weepy song and a montage. And Brennan is a best-selling novelist who understands little of human nature? Whatever.

fruit punch mouth | May 31, 00:53 CET

Oh, and I forgot to add, if anyone stopped watching Reaper during the first half, try it again -- as the article said, once the strike ended, they overcame their monster-of-the-week phase and it's gotten really funny and overall good. :)

cabri | May 31, 00:58 CET

ohbejoyful, I always suspected it would be Zack in the end mostly because it had to be someone we knew well. Otherwise the season-long story wouldn't have been very satisfying. And of the main characters, only Zack seemed like a possible option. None of the other characters had any real (believable) motive to be a killer. Zack, on the other hand, is a very awkward kid, and he's easily influenced by others, as we've seen throughout the show and his communication with the other characters. He got lured into the whole business thinking he was doing something "logical".

I read that they plan on bringing Zack back as a recurring character. He'll be in the sanatorium, something like Hannibal Lecter. That's seems like a cool idea.

Valentyn | May 31, 01:16 CET

Thanks Valentyn - it seems very logical now.

ohbejoyful | May 31, 01:37 CET

fruit punch mouth:



my emphasis

I would recommend As Good As It Gets to counter you argument. You can observe human nature without actually experiencing and understanding it. Brennan is an analyst, and she always looks at the world (if she can help it) through detached eyes. To be engaged, that is something she hasn't fully submitted to.

korkster | May 31, 02:58 CET

Although I wasn't too pleased about the resolution of the whole Gormagon arc either, I was more disappointed in the beginning of the episode that dealt so swiftly with the ramifications of the events of the previous episode. After several years working with Booth, the way Brennan reacted really fell flat for me and seemed out of character.

But yeah, the ending sucked, too. I'd really been enjoying the third season immensely until this episode.

JossIzBoss | May 31, 03:39 CET

The finale had me on the edge of my seat, and to be honest, I was okay with it.

Yes, the plots aren't any better than any other weekly procedural, but it's not why I watch. I like the characters, and I love the gross factor. Them's good bones (and bathtub sludge).

redeem147 | May 31, 04:15 CET

I haven't seen the finale, or most of Season 3, as Channel 7 in Australia keep %$*#ing around with the 'Lost' and 'Bones' schedules.
But thanks to Amazon and the strong Aussie dollar, I far prefer to watch TV on DVD now, anyway. Roll on August for mah 'Bone's' fixin', and September for 'Supernatural'!

Thanks to those who used invisi text in consideration of others, even though I'd heard about the finale and the shocking turn of events. I do wonder if Zach's Asperger's will give cause for a lenient sentence, thus freeing him up to be slowly reintegrated back into the lab. I do have legal concerns that any case he worked on could now be thrown out of court, thus negating the work of the team for the entire season. Yikes.

Before switching off in protest though, give Season 4 a chance. We may very well be surprised by the turn of events.

missb | May 31, 05:02 CET

Korkster,
It seemed to me that Brennan had very little understanding of the social relations between people, and good books demonstrate one's understanding of those relations. Perhaps such a person could write a solid procedural with meager character development, but not much more than that. And maybe that's all Brennan's books are supposed to be. At any rate, while it sort of peeved me, it's not why I stopped watching the show.

At any rate, I'm glad people are enjoying the show's strengths instead of being put off by it's weaknesses.

fruit punch mouth | May 31, 05:13 CET

Its a great show and David is outstanding in it. Its first season is pretty goofy but it hits its stride in the second season.

that being said, I don't know where its filmed but most of it isn't in DC and they take real liberties with the geography out here.

magnus carnage | May 31, 05:35 CET

It doesn't seem fair to dump the show based on one episode that you didn't see. Seems to me that it would make sense to actually watch it and then decide.



magnus - the show is filmed in LA. I live in the DC area and it is kind of hard sometimes to reconcile the geography. However, one of my favorite DC scenes is from season 1 where Booth and Brennan end the episode on a scaffold on the Washington Monument. Really a great moment and I'll forgive any 'weird' DC shots if we get a few more like that.

resa | May 31, 06:21 CET

In regards to the DC geography, I lived in DC for 2 1/2 years and lived there when the show first started. I knew not to take it too seriously when in what was one of the first shots of the show, they showed the DC skyline in view of Dulles airport (completely impossible as Dulles is miles from DC and the monuments).

I watch for the characters/writing and that's about it (and enough as it's pretty good). The science is sketchy at times (I'll leave out my rant on the Christmas episode in the first season), but it is one of the shows that gets to me emotionally based on characters and writing and very few shows are able to do that.

foreverwes | May 31, 07:17 CET

foreverwes - I know exactly what you would be ranting about. That episode makes the microbiologist in me cringe :)

But the show has performed a little better in this regard as the seasons have progressed. And I agree that the characters and their interactions are enough to keep me watching.

JossIzBoss | May 31, 08:49 CET

I would recommend As Good As It Gets to counter you argument.

Err, you know that that's fiction right korkster (i'm assuming you mean the Jack Nicholson/Helen Hunt film) ? Fiction can do many things but defending assertions about the state of the world isn't one of them owing to how it's, y'know, made up ;).

(personally I don't think a best-selling novelist could be so innocent about pop-culture or what makes people tick - that said I don't think a very well travelled anthropologist could be either - but it doesn't stress my suspension of disbelief too much. Might be relevant to point out BTW that the book Brennan, though extremely dedicated, is a much less eccentric, more well-rounded person)

Didn't like the finale and I didn't see it coming which, to me, is because that's very much not how Zach has been presented in the past. Not only was the immorality of murdering someone and betrayal of everything Brennan stood for completely out of character but much more importantly, the simple gap in his "logic" portrayed him as unintelligent which he certainly never has been before. Not a bad idea, very brave on the part of the creators BUT it needed more time to work properly and would've been better left to the start of next season IMO (after a few episodes showing Zach in crisis, presumably after his experiences in Iraq). Still hoping for a 'Colby Granger'/'Numb3rs' style plot-turnaround though I don't see it actually happening.

To some extent though it boils down to how you viewed Zach. Maybe people that don't spend much time around guys (and, less frequently, gals ;) like that see them as broken and abnormal so that when we find out he's actually a dangerous killer their expectations are (even subconsciously) fulfilled. To me though, one of the strengths of 'Bones' was the way this seemingly dysfunctional family actually worked because they complemented each other's weaknesses. In effectively judging Zach as dangerously "lesser" they're making clear that what the show really means is "Angela - and by association Hodgins as well as Booth and Cam are normal, and with their help Brennan can become normal too" - instead of a celebration of diversity it's just the same old "Look at the freak" schtick whenever geeks are presented on TV.

Saje | May 31, 14:49 CET

Agreed there, saje.

To be clear, the producers have stated that they felt they went as far with Zach as they could. Eric Milligan has said that he was shocked to find out what was going to happen, and it is clear from interviews that he is not happy about it. Using Zach sparingly, i.e, his mind, for consultation, allows him to remain in and be used now and again, while they bring in someone new to alter cast chemistry. I just feel that the reveal at the end made no sense- it is a stretch to go from his Iraqi experience, which was not long, to becoming the apprentice of a cannibalistic serial killer.

As to the Christmas episode, all I can say is, making Billy Gibbons of ZZ Top Angela's father was a stroke of genius. I love Michaela Conlin. My wife, however, loves TJ Thynes, so we are even.

As to Brennan, the Brennan of TV is radically different from the Brennan of the book series. The book Brennan is not so culturally unaware. "Hey, Brennan, don't go all Hannibal Lector on me now." "I don't know what that means!"

Dana5140 | May 31, 16:13 CET

Let me make my position clear; I can not accept anything as
preposterous as this ending for Zach. It makes me feel as if
I had been lied to for 3 years. Not acceptable. I vote Bones
off the Island.

JDL | May 31, 19:36 CET

... it is a stretch to go from his Iraqi experience, which was not long, to becoming the apprentice of a cannibalistic serial killer.

Yeah it'd be a big stretch Dana5140 but at least it'd be something. If we were shown that his behaviour was the result of trauma then the show wouldn't be saying that Zach was basically a ticking time-bomb all along - that all it needed was the right (extremely flimsy) "logical" argument and he'd start murdering people - because anyone could go a bit bonkers when suffering from post traumatic stress (to a lesser extent we saw it happen to Booth in an earlier season) - and I for one would feel better about how the character ended up.

In other words, there are ways to make it less unbelievable, none of which they employed IMO (almost definitely due to time pressure).

Saje | June 01, 12:03 CET

I don't blame JDL for quitting, for the reasons Saje gives--not because I liked Zack and I think nice guys can't be serial killers (I've seen enough TV to know better!), but because of how it invalidates his way of looking at the world.

I'll still watch because I like Brennan & Booth, but if they did something to "normalize" Brennan, to suggest that her worldview is more crippling (like Zack's), then I would definitely be out. Cuz although I really enjoy Booth & DB's portrayal of him, I'm on Brennan's side.

jcs | June 01, 18:53 CET

I agree and it's something they could fix next season (at least a little bit). I'm sure the characters are just as blown away as most of the rest of us and the writers could use their attempts to understand help us understand. It might help.

resa | June 01, 18:55 CET

Zach reminds me of the Cordelia fiasco on Angel. We need closure; at least an episode to come together.

korkster | June 05, 01:32 CET