ithildin | Bones

You're viewing

ithildin's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

So I've read some rumours about how the season ends...

Supposedly, Booth and Bones will have sex in the last ep of the season.

I don't think I want this to happen.

Don't get me wrong, I think they're eventually destined for each other, but when TV types remove the 'U' from the UST, it usually doesn't bode well for the series. I guess I don't trust them not to screw it up.

'Moonlighting', anyone? 'Remington Steele'? 'Scarecrow and Mrs. King'?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'll be the voice of dissent. I want them to get together.

Yes, many a show has been ruined when they resolved the unresolved sexual tension. But that's because the writers were timid. If UST is all they've got in their bag of tricks, throwing it out the window is a bad idea. But it doesn't have to be.

I've noticed that lots of shows that [b]begin[/b] with a happily married (or unmarried) couple get along just fine despite the fact that we may assume they're frolicking together frequently. Why? Because UST is not what the show is about. The relationship is part of it, but the "will they or won't they dance" isn't.

If you're going to deep six the UST, you have to have something to replace it with. Or at least change it up. The producers/writers who were willing to reveal Zack as a serial killer's apprentice (whether we liked that plotline or not) should not be afraid of shaking up the status quo between Bones and Booth.

Or hell, just have them sleep together once--and then deal with the prickly consequences of THAT. Bones has already been shown to have no qualms about purely sexual relationships. So she sleeps with Booth. As far as she's concerned, it's fun, it's pleasurable, as long as it doesn't interfere in their working relationship, why not?

Booth, of course, wouldn't see it that way. They would still have issues a-plenty, plus the question of whether they'll do it again. Booth might resist because it means more to him, or he wants it to mean more to Bones. She might decide that Booth's reaction means they should resume their previously chaste relationship. Or both. Even while both of them want to do it again.

It doesn't have to mean they'd screw up the show. And I'd rather see the writers take that risk than continue the dance indefinitely with no resolution.

I hope you're right! I guess I just don't have a lot of faith in the PTBs not to mess up one of my favourite shows. After what's been done to House over the last two seasons, I don't have a lot of faith that they won't screw it up. However, if they get rid of Sweets, I might be more willing to cut them some slack [g] And put Angela and Hodgy back together while they're at it.

Yeah, House has been pretty disappointing lately. And while I initially disliked Sweets, he's grown on me this season. Given a choice between ditching Sweets and getting Angela and Hodgins back together, I'd take the latter in a heartbeat.

THAT plot contrivance annoyed me more than Sweets, or even the assassination of Zack's character. The pudgy hand of god was wa-a-ay too evident in their breakup. (Which, I suppose, suggests that a Brennan/Booth hookup might NOT be a good idea after all...)