Just a question for those who have been rabid fans (which I mean lovingly) since the get-go (as I have only been what I would call obsessive since the end of Season 5):
The show seems to be playing pretty fast and loose with the spoilers this season. Was it always this way?
Have you guys read this interview? I came across if after the season 5 finale - back when anything was possible.
http://redblog-thementalist.blogspot.com/2012/06/interview-bruno-heller-teresa-lisbon-is.html
It is a translation of a French interview Heller gave in (I think) 2010 and it contradicts his statements this past fall - to the American media - that he only decided who RJ was in Season 5.
HERE - he says that Simon Baker and a small circle knew the true identity of RJ from the get go. He also states that he had a hard time getting Baker to sign on for six seasons, which, if I extrapolate, suggests that his original vision for the show was for six seasons.
He seems to also suggest that the final episode of the series would be the RJ reveal.
So, either he changed his mind (which would probably have royally pissed off Baker), was pressured to change his vision, or...something else is going on.
One can dream.
So Sunday's episode wasn't horrible. It was fun. And, unlike the last several episodes, it felt like a complete thought.
For me, much of the evidence that we weren't through with the RJ storyline was in how poorly it was handled and, then, how clumsy and awkward the post-RJ episodes have been. It is these things that gives us room to theorize and makes it easier for us to make the leap that it is all subterfuge to make way for a grand twist or reveal.
If all of the other episodes were as good as this one (and it wasn't perfect), it would be much harder for me speculate that we are being led up the garden path because I could buy this as a genuine effort at revamping The Mentalist.
So I find myself wondering - can I get on board with a decent 2.0 Mentalist (that gets renewed) and accept McRJ as the real deal?
I'm not sure I'm built that way.
It would be easier if, for instance, the new character wasn't named "mar"-cus. It can't be a coincidence that one of the MAJOR CLUES THAT IS NOT ADDRESSED AT ALL IN THE RJ REVEAL is in a new character name. I'm not suggesting that he is RJ but rather that Heller is purposefully poking the bear. If they are SO ADAMANT that the show is through with RJ, why do this?
For now, I will find solace in the fact that this was at least a good episode and perhaps a renewal isn't totally out of hand.
So...I'm home sick today and thusly binge watching Season 2. (Not that I need an excuse or anything...)
In Red Bulls - Bosco and Jane are chatting with an informant from a drug gang and ask about their tattoos. The informant says that a lot of people are copying their tattoos as a means of deception. We know that the three-dot tattoo (in actual life, not TV life) has several meanings and has been used by different groups to identify themselves.
I'm sorry if I am treading on overly-trodden ground but if ALL the people who were doing Red John's bidding who are also law enforcement were also in the BA - then they would all have that tattoo. And, clearly, they don't because several of those people have been killed. It would seem to me that the three dot thing is just a deception (as I know many of you agree with.)
In the same episode - Van Pelt gets shot but is wearing a vest. In the ambulance, she slaps Rigsby (who wasn't wearing a vest) and makes his promise to always wear a vest. This is both poignant and ironic given last week's seemingly super-human vest-less feats.
On another topic - did any of you detail-oriented people notice that in the bar scene Jane said Grace was "a price above rubies" which is also a Season 2 episode title. It is, itself, a bible reference to "a virtuous woman". Not sure what the meta relevance would be but I found it interesting.
There are so many of these little things that suggest that the writers are not total idiots and have a least a passing appreciation for detail and maybe this is all going somewhere. Or they are just coincidences. But one can hope.
Or maybe it is the flu talking....
Other than being annoyed that it was actually Haibach - I really enjoyed this episode. There were a few WTF moments but I'm gonna let those slide. It was just SO MUCH BETTER that the last few weeks that for now I am satisified.
Question though - I don't think they categorically said that Haibach was also behind the other murders - it is just assumed at this point, right?
So I (very rudely) started posting this another another man's (or woman's) theory so I'll repost it here.
I'm starting to think that the whole "old gang" is in on the kidnapping - which would explain why the gang went out for a drink (so that VanPelt could be left alone in the Red motel) and why Lisbon demured (so that she could help set up the caper).
It is a very Mentalist-y twist - a la "Crimson Hat" where Jane fake murdered Lisbon and Rigsby.
Haibach is a decoy villain because he is easily riled. That is why Lisbon chooses him when Jane asks about their hunches. He is used to draw out the real killer.
If the real killer has eyes within the FBI, it would be one explanation for why everyone was acting so weird around each other.
Or, it is possible that Rigsby and VanPelt weren't even privy to the plan until Lisbon starts to stage the fake kidnapping. (Perhaps Rigsby doesn't even know it is fake during the episode.)
This would kind of make this episode like "The Mentalist - Greatest Hits" because it draws on a lot of elements and twists that we've already seen and would be a good farewell to Rigsby/GVP.
Eh?
Spoilers from yesterday's episode....
Something is fishy here. Clearly Haibach isn't the guy. Why would he kidnap VanPelt? (Other than the lazy answer that the actress is leaving the show and thusly the character needs an exit strategy.) If he has an endgame that isn't simple murder...wouldn't it be Jane or Lisbon? He must be fronting for someone else. The guy from Rigsby/VanPelt apartment doesn't seem to be the same guy from the motel - which supports that the actual doers of the crimes aren't the masterminds. (Loved the red in the motel name. Just fantastic.)
Also...what's with Jane's icy reception of Van Pelt and Rigsby? Cho - not the demonstrable one - gives them hugs. Jane was just kind of "whats up"?
This episode got my blood pumping and it is tempting me to start theorizing again. Will try to keep my expectations in check.