Thursday, February 19, 2009

Ausiello Spoilers: Multiple

Ausiello tosses out a new Bones spoiler and reaffirms an old one.

What do you think of the new one?

21 comments:

Angelator said...

I don't think I like that spoiler. But I didn't like the one about Booth's brother and it turned out to be nothing, so I'll just wait and see how it plays out.

I really wish I wasn't a spoiler addict!!

Shep said...

I'm going to wait until we get more info so I don't freak myself out for nothing.

Sophie said...

It makes sense, I think that people within the lab would start getting freakishly suspicious. They know it can happen, they've seen what happened with Zack.

I suspect, that if the sex spoiler is without cheat, it's going to happen in relation to that.

Jeannie said...

That sounds a lot like last year's finale. I wonder if there is some sort of connection?

Milky said...

I see it happening! Though, Sophie, I think the sex isn't only related to that but to some other spoiler I read somewhere.

Since this post is spoilerish by nature, can I mention that spoiler, Wendy? I don't remember reading about it here :-s

what if I give a fair warning before writing the spoiler? lol

Wendy said...

Yes, I'm not sure which one you're talking about. The only ones I specifically don't mention here are Korbi's because she pulls them from the sides without telling people that's where they come from and some people who read media spoilers don't read the sides.

Milky said...

Ok :) though I did a little research and found out where I read it...

...it was here.

I'm sorry, Wendy, lol :( *blushes*

So, remember the article where they described how we'd see a Booth's family crisis? The one where they said we'd see Booth's grandpa and discover some things that happened in Booth's childhood?

Well, I think the sex is related to that--some kind of comfortsex or I'msodownIcan'tstanditanylongersex-- rather than the suspicion at the lab over we don't know what yet.

about the spoiler itself... well, I kinda hope it's related to the gravedigger. Thanks to ForensicMama for putting ideas in my head LOL

ForensicMama said...

LOL you're welcome Milky!!!

IT'S THE GRAVEDIGGER!!!!!!!!! The accomplice... let me tell ya!!!

Jeannie said...

Nothing would make me happier than a proper ending to the gravedigger arc but I fail to see how the revealing of an accomplice would make them suspect each other? Seriously, what are the odds of having a serial killer's apprentice among a tight-knit group like that twice within a year? ;-)

Milky said...

Well... I don't think there will actually be another apprentice... but they've suspected Hodgins twice already.

What I'm trying to say is they're probably going to suspect each other--that's the spoiler, after all--but it won't be any of them.

And I know it's only my wish... but I'd love it if it were the Diggy.

Wendy said...

The Gravedigger line has left a bunch of questions - such as how that woman was able to do everything herself. I would like it to add to that story (remembering Hart's claim that multiple episodes would involve the GD storyline resolution). But I hope this better than a rehash of PitH-type suspiciousness, no matter what it involves.

Wendy said...

Maybe Michael Baddaluco returns as a crazy? :) He's the only intern I could buy being something more than he appears. All the others don't have that much depth. That would be something interesting to see...

I definitely would have a hard time buying a second Bones regular being involved in anything wrong, truly guilty or not.

Jeannie said...

Especially given the fact that Booth's kidnapping was so deliberately different from the GD's usual MO that I keep wondering if that was supposed to be a clue. Also, on a more rational note, why in the world would HH choose to reveal the GD identity during non-sweeps season??? Or was that due to the constant preemptions?

I agree with Wendy, it was hard to swallow the first time around but having a second member of the crew be some secret baddie (is that a word?) would be way too much. What are the odds anyway?

Although I have to admit, I really did suspect Hodgins for a bit during PitH (I was completely spoilerfree for that episode). Worked for me! ;-) (But again, only once.)

thegryphin said...

I think that this feels like a natural progression. After Zach and then finding out what Hodgins was up to with the Gravedigger, I can see how everyone would start getting suspicious of everyone else when things start going wrong. I am curious to see how Booth and Brennan's relationship changes. Maybe they even pull away a little from one another which is then the catalyst for bringing them back together. I don't know! I guess we'll have to wait and see!

Milky said...

We'll *always* have to wait, thegryphin. I can't help but be paranoid when talking about spoilers, lol.

I always feel they're just playing with us so it'll be a real surprise.

Anonymous said...

Jeannie - February is sweeps month. February, May, July, and November. :)

Jeannie said...

Yes, I know but it was scheduled to air in January, remember? I seriously doubt HH knew about Bush's address before Fox ever knew. ;-)
Does a month still count as a sweeps month if there are hardly any new episodes???? Like, say, February for Bones this year?

Shep said...

I hope we don't end up with another Zack-like fiasco, they should have learnt from last time! But maybe we'll get a chance to see Zack again if Hodgins is the suspect? He might go and visit Zack in the loony bin. I'm really hoping for a resolution to Zack's little revelation to Sweets at the beginning of the season - they seem to have forgotten about it.

Hero still left loose ends about the Gravdigger so hopefully, they'll tie those up as well.

Anonymous said...

Sweeps month is determined by the ratings people, not the shows themselves, so yes it is still sweeps even if the show was preempted the whole time. I didn't realize HITH was scheduled for January, so my bad there. It seemed logical to me that they would reveal who the Gravedigger was since it was sweeps, but I see your point now.

Jeannie said...

I'm sorry for being so unclear about what I mean. From what I gathered, sweeps months determine the prices for ads during the show (or something to that effect), right? So a show is anxious to deliver its best episodes during sweeps months. What I meant was that Bones sort of "lost" a sweeps month to show itself off this year since there were hardly any new episodes which might have ruined their entire "presentation schedule". Was that better? ;-)

Anonymous said...

In that sense, yes, they did lose a sweeps month. That doesn't need to be a bad thing for the program, however. Reliably consistent ratings are often better than having an unusually big spike for, say, a special crossover show.

For the record, neilsenmedia.com explains sweeps month as follows:

"Sweeps are designated months during the year when Nielsen Media Research measures all local markets. We survey the majority of our 210 local television markets in November, February, May and July.... These months are known as “sweep” months, and the data are used by local stations and cable systems to set local advertising rates and to make program decisions. The term 'sweep' originated in the 1950s, when Nielsen Media Research mailed and processed diaries to sample households, starting with the East Coast and 'sweeping' across the nation."

Add to Technorati Favorites