IMDb > "Castle" Secret's Safe with Me (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
"Castle: Secret's Safe with Me (#5.3)"
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
"Castle" Secret's Safe with Me (2012)

« Prev | 84 of 173 Episodes | Next »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 2 reviews in total 

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Overall Good Show, Though Some Iffy Plot Tricks

8/10
Author: Michael Seese from United States
17 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

SPOILERS THROUGHOUT! Proceed at your own risk!

I could write this show! Midway through -- when Castle and Beckett went back to Anjelica's to confront her about the insurance fraud -- I said out loud, "The butler did it." And I was right! Castle was even gracious enough to use my exact words. Then, when they went to commercial I said, "Why commit the fraud? Just sell the $4 million bracelet for $4 million, and pay off your debts." And when they returned, what did Beckett ask Anjelica?

Overall, though, this was a mixed episode. There were a lot of good points. The homage to "Da Vinci Code" was a great way to start. In my writing, I enjoy throwing in pop culture references. (Did I mention I could have written this one?) I thought it was hilarious when Captain Gates turned into a giddy child when she saw the "Gemini" doll, and then became a fawning fan of Castle, the author. And I love the quirky characters they throw in. Last week, it was the makeup artists; this week, it was the you-store-it owner who looked at the victim's picture and said, really drolly, "She was a lot less bloody when I saw her."

My primary complaint was the plethora of plot implausibilities, some bordering on deux ex machina. Castle and Beckett wanted the contents of storage unit 317. A lot. Obviously, so did Felix. A lot. They didn't think to question him right then? Really? Wendell was able to take a photo of an artificial eye fragment and actually find the owner? Really? And then poor Wendell just happened to use the subway station which happened to have out-of-order cameras, allowing Kirby the butler to shove him in front of the train? Oh, and no one standing on the platform saw it? Really?

Oh well.

As always, much of the dialog had me in stitches.

Castle: "I learned so much," in reference to the time he and Alexis had "the talk."

Castle: "Mother used her Jedi mind tricks on me." (See pop culture reference comment above.)

Lanie: "Oh, you are in trouble." (After Beckett busted him rummaging through her desk.) Castle: "I'm not in trouble." (Hangs up.)

Castle: "I'm a best-selling author. Why wouldn't I have two grand in my pocket?"

Castle: "I think my hand's getting sweaty." Beckett: "I know. It's kind of gross."

And the capper, which was 50% a "look."

Beckett: "Take your hand off your tool." Ryan & Esposito: (snicker) Beckett: "Shut up."

My other favorite look was Castle's raised eyebrow when Beckett did not disavow her "kinky past."

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Good episode, but based around a weak cliché.

6/10
Author: phoenix-hourglass from United States
5 November 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This may seem nit-picky, but they brought it upon themselves.

I've never seen a case where a victim leaving some sort of clue to their murderer made sense. How did they know? What if they're wrong? Why didn't the killer wait until they were dead to leave? How do you know that's even supposed to be a clue? They really had the presence of mind to do that? How much blood has this person lost already? Etc.

So as I'm watching the episode, all I can think about are better clues she could have left. Why "317"? Why not "locker" or "doll" or her brother's name?

And why write it so big? You're BLEEDING TO DEATH! Ration that stuff! She had to crawl, repeatedly, to write out the most cryptic clue she could find in huge letters. Wouldn't it make more sense to stay in one spot and write a longer clue in smaller lettering. If she hadn't wasted so much time and blood, she could have written something that actually made sense. "Locker 317." "Gemini doll." "My brother tracked down the man who killed our parents, so if you look inside the Gemini doll inside storage locker 317 you'll be able to solve four murders."

Who the heck is she writing to anyway? At least when a victim leaves a clue to the murder's identity, it's clear they're leaving it for the police. She really expected writing "317" to help the police? Why would she possibly think they'd have any idea what that meant? Again, at least write "locker 317" so they have some idea where to look. Yeah, maybe they'll waste some time looking at a train station or gym or something, but that still narrows it down much more than just a three-digit number does.

And the most infuriating part is that it didn't have to be a cryptic message written in blood. It could have been a note in her pocket, or jotted down on her arm if they wanted to go for something a little weirder. And in that case, it makes more sense, because it would mean it's a note she wrote to herself. It doesn't have to be specific or useful to the investigation. It just needs to be helpful to her.

The rest of the episode is great, but it's based around one of my least favorite crime tropes, and that spoils the whole thing for me.

Was the above review useful to you?


Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history