Check out the second paragraph of my profile (if you have that much time on your hands)!
User 389834
WOW! That last Monk was very dark.
Here is my input:
The episode, especially the final scene, has a lot of holes, raising several questions, leading to one much bigger one.
Here are the smaller questions:
1. At the pier scene, Monk is wearing his brown suit, either that or I saw it wrong. However, Monk was wearing Mitch's uniform when he called Stottlemeyer on a pay phone, and had no access to his apartment, where all his brown suits were. How did he get the suit?
2. Why would Monk, the man of phobias, pick a dark, rickety pier with water on three sides as the rendezvous point?
3. Why would Monk ask for food when he had money that Natalie gave him and access to restaurants, albeit in a navy uniform?
The latter two questions are irrelevant when the following, big question is asked:
Monk never picked a rendezvous point. Why would he be waiting if he was unaware a rendezvous was taking place?
Tell me if I'm missing something.
These questions lead to several solutions. One is that the man that Stottlemeyer shot was not Monk. The others somehow tie in, but I'm missing them too. Input, Monk-o-philes?
Originally posted by scherzo1. Central casting. No doubt the director asked himself, during a particularly soul-searching moment in the wee hours of the morning, whether the fans of a television program about an obsessive, perfectionist detective would notice glaring continuity errors such as a magical change of clothing. Then he took another hit of cocaine for inspriration, decided not, and telephoned the escort service for that pair of Honduran twins he finds so congenial.
WOW! That last Monk was very dark.
Here is my input:
The episode, especially the final scene, has a lot of holes, raising several questions, leading to one much bigger one.
Here are the smaller questions:
1. At the pier scene, Monk is wearing his brown suit, either that or I saw it wrong. However, Monk was wearing Mitch's uniform when he called S shot was not Monk. The others somehow tie in, but I'm missing them too. Input, Monk-o-philes?
2. Because the writers are convinced that good television requires drama and conflict, not logic. That, and the cocaine parties.
First Writer: "Let's put Monk someplace where he would be uncomfortable: that would be dramatic."
Second Writer: "OK, but we'll have to rack our brains to explain why he's there in the first place."
First Writer: "Don't overwrite. That's a failing with you. Here, have some more cocaine."
Second Writer: "OK. BTW, when does the director get here with the Honduran twins?"
3. He has a phobia against visiting restaurants in a navy uniform. Also see the answer to question number 2.
4. Monk was waiting because the denouement required it. He had to wait somewhere. Since waiting at a location that would test his phobias constitutes "good drama" according to the standards of the series writers, he was waiting at such a place. The villains, sensing the writers' intentions, also showed up. You might object that there are many such places, and how could both Monk and the villains know where to meet if no previous arrangement had been made? The answer is kismet. If this seems implausible to you, ask yourself, who is the professional writer? Aha. Thought so.
You might as well ask why someone with pronounced phobias about things like dust and dirty silverware, would consent to a scheme wherein he agrees to be shot in the chest with live ammunition, relying on a kevlar vest to protect his life. Bone-bruising hammer-like blows to the sternum, Monk? Why, yes, thank you.
Originally posted by Mark AdkinsIt doesn't matter. The whole thing was a setup. The suit thing was not a continuity problem; it was planned by Monk and Stottlemeyer, and Natalie never noticed that Monk had dropped Mitch's uniform.
1. Central casting. No doubt the director asked himself, during a particularly soul-searching moment in the wee hours of the morning, whether the fans of a television program about an obsessive, perfectionist detective would notice glaring continuity errors such as a magical change of clothing. Then he took another hit of cocaine for inspriration, dec ...[text shortened]... fe. Bone-bruising hammer-like blows to the sternum, Monk? Why, yes, thank you.
Randy sucks at singing.
Originally posted by scherzoA likely story. No doubt the writers, sobering up after their cocaine party, had to come up with something to resolve the story; and the director didn't want to reshoot the scene with the suit. Hence that byzantine "explanation".
It doesn't matter. The whole thing was a setup. The suit thing was not a continuity problem; it was planned by Monk and Stottlemeyer, and Natalie never noticed that Monk had dropped Mitch's uniform.
Randy sucks at singing.
Who's "Randy"?
Also, is it alright to call myself a Monk-o-phile if, first, I have never watched an episode, and second, I'm not at all certain that the basic premise is appealing? I'm really more of a Monk-o-agnostic. That is to say, I have nothing against Monk, and if I were going to watch a contemporary televised detective series, I should certainly give this one a try; but, lacking a television, that seems sadly impossible -- unless I can view it on youtube.com or something of the sort?