Zak is the Gormagon Apprentice??? Bogus!

OK, now that it is over and I have had some time to think about it, I still think making Zak the Gormagon Apprentice was complete and utter bull.

I am not a total TV geek, but I discovered Bones this year literally right before the writers strike. I ended up trying to catch up on the current season through the Amazon UnBox on my Tivo. I liked everything about the show, but I was particularly intrigued by the whole Gormagon story. I liked the whole ongoing chase of a criminal mastermind with all those totally over-used plotlines of secret societies, cannibalism, masters & apprentices, etc.

When the strike was over I read that they were going to finish off the Gormagon story because it had been planned for a longer arc but now they were quite short on episodes. I knew that were going to make someone the Gormagon or his apprentice. Honestly, I thought they were going to cheese it up and either make it be the psychiatrist, Dr. Sweets or they were going to make it someone in the lab that we didn't really know, but they all knew the person. When I sat down that night to watch the finale I was totally surprised when it ended up being Zak. I actually, like a dork, expressed "Oh my God that can't be" out loud (I know - dork!).

Was it a good choice? I could argue it is not, but I am not a television screenwriter. It is fine if they think that it makes for a better story and that they can entertain us in the future without him. Was it believable? Absolutely not. I am not going to talk in detail about the character and his motivations like he is a real person (ever read those fan sites - they write these long diatribes as if they just had lunch with the character), but the basic premise did not seem to make sense. For me it was the whole timeline of the events and my re-watching of the episode where the character was supposed to have killed the lobbyist. I can't suspend my disbelief when you show me a different actor doing the killing!

It was not my favorite episode.