It’s been a crazy day. I actually wanted to post this earlier, but I had a power outage for the last 3 hours, so I’m just getting caught up on things. Here’s where I stand: After thinking things over last night, I’m still undecided on when to reveal what I know. The addition of the 2nd “After the Final Rose” show doesn’t have me shaking in my boots or upset, in fact (as I’ll explain momentarily) doesn’t come as a surprise at all. The thing that I was surprised at was they announced it on Feb. 12th. I thought they’d wait a little longer. But it doesn’t change what I know, it only makes what I know that much more believable when I eventually tell you.
I’m sure this is how ABC is playing this. They are going to present to you a love story. They are going to show the journey of that love story. They are going to show two people getting engaged, get reaction from the one who wasn’t picked, then give you a follow up on the next night as to where everything stands. I am here to tell you that is not what really happened. They are going to show you one story, and I will tell you another. There is no love story here, sorry to disappoint all you hopeless romantics. The 2nd “ATFR” show is being done, in their minds, to tell their side of the story and justify things that will happen in the finale. The reason they can do is this because this has all been one giant puppet show, with the creators pulling all the strings. Listen to what creator Mike Fleiss said in an interview yesterday:
“I’m the one to blame,” he said. “The show was being phoned in there for a couple of seasons. We were a little complacent. I was off making my movies (“Hostel,” “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre”) and we all took our eye off the ball. I thought the show would run itself.”
Mr. Fleiss has refocused his energies on “The Bachelor” and the rest of his TV efforts, which he produces in conjunction with his Warner Horizon-based Next Entertainment. That’s included naming “Bachelor” editor Martin Hilton as showrunner, something Mr. Fleiss credits with helping turn the show around.
“These shows are made in post,” Mr. Fleiss said. “He’s able to think about a show and how it’s cut together in advance.”
Mr. Fleiss also is thankful to ABC for sticking by his show.
“They’ve been supportive of the creative changes on the show, they’ve given us a nice time period, and they let us make the show we want to make,” he said.
Phrases like “creative changes”, “a nice time period”, and “making the show we want to make” further prove that this season has had a storyline set out from the very beginning. They have a certain story they want to present which will attract the most attention, generate interest/buzz, thus increasing ratings. Of course Fleiss is coming out and saying “It’s our best ending yet”, because the story was already written! They just needed it executed. You think this just naturally happened in the 13th season of a struggling franchise? Certain people have to go along with this story or else it doesn’t work. I became aware of this seasons storyline right when I broke the “exclusive” news on Jan. 27th. And through all the comments on my board, and through all the 3600 posts on FORT about what this could be, I am here to tell you now that NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON has nailed this thing dead on yet. Not one.
If they’re gonna give us a two hour finale on the Monday the 2nd, followed by a one-hour “ATFR”, why then do we need ANOTHER “ATFR” less than 24 hours later? What’s the point? There’s only one explanation. It’s because it’s all been set in motion since the beginning of the season. They knew what they were doing when they let out those screencaps in episode one, and they’ve known all along what was going to eventually happen. Yes, the finale is “jaw-dropping” because of what they were able to pull off. Sure, the finale and both “ATFR’s” will make it seem like these events happened totally on their own and without manipulation, and it’ll even come across as a genuine and somewhat believable story. I’m here to tell you its not. There is a story here that goes much deeper than what we’re seeing on television and people have been in on this from the very beginning. Who has been in on it, you ask? That will be revealed in my final column. And no, I have not told you the shocking part yet. This was just the beginning part of the story. There’s much more here. Who’s in on it? For how long? What exactly has been scripted? What’s the final resolution in all this? Who’s to blame? Did any of the girls know about this? What’s Jasons role in everything? Its going to get better, trust me.
So what does “K Moon/Rebecca” mean? When I first found out this information, and a friend asked me, “Can you tell me anything without giving it away?”, what I told them was, “This season is not necessarily about the who, but the how.” And I think even someone ran with that and put it in comment section back on either 1/19 or 1/26. So when I posted the first clue of “K Moon/Rebecca”, I thought someone would go back a week, remember the “It’s not necessarily the who, but the how”, and put two and two together. Well, I was wrong. I think there’s about maybe 20 to 30 people who figured out “K Moon” was “Keith Moon”, drummer for “The Who”. Hell, if the clue would’ve been “R Daltrey/Rebecca”, would that have made it easier? I don’t even listen to “The Who”. I just knew I wanted my clue to be “It’s not necessarily about the who, but the how.” So I wikipedia’d “The Who” and used the guys name from the band who I least recognized. I’d never even heard of the guy, so I went with that one. So “K Moon” = The Who.
The “how” was a bit trickier, but not much. So I went to imdb.com for a little help. Well, let’s see, Kirstie Alley’s character on “Cheers” was named “Rebecca Howe.” Bingo. There’s your clue. “K Moon/Rebecca” = Who/How. I’m a simple man. I wasn’t looking up Kiwi birds in New Zealand, or talking about moons, and orbits, and whatever else got thrown out there. You people really overanalyzed this clue. As for the Rebecca part, I was SHOCKED that nobody would try to link it up with a pop culture reference to one of the most famous sitcoms of all time. But like I said, even if you got that clue (which I think one person in America even suggested that Rebecca was a character on “Cheers”), didn’t mean you’d be able to figure anything out. It all fits in the story ABC is telling this season. No, this season is not about WHO he chooses, but the HOW behind it all.
So Clue #1 – “It’s not about the who, but the how.”
Back Tuesday with the next “Bachelor” column. Let the speculating begin.