In This Section
TV Guide Spotlight
Also on TVGuide.com
|
« TV Matt'rs
Exclusive: Desperate Housewives' Biggest Twist Yet?
Hold onto your calendars, because this scoop/possible spoiler is a doozy. When ABC's Desperate Housewives resumes its season on April 13, several months will have passed for the residents of Wisteria Lane. "Several months," though, is a drop in the bucket compared to the temporal shift Housewives viewers might be subject to next.
Sources tell me there is a plan on the drawing board to fast-forward the show five years into the future in the closing moments of the season finale — and continue on from there for the duration of the series.
Such a tornado-trumping twist would of course necessitate several cast changes. For more on the possible recasts as well as a peek at another season-finale shocker under consideration, watch this new Mega Minute:
So, which do you think is the better notion — going forward or back? And who from the cast do you think could pull off either "age difference"? Talk about it here! — With additional reporting by Michael Maloney
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
Apr 1, 2008 11:18 PM
|
Where's the Spoiler Alert?! Some of us are allergic to spoilers. 
But still, the time jump sounds awesome. A great way to freshen the series, don't you think?
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 5:35 AM
|
|
For you, Marcus, I have added a spoiler alert — though I must reiterate, these are just two ideas being batted around. Neither is set in stone.
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 6:42 AM
|
No no no no! Say it ain't so ! Why does DH feel the need to rip off Lost? matt even you got the Lost vibe with the mention of the 'snake in the mailbox'.
I think it's a bad idea that will not go well.
I love this show and would hate to see it start tanking over some dumb stunt.
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 8:40 AM
|
|
Fast forward 5 years into the future? Just because a tornado blew thru the street doesnt mean we have to act like its Wizard of Oz time! Everyone will be older, the kids will all be older with more problems---boring teenaged troubles we've all seen to death. Since the women will be older, they will be even more desperate, and too much desperate is not a pretty sight!!
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 9:31 AM
|
C'mon Matt! 'fess up! I saw the date of your post--thought you nearly "Lost" it when I saw your hints.
I have a better idea--show each character at the moment they die. Now that's never been done before, right? ![]<img border=](http://community.tvguide.com/images/emoticons/devil.gif) ">
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 9:53 AM
|
|
Both of these are really bad ideas. I mean 'jump the shark' bad. Bad bad bad. Why can't we just continue with the story as it is? What's the advantage of moving it 5 years into the future, or moving it back to relive stories we've already heard about? It won't amp up the show...it won't freshen up the stories. Ugh...no thanks.
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 10:39 AM
|
|
Forward's much better than back. I'm sick of the prequel trend. Very few movies and shows can make the prequel stuff work (see exhibit # 1a: George Lucas's Star Wars prequels, with the possible exception of # 3). "Lost" manages it because the flashbacks always either add to or explain the show's specific, continuing mysteries. But I don't see any point with DH. A prequel episode or two might be interesting, but anything long term? Nah.
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 12:49 PM
|
|
That's copying One Tree Hill's four year jump into the future. It seems like it's worked for that show, but I don't know how it's going to work for DH.
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 1:04 PM
|
|
Im not liking this idea one bit. They still have storylines to complete. And that means all the kids will be older. And SusanThis is so dumb.
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 1:58 PM
|
Ok,from a purely plot perspective,fowrward is better then back.
uch of heroes' second sucked,but one of the pluses was the time jump. let us guess what happened to the characters. don't jump back and tell us stuff we know already.
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 2:19 PM
|
I like the idea of a fast-forward to 5 years later. I've had enough of Lynette's kids already. They didn't die in the tornado as many had speculated. Adding 5 years to their ages will be the next best thing for me. 
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 2:19 PM
|
|
I forgot to mention so does this mean that Susan will have the baby? Or will she?
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 3:33 PM
|
|
The whole thing sounds a little iffy to me, but I think jumping forward is way better than jumping back. Going back means I know how everything is going to work out and leaves no suspense. Would they stay in the past for the rest of the series or would they meet up with present time eventually? They would have to come up with ideas to tie into everything else for the duration of the show. That'd get tiresome. Jumping ahead means flashbacks to the past five years and still going forward. I didn't like it in OTH, but it could work with this.
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 8:32 PM
|
C'mon Matt! 'fess up! I saw the date of your post--thought you nearly "Lost" it when I saw your hints
Trust me, it pained me having to post this (for production reasons) late last night. So many doubting Thomases out there.
... so does this mean that Susan will have the baby?
Yes, the tot will just sprout to age 5 by the fall (under the fast-forward scenario).
|
|
Apr 2, 2008 8:57 PM
|
|
|
