I’m annoyed I didn’t see that coming until about 30 seconds ahead of time.

Then again, I’m pathologically pathetic at guessing stuff like this. I am proud I at least figured out that there was a human being inside the casing, but only when did it seem like Chuck and Sarah had no more obstacles did I put two and two together. Then again, I was the guy in the theatres going, “Man, I totally didn’t see the lead in a romantic comedy finding true love by the time the credits rolled,” so, take what I say with the appropriate dosage of salt.

Now, this is something I want to get into later in the week: Chuck seems like a show built for the short-haul. And I mean this is a positive sense. They have a finite story to tell, and they are not about to slow down in order to tell it. Tonight’s twist gives the show more story to work with, but it’s still not an enormous amount of story. Essentially, they solved a narrative problem (”How do we explain why Bryce destroyed the Intercept if he’s dead”) by bringing Chuck’s former roommate/Sarah’s ex-lover/Casey’s ex-murder victim back into the mix. But here’s the issue: there are only so many “I can’t tell you why!” scenes they can play before it gets old.

Now, short-haul shows can be absolutely fantastic. There’s nothing wrong with knowing your narrative limit and simply producing that much narrative. Essentially, we need to know why Bryce destroyed the Intercept, and how Chuck will survive the erection of Intercept II. Bryce’s reintroduction to the story could be the start of “Operation: Make Sure The Second Intercept Is Never Built.” Or, it could simply be the writers’ already out of story and desperate to keep things moving along.

In any case, especially in the new age of broadcasting we’re entering, it will be interesting to see if more shows take a 6-, 8- ,11-episode closed narrative approach. I’m pleased as punched with Chuck these days, don’t get me wrong: but I can see the end of the narrative tunnel coming sooner rather than later.