TVSquad

I find it disappointing that the second spin-off from CSI: Crime Scene Investigation - where the characterization and development of backstory, relationships within the CSI unit(s), and the interplay between the characters is so strong - simply cannot develop any chemistry between the characters, save for the generally excellent Messrs Cahill and Giovinazzo, and where the characters seem to exist simply to spout forensibabble.

The original CSI's strengths, in my opinion, are that the characters are sufficiently diverse in their interests and opinions that the audience can readily empathise/sympathise with them and yet their conflicts still represent themselves genuinely and believeably - just as their camaraderie is convincing, so are their conflicts; and that they are allowed to develop a backstory over the course of one or several seasons.

The writers understand that the show will benefit in terms of placing clues or markers across many episodes which will then allow the actors to flesh out their roles as more realistic people rather than simply objects who move the plot along; the recurring guest stars such as Catherine Willows' father also ground the series in a reality where not everything is clean-cut and solved by the end of the viewing hour. CSI: Miami does this also (and does it well, though not quite as well as CSI in my opinion) giving each of the characters several emotional mini-arcs across the various seasons which allows them to develop into more rounded characters, and bringing back regular guest stars.

Of course, a difficulty with any of these shows is that they have the problems of fitting in the backstories and character development of a relatively large ensemble cast into each 40-minute episode, yet where CSI and CSI: Miami succeed, CSI:NY does not even seem interested in pursuing this, preferring to focus on the A- and B-stories of each episode with minimal engagement between the characters. This seems especially pointless when the New York incarnation of CSI has the least principal stars of all three series' casts.

There are many such 'procedural' shows, be they forensics, police, medical or any combination of those, on television at the moment and the reason why shows such as the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, House, Grey's Anatomy (to name only three) continue to receive critical plaudits while at the same time enjoying healthy ratings is because they have managed to strike the correct balance between pursuing some intriguing procedure-focused plots and affording the writers the opportunity to build up each character's history, viewpoints and attitudes, to the extent that we believe we 'know' these fictional characters.

As a regular viewer of all three CSI shows, the work done on the original and Miami series gives me a feeling of insider-hood: I believe that I understand what Gil Grissom, Calleigh Duquesne or Jim Brass will do in certain situations. However, in CSI:NY - with the exceptions of Flack and Messer - I am still not familiar with them, save for the one-line pitch for each character (eg, other than the "Taylor is a former marine whose wife died on 9/11", there is very little to go on). Without that sense of history and emotional depth, I believe that CSI:NY is destined to be remembered always as a CSI series too far.

Reply

If I remember from my days living in NYC ... the Forensics unit is the CSU ... they don't wear jackets or vests that say it either (execpt maybe police)

IMHO they should have left NYC to law and order and instead make CSI -LA ... which would make sense since that is where they are all filmed.

Reply