I always said - Today's CSI

I hate to be a fangirl bitching about "oooh they're changing this and that about xyz beloved television show", but here are the reasons why I am dubious of this week's CSI and how it could exemplify a change in tone for the entire season.

Firstly, the mood of the season is so sombre. I understand that they're letting Warrick's death set the mood, okay, fair enough. Last season was very upbeat and full of jokes, and maybe they got some guff from that, but I like TV that makes me laugh. My favourite episodes of CSI are the ones that really explore the limits of the absurdity of Las Vegas. They can't take themselves too seriously and be successful with me.

But the biggest problem for me while watching this episode was that I was pretty much unable to suspend my disbelief. There were so many things that drew my awareness.

First, the story was really predictable. Maybe this reflects that I am a sick, sick individual, but the second they revealed the first crime scene, I knew it was a staged art installation by some art perv. Maybe I'm an art perv myself and I recognize it immediately. (Well, really, I'm just an everything perv.) So every reveal in the episode was just me throwing up my hands and being like, "Yes of course, welcome to ten minutes ago".

Speaking of art pervs, the visual team seems to be slacking a bit. The dead bodies looked really fake, so I couldn't suspend my disbelief for any scene that contained a corpse (and this is a forensics show…). And the costumers are out to lunch, I think, because hot chicks like the fingerprint lady and Catherine for crying out loud, looked fat in their outfits! They put gorgeous Catherine in a tucked-in t-shirt with a big stripe of weird ruched fabric or something right down the belly to achieve the impossible and make Catherine Willows look fat. I was appalled and really distracted by it.

They introduced TWO new characters in one episode. Is too much. I protest very much. CSI is a story-driven show. In the tried-and-true seasons, they stuck to a formula: fifty minutes of story, ten minutes of character, usually at the end in the form of a few clever quips or something. Just one obligatory "character moment" per episode. Over the course of many episodes, the cumulative effect of all those little "character moments", those snippets, built into well-rounded, interesting characters that we all love. Extended "character scenes" or "character storyarcs" just draw too much attention to themselves as very un-CSI-like. It was much more masterful when they would sneak character-building into mannerisms, and brief interactions in scenes that were primarily about moving the story forward. That was always what I loved about CSI. Those were the CSI writer skillz.

I'm willing to wait on judging the new CSI girl. She is very cute, and funny and snarky, but the writing just felt like it was pushing too hard. "Look, this is a new character, and this is what she is like!" It felt kind of forced, and quite different from the way other characters just plunge into the stories and develop over time.

That therapist, though, god. What a stereotype. The stereotype of the TV therapist, which is nothing at all like a real therapist. My dad's a psychiatrist, my mom's a MBCT therapist, I myself am crazy and have been to therapists, I know therapists. I know therapy. And the most annoying rookie mistake therapists make is to make a big deal out of everything. Some people grieve by not talking about stuff. They don't want to think about it. Rookie therapists (and/or TV therapists) make it sound like it's unhealthy to be like that. But it could actually be doing more damage by forcing them to dwell unnaturally, by encouraging or forcing them to sulk by threatening it will damage them if they don't, by effectively extending their suffering.

It's like, if something bad happens to someone, you shouldn't say, "You're going to get post-traumatic stress disorder!!!! You can talk to me ANYTIME!!" That is basically putting the idea in their heads that this event has made them sick — has made them damaged. They might have actually gotten better on their own, using their natural coping mechanisms. I've heard of clinical trials that noticed that rates of PTSD actually increased in groups that were provided sessions about PTSD, compared to groups who were given access to therapists who didn't mention PTSD. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

But really, does she have to spout all that nonsense about how you HAVE TO TALK ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS nah nah nah, in a British accent??

The British accent is like a cheap cop-out to represent "person of authority and wisdom". Can I cash in that British accent and exchange it for some good, real acting please? Thanks.

Also, I noticed that they made a big deal out of using this newfangled Intermanets to help find the victim. Oooh catchphrase "BLOG", oooh gratuitous use of Google Maps, are we hip now? Are we cool with the intertubes? I am so over that. It's a forensics show, not "remedial cool stuff that might impress your dad". Show forensics please.

Ranting aside, this episode had some glorious performances by the two suspects: the painter and the killer. Amazing. Loved them both.

And I know the main cast has it in them to deliver wicked acting. They just need some scripts that call for something other than "dour and sombre". Please? Thank you.

In conclusion:

I'm too big a pervert to be surprised by CSI anymore, please find us more of the weird thank you.
Also, more Jerry Stahl, less Evan Dunsky (although I did enjoy "Ending Happy", that was a pretty awesome episode). But more Jerry Stahl please. Thanks. He rocks.