As an ardent CSI fan, I have watched every single CSI episode in existence (including the spin-offs). So as far as the present series are concerned:
1. Storytelling The storytelling has always been the strongest incentive to watch the series (for me). The plot has a hook at the beginning, right before the opening theme starts, and it's usually something like: a person enters a ballroom and there's a body impaled on an iron stick on top of a wedding cake or something. And you look at it and think: "Wait, how did this even happen?" So far, the storytelling in the present show is below average (someone knifed, someone burned), with the exception of the underlining Hodges theme. Meh.
2. Characters It's a mixed bag. Grissom, Sarah, captain Brass (yay!) and Hodges (double yay!) are back. There are some new faces as well. The upside: on paper this is the best possible scenario, in practice - it really isn't. All that the new characters have going for them is that they are diverse in their ethnicity and gender. That's practically it. The male lead has feelings for the female lead, who's engaged to someone else. The new team captain is a mom. The new coroner has one funny line. That's everything. Their screen presence is how cardboard tastes. I hope this changes as the new actors get more comfortable in their roles or just get exchanged with someone who can carry it.
3. Cinematography Man, the camera work of the series was the bomb! The dark filters with the green hue, the slow motion combined with double speed, the unusual angles. It was a revolutionary work of art. Was. I have hardly noticed anything similar here. Why, why?
4. Soundtrack It's The Who, so you can't go wrong with this, everything is on point.
5. Science There is a HUGE problem here. CSI usually involved something very exotic (sexual kink, genetic syndrome, behavioural/psychological deviation etc.), combined with national geographic knowledge (the tiny particle over the suspect's eyebrow is actually the left third upper leg of an insect that lives within the perimeter of the victim's mansion). As funny as it is, the science employed in the CSI episodes was actually solid. That is, until the present series, where in episode 4 you are expected to believe that you can burn plastic (which ignites at 580 degrees Celsius) and any DNA (disintegrating at 130 Celsius) would magically survive. No, darling, if there is a dark black, burned plastic object, there can be no DNA on it, unless the perpetrator decided to spit on it on purpose (and his saliva actually contained epithelial cells) shortly before burying it. Frankly, that mistake alone is both disappointing and offensive.
Yeah, so overall: I am beyond happy that CSI is back. But we need major improvements: better writers, better actors and better directors. This is not an average show, stop treating it as such.
1. Storytelling The storytelling has always been the strongest incentive to watch the series (for me). The plot has a hook at the beginning, right before the opening theme starts, and it's usually something like: a person enters a ballroom and there's a body impaled on an iron stick on top of a wedding cake or something. And you look at it and think: "Wait, how did this even happen?" So far, the storytelling in the present show is below average (someone knifed, someone burned), with the exception of the underlining Hodges theme. Meh.
2. Characters It's a mixed bag. Grissom, Sarah, captain Brass (yay!) and Hodges (double yay!) are back. There are some new faces as well. The upside: on paper this is the best possible scenario, in practice - it really isn't. All that the new characters have going for them is that they are diverse in their ethnicity and gender. That's practically it. The male lead has feelings for the female lead, who's engaged to someone else. The new team captain is a mom. The new coroner has one funny line. That's everything. Their screen presence is how cardboard tastes. I hope this changes as the new actors get more comfortable in their roles or just get exchanged with someone who can carry it.
3. Cinematography Man, the camera work of the series was the bomb! The dark filters with the green hue, the slow motion combined with double speed, the unusual angles. It was a revolutionary work of art. Was. I have hardly noticed anything similar here. Why, why?
4. Soundtrack It's The Who, so you can't go wrong with this, everything is on point.
5. Science There is a HUGE problem here. CSI usually involved something very exotic (sexual kink, genetic syndrome, behavioural/psychological deviation etc.), combined with national geographic knowledge (the tiny particle over the suspect's eyebrow is actually the left third upper leg of an insect that lives within the perimeter of the victim's mansion). As funny as it is, the science employed in the CSI episodes was actually solid. That is, until the present series, where in episode 4 you are expected to believe that you can burn plastic (which ignites at 580 degrees Celsius) and any DNA (disintegrating at 130 Celsius) would magically survive. No, darling, if there is a dark black, burned plastic object, there can be no DNA on it, unless the perpetrator decided to spit on it on purpose (and his saliva actually contained epithelial cells) shortly before burying it. Frankly, that mistake alone is both disappointing and offensive.
Yeah, so overall: I am beyond happy that CSI is back. But we need major improvements: better writers, better actors and better directors. This is not an average show, stop treating it as such.