Why Lindsay Must Go (Part 3)

Welcome to the third "Why Lindsay Must Go" thread. The title is, admittedly, unoriginal, but if someone can come up with something better, I'm sure the mods wouldn't mind changing it for us.

For the old farts on the board, you might want to revisit the first few threads. For the newbies, you might wish to read through the first 2000 posts on the subject of why Lindsay Monroe should leave CSI:NY. If you are so inclined, you can find the first thread here and the second thread here.

The purpose of this thread is, of course, to debate and discuss (in a mature manner) the reasons why Lindsay should go or, if you wish, provide reasons why she should stay instead. To quote JDonne from the original thread:

And--go!

 

I hope I did this quote thing right. Anyways someone (I can't remember who sorry) suggested last time WLMG #3- Chemistry -It's ok if you don't have it in reference to a quote said by Anna herself.

Anyways like privatename was saying before about how there are others deserving of a kick ass story line. That kind of bothers me. I mean there are uber talented people like Hill and Eddie who shine in even the small bits they get. They would do a fantastic job with a big storyline. I think they have proven themselves worthy of one.

As for her court room scene it REALLY surprised me when she said it helped that she had just had her daughter 3 weeks earlier and she was thinking about her. Imagine how it wold have been had she not had the child.

I'm sorry but her performance was no deeper than a kiddie pool. And a shallow one at best.

 

I'm not stormymac, but here it is:

I said this in the last WLMG thread:

 

I don't agree with the Anna isn't playing a mother thing. She could have put herself in the position of what if something happened to her own child to make it easier for her to portray sadness and grief. Point I'm trying to get at is if you're using say method acting it's all about using your real emotions it doesn't matter if you're thinking about your child and and you're not playing a mother. You're not going to always have the perfect real life situation to look back on so you use what you have.

But in the end it all depends on exactly what she was thinking and how she was interpreting it at the time. Something that we'll probably never know.

Question. Did Anna know about Lindsay's secret before season 3? I feel like she may have mentioned it before, but I also feel like I might be making it up.

 

Thank you, PerfectAnomaly. I appreciate it! Hmm, all I can say about her answer is that I have to agree the bit about the writer's reply doesn't jive with what other actors on the cast have said about similar situations. Like Carmine, if I remember right, mentioned a few times in various interviews about approaching the writers and discussing with them what's going on with his character. I imagine if he'd gotten a reply like, "Oh, you know, it's drama. We've got to make it bumpy," he would have continued to speak with the writers to state his mind and try to reach some compromise, at least.

It just seems to me as if Belknap's trying to make it look like the writers are the ones fully at fault for Lindsay being such a terrible character and that had to 'justify it' and 'make it work for herself'. If that's so, that wasn't a smart move. The writers are, after all, the ones who get to determine what the characters do or say in the episodes, get my drift?

OT trivia: Heh, James Marsters of Buffy the Vampire Slayer fame used to mention in his interviews he employed method acting as a means of getting in character. I think he said that one time, he got so into his technique he lost a lot of weight and became sickly to remain in character and worried his friends. :lol: Now that's dedication!

In Belknap's case ... it was interesting to finally find out what she was thinking about that scene and how she thought she handled. Unfortunately, none of what she said carried through into the final production of the episode. Like PerfectAnomaly said, she might as well have babbled about nothing because no matter what she said, it didn't show in the episode itself which renders her statements empty. And like Top41 said, there's no depth.

Just her two answers from the interview indicated to me she doesn't seem to think much about her character and where she's going. They read as if she's hoping to justify herself and clear herself of any blame for Lindsay being such a shoddy character rather than give us any real insight into her. I hope that isn't the case but that's how they come off to me.

 

This is my first time in the WLMG threads, but I've decided to stop in.
I don't think Anna is a horrible actress, she's not the best, but she's certianly not the worst. Unfortunetly for her, she doesn't have a lot to work with. Lindsay is not a brilliantly written character with witty lines, or real deapth like the others. She's a new comer, replacing an favourite. She's got the odds against her to start with.
Lindsay, to me, is an ever changing character that's happy one episode, and angsty and depressing the next. Her back story seemed to come out of nowhere, and in my opinion, never really justified her character. Something that tramautizing would have a lasting effect, and should've been mentioned more often. That's more the writer's fault though.
As for Anna, she doesn't seem to know what to bring to the scenes to make Lindsay more interesting. Some of her emotions just don't seem to go with her lines, and often there is a serious lack of continuity to her reactions. If something huge happens in one scene, she doesn't always carry it over to the next. Like with the Suicide Girls, they never explain why she has trouble dealing with mothers (her back story doesn't really justify that). Also, moving to the advice of my Musical Theatre teacher, she uses a similar tone, or lilt, for all her lines. It's hard to explain, but she uses the same tempo and tone for almost everything she says.
Honestly I think that the reason Lindsay needs to go is because the character has no development. Almost two seasons later, she is little more than Danny's love interest. Maybe I'm just a little irked that she got a real back story before Flack or Hawkes, but she just doesn't seem like a character that you enjoy watching. She's not interesting, and her lines could easily be said by Stella, or one of the other characters. The connection she had with Mac (like the scene where she does up his tie to demonstrate how a chemical got on the victim's shirt) in season 2 would've been better played by Stella, and her relationship with Danny seemed, to me at least, rushed and forced.
I don't know if that makes sense, or is just my pointless babbling, but that's what I think.

 

How long is that going to be an excuse? This IS Anna's third season playing Lindsay on the show. She's hardly a newcomer. As I recall, Ryan replaced Speedle on Miami and nobody complains/complained about him replacing a favorite or about JT being a bad actor.

I agree, she doesn't seem to have a clue what to do.

I was thinking the same thing. It seems odd that they'd take the time to sit with Carmine or Eddie and discuss their characters in depth but tell Anna they did what they did with Lindsay just for the drama. If that is the case then they obviously don't give a shit about Lindsay either.

Anna just doesn't seem to care for Lindsay at all so if she doesn't care about her, why should anybody else? :brickwall: Just a thought.

 

Plus, and correct me if I am wrong, but she has only been on for one less season than everyone else. So, they have been in for 4 seasons and she has been in for 3 -- that isn't that much of a difference. And with the show almost through its fourth season, she has been in far more episodes than she wasn't in.

Doesn't that make her a bad actress. Shouldn't a good actress know how to make a character more interesting? Or is it just she is a lazy or disinterested actress?

 

Sometimes I feel like you guys are over-focused in your dislike. The CSI NY article from Anna did talk about that she used her child, but also she used the fact that she was tired ... and you're going to bash that. Fine. However, I don't know that its Anna as much as editing that takes from her acting in that scene. She also stated in the interview that she cried during one scene in the season and Pam Veasey decided not to use that clip because she wanted Lindsay to appear strong. I don't like that perception of women, that tears are necessarilly a weakness ... and it seems to be a double standard as Carmine was allowed to cry in his scenes. Just keep in mind there is more to a show then acting.

Also, your point that Carmine sits down and discusses his role with the authors ... note that he also says that in the end its their choice. He doesn't get his way either. He didn't say he made compromises, so it seems you're just putting words in his mouth. Anna doesn't say that she didn't sit down and talk with the writers. But she's not going to back stab them for their decisions. Both of them know where their loyalty lies.

Also this season the bad editing made Lindsay look happy after Danny's loss in Child's Play. That was editing gone bad--if you follow the lines in conversation, its all out of order.

Until this season, I haven't seen the lack of character support for Lindsay. This season she is tied a lot to Danny, but she is also conflict-less at the moment. Or a better way of saying it, is the the conflict is focused on Mac, then Danny. I also don't think that the single crime episodes do anything for any of the characters beyond Stella and Mac. In these epis, all characters come out a little weak--beyond Stella and Mac. Danny was able to shine in the Child's Play arc, but before that he was watered down plot wise as is Hawkes. I think Flack comes out differently because he has a different role. It's funny that when it comes to Danny, its the writers that are blamed.

I don't think I'm going to change anyone's mind, and fully expect you to blast this ... not because I believe my argument is weak, but because I understand that everyone is watching the show with their own bias. I liked Lindsay's character. I relate to her. I think she does bring excitement to the scenes--so in those arguments, all I can do is disagree. If we were all alike and liked everyone, the world would be a very boring place. And I really love CSI NY ...

 

Good for you baker grad.I'm not a big fan of Lindsay but i could see your point.tHE D/L Shippers are over-focused in the relationship that's not even there nor convincing.But what's the different with these people on this thread.iWell,apart from top 41.Most of the times i agree with your opinions on Lindsay or AB.I still think csi vegas is the best.Gary sinise is a good actor but his character is sometimes annoying and boring.Plus he looks like Butthead so it's hard for me to take him seriously.By the way,I'm from Thailand so you can slagging off my appaling english and grammar

 

Woo Hooo made it to thread #3!!!!!!

Just a few things I'm going to have to disagree with baker_grad. First off, I don't think we are doing any "bashing" it's more discussing and disagreeing and we are not going to "blast" anything you say, you have the right to your own opinion. Ms. Belknap using her child to method act is great, but can't give her "being tired" as an excuse either ... I'm sure Gary Sinise is tired as well, you know, being producer and being in almost all the scenes and whatnot, but he doesn't bring tiredness onto the screen (unless he is suppose to show tiredness from the stress of the whole 333 thing). On the other hand Anna being tired could really pull off an amazing scene for when Lindsay has to let it all out and face that killer in the court room ... I don't think she acted so well there, she just looked kind of ....scrunched faced, there are no other words to describe it.

As to "Just keep in mind there is more to a show then acting" .... I thought acting made the show?

Butthead???? Where/who is his Beavis? :lol:

 

Back to the discussion at hand.

I agree that writing/editing/etc impact character as much as (or sometimes more than) acting--but while that (possibly) excuses the actor, it doesn't change the fact that the character comes across badly. Anna's acting is part of the reason why Lindsay is a bad character IMO, but the character itself is a combination of acting, writing, editing, etc.

I don't think any other character has ever needed as many excuses as Lindsay--emotional scenes aren't her strong point in one instance, it's all the writers' fault in another instance, editing is to blame in yet another instance. All of the characters have bad lines, bad scenes that make you scratch your head, delivery that makes you cringe--but never as much as Lindsay seems to have.

I often feel like other people are over-focused on our dislike. *shrug* It's the point of the thread, in any case. There have been so-called 'anti' threads for Danny and Angell (that I can recall off the top of my head), both of which fizzled pretty quickly (especially the Angell one)--there has to be a reason we've made more than 2000 posts on this subject.

As for the interview from the CSI magazine--I don't have it (yet), so I can only base my comments on what I read on here--and if I don't see that they edited out a scene where she cries, I can't comment on that.

 

Baker_grad wrote

It is funny because sometimes I think that her supporters are over-focused in their like. My guess, which could of course be wrong, is that some people feel the need to support Lindsay because so many people dislike her. Even her supporters have mentioned that the character has been inconsistent and that the actress doesn't do the heavier scenes very well. Yet, they still think she is a great character. How does that work?

There have been so many excuses given for her inability to be a multi-dimensional character -- the actress is new, the actress was pregnant, the actress just had a baby, the editors cut her funny, the writers write her wrong, she has had too many personalities, she doesn't get good storylines. And all those things are valid points -- although I would argue that the pregnancy and baby are not valid excuses for not doing a good job. Anyway, if she is such a great character, she should be able to stand on her own merits without excuse after excuse being trotted out.

The character is a combination of the actor, the writers, the editors and the directors. If those four elements work almost all the time with all the other characters on the show to develop likeable, viable, believable characters with depth and defined identities, why can't they manage it with the character of Lindsay "Montana" Monroe? Who knows. But after almost 3 seasons they haven't yet managed it and I don't think, at this point, they are going to be able to. And that is why I think she should go.

And, like you, Baker_grad, I recognize that not everyone is going to feel the same way. That doesn't mean I shouldn't express my view point. And far from bashing you (or whatever pejorative term you used) I am always happy to read what others think even if they don't agree with me.

 

There isn't much to go on for Hawkes or Adam or perhaps Flack, but these characters don't seem to receive the same kind of dislike that Lindsay does. Personally, I think it's interesting. Is it because Lindsay has received more focus than, say, Hawkes and we expect more from her because of it? I refuse to believe it comes down to jealousy. (I don't think that's come up in here recently, but it's a typical response around the 'net.) If I'm going to be 'jealous' of a character, I'll be jealous of Angell, but that's neither here nor there. For whatever reason, Lindsay has created a strong negative reaction from part of the fandom--and whether the strong positive reaction from a different part of the fandom is a result of this or not is anybody's guess. *shrug*