Why Lindsay Must Go (Part 3)

When I mentioned her stage work, I was merely pointing out the fact that the stage is 'acting without a safety net'. On stage, there aren't human props for actors/actresses. It's your job to portray that character effectively. Granted, that's the stage and the CSI:NY is written with inconsistencies in her character from week to week, but I'd imagine an actress who touts a Masters andBachelors in ACTING would be doing a better job. But, I guess that's just me.

I'm sure that no one would dare equate her to Patrick Stewart or any of the other people who started out on stage. Hell, Keanu Reeves starred as MacBeth once. (Not sure if that applies here, but people love/hate his acting. )

I'm just wondering how someone bases her collegiate education on that art, get into acting and stink so badly.

 

WhosLaughingNow - that's assuming she was actually a good stage actress in the first palce. Based on her woeful emoting and body language in scenes on CSI:NY, I'm venturing not.


Ticamo77 - There is only so much education will do for a performing artist. If you don't have the natural attributes - like presence for example - there really is only so much lessons will provide you with.

To equate, when I was in arts college there was a singer who was for all intents and purposes 'technically perfect'. She always hit the right note, she was pitch perfect and had fantastic technique. Singing is, in part, despite the biological constraints, a learned skill. You can improve your voice with better technique. However, you have to have a tonally decent voice to begin with - and not to be cruel, but all the technical perfection in the world did not hide the fact that this girl had a voice that could shatter glass and that went right through everyone every time she opened her mouth.

My point is, I don't think Anna has those natural attributes in spades, and certainly not in enough of a quantity that any amount of education would make her a decent actress, let alone a good one.

My point of irritation with the stage comments is actually a throwback from years of listening to luvvie bitching about where the best actors ply their trade. Because both have their fair share of untalented muppets and ultimately the same basic concepts when it comes to natural talent apply to both. It's just the technique and application that differ. Ultimately a crap actor is a crap actor, and moving from stage to screen isn't going to make them any better.

And the answer to your last question is simple - ego.

 

To be fair, didn't she win a theatre critics award or something at one point?

 

Why are we debating her abilities as a stage performer? This isn't the stage. She could be the bestest stage performer EVAR, and I really just don't care--I'm watching her on TV, and that's all I'm going to concern myself with. A fireplace mantle lined with stage acting trophies couldn't make up for what I see on CSI:NY. If she's so fantastic on the stage, she could always make her living there.

Some actors do equally well on stage and screen. Some struggle with one or the other (much as I love John Barrowman--and I do love him--he can be a bit over-the-top sometimes). Such is life, but skill in one does not excuse lack of skill in the other. If I was in the theater, I wouldn't go, 'Oh, well so-and-so is great on that TV show, so it's really alright if they suck balls on stage.'

As for Quinn--I don't care if she's similar in age to Melina. I would rather see an older woman who adds something to the show (as Top said, I believe), than to see more young 'uns who can't make you believe the crap they're saying. I'll more readily accept that Quinn has some random bit of knowledge than I would accept that a twenty-something CSI has that same knowledge--merely because she's got more experience.

Besides, Lindsay doesn't have the force of presence that Quinn has. When Quinn walks in and says she's going to get a warrant to make Reed give up the identity of his source (or something similar, I don't remember the exact details), you believe without a doubt that she can and will do that. When Lindsay stands there and tries to be forceful, it just comes across like a kid trying to hang out with the older kids by acting tough. You might have the gun and badge, sweetheart, but you don't have the presence to go along with them.

Stella could intimidate me, Flack could intimidate me, Mac could definitely intimidate me, Danny could if he was in the mood for it (although his empathy sets him apart), Hawkes can be pretty tough despite being a big ole softie (although his strength lies in being smart, sensitive and sympathetic with a little bit of badass on the side )--what about Lindsay? She talks the talk, but she doesn't quite walk the walk. She doesn't have the empathy Danny has to round her out, so I really just don't know where she stands (or what her strength as a character is supposed to be). She's awkward, but we're not supposed to see it that way. We're supposed to see Adam as the socially awkward one (they even put the words into Lindsay's mouth, of all people--how ironic), and while he is outwardly awkward, he's got a softness and he really tries to make the connection despite that (several scenes with Stella immediately come to mind).

Lindsay as a character isn't fully fleshed out even after 3 seasons, and Anna's acting doesn't bring anything to the table to make up for what the character is lacking.

(Oops, uh, rambling post is rambling. )

 

Those interested in the particular award Anna Belknap won, you can see it at the San Diego Theatre Critics Circle website. Her name is listed under the 2002 awards.

Take a look at the website and judge for yourselves.

 

As someone who has acted on both the stage and in TV/movies, there's quite a difference in the two.

 

I have to agree with faylinn on this one.

She might be great on stage but on tv she hasn`t shown anything to make me say wow.
Like i said before in the beginning it was promising but now it gets to the point of getting annoyed.
Plus having seen her role in MI and WaT I have a feeling she only knows one way of acting and uses that everytime.
The thing is that it works in some scenes but screeches like nails on a chalkboard in others(and those scenes are getting more and more)

 

Nicely put! I could have written a long comment but this pretty much says it all.

When you think about the characters in this TV show every one brings up an emotion. When I think about Lindsay nothing happens. Not even dislike. Just...Nothing...

 

I completely agree with this. Also there has been some mention of how she has a bachelor's and a master's in acting with the implication being that she must be good. But, how many of us went to school with people who got their degrees by the skin of their teeth. They still have those degrees, but in some cases I wouldn't want them providing services to me.

 

:lol: Very, very true. It also depends which school gave the degree/master in the first place. There are tons of schools in the US now that offer degrees and masters, but you still have people fighting for a spot in Ivy League schools because they're credible, they have a history of producing excellent graduates and people know their rep.

It's a sad reality these days but a degree or even a masters these days means jack, especially if it was given by a school that's not known or worse, unaccredited. And for a creative field such as acting, it's how well you act that gives you the jackpot. All the degrees and masters and awards in the world won't be able to hide bad acting that can be seen right there on screen.

 

Yes, miscasting could be an issue, but I've also wondered whether the producers had a good idea of what they wanted to do with the character early on. Did they intend from the start to have Lindsay as a romantic interest for Danny? If so, seems they would've spent significant time testing them together (especially onscreen chemistry) and trying to map out some specific benchmarks for the relationship. Instead, I don't think the romance angle has been handled well (too much ambiguity and poor continuity), which has hurt both characters in certain ways.

Just to clarify, I really wasn't trying to harp on the age issue. Yes, it's a factor, but when I said Quinn's more in the mold of Stella, I was thinking that she also seems to be a strong, confident, independent character (well, except for that "I still have a thing for a guy that I kissed once more than ten years ago" :vulcan: stuff).

Anyhow, if the idea is to have a more youthful, fun, and possibly naive female perspective which brings more diversity to the team, I don't see how Quinn helps with that. If the desire is to just have a different actor who has a more energetic, fun-loving persona, they could just move AJ Buckley in as a regular and/or give Hill Harper the focus that he's apparently missed out on in previous seasons.
​

 

Also miscast because, in reality, from what I have read here anyway, Anaa is only 5 years younger than Melina. If the hope was for her to be a young fun character to contrast with Stella (who I think comes across as more fun than Lindsay ), they should have gone that route by having someone, you know, actually young. Not that 35 or 36 is old by any stretch, but if you want someone young and a bit more naive than the other female on the cast then you should go for someone actually younger. In my opinion 5 years age difference when you are in you are talking about people in their mid-30s and higher really isn't that much of an age difference.

I definitely agree that she has no warmth or lightness and doesn't portray that at all on the screen. In that respect, if that is what they were looking for, I also think she was terribly miscast.

I would be all in favor of either Quinn joining the cast on a more regular basis because I do think she brings something to the show or I could be quite happy with them giving more time and attention to either Hill or AJ or both characters. Anything if it limits Lindsay's time on screen or eliminates it completely is fine by me
​

 

Yeah. My problem with Lindsay above all is that she doesn't make me feel anything for her. I was curious and intrigued about her at first, then....She fell somewhat flat. Especially in Season 3 with her story arc about the murder case in Montana. There's just something about it that rubs me the wrong way. It's like, ok, you're going back to Montana for awhile, you were the only survivor and....? She didn't make me feel her pain.

Then, with her monologue of doom and hypocrisy in Season 4, that really pissed me off, but not enough to really dislike her. Think she's childish and a hypocrite, yeah, dislike, no.

I didn't know she had a Masters in acting or drama or whatever. I also wasn't aware that she'd won an award for stage acting. I'm not sure those things matter, because I've seen people with Doctorates who are absolute bird-brains and incompetent at their professions.

I do agree with the people who have said that she has had three seasons to make her mark and establish her character and hasn't done that. At this point, there needs to be something done. Right now, she's a cardboard cutout at best. There's nothing behind the facade of a character. That needs to be either rectified, though I don't see how at the expense of other characters, or her role needs to be reduced or eliminated.

They've been trying to prop her up with Danny for more than a Year, hasn't worked, and has greatly reduced the impact of Danny's character. Why can't there be some sort of Drama where she gets demoted to Lab Tech, and she can do what she does in a limited capacity there? Either that or TPTB can kill her off or fire her. Whichever it is, something needs to be done.

 

Technically, TPTB has been using Danny as a prop for Lindsay since she appeared on the show. :lol: Guess that makes the situation even more sad and anger-inducing, eh? Three years is a long time to be another character's prop.

Actually, considering Lindsay's behavior and the fact Quinn pointed her out as not doing her job well and the fact she actually heavily implied to Mac that Danny would automatically clean up after her when Mac called her out on her unprofessionalism ... who knows, Lindsay getting demoted to lab tech is a very plausible storyline. It's about damn time she experienced consequences for her actions. The writers writing off any wrong she does without so much as a slap on the wrist ends up making her look bad too. That contributes to her two-dimensionality.

 

I have only one image since you mentioned that Lindsay should be put to lab work: she doing the wrong experiment and destroy evidence, hence her getting fired. I like to call that wishful thinking.

Being a prop for someone for 3 years is not very nice, But during those years, Danny got many storylines, and to be fair,most of them ended up being somehow Monatana related. I think that the writers realized after giving her the dark secret storyline that she isn't up for it, and the only way she can get development is having Danny next to her. Or basically just anyone. Because in my view is that everyone around Lindsay changed because they had to mold afte her in order to make her look good. And I felt that. And it's annoying when they already messed with the best character of them all, Danny, and now they are screwing up everyone. Hawkes has just entered this category (and I say that with a sad and disappointed tone). The last two people they should drag in are Sid and Adam and the menu will be complete.