CSI: New York--'She's Not There'

[CSI Files]

<p><b>Synopsis:</b><p>A girl gets off the subway in Times Square on a rainy evening and meets her friend for a night of fun, passing by a man in a tourist t-shirt. The man wanders through the crowd before getting mugged by a man and a woman. As the two girls get into a black van, one drops a gum wrapper, which floats past the now dead body of the man. Mac and Hawkes show up at the scene and Flack informs them that the victim was found without a wallet or ID. Hawkes notices a scar on the man's neck, evidence of cataract surgery and rings on his nails, indicating he had cancer and was treated with chemotherapy. His acrylic dental work leads Hawkes to surmise that he was from the Ukraine. Back in the lab, Stella finds evidence the man spilled coffee on his pants but not his shirt. When Danny finds the remnants of a price tag in the shirt, Stella wonders if the man purchased the shirt at the airport. She asks Danny to check into incoming flights at nearby airports. Sid traces residue on the knife to flowers found in Chinatown, while Lindsay is able to get DNA off a lip piercing from the body and match it to a man named Sammy Chen. Danny and Flack go to Chinatown and chase down Sammy and his partner in crime, Jody Sun, and bring them in for questioning. The pair admits to mugging the dead man, but when they found he only had rubles on him, they tossed his wallet up on an awning. He got the knife away from them and they ran off--leaving him alive. Danny and Flack climb to the top of the awning and recover the wallet, along with an ID identifying the man as Adrik Fedoruk, a letter damaged by the rain water and a piece of paper with a meeting time and location on it. Mac goes to the Deluca Motel and finds Deputy Inspector Gillian Whitford waiting. She tells him that Fedoruk's daughter Rani had come to New York a month ago and disappeared. Fedoruk wrote the mayor and the letter ended up on Gillian's desk, and she agreed to meet with the man.<p>Danny and Hawkes delve into processing the letter: Hawkes translates it from Cyrillic and is able to decipher that Rani had written to her father asking him to come get her. The letter was postmarked four days ago. Danny lifts DNA from the stamps on the envelope and matches it to a club owner named Willie Burton. Stella pays Burton a visit, but he only vaguely recalls mailing the letter for the girl after she approached him at a party at his club and asked for a favor. Frustrated, Stella heads back to the lab and recovers a glove print from under the armpit of Fedoruk's sweatshirt, leading her to believe that his killer helped him up before stabbing him. Trace from the glove print is made up of multiple elements, including rust, plaster and several spices used in the making of mustard, leading Hawkes to suggest that perhaps the girls are being held in an old abandoned mustard house in Williamsburg. The team storms the warehouse, finding it filled with mattresses and blankets. Mac has a disturbing realization: their killer is a sex trafficker. Flack catches a young woman hiding under some blankets. She tells Mac and Stella that her name is Katie, but she claims she was just crashing at the warehouse. Assuming she is traumatized from her experience with the traffickers, Mac and Stella allow her to use the bathroom, but she locks the door and breaks out through the window and runs away. Gillian Whitford surveys the scene and estimates thirty girls are being held, and when Lindsay runs a hair analysis, she notes that the girls are all between the ages of 14 and 21. Lindsay also finds evidence that the girls are being drugged with a combination of heroin, ecstasy and codeine. A search of the drug database reveals this particular drug mix is unique to a dealer named Nemo. Stella floats the idea of getting Willie Burton to set Nemo up.<p>Flack brings Willie in and while he's reluctant, he eventually agrees to go along with the plan for the sake of the girl he mailed the letter for. Gillian is upset when she finds out he wants to do it his way--with no undercover cop involved--and Mac follows her after she storms out. She tells him why the case is so personal to her: her fourteen-year-old niece, Rachel, went missing three years ago. She relents and tells Mac he can arrange the set up however he needs to. Patrick Habis, the father of one of the missing girls, shows up at the station, frantic about finding his daughter Tara. Stella sits with him as he describes Carolyn, the girl his daughter Tara met in New York who had promised to take her to LA with her so they could pursue acting careers. A single father, Patrick tells Stella that he didn't hear from Tara after she went off with Carolyn, which wasn't like her. Willie meets Nemo and as soon as the drugs change hands, Flack and his team burst in, arresting the men. Flack whispers a quiet thanks to Willie. In the interrogation room, Flack and Danny lean on Nemo about him selling large amounts of drugs to a sex trafficking ring. Nemo gives up the name and location of the man he's been selling to, and Mac and Stella storm it along with the cops. Flashbacks reveal that Fedoruk went looking for his daughter and the sex trafficker followed him, killing him after Chen and Sun mugged him. Gillian brings Rani to view her father's body and the tearful girl tells him that he saved her and the other girls. Stella reunites Tara and her father, and Tara recognizes the computer rendition of Carolyn and identifies her. Stella realizes Carolyn is actually Katie, the girl who escaped the warehouse--she's in league with the trafficker. Katie greets another young girl fresh off the subway and prepares to get her into a black van--until the doors open, revealing Stella. Mac catches Katie before she can run off and arrests her while Stella gets the unwitting girl to safety.<p><b>Analysis:</b><p>I had serious reservations going into "She's Not There," in large part because both <i>CSI: Crime Scene Investigation</i> and <i>CSI: Miami</i> had already rolled out episodes dealing with sex trafficking rings. <i>CSI</I>'s entry, <A class="link" HREF="http://www.csifiles.com/episodes/csi/season9/disarmed_and_dangerous.shtml">"Disarmed and Dangerous"</a> aired a mere two weeks ago! <i>Miami</i> went to the well <i>twice</i>, first with <A class="link" HREF="http://www.csifiles.com/episodes/miami/season3/legal.shtml">"Legal"</a> back in third season and then again in this season's <A class="link" HREF="http://www.csifiles.com/episodes/miami/season7/wont_get_fueled_again.shtml">"Won't Get Fueled Again"</a>. Though the episodes were by no means disasters, they all had something in common: each dealt with the issue of sex trafficking in a very surface, clichéd way. The girls were all helpless, cowering victims, who blinked into the light when the heroic CSIs came to rescue them from the dark rooms or warehouses they were being kept in. Sex trafficking became a device in which the CSIs--usually the male CSIs--could look like big, brave heroes saving the most helpless of victims. There wasn't anything personal to the stories, nothing to connect us to the victims--they were barely given voices in the previous storylines. So when I heard <i>CSI: New York</i> was going to do a sex trafficking episode, I wasn't optimistic. The other two shows had fallen short on giving the issue any depth, and I wasn't hopeful about a fourth attempt, especially given that two out of the three previous ones had been just this season.<p>Well, I was wrong. Because <font color=yellow>Pam Veasey</font> and <font color=yellow>John Dove</font> made the sex trafficking storyline the main focal point of the episode, the victims were actual characters as opposed to a batch of voiceless girls rescued at the end of the episode. Yes, we got the typical rescue scene where the CSIs heroically burst in and rescue the dozens of girls held in the dark room, and they catch the man who both murdered Adrik Fedoruk and held the girls prisoner. But unlike the <i>CSI</i> and <i>Miami</i> episodes, that wasn't the end. The traumatized girls didn't just smile blankly and silently at the CSIs as they were led out; the episode went on to show us what happened <i>after</i> they were rescued. In doing so, it gave the girls voices and personalities, two essential elements in giving the storyline resonance and meaning. I don't find episodes of the <i>CSI</i> shows often moving me to tears, save for ones that feature the death or departure of a major character, but I'll readily admit that Rani's heartbreaking goodbye to her father made me cry, and not just a little.<p><HR ALIGN="CENTER" SIZE="1" WIDTH="45%" COLOR="#007BB5"><p>To read the full reviews, please click <A HREF="http://www.csifiles.com/reviews/csi/shes_not_there.shtml">here</A>.<center></center>

 

[Nerwen Aldarion]

I like to read episode reviews, it helps me get a better feel for what I like and what I disliked about the episode as well as interesting tidbits that usually find there way into them, however this is one time where I'm going to complain about the reviewer.

CSI Files take note, I am sick of Kristine Huntley obsessive anger towards Lindsay Monroe and Anna Belknap, this is seriously getting insane. In an episode that only had a grand total of three minutes of screen time for Anna, Kristine still has to find a way to bash her character.

How is " Freed at least for a week from the cumbersome burden of Lindsay..." relevant to this episode? These reviews a heinous and rude, they make a bad image for CSI Files and alienate the many veiwers who actually like Danny and Lindsay together. What makes this worse is Kristine continues to bash a pregnant woman! I can't think of anything ruder than that!!!

I can understand that the reviewer doesn't like Danny and Lindsay, that is her opinion and she is entittled to it, however it is time for her to take the high road. If you can't say anything nice, just don't say anything at all and please stop looking for places to bash her character particularly when they are NOT relevant.

Tell Kristine to keep her unbridled hatred to herself...or find another reviewer.

 

[Top41]

CSI Files take note, I am sick of Kristine Huntley obsessive anger towards Lindsay Monroe and Anna Belknap, this is seriously getting insane. In an episode that only had a grand total of three minutes of screen time for Anna, Kristine still has to find a way to bash her character.

But I didn't even mention her smug, flat delivery in the scene with Mac and Sid! And here I thought I was being so restrained. :lol:

How is " Freed at least for a week from the cumbersome burden of Lindsay..." relevant to this episode? These reviews a heinous and rude, they make a bad image for CSI Files and alienate the many veiwers who actually like Danny and Lindsay together. What makes this worse is Kristine continues to bash a pregnant woman! I can't think of anything ruder than that!!!

No scenes with Lindsay = a return to the old Danny. Therefore relevant.

I can understand that the reviewer doesn't like Danny and Lindsay, that is her opinion and she is entittled to it, however it is time for her to take the high road. If you can't say anything nice, just don't say anything at all

You do understand that the concept of a review means I'm supposed to give my opinion, right?

and please stop looking for places to bash her character particularly when they are NOT relevant.

Tell Kristine to keep her unbridled hatred to herself...or find another reviewer.

In all seriousness, it's not anger or rudeness or hatred. I'm giving my opinion in a review. I think Lindsay is a poorly written and poorly portrayed character. You're more than welcome to debate any of the points I make about her in my review, but to just come in and complain about how mean I am is really pointless.

 

[nattybatty55]

But unlike the CSI and Miami episodes, that wasn't the end. The traumatized girls didn't just smile blankly and silently at the CSIs as they were led out; the episode went on to show us what happened after they were rescued. In doing so, it gave the girls voices and personalities, two essential elements in giving the storyline resonance and meaning.

Tha is an excellent point- it had the extra something that made it feel more real in which I think the team (especially Mac and Stella) seemed to take a personal role without them being the main attention in the storyline. This is one of the resaons that this is one of my favourite episodes this season.

Great review overall btw

 

[Nerwen Aldarion]

CSI Files take note, I am sick of Kristine Huntley obsessive anger towards Lindsay Monroe and Anna Belknap, this is seriously getting insane. In an episode that only had a grand total of three minutes of screen time for Anna, Kristine still has to find a way to bash her character.

But I didn't even mention her smug, flat delivery in the scene with Mac and Sid! And here I thought I was being so restrained. :lol:

How is " Freed at least for a week from the cumbersome burden of Lindsay..." relevant to this episode? These reviews a heinous and rude, they make a bad image for CSI Files and alienate the many veiwers who actually like Danny and Lindsay together. What makes this worse is Kristine continues to bash a pregnant woman! I can't think of anything ruder than that!!!

No scenes with Lindsay = a return to the old Danny. Therefore relevant.

I can understand that the reviewer doesn't like Danny and Lindsay, that is her opinion and she is entittled to it, however it is time for her to take the high road. If you can't say anything nice, just don't say anything at all

You do understand that the concept of a review means I'm supposed to give my opinion, right?

and please stop looking for places to bash her character particularly when they are NOT relevant.

Tell Kristine to keep her unbridled hatred to herself...or find another reviewer.

In all seriousness, it's not anger or rudeness or hatred. I'm giving my opinion in a review. I think Lindsay is a poorly written and poorly portrayed character. You're more than welcome to debate any of the points I make about her in my review, but to just come in and complain about how mean I am is really pointless.

Yes you can give your opinon and I do recall saying that you are entitled to it. However every week you consistenly find a way to unleash your Anna/Lindsay hatred.

As for your belief in the relevance of "Freed at least for a week from the cumbersome burden of Lindsay..." There are otherways to word "No scenes with Lindsay = a return to the old Danny."

Such as: "Danny was able to act more like himself in this episode, in my opinion" If you believe he actually was acting any different this episode, I do not personally.

Besides there is something good about a character changing overtime, it's called character development. Danny is growing up, I find this plotline exciting, again this is my opinion and I didn't bash anyone on the show while expressing it!

Do I consider you calling Lindsay a burden bashing her character: absolutely.

Your obvious hatred towards her character is distracting from the other good points you make in your reviews. Perhaps if you spent less time venting your anger towards Lindsay, you might actually have more people read and like your reviews. Such as the multitude of Anna/Lindsay fans that flock to EW and TvGuide to get away from your obsessive anger.

 

[PerfectAnomaly]

I like to read episode reviews, it helps me get a better feel for what I like and what I disliked about the episode as well as interesting tidbits that usually find there way into them, however this is one time where I'm going to complain about the reviewer.

CSI Files take note, I am sick of Kristine Huntley obsessive anger towards Lindsay Monroe and Anna Belknap, this is seriously getting insane. In an episode that only had a grand total of three minutes of screen time for Anna, Kristine still has to find a way to bash her character.

How is " Freed at least for a week from the cumbersome burden of Lindsay..." relevant to this episode? These reviews a heinous and rude, they make a bad image for CSI Files and alienate the many veiwers who actually like Danny and Lindsay together. What makes this worse is Kristine continues to bash a pregnant woman! I can't think of anything ruder than that!!!

I can understand that the reviewer doesn't like Danny and Lindsay, that is her opinion and she is entittled to it, however it is time for her to take the high road. If you can't say anything nice, just don't say anything at all and please stop looking for places to bash her character particularly when they are NOT relevant.

Tell Kristine to keep her unbridled hatred to herself...or find another reviewer.

A review is one person's opinion, it isn't just a recap of an episode or something someone writes to try and please other fans. If Kristine dislikes Anna Belknap as an actress - she never gets personal and I don't see how Anna being pregnant somehow should exclude her from professional criticism - or Lindsay as a character what difference does it make? Kristine isn't trying to get people who like Lindsay and/or Anna Belknap to change or censor their opinions so I don't see why people feel the need to try and change or censor her opinion.

Telling Kristine to stop making critcisms of or negative comments about Anna/Lindsay makes about as much sense as me telling people to stop talking about how much they like the actress and/or character. If anyone were to suggest that the cries of indignity and injustice would be deafening. Yet people who don't like the actress and/or character and talk about it are constantly subjected to others telling them to stop expressing themselves. Kristine's reveiws are her opinion and you can agree with them or not; but trying to get her opinion censored is hypocritical, unfair and childish.

 

[Nerwen Aldarion]

I like to read episode reviews, it helps me get a better feel for what I like and what I disliked about the episode as well as interesting tidbits that usually find there way into them, however this is one time where I'm going to complain about the reviewer.

CSI Files take note, I am sick of Kristine Huntley obsessive anger towards Lindsay Monroe and Anna Belknap, this is seriously getting insane. In an episode that only had a grand total of three minutes of screen time for Anna, Kristine still has to find a way to bash her character.

How is " Freed at least for a week from the cumbersome burden of Lindsay..." relevant to this episode? These reviews a heinous and rude, they make a bad image for CSI Files and alienate the many veiwers who actually like Danny and Lindsay together. What makes this worse is Kristine continues to bash a pregnant woman! I can't think of anything ruder than that!!!

I can understand that the reviewer doesn't like Danny and Lindsay, that is her opinion and she is entittled to it, however it is time for her to take the high road. If you can't say anything nice, just don't say anything at all and please stop looking for places to bash her character particularly when they are NOT relevant.

Tell Kristine to keep her unbridled hatred to herself...or find another reviewer.

A review is one person's opinion, it isn't just a recap of an episode or something someone writes to try and please other fans. If Kristine dislikes Anna Belknap as an actress - she never gets personal and I don't see how Anna being pregnant somehow should exclude her from professional criticism - or Lindsay as a character what difference does it make? Kristine isn't trying to get people who like Lindsay and/or Anna Belknap to change or censor their opinions so I don't see why people feel the need to try and change or censor her opinion.

Telling Kristine to stop making critcisms of or negative comments about Anna/Lindsay makes about as much sense as me telling people to stop talking about how much they like the actress and/or character. If anyone were to suggest that the cries of indignity and injustice would be deafening. Yet people who don't like the actress and/or character and talk about it are constantly subjected to others telling them to stop expressing themselves. Kristine's reveiws are her opinion and you can agree with them or not; but trying to get her opinion censored is hypocritical, unfair and childish.

I'm not professionally reveiwing a legitimate TV show, when a reveiwer at EW or NY Times reviews a movie or TV show, how many times do they consistently spew vile hatred towards a personal actress. Including getting off topic to post it?

I was under the opinion that Kristine wants her reviews to be taken seriously and review like a proffessional. But if she does not want to achieve those goals...then she's doing a marvelous job.

 

[PerfectAnomaly]

I like to read episode reviews, it helps me get a better feel for what I like and what I disliked about the episode as well as interesting tidbits that usually find there way into them, however this is one time where I'm going to complain about the reviewer.

CSI Files take note, I am sick of Kristine Huntley obsessive anger towards Lindsay Monroe and Anna Belknap, this is seriously getting insane. In an episode that only had a grand total of three minutes of screen time for Anna, Kristine still has to find a way to bash her character.

How is " Freed at least for a week from the cumbersome burden of Lindsay..." relevant to this episode? These reviews a heinous and rude, they make a bad image for CSI Files and alienate the many veiwers who actually like Danny and Lindsay together. What makes this worse is Kristine continues to bash a pregnant woman! I can't think of anything ruder than that!!!

I can understand that the reviewer doesn't like Danny and Lindsay, that is her opinion and she is entittled to it, however it is time for her to take the high road. If you can't say anything nice, just don't say anything at all and please stop looking for places to bash her character particularly when they are NOT relevant.

Tell Kristine to keep her unbridled hatred to herself...or find another reviewer.

A review is one person's opinion, it isn't just a recap of an episode or something someone writes to try and please other fans. If Kristine dislikes Anna Belknap as an actress - she never gets personal and I don't see how Anna being pregnant somehow should exclude her from professional criticism - or Lindsay as a character what difference does it make? Kristine isn't trying to get people who like Lindsay and/or Anna Belknap to change or censor their opinions so I don't see why people feel the need to try and change or censor her opinion.

Telling Kristine to stop making critcisms of or negative comments about Anna/Lindsay makes about as much sense as me telling people to stop talking about how much they like the actress and/or character. If anyone were to suggest that the cries of indignity and injustice would be deafening. Yet people who don't like the actress and/or character and talk about it are constantly subjected to others telling them to stop expressing themselves. Kristine's reveiws are her opinion and you can agree with them or not; but trying to get her opinion censored is hypocritical, unfair and childish.

I'm not professionally reveiwing a legitimate TV show, when a reveiwer at EW or NY Times reviews a movie or TV show, how many times do they consistently spew vile hatred towards a personal actress. Including getting off topic to post it?

I was under the opinion that Kristine wants her reviews to be taken seriously and review like a proffessional. But if she does not want to achieve those goals...then she's doing a marvelous job.

Talking about how the show was better without Lindsay/Anna being in it or having much screen time is on topic. Also, critcism of an actress' performance is not the same thing as "spewing vile hatred." The only people who don't take Kristine's reviews seriously or who see them as unprofessional are people who love Lindsay/Anna so much that they'd let one line in a detailed review be the basis of liking or disliking the reveiw as a whole. I'd hardly call that fair or unbiased criticism of her reviews.

 

[Top41]

But unlike the CSI and Miami episodes, that wasn't the end. The traumatized girls didn't just smile blankly and silently at the CSIs as they were led out; the episode went on to show us what happened after they were rescued. In doing so, it gave the girls voices and personalities, two essential elements in giving the storyline resonance and meaning.

Tha is an excellent point- it had the extra something that made it feel more real in which I think the team (especially Mac and Stella) seemed to take a personal role without them being the main attention in the storyline. This is one of the resaons that this is one of my favourite episodes this season.

Great review overall btw

Thanks! And yeah, I really liked that touch...I think it humanized the victims rather than just having them be silent, nameless women saved by the CSIs. I wasn't expecting to like this episode in all honesty...and I really did think it was a great entry. It's one of my favs this season, too.

Yes you can give your opinon and I do recall saying that you are entitled to it. However every week you consistenly find a way to unleash your Anna/Lindsay hatred.

Every week? Really? Or maybe not so much. Again...if I find the character annoying or the acting grating, I say it. If not, I don't. And if I like something she does, I say it, too.

As for your belief in the relevance of "Freed at least for a week from the cumbersome burden of Lindsay..." There are otherways to word "No scenes with Lindsay = a return to the old Danny."

Such as: "Danny was able to act more like himself in this episode, in my opinion" If you believe he actually was acting any different this episode, I do not personally.

My way is more eloquent. Also, "in my opinion" is totally redundant. Of course it's my opinion. I wrote the review.

Besides there is something good about a character changing overtime, it's called character development. Danny is growing up, I find this plotline exciting, again this is my opinion and I didn't bash anyone on the show while expressing it!

I like to see change and evolution, but there's nothing that's been grown up in Danny and Lindsay's relationship until this season, when they've kind of magically become Good Parents to Be because Lindsay is pregnant. It's a littl rushed, but I actually kind of like that, as I've said in some of those biased reviews.

Do I consider you calling Lindsay a burden bashing her character: absolutely.

Maybe I should have said albatross. Get a literary reference in there, too. Hmmmm...oh, I'm sorry, you were saying?

Your obvious hatred towards her character is distracting from the other good points you make in your reviews. Perhaps if you spent less time venting your anger towards Lindsay, you might actually have more people read and like your reviews. Such as the multitude of Anna/Lindsay fans that flock to EW and TvGuide to get away from your obsessive anger.

I think they take it a little more seriously than I do. Once a week, CSI: NY airs. I review it, and I write what I think about the performances. I don't hate Anna Belknap; I just think she's an inferior actress much of the time. She's turned in a few decent performances, and I've mentioned those times in my reviews, too. Why does everyone forget that? :lol: Selective reading I guess.

I was under the opinion that Kristine wants her reviews to be taken seriously and review like a proffessional. But if she does not want to achieve those goals...then she's doing a marvelous job.

I'm perfectly happy with how seriously my reviews are taken.

Talking about how the show was better without Lindsay/Anna being in it or having much screen time is on topic. Also, critcism of an actress' performance is not the same thing as "spewing vile hatred." The only people who don't take Kristine's reviews seriously or who see them as unprofessional are people who love Lindsay/Anna so much that they'd let one line in a detailed review be the basis of liking or disliking the reveiw as a whole. I'd hardly call that fair or unbiased criticism of her reviews.

I know! One line. One half a line even! Not even a whole sentence in a pretty long review. :lol:

 

[Nerwen Aldarion]

You're right when you say that I don't read all your reviews, I usually only read the ones where Anna wasn't in the episode much so that I can avoid getting worked up over your negativity. Which is why I specifically read your review THIS time, I was hoping to read something about how great Stella was in this episode, some interesting comments about the slave sex trade and of course some good laughs over Flack and Danny.

And you delivered that portion beautifully.

However this is not the first time your reviews have been discussed as rude and your Lindsay/Anna hatred comments irrelevant.

I really do love your reviews, such as in the Triangle when you mentioned the real myth. That is why I read reviews like this, to enjoy the episodes that much more. It truly breaks my heart and boils my blood that anyone would spend THIS much time venting rage towards a character and actress. I believe your reviews would reach a wider audience if you toned down your anger and tried to express your opinons towards the actress in a more neutral manner.

I don't understand why you still have so much hatred bottled up inside like this, I don't know what you are trying to accomplish. I don't think CSI: NY is going to get rid of Anna b/c of your comments. I just see no point to your tirades.

 

[Top41]

You're right when you say that I don't read all your reviews, I usually only read the ones where Anna wasn't in the episode much so that I can avoid getting worked up over your negativity. Which is why I specifically read your review THIS time, I was hoping to read something about how great Stella was in this episode, some interesting comments about the slave sex trade and of course some good laughs over Flack and Danny.

And you delivered that portion beautifully.

However this is not the first time your reviews have been discussed as rude and your Lindsay/Anna hatred comments irrelevant.

I really do love your reviews, such as in the Triangle when you mentioned the real myth. That is why I read reviews like this, to enjoy the episodes that much more. It truly breaks my heart and boils my blood that anyone would spend THIS much time venting rage towards a character and actress. I believe your reviews would reach a wider audience if you toned down your anger and tried to express your opinons towards the actress in a more neutral manner.

I don't understand why you still have so much hatred bottled up inside like this, I don't know what you are trying to accomplish. I don't think CSI: NY is going to get rid of Anna b/c of your comments. I just see no point to your tirades.

Now, see, if you'd said this to begin with I feel like we could have started off with a more productive conversation.

I see what you're saying--to you, the comment about Lindsay was irrelevant. But to me, from where I sit, it was relevant because Danny has been kind of neutered lately and then we finally get an episode where Danny and Lindsay don't share a scene and boom--we get to see a glimpse of his old self. So to me, the fact that Lindsay wasn't around seemed very relevant. And sure, that's my own viewpoint and others are bound to/free to disagree with me. But that's how I saw it, and so I went ahead and made the observation.

You can say I "hate" Anna/Lindsay all you want, but it doesn't make it true. I just think she's a terrible actress who has no business being on this show. Do I think that she'll be written off because I (and many others ) feel that way? No, of course not. But since I'm tasked with giving my opinion of the episodes, I don't hold back when that opinion is negative, whether it be about an episode or an actor. I can't stand Norm MacDonald as an actor or a comedian. I think he's the unfunniest man alive. If CSI: NY cast him tomorrow, I'd probably have plenty of bad things to say about him, too. If someone asked me to go back and review the SNL years he was on, I'd probably have negative things to say about every one of his godawful Weekend Updates. Just because someone has a role on a television show doesn't make that person a good actor, or mean I should just go ahead and praise him/her.

Different people have different opinions, and I'm always happy to discuss episodes or characters with people who don't agree with me. I enjoy it a lot, actually and I'm always willing to rethink or reevaluate a particular scene or storyline or character or episode. But I'm not going to be bullied into silence on my thoughts about Lindsay or Belknap as an actress. On the same token, I'm not going to to say she sucks in a scene when I think she did well if that's the case just to agree with those I usually agree with.

The great thing about TalkCSI and CSI Files is that all opinions are welcome.

 

[Nerwen Aldarion]

" I can't stand Norm MacDonald as an actor or a comedian. "

For once we agree on something :lol:

I don't want to bully you into silence, I just believe that you take your opinions a bit too far, putting words in the thoughts of the characters that don't seem to be necessary.

I just want you to be the best reveiwer you can be. I've worked as a reviewer on newspapers before and one of the first things I was taught was to try to write in a way that opens the door to all audiences. I understand people won't always agree with what you write but I do believe there are less controversial ways to address your opinons.

 

[Top41]

" I can't stand Norm MacDonald as an actor or a comedian. "

For once we agree on something :lol:

LOL, he's awful, just awful. :lol:

I don't want to bully you into silence, I just believe that you take your opinions a bit too far, putting words in the thoughts of the characters that don't seem to be necessary.

Well--and not that this is what I'm going for, but to offer a counter-balance to that--sometimes passionate opinions make for the best discussion. I've been doing this for a while now. I was probably milder in early reviews than I am now. And to be fair, I do feel Lindsay is a detriment to the show much of the time. I do make every effort to be fair in evaluating her--and I do make a point of mentioning it when I think she's done well in a scene or when the character acts sympathetically.

I just want you to be the best reveiwer you can be. I've worked as a reviewer on newspapers before and one of the first things I was taught was to try to write in a way that opens the door to all audiences. I understand people won't always agree with what you write but I do believe there are less controversial ways to address your opinons.

To be fair, sometimes controversial isn't a bad thing. One of the reviews I'm most proud of is one of my most incendiary ones (the "All Access" review). But I do like to have a varied audience, and my commentary on Lindsay/Anna is not meant to be a commentary on those who like her. There are characters I like that others think are overrated or inferior. I'm always happy to discuss other takes on a scene or character, and consider other opinions. I like discussion, I like debate. But when it comes to my reviews, I can only bring my own opinion to the table. And just as something to consider...the ones where I express strongly worded or controversial opinions do tend to get the most response.

What kind of reviews did you write?

 

[Ghawazee]

Kristine, loved this review. Considered i knew your reservations on this case i am glad you were very objetive with this story.

Something i would like to add: There is a brave woman called Susana Trimarco

whose daughter, Marita, was taken by one of these human trafficking groups. She never found her but she created a foundation to help girls like her daughter to escape from these men. These guys rape them and beat them and drug them to keep them under sumission and then these guys become them into prostitutes.
This woman also infiltrated insde one of these groups and she helped to set free about 180 girls from all provinces. Some of them knew her daughter. So if these poor girls cannot escape is mainly because the fear, the shame (all of them are very humble). One of them (for example) escaped because she told one of her "clients" her phone number and she told him her story. The man believed him and cops just saved her along with other girls
So for me it's not being coward the fact they couldn't escape earlier. Just they can't.

Debbie

 

[Faylinn]

Excellent review, dahling.

You made me hesitant about this one! :lol: Even though I was open to liking it (despite the fact that the other shows have done human trafficking stories this season), I was expecting for you to be proven right that it would be more of the same. :lol: Luckily for all of us, it wasn't.

I always like when you get to connect with characters who are in the middle of the action, like the girls. You want the team to find them, and it keeps you engaged as you're watching and yelling at the TV, hoping they get there in time. Most of the time, the heroes will save the day, but there's enough of a chance that they won't to make viewers really worry for the characters.

I thought Julia Ormond did a good job in her second appearance - she was barely even a blip on the map in "My Name is Mac Taylor", which is a shame since she's only signed on for three episodes so far (and we've now seen two of those, with the last coming up soon). I teared up when she was telling Mac about her niece - granted, I'm the human waterworks, but it was still an emotional story. (I also kind of like that they didn't magically find her niece in this episode - sometimes, people don't get the closure they need or deserve.)

I also liked Stella's obvious connection to the case. When 'Katie' was saying that she didn't have anywhere to go, I was reminded of Stella - in a different universe, Stella could have fallen through the cracks as a young woman in foster care and ended up in a similar situation.

The scene at the end with Rani talking to her father's dead body made me cry more than the scene where Gillian told her story. Wiping off her makeup and taking off her earrings seemed (to me) symbolic of the fact that she's still a little girl - his little girl. He came halfway around the world to save her, and he did - at the cost of his own life. That he saved so many other girls in the process is bittersweet comfort for Rani, I'm sure.

I also couldn't help but be reminded of Sid's scene in "Not What it Looks Like" when he told Stella the victim reminded him of his daughter - Sid didn't say anything to confirm it at the end of this episode, but just with his demeanor in the scene with Rani, it conveyed his own emotion at the situation. I'd love to see his daughter on the show someday.

I really liked Flack's scene with Willie - Eddie always does such a great job, though, so I'm not surprised. I'm curious to see if they'll ever return to that favor Flack offered in exchange for his help. (Considering how things have a tendency to fall into the Black Hole of Continuity on this show, I'm not holding my breath. )

Given that, like Nelly's character Terrance Davis (from "Turbulence" and "My Name Is Mac Taylor"), Willie Burton is a successful club owner with street connections, I can't help but wonder if the original intent was to have Nelly return to reprise the role and once again be called on by Flack for a favor.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that was the original intention. Oh well, I guess they couldn't get Nelly back - I'd rather see a new character (with a lot of potential IMO) than for them to recast the role for any reason. There's always the chance to bring Nelly back (which I'd like), too.

As it is whenever they're paired up, Danny and Flack are a blast to watch.

But of course! Those two are great - you can't script that kind of chemistry. The friendship and the comfort they have with each other (and the characters) really comes through.

One of the things that stood out to me in the episode:

The letter was postmarked four days ago.

Seriously?! I can mail things within my own state and they take more than a week to get there, and I'm supposed to believe that a letter got from NYC to the Ukraine in four days?

(Unless he was already in the country, which just confuses me further - I must not have paid close enough attention to the scene about the luggage, because some of these details are a mystery to me.)