CSI: New York--'Point Of No Return'

I never said I was an expert. I just wanted you to know I had a little bit of knowledge before you started calling me an ignoramus. But I can see my efforts were in vain.

Well, yeah, when you say stuff like this, it's not too impressive:

Although, I suppose you don't really have to worry about professionalism since you're not writing for a paper or magazine.

So please Obi Wan, teach me. (Please recognize this is sarcasm because the day I let you dictate any part of my life is the day I follow a few cocktails with a few bottles of painkillers. :) )


But honestly, I did want to get your opinion as a writer.

Again, I come back to these two quotes:

Although, I suppose you don't really have to worry about professionalism since you're not writing for a paper or magazine.

So please Obi Wan, teach me. (Please recognize this is sarcasm because the day I let you dictate any part of my life is the day I follow a few cocktails with a few bottles of painkillers. :) )

Neither leads me to believe you approached me for any other reason to insult me. Not very professional of you. ;)

I don't know why, and really this isn't an insult, I try talking to you. :lol: We're like cats and dogs. We've been able to have civil and rather nice conversations before but clearly we're not meant to be friends. So this is me stepping off.

If you want to have a discussion, you need to be civil and reasonable. Plenty of people come in and disagree with my reviews and things I've said without being personally insulting. Florry86 posted in this week's Miami review about not agreeing with my take on Eric and Calleigh's relationship, while m1304m disagrees with my opinions on CSI's newest team members and my review of "No Way Out." Both were civil and polite and made great points. With all due respect, if you intend to pursue a career in journalism, I think you still have much to learn about how to conduct discussions with people you don't agree with.
 
I never said I was an expert. I just wanted you to know I had a little bit of knowledge before you started calling me an ignoramus. But I can see my efforts were in vain.

Well, yeah, when you say stuff like this, it's not too impressive:

Although, I suppose you don't really have to worry about professionalism since you're not writing for a paper or magazine.

I wasn't really going for insult there. It's true that when you're writing for an internet blog/web site professionalism isn't really that important. There are no set rules for freelance internet writing whereas if it were an online publication from a magazine, journal, or newspaper there would be more set rules about it.

I will say though the the Obi Wan comment was me being snappy because you were mocking me for being in college and being an assistant copy editor.
 
I wasn't really going for insult there. It's true that when you're writing for an internet blog/web site professionalism isn't really that important. There are no set rules for freelance internet writing whereas if it were an online publication from a magazine, journal, or newspaper there would be more set rules about it.

That's a pretty blanket and erroneous statement--it depends on the internet publication. A personal blog doesn't have to be professional, no, but CNN.com is a website and they adhere to news standards. Then there are the entertainment sites, from Perez Hilton to EntertainmentWeekly.com--the professionalism varies there, too. In short, it's a lot more complicated and varies from site to site. This isn't my site--I simply write the reviews and conduct the interviews--but Christian Sparborth does have a set of standards for the site and I think overall both sites he runs are very professional. I doubt the people writing for and acting in the CSI shows would grant us interviews if they thought the site was an unprofessional mess.

I will say though the the Obi Wan comment was me being snappy because you were mocking me for being in college and being an assistant copy editor.

And my response on that was a direct response to your professionalism comment. As I've said before, I'm always open to discussing my reviews when presented with counter-arguments that are given civilly. It's when insults are flung about that I have difficulty taking people seriously.
 
And you make gigantic leaps in logic and like to imagine things that didn't happen on screen--like the continuation of Danny and Lindsay's conversation where he confessed all to her. I think you're blurring the line
Kristine, I never said it continued. I said "we dont know if it did".

You yourself told me " I can only deal with what actually happens on screen.", and in the next breath you say "Adam presumably was working but not on this case". Going off your first statement, wouldnt you have to say, "Adam just wasnt there". He wasnt shown onscreen, it wasnt mentioned he was at work so isnt that how we should take it? You cant have it both ways.

Danny being Mac's protege, Mac only asking about Lindsay because of that, the team, or fans not missing Lindsay, Danny being annoyed because Lindsay called, they are all you making assuptions or twisting things to suit your own agenda. There was nothing onscreen that suggested or even hinted at that being the case. And then you tell me I'm blurring the line or imagining things. Please!!

Kristine, you put your reivews out there for people to read. So you should expect that people are going to be critical when what they see in the episode is totally different to what you write.
 
Danny being Mac's protege, Mac only asking about Lindsay because of that, the team, or fans not missing Lindsay, Danny being annoyed because Lindsay called, they are all you making assuptions or twisting things to suit your own agenda. There was nothing onscreen that suggested or even hinted at that being the case. And then you tell me I'm blurring the line or imagining things. Please!!

Kristine, you put your reivews out there for people to read. So you should expect that people are going to be critical when what they see in the episode is totally different to what you write.

What "agenda?" A review is a place for a person to give their opinion and analysis of a show. That's what Kristine does. She gives her interpretation and opinion about the show. She also takes things from the entire history of the show to make interpretations about someone's characterization. You can't start every new show off with a clean slate and not have any context for why or how a character behaves and what and why they do certain things. Like Kristine said, in S1 and part of S2 it was pretty obvious that Danny was Mac's protogee. To say he still is isn't a big leap in logic or characterization.

But you're a Lindsay fan so I can see how you would think that's how it works. Lindsay's characterization changes almost every week, but that's not how it's supposed to work. ;)
 
And you make gigantic leaps in logic and like to imagine things that didn't happen on screen--like the continuation of Danny and Lindsay's conversation where he confessed all to her. I think you're blurring the line
Kristine, I never said it continued. I said "we dont know if it did".

You yourself told me " I can only deal with what actually happens on screen.", and in the next breath you say "Adam presumably was working but not on this case". Going off your first statement, wouldnt you have to say, "Adam just wasnt there". He wasnt shown onscreen, it wasnt mentioned he was at work so isnt that how we should take it? You cant have it both ways.

I think there's a difference between making an assumption about a character not appearing in an episode and making a leap that a phone conversation we saw going one way took a completely different turn.

Danny being Mac's protege,

Seasons one and two. Watch them--they're good! Mac and Danny's relationship was built up during those seasons as a mentor/protege one.

Mac only asking about Lindsay because of that,

I think Mac cares about Lindsay--but not as much as he cares about Danny. And I do think it was interesting that last time no one noted her absence, but now that she's carrying Danny's baby, they have. I simply found that interesting.

the team, or fans not missing Lindsay,

Me. Review writer. Woman whose byline is at the top of the review. Not the team. Not the fans--though if you read around, many of them happen to agree. ;)

Danny being annoyed because Lindsay called,

Never said that--I pointed out that they still don't communicate well. Biiiig difference.

they are all you making assuptions or twisting things to suit your own agenda. There was nothing onscreen that suggested or even hinted at that being the case. And then you tell me I'm blurring the line or imagining things. Please!!

Well, because you're either misreading or imagining things I never wrote. So yes, I do think you're blurring. But nice try. ;)

Kristine, you put your reivews out there for people to read. So you should expect that people are going to be critical when what they see in the episode is totally different to what you write.

I'm watching CSI: New York. If your viewing of the show is as poor as your comprehension of my reviews, I'm not surprised we're coming up with different viewpoints.
 
Kristine. I have yet to see you give one solid answer to anything I have said. Its funny, you say you are up for a civil debate, but when anyone disagrees with you, you start to insult them. Your a reviewer, on a public site, you should be able to take critisism when someone disagrees with you. Yes we all have likes and dislikes thats life, but you have to stick with the facts. You say, " Lindsay ALWAYS critisizes Danny". Can you give me examples of her doing that? Its comments like these that made me ask the question about blurring the line between whats seen onscreen, and the way you want things to be. Mac wasnt asking about Lindsay because Danny is his protege, nothing on screen suggested that. The team obviously miss her or Mac wouldnt have said "tell her we miss her". What did you want. Did you want every character to say they missed her? Then you would be complaining TPTB over did it and you dont need to be constantly reminded she is gone.

And about the fans not missing Lindsay. Who were you refering to when you said lots of fans agree with you? The dozen or so fans here at Talk CSI that have the same hate for Lindsay you do? Or did you poll the whole 13 million? I'm curious.
 
Kristine. I have yet to see you give one solid answer to anything I have said.

:wtf: :lol: Referencing two entire seasons with regards to the statement "Danny is Mac's protege" isn't "a solid answer"? Do you need an episode run down? How about: "A Man, A Mile," "Outside Man," "Til Death Do Us Part," "Crime & Misdemeanor," "On the Job," "Run Silent, Run Deep," and last week's "Green Piece." There are probably more, but I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of the show. ;)

Its funny, you say you are up for a civil debate, but when anyone disagrees with you, you start to insult them.

Bring some facts, we'll have a debate. You respond to every review that has a criticism of Lindsay or the romance between Danny and Lindsay, calling for facts--and the minute they're presented, you don't return. Funny how that works. ;)

Your a reviewer, on a public site, you should be able to take critisism when someone disagrees with you.

Oh, I can. But the cries of "you're so biased" don't really foster any kind of constructive debate. Again--you want to debate the facts, let's go. It does help if you bring something to the table, though. ;)

Yes we all have likes and dislikes thats life, but you have to stick with the facts. You say, " Lindsay ALWAYS critisizes Danny". Can you give me examples of her doing that?

Actually, I can! "Manhattan Manhunt" (the nickname), "Oedipus Hex" (sticking her with the bad jobs), "DOA for a Day" (forgetting her birthday), "Right Next Door" (blowing her off for lunch), "The Box" (the "I know you" comment with regards to his potential as a father). I'm sure I'm forgetting some instances, too, but it establishes a pattern of behavior--enough reason for him not to tell her what he'd been up to that day.

Its comments like these that made me ask the question about blurring the line between whats seen onscreen, and the way you want things to be. Mac wasnt asking about Lindsay because Danny is his protege, nothing on screen suggested that.

Really? Nothing on screen suggested Mac was asking about Lindsay because he cared about Danny? Nothing at all? I think Mac inquired because he cares about both of them, but in large part because he knew from last week's episode how Danny was fretting about Lindsay leaving. So yes, I think it has more to do with Mac's relationship with Danny than his relationship with Lindsay.

The team obviously miss her or Mac wouldnt have said "tell her we miss her". What did you want. Did you want every character to say they missed her? Then you would be complaining TPTB over did it and you dont need to be constantly reminded she is gone.

Again--again!--I never said the team didn't miss her. But the focus is and has always been on Danny when it comes to Lindsay. I notice you didn't have anything to say about her development these past few seasons and how it's all been about her relationship with Danny. No comment on that? Nothing at all? Interesting.

And about the fans not missing Lindsay. Who were you refering to when you said lots of fans agree with you? The dozen or so fans here at Talk CSI that have the same hate for Lindsay you do? Or did you poll the whole 13 million? I'm curious.

Yes, I polled each and every one of them. 89% of them also think you could use a little help with your grammar!
 
Actually, I can! "Manhattan Manhunt" (the nickname), "Oedipus Hex" (sticking her with the bad jobs), "DOA for a Day" (forgetting her birthday), "Right Next Door" (blowing her off for lunch), "The Box" (the "I know you" comment with regards to his potential as a father). I'm sure I'm forgetting some instances, too, but it establishes a pattern of behavior--enough reason for him not to tell her what he'd been up to that day.

You say those things like she was totally unjustified though.

She was annoyed that he kept calling her Montana, if I remember correctly that's something that also annoys you.

Telling a mother that her daughter is dead is a shit job. Plus, we know now that she was going through some trauma with her past. THAT'S why she blew up on him. If it had been Hawkes she would have done the same thing. That wasn't about him it was about the situation.

And yeah, she gave her boyfriend a little flack for forgetting her birthday. What kind of woman would do such a thing?!

In RND she blew up on him because she knew he was lying to her and hiding something from her. She even said that it wasn't about lunch so maybe you should go back and rewatch that.

As for "The Box", that was totally justified too. Danny is reckless and when the going gets tough he tends to get going. He had betrayed her trust, cheated on her, and their relationship was on the rocks. Of course she was going to be apprehensive. Plus that was a highly emotional situation and she was afraid. She said it in the heat of the moment.

As for last night's episode, can you honestly say to me that you think it would be a good idea for him to tell his extremely pregnant wife that he almost died over the phone? Did you want him to induce labor?! :lol:
 
You say those things like she was totally unjustified though.

And this is where different points of view come into play. You sympathize with her on these things. I don't.

She was annoyed that he kept calling her Montana, if I remember correctly that's something that also annoys you.

I actually give her that one, though a few seasons later she was complaining about missing it. Danny can't win! :lol:

Telling a mother that her daughter is dead is a shit job. Plus, we know now that she was going through some trauma with her past. THAT'S why she blew up on him. If it had been Hawkes she would have done the same thing. That wasn't about him it was about the situation.

Why is Lindsay above shit jobs? Don't they all have to do shit jobs sometimes? It's always personal with her, though she picks and chooses what's too much for her and what's not. In "Manhattan Manhunt," she complained about being sent away from the crime scene. At that point, she was the low man on the totem pole. Complaining--and manipulating Danny--definitely made her look unprofessional.

And yeah, she gave her boyfriend a little flack for forgetting her birthday. What kind of woman would do such a thing?!

A few weeks after a kid in his care died? A self-involved woman--which Lindsay certainly is.

In RND she blew up on him because she knew he was lying to her and hiding something from her. She even said that it wasn't about lunch so maybe you should go back and rewatch that.

Oh, I remember. She was mad at him for pulling away from her--when she failed to reach out to him in the first place. And this was while he was wallowing in self-hatred over his responsibility for Ruben's death. Rather than telling him she wanted to be there for him, she turned it around on him and made him feel worse.

Had she known about Rikki, I would have sympathized with her. But she didn't. She was just pissed that she wasn't Danny's number one priority.

As for "The Box", that was totally justified too. Danny is reckless and when the going gets tough he tends to get going. He had betrayed her trust, cheated on her, and their relationship was on the rocks. Of course she was going to be apprehensive. Plus that was a highly emotional situation and she was afraid. She said it in the heat of the moment.

It was a cruel thing to say. Danny doesn't get going when the going gets tough--he stuck with her throughout all of season three, even when she constantly pushed him away. He flew to Montana to support her during the trial. He took her shift to be sweet in "Snow Day."

As for him turning to another woman during season four, yes, he did. Because the woman he was seeing was so self-involved that her birthday was a bigger deal than his pain over the death of a child in his care.

As for last night's episode, can you honestly say to me that you think it would be a good idea for him to tell his extremely pregnant wife that he almost died over the phone? Did you want him to induce labor?! :lol:

Yes, because I think couples should be able to communicate openly and honestly with each other. That's really the crux of a healthy relationship, and so essential to the survival of a relationship. The fact that they still can't do this, three years down the road, newly married with a kid on the way, does say a lot to me. They've still got problems. And maybe they'll work them out, but they're definitely not in a solid place yet if he can't tell her what happened to him. I'd expect him to preface it with an "I'm okay" first, so as not to panic her or put her into an early labor. ;)

ETA: This is the kind of debate I enjoy--two differing opinions, but no personal insults or mud-slinging.
 
While I'm not prone to jump to the defense of someone who is indubitably capable of defending themselves, you and others have taken to every conversation here with such bitterness that I'm left thinking you believe Kristine is out to convert you. I can't speak for her, but I have to say it's highly unlikely that she gives a crap about which side of the debate you have chosen to dig your heels into.

I also have no idea how else anyone can begin to express to you that her reviews are not written to challenge or undermine your personal opinions despite what you may think. Do you get this peevish when Ebert and Roper give your favorite movies a big thumbs down? Do you start slinging defensive emails at them or crying our for their credentials? While I'm using E&R for comparison I'd also like to point out that those two are capable of debating the merit of a film without the rending of garments and flinging poo. They are aware that while they feel differently about a picture, they've both got credible reasons and a myriad support for the way they feel, but when all is said and done, it is still just the reviewers interpretation. If you don't agree, counter it tactfully or move on. I don't understand why you think it's a reviewers job to be stringently objective. It's not.

melanie33 said:
Is it your opinion?
Top41 said:
Do you know what a review is? Of course it's an opinion--the analysis part is all my opinion. Perhaps you should brush up on your definition of what a review is before reading one.*

*translation: yes it is.

You've been clinging to your defensive interrogations a long time, even when your questions HAVE been succinctly answered. In any case where the responses of Kristine and others have been less than concrete it's always because the question itself was born in such specious reasoning that it raises more questions than it does lend itself to being answered!

You've talked yourself in such circles in your attempt to rage against the oh so oppressive TalkCSI machine that you're barely making any sense anymore and it's painful that you can't see that.

It's also very concerning that you can't see any difference between defining the implied Danny-Mac relationship as mentor and protege and assuming the direction of a conversation long after the scene cut. There's a stark difference there and it's between understanding a show's context and writing fan fiction. You'll NEVER see Kristine's reviews say something outlandish like "And then he hung up but it's pretty clear THIS is what was said after that scene ended..."

The more I read these responses the less I believe you're even reading the replies your getting, let alone what else is being said by other posters who've attempted to clarify this argument for you.
 
Last edited:
Opinions by their very nature are inherently biased.

Kristine doesn't like the D/L pairing and that will influence her interpretation of a scence, people who like D/L will view the same scene from a different perspective and have a different interpretation. Thats what makes the world an interesting place and leads to good debates, as long as each sides repects each other views. Taking person swipes at someone only suggests you can't backup your own opinion.

Personally I not keen on the pairing but even then I don't always agree with Kristine analysis. For example, I didn't see anything wrong with Danny not telling Lindsay what had happened - he would have just worried her unnecessarily. However, I can understand Kristine view on this given the lack of communication between these two in the past. I viewed it as an isolated incident, Kristine seems to have viewed it as another example of a continuous theme. I don't feel the need to question her professionalism or try to demean her job her work - that kind of behaviour is just unnecessary.

I can't stand reviews that are just this happened and then this etc, I want to read a constructive critique that makes me think about the show and possibly see things differently. A review that either always echos my own thoughts or offers no opinion will not do that. For these reasons I enjoy reading Kristines reviews, whether I agree with them or not.
 
Actually, I can! "Manhattan Manhunt" (the nickname), "Oedipus Hex" (sticking her with the bad jobs), "DOA for a Day" (forgetting her birthday), "Right Next Door" (blowing her off for lunch), "The Box" (the "I know you" comment with regards to his potential as a father). I'm sure I'm forgetting some instances, too, but it establishes a pattern of behavior--enough reason for him not to tell her what he'd been up to that day.
I totally agree with what a poster above me somewhere said. IMO everyone one of those examples you listed are justified. In MM how is that criticizing? she asked him not to call her Montana because she didnt like it. In OH we later found out why she reacted that way, perfectly justifed given the circumstances and I also dont remember her comments being specifically aimed at Danny in particular. In RND, it was Danny that assumed she was upset about him missing her birthday and blowing off lunch. Lindsay never said that, actually she said the opposite, she said it wasnt about that. And regardless of whether he cheated or not, he lied, and tried to turn things around oh her to take the blame off himself. Dont you think she had a right to be ticked? And in "The Box". Put yourself in Lindsay's position. Her and Danny's relationship isnt exactly stable, she finds out she is pregnant and Danny has a history of closing himself off when things get rough. i.e CP through to RND, plus she is scared. I thought it was a very natural reaction given the circumstances. So can you give me an example where she has criticized Danny where it hasnt been justified?

I get that you dont like Lindsay or D/L, and I get that we all interperet things somewhat differently and I get a lot of what you say is only your opinion, but I thought a review was supposed to be somewhat objective. I dont see that at all in your reviews, your hate for the character shines through. You dislike the character so much, and you love the Danny character so much, you see every situation between the two of them as Lindsay's fault, you never look at things from her POV. That to me is not looking at things objectively. JMHO.
 
I totally agree with what a poster above me somewhere said. IMO everyone one of those examples you listed are justified. In MM how is that criticizing? she asked him not to call her Montana because she didnt like it.

She snapped at him in the lab because she was irritated about being sent back to process evidence when she wanted to be at the crime scene (the crime scene that, by the way, totally mirrored the one she herself experienced). Like I said, I get why she was annoyed by the nickname (that she grew to like to the point that she missed it two seasons later), but her response to being asked to do her job was immature.

In OH we later found out why she reacted that way, perfectly justifed given the circumstances and I also dont remember her comments being specifically aimed at Danny in particular.

She addressed them right to him, complaining about "Lindsay always getting the jobs no one else wants" or something along those lines, two episodes after he said he had feelings for her. If she'd told him she had an issue with mothers and politely asked him if he would switch tasks with her, it would have been one thing. But she manipulated him into it which, given that he had feelings for her, was somewhat cruel.

In RND, it was Danny that assumed she was upset about him missing her birthday and blowing off lunch. Lindsay never said that, actually she said the opposite, she said it wasnt about that. And regardless of whether he cheated or not, he lied, and tried to turn things around oh her to take the blame off himself. Dont you think she had a right to be ticked?

What happened to "the circumstances" making things understandable? Or does that only extend to Lindsay? ;)

And in "The Box". Put yourself in Lindsay's position. Her and Danny's relationship isnt exactly stable, she finds out she is pregnant and Danny has a history of closing himself off when things get rough. i.e CP through to RND, plus she is scared. I thought it was a very natural reaction given the circumstances.

Treating him like some irresponsible cad after they'd both made the decision to carry on a sexual relationship wasn't very kind, given that she knows what his insecurities are. She knew how to drive the knife in, and she did that to be cruel. The "I know you" part wasn't necessary. Telling him she wasn't expecting anything from him I understand, though I do wonder if that was really true. But judging him before giving him a chance to react to the news wasn't fair. Supposedly she loves this man, so why does she seem to think so little of him?

So can you give me an example where she has criticized Danny where it hasnt been justified?

I don't think you'd find any example of Lindsay criticizing Danny unjustified. I think you're working from your own bias here. Fair enough--but if you want me to acknowledge one, you should look in the mirror, too. ;)

I get that you dont like Lindsay or D/L, and I get that we all interperet things somewhat differently and I get a lot of what you say is only your opinion, but I thought a review was supposed to be somewhat objective. I dont see that at all in your reviews, your hate for the character shines through. You dislike the character so much, and you love the Danny character so much, you see every situation between the two of them as Lindsay's fault, you never look at things from her POV. That to me is not looking at things objectively. JMHO.

See, here's another instance where your bias comes in--that's not the way I see it at all. I think the relationship is a mess because of both of them. Danny is so insecure and needy that he's willing to try--and of course, is failing--to make himself into someone he's not to please Lindsay. He's only interested in Lindsay when she's pushing him away, which is pretty messed up to begin with. Danny's a mess. The failure to communicate is definitely 50% his fault.

And I've noted when I've thought Lindsay has acted maturely or unselfishly. She was right to turn down his marriage proposal in "The Triangle," and though she should have given him an explanation right away rather than making him once again chase after her for it, what she said in response was reasonable and kind.

I know many fans want to see these two as a lovey dovey perfect couple. And that's fine--I don't begrudge anyone that. But the key to relationships--real relationships, not fantasy ones where the man says he's willing change who he is for a little girl from the country--is communication and these two don't have that. They've communicated openly and maturely in one episode: "The Triangle."

I don't "hate" DL--or even Lindsay, though I do think she's a detriment to the show. I actually liked the character in the incarnation where she showed some sass and spirit--like in "Cool Hunter," "Stuck on You" and even "Snow Day," when she put the moves on Danny. Sadly, that interesting, spirited incarnation is the one seen least frequently--instead we get shrill, self-involved, holier-than-thou Lindsay far more often than we see her fun, take-charge side.

But, yes, I think the relationship between Danny and Lindsay is unrealistic and not a positive one for the show, and I'm not going to stop saying that in my reviews just because it irks people who look at them as the perfect pairing.
 
Back
Top