Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion - Part 1

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

WL was listed this way last year too

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

My thoughts exactly, I believe TPTB are messing with our heads with conflicting info, pub stunts, new characters, rumors, etc

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

Maybe he gets his spot in the opening credits.

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

I so hope he is, I think it is time for him to get that kind of credit. After all if CM says we will see more of the lab rats it would make sense, right?

Here's hoping

Not to sure if WL listed in opening credits is really a spoiler? Still hope it happens though.

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

I don't really think that WL should be in the opening credits though. I feel like maybe he hasn't paid his dues.

I think that Nick is way too immature for a role as leader or supervisor or whatever(all hearsay). I think that Warrick is a better fit because of all of the examples we have. Nick flipped in Gum Drops and the Grave Danger thing hasn't really been settled. Plus, in Redrum he was all angsty. IMHO I believe that Nick woulfd be the wrong choice if TPTB did decide to upgrade anybody.

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

Well we all have our own opinions of the matter. Personally thinking about it I think Greg is the only junior CSI that even has a hope of growing up to be a good CSI supervisor, but not for a LONG time.

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

Why hasn't he paid his dues?

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

Here's 3 different web-sites with Jorja Fox listed! enjoy

DEAD DOLL

CAST LINEUP

STARPULSE

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

For me I just have a hard time seeing anyone other than Catherine or Grissom as a supervisor because that is the way it has always been. But thats just me.

I personally would love to see them stay this way forever because really, there is not a lot of supervising going on anyways. LOL.

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

Everybody got their own opinion. Nick is not immature, he has grow up a lot, he make a little mistake on Gum Drops and Redrum. Nick is the one got the teams together to go against Catherine and Keppler. I think he will be a good leader to his teams.

Warrick is good, but he can't handle be the leader. He doesn't like to do paperwork. Maybe Warrick and Nick can be partner of the leader, supervisor with each other.

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

I admit I see it differently.

WL has paid as many “dues” as ES had when he became a regular on CSI (two years on the show as a recurring star before moving up to the opening credits) so why can’t they move WL? Who does it hurt if the gets an opening credit?


As for Nick flipping out in Gumdrops, well so did Warrick in Random Acts of Violence; in fact so much so that Grissom took him off the case. In Redrum Nick was antsy because he knew something was not right with the case, and how it was being investigated, so he worked to correct it, further proof to me that he could be a good leader. Every character on this show has made mistakes on the job so pointing them out doesn’t really work for me. I am thinking more of what they have done right, verses wrong.

Just so I can see your side better, what examples are you thinking of? You have listed why you don't think Nick would be good at the job but not why Warrick would be better. What moments are you thinking of where Warrick has shown really strong leadership skills?

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

^^^ Agreed on the Wallace bit. He's been on the show since season 3 and that's five seasons. Season 8 will be his sixth. That's a long time. In my opinion, he's done a very nice job playing Hodges and I believe this character has grown on many viewers. I'm neither pro nor con, but I think he deserves it if he really gets it.

As for Catherine's story in the fourth episode, I don't know, I doubt it's going to be the Cath!Drama people complained about. Remember how they pimped KKBB as the "dark secret of Catherine's family"? A lot of people were like "oh no, not Cath!Drama again!" It turned out that it was not that much of Cath!Drama and that it was a great episode where Greg shone the most so I'm actually looking forward to this episode. It looks like it's going to have a connection to KKBB. And I'm glad that they plan to have Adam Novak back. He and Catherine agreed on a truce during their latest encounter and got along pretty well. I'm interested in how they'll develop the dynamic between these two characters.

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

In all honesty I think that Nick "stepping up" could just be that he fineally gets that promotion that he was denied due to budget cuts. I think both Nick and Warrick have alot of experience under their belts to handle any step up. Both have had their moments of emotions getting in the way and emotions that helped them. Honestly I am not seeing anyone else getting a supervisor role, but maybe more of a fill in if needed (ie like Warrick in 'Ellie').

While I like Hodges he is a funny, paranoid type of character and I can see him in more, he tries to please but uses the sarcasam with just enough dry to make it funny, but I don't think I want to see him bought up to far, otherwise the chance of losing some of that could happen.

Greg is still has much to learn, he is in the position to a point that Nick was in when the show first started, he lets his emotions lead him, this isn't a bad quality its a good one, but he needs to get more control of them, but at the sametime as the show tries to mature him from the "lab rat funny guy with head gear and straws up the nose" to a full serious CSI at first they lost some of that which made him greg.

The thing in my opinion is this, the show needs to becareful maturing or what have you any character, because if you take them too far to fast then you could take away something from the character that made them who they are to the fans.


Also please if you are going to use press releases give credit to CBS site for it in that thread, otherwise you will get that "Site your source" and then you have to come back and explain it.

Note that while some press releases are official they are subject to corrections and/or changes, So whether or not Jorja's name not being on their was a mistake or on purpose is yet to be seen, especially with all the stuff that was happening.

 

Re: Season 8 *Spoiler Lab* Discussion & Posting - Part 1

Just how does turning the whole team of poeple that Catherine trusted with her life and loved like family against her make him a good leader? How does automatically turning against someone who didn't falter for a second to believe in him in his time of need and questionable character make him a good leader? Maybe I missed something here... but I think that makes him a bad friend and perhaps a person of lesser character than I (and Catherine) once believed. Catherine loves Nick, undeniably, and unceasingly (not in love with, but she loves him like one of her own family, you can't deny it) and he doesn't even trust her enough to give her the benefit of the doubt.... some leader.

I'm not trying to start anything and I'm not going to discuss the issue of his capability as a leader anymore. I just don't think that particular instance is a shining or proud moment for him. I could even see Grissom contesting that as a qualifying characteristic.


Thinking the leadership thing over again I'll say my final piece and then I'm dropping the issue entriely. (I'm expecting a rebuttle to my above rant, and I'll partake in that but only to a limited degree.) I will admit that when I first said my piece in protest of Nick being promoted to supervisor, ever, it was because of the events in Ellie as well as a few other resounding moments in earlier seasons. Anyway I don't think either of them have the qualities that a person needs to be a good leader. I was thinking of the time when Catherine stood by Nick in "Boom." That is the biggest quality that is needed to be a good leader. Grissom has it. How many times has he been there to help Sara, Catherine, and even Warrick when they were in need? How many times has he offered his friendship as well as his faith in the person in question? Catherine and Grissom believe in and trust the poeple they are working with. Until the others can learn to do this they'll only be half qualified it's why Ecklie failed as a CSI and a supervisor. It's what Sofia was talking about when she said she "missed being trusted" in order to be a part of something like that you have to have faith.

I amend all of my previous statements to say that neither Warrick or Nick have what it takes. I don't think anyone but Catherine and Grissom do... yet.