"Disarmed & Dangerous" Discussion *SPOILERS*

Did anyone else notice that Ray called Hodges by his first name... I enjoyed seeing Wendy in this episode. It was odd that the case started with Catherine and Ray working together and ended up with mostly Ray working the case, as inexperienced as he is I would think that an upper level CSI would have to be with him most of the time.

In all it was an okay episode, i enjoyed last weeks much better, there seemed to be more communication between the characters.... I want more lab rats though.

And how funny was that to see Marc Vann in the guys pocket in the Radio Shack commercial, i had to do a double take when I heard the voice and didn't see the face at first.

 

I have mixed feelings about this episode. I DO like Fishburne's and Smith's characters, but I think (very understandably) the show feels a bit off, due to the writers having to write for new characters which are (again, understandably) less developed than the ones we've lost. I think as viewers it'll take some time for us to become accustomed to the new feel of the show. It's CSI, and yet it's not.

That said, I think the episode was well-done, though gruesome!! Paul Guilfoyle, as usual, was superb.

I particularly liked the ending; giving the inmate Don Quijote was a nice touch, very in keeping with something a professor would do, though not so much something that I think doctors regularly do. Maybe Langston is really a professor at heart, even though his training is in medicine. There were some nice moments of Langston learning (with Wendy, for instance).

I think the show's gonna do alright.

 

Ending Happy comes to mind, and its hilarous drunk barman (I killed him??!! LOL) who also found the fake FBI's body in last night's episode.

i didn't feel LF's presence was overwhelming yesterday. probably b/c i don't care for Nick and Greg, really. i loved that we got a lot of Brass who had some great scenes. i agree that there should've been more Catherine, though. as a supervisor she should be truly in Grissom's spot, and now when the main character is CSI level 1, it feels way too weird.

but even though Langston is not familiar with forensic techniques he has a lot more knowlegde, and ultimately experience, than any Holly Gribbs out there. so the fact that he gags when he sees a dead body is quite suprising.

 

Okay we need to talk about continuity...What is the definition? Somebody needs to send it to the writers of last night episode...okay,Hatford had his prints removed surgically(the first guy to die) then Wendy sends his DNA off the gun to Quantico,but HIS PRINTS ARE ALL OVER THE GUN and ACCORDING TO RAY they're all over it...what prints(Ray tells Brass that he found the prints on Mingus's gun,they are Hatford's)...but he had them removed...duh.

So that made me think...we had to have another four minutes of Ray so they had him do prints again,possibly after they filmed Wendy sending the DNA and Ray finding the prints on the gun...no,they aren't that dense....no really they're not.really.

Why is it that Nick wasn't even trusted as a CSI 3 to go solo but we have CSI1 going out on his own???????? I'm virtually screaming right now!

 

I do agree Langston is doing a lot for a level one. I think he may be shown more because he took Grissom's place in a way and Grissom was the lead. I liked how Langston dealt with the inmate and he gave him that book. He was very nice and tried to empathize. I also loved Greg's blue sweater. That is so him. It scared me a little when the guy shot himself.

 

This was was interesting, in a weird twisted kind of way. Too little Greg for my taste but at least his nickname is back, Catherine called him Greggo.

Hodges belongs in the lab...enuf said

All in all it was an ok episode, not great but good.

 

Well, the first scene really gory, "The Red Hulk":klingon: and the guy who came upon it wasn't that Ernie Dells kid from the S/7 ep. did you all notice that? and the fake FBI guy Frank Whaley was in an old Kevin Spacey flick "Swimming With Shark's from years ago, in the 90's. anyway Mingus nice guy, NOT and touching Nick "Don't touch me" and then the "these guns aren't real" and blowing his brains out. I bit confusing for me, I didn't understand where they were going with this.. Hodges "we always save the best for last" and Langston replying "That's already getting old" good one:lol: Wendy calling Brass with the info. about the fake FBI guy and then he disappears. So they find him in a halfway house muttering to himself, and is I guess nuts & whispers to Dr. Langston, to handcuff him, and Brass goes along with it. Then the drive by shooting and Brass running amok, I haven't seen him so mad since the last scene in "I Like To Watch" on the shooting. I still don't get who killed the fake FBI girl The ending with Langston giving Miles the Don Quixote book and him stating "he was still melancholy and killed him self, which he replied "well, they didn't have anit-depressants in those days" and the windmill comment:thumbsup: the smile.. Analysis, it was kinda of a mish-mash of events that were vague and blurry. I did get the heroism of the fake FBI people trying to change things for the better, just a bit off the wall.. They seem to really be bringing LF way in to the center of this ep. and having him in almost every scene.. I do like him but... where were are other CSI's? they we're in the background especially Greggo, he was like in one scene. I don't get that, I realize he's new, but so is Riley and she didn't dominate every scene in her first and second epsiodes They all seemed to be floundering and lost in the mix of this ep. I want to see the cast members that are left more

 

Okay we need to talk about continuity...What is the definition? Somebody needs to send it to the writers of last night episode...okay,Hatford had his prints removed surgically(the first guy to die) then Wendy sends his DNA off the gun to Quantico,but HIS PRINTS ARE ALL OVER THE GUN and ACCORDING TO RAY they're all over it...what prints(Ray tells Brass that he found the prints on Mingus's gun,they are Hatford's)...but he had them removed...duh.

So that made me think...we had to have another four minutes of Ray so they had him do prints again,possibly after they filmed Wendy sending the DNA and Ray finding the prints on the gun...no,they aren't that dense....no really they're not.really.

Why is it that Nick wasn't even trusted as a CSI 3 to go solo but we have CSI1 going out on his own???????? I'm virtually screaming right now!
[/quote]

I noticed that confusion in the episode too. My husband and I were (wearily) trying to figure it out last night, and thought maybe we'd just been too tired and hadn't paid enough attention.

I know it must be REALLY hard to write these episodes, get all the scientific detail right, and keep things in character (and go for believability at the same time). But something was off in this ep -- either the editing was done in such a way that it made it hard for the audience to follow the logic, or the logic itself was flawed.

Still like the show. Still think Fishburne (and Helgenberger and Eads and Szmanda and Guilfoyle) are going to save it.

 

Yes, he had them removed so the result when he touched something would be a distinctive blob instead of the whorls and loops we're used to seeing. If you knew one of your suspects/victims didn't have any prints and then you saw blobs instead of prints, wouldn't you put two and two together and figure your suspect made them? I believe that is what Langston did.

 

They were prints,he dusted them,they had swirls...Hatford had blobs,just rewatched it again...swirls are not blobs.

 

well right now the ratings were great for this episode..it gained like 3 million viewers from last week(got around 20 million viewers)

I do want more Greg, but what can you do? We can complain all we want...but they'll do what they think is best for ratings..

But, from what I saw of Greg, he just gets better looking...

 

First of all, I have to say that I thought this episode was amazing, though I realize that I'm in the minority. I thought the entire plot was really intriguing, as well as inspiring. I think the biggest problem was that they had to fit it all into one episode. Honestly, I can imagine this episode working out really well as, say, a movie, or even as a two-parter.

The whole idea of three people who had been relatively written off by society basically transforming themselves into people who can make a difference was excellent, especially in the way that CSI portrayed it. They're doing the same work as FBI agents, but they're doing it for entirely altruistic reasons, and they're not even getting paid for it.

I think the earlier scene with Riley and Emma speaks a lot for Emma's (and her "colleagues'") attitude and perspective on life -- other people (like Riley) view the job they're doing as lame, as Riley basically implies that they must have pissed people off to get the job in the first place. But to Emma, it's a job that needs to be done.

Basically, I think CSI put a fascinating twist on the idea of superheroes with the three fake agents. The three fake Feds go out on a daily basis to deal with a dangerous world (as evidenced by the fact that, by the end of the episode, two of them are dead and Miles barely dodged the bullet from the guy in the car) and their ambition is just to do good and, as Ray puts it, to clean up their little corner of the world. Unlike many real agents (and general workers) they're not seeking pay, or trying to move up the work totem pole. They're just using what they have to make a difference. The scene with Miles and Langston at the end was definitely one of my favorite scenes ever; you could really tell that Miles didn't care quite so much that he was going to jail as he did that he had made a difference. And then you see the juxtaposition with the girls being loaded out of the prostitution ring. Nobody would expect someone like him to make a difference, yet he was basically responsible for freeing all of those girls and entirely because of his and his equally unusual colleagues' altruism and courage.

At the same time, unlike in standard superhero fare, CSI put in lots of twists and turns, so that you really don't see it from the perspective of the "superheroes." It's like watching Spiderman from the perspective of the newspaper editor, or of a police officer.

Overall, I think it was fascinating, even though I think it would have worked better as a two-parter or, preferably, as a movie. It definitely was different than the standard CSI episode.

At the same time, however, I felt like it was going back to CSI's roots. To me, a big part of what made Grissom, and the show as a whole, special, was the exploration of things we'd generally dismiss -- episodes like 'Ch-ch-changes' and 'Fur and Loathing' that really focus on forgetting biases and just looking at the evidence and, in the process, treating every human being as an equal and really understanding the truth, rather than what the truth seems like it "should" be. Overall, I think it was one of the most fascinating premises for an episode (or anything really) that I've seen in a very long time. I also have to say that Miles and Emma are, for the moment, my favorite "bad guys" ever.

On the topic of the girls in the sex slavery/prostitution ring, I feel like the premise and plot of this episode not only exemplifies what makes CSI special, but also illustrates a big difference between the original CSI and CSI:Miami. I don't watch much Miami, but I've definitely seen Horatio break up similar sex slavery/prostitution rings, but it was alway so different. With Miami, it's Horatio, everyone's standard (and, IMO, more stereotyped) hero coming to save the day and then reassuring the women/girls that everything's gonna be alright. In CSI Vegas, however, it's an underdog psych patient, with the help of a former prostitute and another halfway house co-inhabitant, that saves the day. CSI Vegas is about the people we'd otherwise dismiss -- and showcasing the many layers that make them complex and human. In that way, I think this episode, as different as it seemed in many ways, really was going back to the roots of the show, and to the heart of what made Gil Grissom such a wonderful, and TV-redefining character.

That said, I do think it was probably a bit too rushed. I think that the execution of the episode could have been better. I can't put my finger on it, but something just didn't feel right in how it flowed.

As to other things,

I noticed the fingerprint continuity thing too, and I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt re: the fingerprints being a blob and go with wlk68's explanation.

I totally disagree. CSI is trying to start a new era. Basically, it's changing. Ray is the new main character, and the viewers have to adjust to him. TPTB are trying to help that transition along. Before, they used to have a lot of episodes revolving more around a Grissom-centered narrative. Now Ray's the star, and they're making it centered more around him.

Personally, I really like this because it gives us the opportunity that we never had to see things from the newbie's POV. I mean, most shows start that way -- with a newbie joining the police dept/hospital/CSI Lab/etc. and that newbie adjusting to how the group that they just joined works, so that the audience learns along with them. CSI, however, never really had that; Holly Gribbs was the "newbie" and she was killed off in the second episode. While Greg became a newbie halfway through the series, we never even really got that experience with him, largely, IMO, because he wasn't the main guy; we couldn't spend too much of the episode following Greg around and watching him learn. Now, though, we have a newbie that we can learn with, which I really like. I've always taken a lot of the science for granted, and it's refreshing to finally get a stronger grip on it as Ray learns more about it.

Most importantly, bringing in the newbie perspective, and centering on it for at least a few episodes is, IMO, a great way to appeal to new audiences. My understanding was that TPTB understood that they were probably going to lose viewers when Grissom left. So they advertised heavily and tried to bring new viewers in for the LF era of CSI. And I think the new viewers gained in that process would, most likely, feel more comfortable getting the newbie perspective. Though it may be unfortunate for fans who were already watching the show and don't want to get this perspective, perhaps because they are already comfortable with how the science itself works or because they'd rather see more of characters that they've grown to love in the past 8 seasons, this transition still seems necessary. CSI's Thursday night time is becoming an increasingly competitive slot, with Grey's and now Bones, as well as NBC's comedy duo, competing for viewers. At the same time, the economic downturn is, no doubt, hitting advertising money hard, and that trend will probably only get worse, at least until the economy is doing better. Overall, CSI has to change.

 

That wasn't Ernie Dell's kid. That's the actor that played Connor Foster in 'Homebodies' and 'Ending Happy'. Though in this episode he was just called 'stoner dude'

 

forum newbie here. I don't know that I am a faithful fan but I've watched every episode of the series at least once. I had to finally delurk and register. Blame the immortal Frank Whaley and Lawrence Fishburne.

I loved this episode and I love the turn the series has taken.

For me, this was the best episode in a long time. Not only did it feature *Frank Whaley* (w00t!) but it I am enjoying the CSI 1 viewpoint Fishburne's character brings more and more. Just pepper the episodes with even more Wallace Langham and I'll be a satisfied viewer.

ITA with most of happyharper13's post. I don't mind being in the minority on this one. I thought it was an outstanding episode myself.

 

I totally disagree primarily because I've never liked the whole central character's narrative on the show. I think CSI is an ensemble cast and I don't know why we have to one narrative.