Search results

I will agree that not every person who lives in the bible belt is homophobic, but I do think there are a number of people that would be uncomfortable with the idea. A while back there was a series of articles in the Washington Post that talked about young gays in the "bible belt" and American...

I'd have to say Archie, Bobby form the the lab and Lady Heather. I would love to see if she (LH) can see that Nick is still effected what happened in Grave Danger...

Right. On both counts. I think that point of scene was to show us just how out of touch Grissom is with his people that he never noticed that Sara doesn't eat meat, His off handed comment that she could have one her fellow CSIs clean up Grissom's expeirment only added to Sara's distress and...

I didn't mind Cahterine that much. It is not that often that we get to see cracks on Chaterine's armor. I liked seeing her just a little vunerable... I do agree that she was very touchy, and took many of Nick's comments and questions the wrong way. I also think that Nick was a tad insenitive...

I'd have to say Archie...he is good. I would also like to see something happen at Lady Heather's so Grissom would have to go back there - in a professional capacity - his not hers. One reason I would like to see this, is I would like to see if Nick was there was well and if LH - given her...

ME: Dr. Robbins - I just like the way he talks and explains his findings to the CSIs... Cop: Jim Brass Lead CSI: Grissom... he is my favorite of the supervisors - maybe because he trys to look at the evidence to make sure the real killer/rapist/what-have-you gets caught and doesn't want...

I don't know if I would go for arrogant... but I do think he was both satisfied that he had figured how the experiment had been manipulated and that it was manipulated in the first place. Grissom is first, last and always a scientist. For one of his fellow bug people to "rig" the results of...

Well said. I had the same thought. The CSIs we see do a lot more then their real-life conuterparts. The way I saw it, Greg was doing a "rookie" task... the leg work that has to be done by someone and given that Greg is low-man on the totem pole he was the one that had to do it...

Not a bad episode...Not the best of the season, but not the worse either... I thought the whole mystery of who the baby was, how the vic became a mama, was well done. I was a bit annoyed with Catherine in Dcctors office, but it was so in character for her to do that it didn't brother me to...

It could also have been that GE was still doing publiity stuff for his film and was not availiable full time. I wouldn't put it past Moonves to be that petty, but I am not sure about the CSI writers, who would have been the ones to make the choices about the stories and who gets them...

But would the CSIs make that distinction? Sara might, but I don't think the others would...that is assuming they investigate her past enough to learn that her ONLY sexual expeirence was a rape...and that is not something I could see them doing, unless there was some relvence to the case. I am...

Well, I will agree on the reason why she would want a child, I was just wondering why she would go to such lengths without trying...more conventional methods first. Moreover I was thinking in terms of plot... that those questions would be something the CSI would be looking into and would lead...

True...And that could be an interesting idea...that sort of thing has been in the news recently. The question would then be where is the mama and what happened to her? And why would a woman who is a virgin go to such lengths to get a child?

Re: Dislike A Character I don't know if I would say I like the criminals, but one thing I do like that is quite often we see "bad guys" that are not really bad. We often see people who have made some very bad and dumb choices... who acted in the heat of the moment and didn't think through...

Re: Dislike A Character? I can't say I really dislike any of the characters... even the ones we are suppose to hate like Eckile. The way I see it , if a character/actor can get me to hate him/her then that is a good - as in well written and well acted - character. The ones I have a problem with...

It could also be that the writers wanted to show how far Nick had come from season one... That he no longer needed Grissom's approval... and that even when he NEEDED Grissom to write him a recomendation to get a promotion he was willing to go againist him and to prove that Grissom had made a...

Well, I can sort of see it. Remember this is a small town... one of those places where everyone knows (or at least thinks they know) everyone else. The shariff might not have wanted to invade the families privacy any more then he had to. From what he told Nick at the begining, it sounded like...

This episode was suppose to be a Grissom episode... but WP had a death in his family - and wanted to be with his family - so the writers wrote him out of the episode...There were even scenes that were shot, but I think they had to scrapped because there was no good way to work them in.. I don't...

Re: "softening of Nick" to popo I know it was unplanned but I thought it was interesting that this episode aired the same week as Maimi's "Three Way" The way the junior CSIs from wach city handled that could not have been more different. (That is not a knock on CSI:M or it's characters...just...

I think they knew what he was capable of. They would not have given him GD in the first place if they didn't think he would be able to show all the emotions needed to do that episode. I do think however that it provides a another layer to have Nick be the one to do this... Not just because of...