Character or Crime?

Where should the focus be?

  • Less character development, more crime.

    Votes: 10 10.2%

  • More character development, less crime.

    Votes: 11 11.2%

  • An equal balance of both.

    Votes: 73 74.5%

  • I really don't care.

    Votes: 4 4.1%
  • Total voters
    98
Couldn't agree more with you! Character development through the cases is the best way to go.

And you're right about certain storylines which haven't been explored enough. We never really got an insight in the whole Warrick/Tina thing.
 
love_fan said:
Couldn't agree more with you! Character development through the cases is the best way to go.

And you're right about certain storylines which haven't been explored enough. We never really got an insight in the whole Warrick/Tina thing.
Click to expand...


I know it was like only mentioned and then dropped? Like Greg and his scars!! What happened to them? Where was Nick's counselling after his near death experience? Or Sara's after being well nearly killed by Natalie and that Adam (earlier season where he was having a weird sexual relationship with his mother, who was a psychiatric nurse in a mental hospital!), or even Warrick and the fall out of Holly Gribbs back in season one.

Although we did brieftly see Warrick fall from grace~but still it wasnt done enough. What about that Judge Warrick got for corruption~nothing really was said after that.


Apart from the Mike Keppler~ the writters got that right.:thumbsup:


Ahhh the flaws in the writting!!!!

So its both crime first cause it affects everyone but it can change a persons perspectives on crime- and thats where we see the character development.

Thanks love_fan I knew you might agree!
 
I'd like a balance of both, but one thing I've noticed is the writers inability to separate the two.

How many times has a character become personally involved in a case? How many times have we gotten personal character development because it was a friend or relative that's been victimized? How many times have we seen a characters life get turned upside down because of something that happened at work?

I know Miami is renowned for this, but it's the one show I've seen change (and not for the better). Calleigh and her father. That started off amazingly. He appeared randomly and could be in an episode without being involved in Calleigh's case and even when he was, he had a legitimate reason for being there. But then they changed it. Suddenly, he was a victim, suspect, reason for something that went wrong... suddenly he was no longer a character, but a pawn in Calleigh's 'development'.

That was simply an example, there are more (Catherine's ex-husband for example. And Natalia's for that matter).

I appreciate they have to stick an entire case and character development into a 50 min episode, but it gets annoying when the characters never seem to have a life outside of their work. Think about the break room at your own jobs... we talk about our actual lives, don't we? Why not mention a ball game, or a niece coming over in passing? Just hint at it. We don't need to go home and have dinner with them (though there are occasions I'd like that) but we need something to prove they're real people. How else are we supposed to empathize and connect?
 
I'd rather they'd focus more on the science rather than personal development with the characters. I mean all 3 CSI shows have been on long enough now to know plenty about the characters and their backgrouds, it's time to get back to basics and realise what made these shows a hit in the first place.
 
Yes, I agree.

However, I think character development is also necessary. We need more then the basic background; we need to see these people become real.

If it was simply science, it'd be a documentary. This is fiction and these characters have been created. They therefore need to be developed, I think.

Otherwise, what's the point of creating Catherine Willows, ex-dancer, with daughter and daddy-issues? Or Eric Delko, the 'ladies man' who lost his sister in a gang-hit... Why not just have Officer B and A teaching us how to amplify DNA to catch perp X? Why establish any characters if it's to be purely about the science?
 
Last edited:
I like a mixture of both. I like the procedural stuff and the cases they work on. I can get lost in watching an interesting case unfold and try to figure out who done it, but I also like to get to know the characters a little bit. I think their home lives must have an impact on their work and vice versa, ie parents with children working a case where the victim is a child. I want to know how what they do for work effects them both professionally and personally.
 
At the moment I should say less character more crime but I did find it hard to decid between "a bit of both". I have just gotten fed up with all the soap stuff between characters
 
After nine years and never really seeing into the characters of CSI:LV's lives has gotten a little annoying. I voted on equal but like Shytownmofo said, it has to be done well or there is no point. If it's not done well you'll either have an over-whelming amount of character development, leaving a pretty dissatisfying resolution. Or too much focus on the crime, and no real emphasis as to why the suspect/victim did what they did.
 
To be honest id like to know some background history if its relevent to a case. But it has to be that. If they cannot continue with a case for some reason then its always interesting to know why but they shouldnt then allow that to overshadow the forensics and the crime itself. We can't relate to the characters if we know absolutly nothing, but we cant enjoy the forensics if their personal lives are always being mentioned. I think for me that is why Csi:Lv got it so right. Only small details came out when relevent. It sets it apart from evey other show. Csi Miami was great in the beginning but then it turned into a soap opera.
 
I put equal balance. I started watching for the crime, and the interesting cases, but the more I got into it, the more I started to care for the characters too, and their development is just as important in the grand scheme of things in my opinion. So an equal balance I think. The cases are what define the show, but the characters make it, imo.
 
I voted for more crime but after reading everyone's thoughts I'm wishing I could retrack my vote (or whatever it's called) & go for "equal amount of both".

I'd like to know more about Eric, Ryan, Tripp & the new ME Dr. Tara Price on Miami & for NY it'd be Sid, Adam, Danny & Flack; but as for Vegas, I'd rather see the crime instead unless their storylines about Gregg, Nick & Dr. Al Robbins' past are good then I'll go for that.
 
i have always enjoyed the characters development. if it was all about the science of the show, to me, i could just watch the discovery channel, or just read about it on the internet. i like getting to know the backstory behind the show, the characters and why they are there. dont get me wrong, i do like the science and the crimes it tries to solve, but it has to have both for me. I do wish CSI put a little more emphasis, but i think over the years, the producers have done a better job at doing that.
 
I enjoy both. That's why I love CSI Vegas so much, there's alot of real science, but there's also alot of character. I love keeping up with the characters and seeing what happens in their life just as much as I like the science part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top