CSI: New York--'All Access'

Lyn said:
Re: Nick with the prostitute - that was actually quite an interesting example. The implication was she was using Nick and had lied to him from the start. He evidently liked her a lot (we know Nicky is a romantic) but was used for sex.
We've also got Warrick - who's relationship is currently in "unknown" status.
Click to expand...

Nick is a good example--like Danny, he's somewhat of a victim character. They are the two exceptions to the rule, and save for the one example of Nick being used, don't appear to have been victimized sexually.

As for Warrick, his marriage seems mostly to be strained by his job. That's pretty routine, and doesn't really make him a victim...although I guess Tina could turn out to be evil or something, I kind of doubt she will be.

Is there a male character who is currently in a stable relationship? Apart from Horatio.
Click to expand...

Mac was in what seems to have been a happy relationship with his wife before her death, and (we assume) had a nice date with Rose. Danny has dated several women, and presumably hasn't been abused by any of them. Same with Delko, who has no problem finding bedmates. None of them, as far as we know, have been mistreated by a sexual partner.

Gil just has his bugs. He will always have his bugs! :lol:
 
Is there a male character who is currently in a stable relationship? Apart from Horatio.
Click to expand...

Does Doc Robbins count? He's married, he has two or three kids... Oh, and EmergencyBackup Dave, he's engaged.
Only thing is, they're not main characters.

Brass is divorced. I seem to remember that his wife cheated on him - and he isn't Ellie's biological father.
Greg - well, he's Greg. God knows what kind of a love life he leads, but I don't think it's too bad...

Who knows, maybe we'll find out next season that Hawkes' girlfriend smacks him 'round the house on a regular basis. At least that would give the poor guy some screentime.
Alright, I'm totally making that one up.
 
So he's another example of a male character in a healthy relationship. Add David to the mix (engaged) and we can also mention Natalia, who was in an abusive relationship.
 
Aha, we were specifically looking for victimisation. My bad. I was thinking in terms of crappy relationships.

Natalia hit really close to home for me. I know she's generally disliked, but as someone who's been there, I respected the character a lot more. And like Top, I totally lost it when we saw Frankie hit Stella's face. Too close.

But no, Nick is the only one who's been used, and the box incident the only example of victimisation of a main male character. And how to put this... even when they're in relationships, we don't generally see it like we do with the women. We saw Catherine's problems with Eddie - we've barely seen Tina. We saw Sara find out Hank was cheating on her. We saw Hagen shoot himself in front of Calleigh, we saw Frankie beat Stella. The male relationships, save for one or two incidents (Mac's date with Rose, Grissom and Lady Heather, etc) tend to be implied, rather than put on screen, so we never really know. I'm sure we've seen Alexx's husband and kids on screen - have we seen Robbins' family?

I hope that made sense?
 
Lyn said:
Aha, we were specifically looking for victimisation. My bad. I was thinking in terms of crappy relationships.
Click to expand...

I guess Sara and Hank fall more under crappy relationships than victimization. I think the jury is still out on Warrick and Tina, though it does seem like they're in a rocky relationship. The marriage was made in haste from an emotional response to a stressful situation (Nick's), so I guess a case could be made for Warrick being shown as making a bad decision. I guess we'll know more when we see more.

Natalia hit really close to home for me. I know she's generally disliked, but as someone who's been there, I respected the character a lot more. And like Top, I totally lost it when we saw Frankie hit Stella's face. Too close.
Click to expand...

Natalia is generally disliked, and I think the writers caused that by making her more of a love interest character than establishing her with more depth, but when the background did come in, it made me respect her more.

But no, Nick is the only one who's been used, and the box incident the only example of victimisation of a main male character. And how to put this... even when they're in relationships, we don't generally see it like we do with the women. We saw Catherine's problems with Eddie - we've barely seen Tina. We saw Sara find out Hank was cheating on her. We saw Hagen shoot himself in front of Calleigh, we saw Frankie beat Stella. The male relationships, save for one or two incidents (Mac's date with Rose, Grissom and Lady Heather, etc) tend to be implied, rather than put on screen, so we never really know. I'm sure we've seen Alexx's husband and kids on screen - have we seen Robbins' family?

I hope that made sense?
Click to expand...

That made sense, and that's another societal thing, I think. Men are judged by their accomplishments, while women are still under societal pressure to get a guy. :rolleyes: It's another way female characters get defined. You can see a male character go through the entire run of a show without being in a relationship, but you probably won't see a female character not hook up at least once. So why is it always a negative experience for them in the CSI shows?
 
You know... is there somewhere in the big monster that is CBS you can actually write to? Because I'd be interested to see what they say about this.
 
Lyn said:
You know... is there somewhere in the big monster that is CBS you can actually write to? Because I'd be interested to see what they say about this.
Click to expand...

Maybe an e-mail address on their website, but I doubt it would get into the hands of the right people, or get a response. It does make for one hell of an interesting discussion, though!
 
Top41 said:
Lyn said:
You know... is there somewhere in the big monster that is CBS you can actually write to? Because I'd be interested to see what they say about this.
Click to expand...

Maybe an e-mail address on their website, but I doubt it would get into the hands of the right people, or get a response. It does make for one hell of an interesting discussion, though!
Click to expand...

I think I'm just exercising my need to grab someone by the collar, shake them thoroughly and go "what are you THINKING?!". NY is inspiring that thought a lot lately.
 
Doc Robbins is a main character. Just not a CSI.
Click to expand...
You're absolutely right, my bad.

I'm sure we've seen Alexx's husband and kids on screen - have we seen Robbins' family?
Click to expand...
He gets to mention them once in a blue moon. I think his youngest is about 16 or so?

So why is it always a negative experience for them in the CSI shows?
Click to expand...
It makes for good drama? I keep thinking about that question and that is about the best thing I can come up with.
Another thing I'm wondering about: there are quite a few female writers on the show. Do they ever kick up and say something about the way the female characters are treated relation-wise? Or am I being unfair on this point?

You know... is there somewhere in the big monster that is CBS you can actually write to?
Click to expand...
You could try their website. My feeling is, though, that it's hard to get through to one of their big guns. Snail mail would probably be the best approach.
 
I never thought of it like that to be honest. I never noticed how it was all of the women with bad relationships. The only guy who I can think of would be Nick, but not because of a relationship really. When he was abused as a kid. When he was crying (2 times), and when he was in the box. But, ya I never noticed. For some reason I didn't think the ep. was that bad. I just hated when he hit Stella. I just wanted to hit him back! :rolleyes: Ya, but actually I thought, over all, it was a good ep. I enjoyed it from a CSI's perspective.
 
^I found it very upsetting when Frankie hit Stella, too. I'm sure that was how we were supposed to react to it, but it seemed to be going too far in my book. But, there's a fine line between something being controversial and it being exploitive.

Lyn, I've been feeling the same way, especially given some of the descriptions of upcoming episodes.

Bunny said:
It makes for good drama? I keep thinking about that question and that is about the best thing I can come up with.
Another thing I'm wondering about: there are quite a few female writers on the show. Do they ever kick up and say something about the way the female characters are treated relation-wise? Or am I being unfair on this point?
Click to expand...

Two out of three of the CSI shows are run by women, so... :confused: I honestly don't know what to say. I do think it's worth noting that this episode was written by two men. But, I don't think men can't handle this stuff well--that's not my point at all. It's just that in this case, it wasn't handled appropriately, at least not in my opinion.
 
I preferred the Danny-centric episode to this one, for all the aforementioned reasons. I did enjoy the expanded Flack time, I find him completely convincing as the tough, but loyal, wisecracking officer.

Melina did the best she could with a stereotypical role. Once again she portrayed vulnerability, but did not crumble at the end, so I suppose that shows consistency of character. I just wish she was given a better storyline.

Mac was his usual hot, but understated self. I thought his final scene with Stella was appropriate since I knew she would try to shorten or bypass the necessary time off. I hope that one day they put Mac in a storyline that makes all of his military reserve and distance break down a bit, I think Gary would excel in a two-parter with a more ambitious, film-level storyline. But I digress....

The very best part of this episode for me was the end of Frankie's character! I could not stand his poorly scripted, unconvincing, smarmy, no-charisma-having butt.
 
LeafDragon said:
I preferred the Danny-centric episode to this one, for all the aforementioned reasons. I did enjoy the expanded Flack time, I find him completely convincing as the tough, but loyal, wisecracking officer.
Click to expand...

Eddie really is great--one of the best things about the show IMO.

Melina did the best she could with a stereotypical role. Once again she portrayed vulnerability, but did not crumble at the end, so I suppose that shows consistency of character. I just wish she was given a better storyline.
Click to expand...

Melina did a great job with what she was given, but yes, she definitely a better story line. Carmine gets emotional drama first by Danny being a suspect and then with his brother getting hurt...and Melina gets pummeled for 42 minutes? That annoys me to no end. They were both great with their respective storylines, but Melina deserved better.

The very best part of this episode for me was the end of Frankie's character! I could not stand his poorly scripted, unconvincing, smarmy, no-charisma-having butt.
Click to expand...

LOL! Frankie never really did take off as a character, which kind of cheapened the "he's a psycho" reveal in this episode. If we'd seen more of Frankie, it might have been really shocking, rather than a cheap plot device to put Stella in danger.
 
the best part of the episode was that frankie died...
he served no impt function in this series..such is my opinion...

stella played really well...that show of vulnerability...that apparent try at humour whist talking to mac at the end...

flack,surprisingly,came off as the serious guy now...i suppose that is because a dear one has been affected...

mac,no surprise here...

overall,the episode was scripted well but had a few hiccups here an there...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top