CSI: NY--'The Triangle'

[Top41]

sorry that i have a learning disability and sometimes i have trouble writing sometimes doesn't make sense

Regardless, if you're going to register and post at a debate board, you should, you know, make some attempt to actually debate. Your four posts here (second four-post wonder of the day ) are just basically attacks lobbed at other posters who don't share your opinions. Your argument, if you actually have one, might be stronger if you countered with evidence from the show. Think Lindsay/Anna is great? Then point out why, rather than crying that anyone who disagrees is "biased" or a "basher." I have no problems with people who disagree with my reviews or anything I post--in fact, I welcome a good discussion--but this tired "Waaaa, waaaa, you're so mean and unfair!" is old. Debate my review if you like, but if you don't have anything intelligent to say, take a hike.

 

[Lindsayrocks]

this site is always bashing Lindsay and Anna and its not fair. I may not type smart so I'll just leave I'll go another site that doesnt make me feel stupid

 

[Top41]

this site is always bashing Lindsay and Anna and its not fair. I may not type smart so I'll just leave I'll go another site that doesnt make me feel stupid

With all due respect, if all you've got to say is "it's not fair," then no, this probably isn't the site for you.

Let's get back on topic now.

The end of the episode felt a little rushed to me, like they had tried to cram too much into the episode and not left enough time for the crime solving.

I felt that, too, and also was a little like, "Huh?" when Mac found the dead body of Kevin Cross. I figured out immediately that it had to be the property clerk, but it would have had more of an impact if we'd seen Mac actually talking to the guy--like he did with the FBI woman who was murdered back in the third season.

 

[audrina]

Well, for anyone who has read my posts (not as many lately, but ...), they know that I actually like Anna/Lindsay. All the same, I enjoy Kristine's reviews. For those of you who don't know, reviews are the opinion of the writer, and that's how I take it. Do I agree with her all the time? No. But they are always detailed, thoughtful and often raise points I didn't think of until I read her review.

Back to the show. I forgot to add that I could have done w/o the I love you's. They seemed a bit contrived after the last eppy that dealt w/ the pair ... Lindsay being kind of angry and impatient w/ him, etc. After Lindsay said Danny should walk instead of being pushed (a good line), they could have just agreed to take things one step at a time and see where it led them. More realistic.

 

[Top41]

Well, for anyone who has read my posts (not as many lately, but ...),

Definitely would love to see you around more, but I'm always happy when I see a post from you!

they know that I actually like Anna/Lindsay.

I always like hearing your perspective and many of the others who like her in the NY forum. People can watch the same scene and take something completely different away from it. It's always nice to hear other perspectives.

Back to the show. I forgot to add that I could have done w/o the I love you's. They seemed a bit contrived after the last eppy that dealt w/ the pair ... Lindsay being kind of angry and impatient w/ him, etc. After Lindsay said Danny should walk instead of being pushed (a good line), they could have just agreed to take things one step at a time and see where it led them. More realistic.

Agreed. I feel like the "I love you's" should be earned, not just a given that apparently evolved off-screen. After last week's tension, things were a little too neatly tied up, especially when it came to Danny. The proposal I bought, but the "I love you" from him would have had more impact with a believable build up.

As I said in the ratings thread,I liked the episode.
The last scene with Mac,and D/L telling him about the baby,felt off for me and after watching it a second time,I still can`t put my finger to it for the why.
Maybe I was more hoping for a talk or something,I don`t know

Meant to talk about this earlier...I actually liked that bit. While I do see what some are saying about Mac being a little too easily accepting of the development with the baby, at the same time, he looks like a miser if he's anything but thrilled for them. After all, they're not going to change their minds about having the baby simply because Mac doesn't like the idea. Not to mention, he obviously cares about both of them. I love the way he kind of affectionately tousled Danny's hair just before it faded out. There's a real father/son dynamic between the two, and I'm sure it meant a lot to Danny that Mac was happy for them.

 

[Moonman190]

I am quite the opposite, and I enjoy watching the criminals escape whether it be near or far from the CSIs' grasp. Regardless, I believe that both Mac and Stella, with their FBI/Greek problems, respectively, along with Hawkes's possible involvement in the FBI, as well as Danny and Lindsay makes this all look like an excellent season to watch.

In the CSI series in general, we go deeper into the lives of the CSIs. Grissom with Lady Heather and Sara, along side the death of Warrick, and the joining of Riley and Langston (sp?) has been shaken by changes. Delko has his new-found problem of his birth father, looking to kill him, as well. Ron Sarius may still be out, and we're going to go deeper when Calleque has a "brush with death" and Alexx returns to Miami.

Here's to the best seasons; 9, 7, and 5!

 

[myfuturecsi]

I liked the episode and am still learning about the show itself.

And I really like the Danny/Lindsay storyline. I think it adds a dash of humanity to the NY show that is sorely lacking in CSI Vegas. I always think of Danny as the Nick Stokes of the show, only he's allowed more storylines and more emotion.

As for Anna Belknap's acting, well, I'm not one to criticize anyone for an art I know nothing about. My feeling is if she was good enough for TPTB in her auditions than she was good enough for the show. This is the kind of argument I give anyone who has ever been critical of someone's acting on CSI.

I'm not saying she's going to go out and win an Oscar tommorow, but she got the role and the storyline is in motion and it's a nice storyline. Very sweet. I'm happy it's happening.

 

[CSI Chick]

It will be interesting to see how the Kevin Cross story develops. It will be a nice change from the Danny/Lindsay focus.

 

[Jacqui]

I have to respectfully disagree with you on the scene with Lindsay in the lab with all the chemicals. They barely showed her face and the lab was full of people - they didn't give her room for an angsty "holy cr*p" scene.

 

[Top41]

In the CSI series in general, we go deeper into the lives of the CSIs. Grissom with Lady Heather and Sara, along side the death of Warrick, and the joining of Riley and Langston (sp?) has been shaken by changes. Delko has his new-found problem of his birth father, looking to kill him, as well. Ron Sarius may still be out, and we're going to go deeper when Calleque has a "brush with death" and Alexx returns to Miami.

Overall, I think that change has been a good thing. For viewers who keep coming back to the shows regularly, the personal storylines are what bring them back time after time. I don't think that means every personal story is good.

And I really like the Danny/Lindsay storyline. I think it adds a dash of humanity to the NY show that is sorely lacking in CSI Vegas. I always think of Danny as the Nick Stokes of the show, only he's allowed more storylines and more emotion.

Position-wise, they have some things in common, but I think Danny and Nick are pretty different. Danny is much more of a hot head, while Nick internalizes things, locking them away inside until they burst out. Danny just lets it all out: he's a very emotionally raw character.

As for Anna Belknap's acting, well, I'm not one to criticize anyone for an art I know nothing about. My feeling is if she was good enough for TPTB in her auditions than she was good enough for the show. This is the kind of argument I give anyone who has ever been critical of someone's acting on CSI.

But you judge the writing every time you say whether you think an episode is good or not, and I assume you're not a television writer. As an audience, we naturally come to conclusions about shows we watch. And I think the average viewer can look at a performance and know whether it's good or not. Plus, if I didn't talk about the performances in my review (good or bad), I'd have a lot less to talk about.

It will be interesting to see how the Kevin Cross story develops. It will be a nice change from the Danny/Lindsay focus.

Agreed...I am curious to see how that plays out. I wonder if it will somehow tie into the Greek storyline at all, or if the two will progress separately.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on the scene with Lindsay in the lab with all the chemicals. They barely showed her face and the lab was full of people - they didn't give her room for an angsty "holy cr*p" scene.

Without a doubt they filmed those angles--every scene is filmed from multiple angles, with each character getting coverage. The fact that they cut around Lindsay in a scene that should have focused on her face and her reaction to the chemicals is actually very telling.

 

[Jacqui]

Without a doubt they filmed those angles--every scene is filmed from multiple angles, with each character getting coverage. The fact that they cut around Lindsay in a scene that should have focused on her face and her reaction to the chemicals is actually very telling.

Not necessarily. They could have had to cut the scene for time or other reasons. I just think the scene (the part without Stella) was so short you can't glean much from it. Also there were a lot of people in the lab with her, so the actor might have been playing it from the angle that there are so many people watching her, she kind of has to freak out in silence. But then again, I'm not sure she was really freaking out - this is a trained professional, and nothing Stella told her was news to her.

Just my take on the scene. I'm just into NY, but I like Lindsay and I think Anna Belknap does well with her; she's just not prone to an overly dramatic portrayal.

 

[myfuturecsi]

But you judge the writing every time you say whether you think an episode is good or not, and I assume you're not a television writer. As an audience, we naturally come to conclusions about shows we watch. And I think the average viewer can look at a performance and know whether it's good or not. Plus, if I didn't talk about the performances in my review (good or bad), I'd have a lot less to talk about.

I just have to ask though, is it Anna Belknap you have a problem with? Or Lindsay the character? Or simply the relationship itself?

 

[Top41]

Not necessarily. They could have had to cut the scene for time or other reasons.

Yeah, but the scene itself was there. If she'd given a convincing performance, the focus would have been on her face, not multiple bottles. One or two would have sufficed. And indeed, in the glimpses of her that we do see, there's little expression on her face. We should have been able to see some concern, some fear--but we saw nothing.

I just think the scene (the part without Stella) was so short you can't glean much from it. Also there were a lot of people in the lab with her, so the actor might have been playing it from the angle that there are so many people watching her, she kind of has to freak out in silence.

Silence is okay, but a change of facial expression was warranted to register her concern.

But then again, I'm not sure she was really freaking out - this is a trained professional, and nothing Stella told her was news to her.

Then why did she ask the question of Stella?

Just my take on the scene. I'm just into NY, but I like Lindsay and I think Anna Belknap does well with her; she's just not prone to an overly dramatic portrayal.

Different interpretations for different people--that's what makes discussion here fun.

I just have to ask though, is it Anna Belknap you have a problem with? Or Lindsay the character? Or simply the relationship itself?

I don't know if "have a problem with" is the best term...critical of, perhaps. I think all three have been detrimental to the show. Belknap's uneven and sometimes downright weak acting stands out more because her co-stars are so good. Lindsay has never risen above being a cliche--the Montana girl in the big city. After four years on the show, that's all anyone really says about her. To me, that's very telling. The relationship itself has unfortunately affected the storylines for Danny, one of the show's strongest characters. His most interesting storylines--the shooting in "On the Job," his peril in "Trapped," his implication in a crime in "Run Silent, Run Deep," and his grappling with the death of a young boy in his charge in "Child's Play" and "All in the Family" have had nothing to do with Lindsay. The fact that the relationship develops at the expense of other storylines is a shame; at the same time, I'm curious to see how Danny will handle the challenge of fatherhood, so it's not all bad.

 

[Jacqui]

Then why did she ask the question of Stella?

Reassurance. Really, I think this is reaslistic because I asked all kinds of questions, to which I had the answers, of others when I was pregnant (both times) because I wanted that third party reassurance.

Also, because the writers gave her the line

The fact that the relationship develops at the expense of other storylines is a shame;

I feel the same way about GSR....

at the same time, I'm curious to see how Danny will handle the challenge of fatherhood, so it's not all bad.

I hope NY writers will do better with this this subject matter than LV writers. A lot of times i feel like Lindsey Willows exists simply as a plot device and to give Catherine extra angst and lines.

 

[myfuturecsi]

Then why did she ask the question of Stella?

Reassurance. Really, I think this is reaslistic because I asked all kinds of questions, to which I had the answers, of others when I was pregnant (both times) because I wanted that third party reassurance.

Also, because the writers gave her the line

The fact that the relationship develops at the expense of other storylines is a shame;

I feel the same way about GSR....

at the same time, I'm curious to see how Danny will handle the challenge of fatherhood, so it's not all bad.

I hope NY writers will do better with this this subject matter than LV writers. A lot of times i feel like Lindsey Willows exists simply as a plot device and to give Catherine extra angst and lines.

I think it's a risk to have romance in a procedural to begin with because you'll always tick off a group of people, especially if they a. never wanted romance in the first place or b. wanted a different pairing thent he one being put forth.

I certainly hope NY writers do their best to balance out the storylines. I get the impression because they've had a little scene with Flack and Angell and then nothing, but they are at least exploring other romances onthat show unlike CSI Vegas where it was GSR and nothing but GSR for personal storyilnes-the trouble was, a lot of us felt snubbed by it because they never investigated the fall out from Grave Danger. And then we find out Warrick has a kid AFTER he died.

So I understand the concerns of nonDL fans, but have faith this storyline will not dominate the show. I have a feeling NY writers are a bit more astute than the Vegas writers.

And to answer your question Top41, I have been trained as a writer-doesn't always show here:guffaw:with all my grammar errors:guffaw:. Grammar lovers are always traumatized after my posts!