"Fallen Angels" Discussion **SPOILERS**

Frosch said:
I was a little disappointed with this episode. Rather than use this as an opportunity to honor the memory of Warrick in a poignant way he was just a means to an end to give Nick and Sara a storyline. As always, Sara and her self righteous attitude grate on my nerves.

Whoever wrote Sara’s scenes did a particularly shoddy job. There were two distinct instances that irritated me. First was when Sara mentioned that before she left (not sure if I recall that properly) she would stop by to bring food and find the house dark and hear Eli crying. And then, apparently, she would just turn around and leave without checking up on Eli to see if he was alright?! How very caring. The second instance was when she told Tina that four years ago she repeatedly tried to reach out only to be turned away. Well, four years ago Sara wasn’t even in town. If I remember correctly she was sailing the seas somewhere, finding herself.

It also bothered me slightly when Brass was reminiscing about Warrick as if nothing ever happened between them. Considering how hostile Brass was towards Warrick during his last days, it seemed a little off to me.

I also don’t understand the focus being just on Nick and Sara and not equally on Greg.
Click to expand...
Clearly we saw things differently.
The point of all that was to show that in the beginning Sara did try to reach out to Tina but was shut out. And from Sara's demeanor I do think she feels guilty about it, or at least remorseful; but four years ago she didn't have any reason to suspect Tina was having problems. We don't have any backstory to fully see what happened to Tina, but a crying child isn't really a reason to be overly concerned. And she, and the viewers, have to assume that Nick or Greg or Grissom or Brass or someone else would also stop by to check on them.
Four years ago Sara was in LV in the aftermath of Warlock's funeral. We don't really know for how long since there was a time jump from episodes 1-3. I guess she could have been more specific and said she was there 3 years and 8-11 months ago, or whatever. :rolleyes:

Focusing on Nick and Sara was more of a way to approach the story from both Eli and Tina's POV. I thought it worked well.
 
Last edited:
Whether it was 4 years or 3 months and 8-11 months is frankly beside the point. Fact is that while Sara was in LV following Warrick’s death, she was completely wrapped up in her own problems and I just do not buy that her character would be ‘reaching out’ to Tina and Eli.
My issue is with writers rewriting character back stories.
 
Frosch said:
Whether it was 4 years or 3 months and 8-11 months is frankly beside the point. Fact is that while Sara was in LV following Warrick’s death, she was completely wrapped up in her own problems and I just do not buy that her character would be ‘reaching out’ to Tina and Eli.
My issue is with writers rewriting character back stories.
Click to expand...

Well, in For Warrick Sara volunteered to help with funeral arrangements and other personal details for Warrick since she couldn't work the case, so clearly during her stay in Vegas she wasn't completely wrapped up in her own problems. She could easily have tried to contact Tina.
I don't see it as backstory being rewritten, but rather as blanks being filled in with what the characters might have been doing off screen. Whether you 'buy that' Sara would have done this or not is subjective; but there is nothing canon that contradicts this scenario.
 
Last edited:
I also don’t understand the focus being just on Nick and Sara and not equally on Greg.
Click to expand...

I don’t recall Greg having such a significant relationship to Warrick as Nick and Sara. He was always the underdog with Brown. That’s why this was their episode basically.
 
Pretty good episode overall but I had a couple of issues with it...

I don't buy the fact that Tina spiraled so far down since the beginning of Season 9. Wasn't it mentioned that her parents were from a wealthy background or something? I doubt they'd let her get herself in so much trouble. I'm also not convinced by her refusal to keep in contact with the CSIs. That just seemed like a plot device shoe-horned in to create some conflict and drama.

Whilst that left a slightly sour taste in my mouth I did enjoy the episode on the whole. There was a great team dynamic to it and some really good individual moments. I particularly liked the conversation between Nick and Brass near the beginning of the episode, but I think they also missed a treat by not having Sara bringing up her foster child past with Tina or Eli. It was nice to get a pretty even representation of all the characters, I can't think of anyone who got put in the background. I kind of wish there was a scene with Hodges and Greg discussing Warrick, because even though they weren't as close to him as Nick and Sara, they were still ultimately his work colleague.

Overall, a decent team-heavy, forensics-heavy episode with a nice balance of the characters. Not my favourite of the season but definitely a re watchable one and a heck of a lot better than last week's drivel!

Rating: 8.2/10
 
Crumbs said:
Pretty good episode overall but I had a couple of issues with it...

I don't buy the fact that Tina spiraled so far down since the beginning of Season 9. Wasn't it mentioned that her parents were from a wealthy background or something? I doubt they'd let her get herself in so much trouble. I'm also not convinced by her refusal to keep in contact with the CSIs. That just seemed like a plot device shoe-horned in to create some conflict and drama.

Whilst that left a slightly sour taste in my mouth I did enjoy the episode on the whole. There was a great team dynamic to it and some really good individual moments. I particularly liked the conversation between Nick and Brass near the beginning of the episode, but I think they also missed a treat by not having Sara bringing up her foster child past with Tina or Eli. It was nice to get a pretty even representation of all the characters, I can't think of anyone who got put in the background. I kind of wish there was a scene with Hodges and Greg discussing Warrick, because even though they weren't as close to him as Nick and Sara, they were still ultimately his work colleague.

Overall, a decent team-heavy, forensics-heavy episode with a nice balance of the characters. Not my favourite of the season but definitely a re watchable one and a heck of a lot better than last week's drivel!

Rating: 8.2/10
Click to expand...

Was about to post my thoughts but this pretty much covers it :)
 
I also found it hard to believe that Tina had deteriortated so much. I guess it can happen, but it seemed a little extreme.

I like that Nick has been visiting Warrick and bringing flowers. :) And I liked the concern that Brass showed, checking on him and even calling him Nicky. :)

Pretty good episode. My boss even liked it, and he's not been thrilled much this season. :lol:
 
I personally liked the backstory with Sara. While Nick bringing flowers might be more believable than Sara attempting to contact Tina and Eli, it could've very well happened. It did seem a little out there with Tina, but what can ya do. Though I would've liked more Greg, not having Finn or DB star was nice :) I did find myself dozing at parts, long day, so I don't remember Brass calling Nick Nicky! :p I'll have to pay close attention for that. I'm glad everyone close to Warrick had something nice to say. Yeah Brass had some fallouts with him, but in the end the man died. I'd rather people reminisce about the good times over the bad. Not my favorite, but a pretty decent episode. High B/low A in my book.
 
I have to agree too that I just couldn't see Tina falling that far but then again,it happens to people in real life all the time.
Have to say I also felt for Aaron Voss in a way too. Yes he deserves to go to jail but in the end,he was trying to be a father in the only way he knew how. Good to see James not follow his path.
 
Did I misread the grave marker? I thought it said Warrick died in 2003. I forgot to go back and look before I deleted the show.
 
goldnhart said:
Did I misread the grave marker? I thought it said Warrick died in 2003. I forgot to go back and look before I deleted the show.
Click to expand...

It said October 10 1971 - May 17 2008

I feel rather neutral about this episode. On the one hand, I liked the backstories with Nick and Sara, on the other I didn't enjoy the case as much as I wanted to. DB's family episodes were much better made than this one. I also thought we got a little more of Morgan than we were supposed to. Greg should have taken her place instead, since Morgan has absolutely no connection to Warrick. Not an episode I'll remember, but I'd re-watch the parts with Nick and Sara.

And, guys, please don't argue over characters. We all have our favourites and ones we dislike. :)
 
My overall feeling (and also hubby's), while watching this episode, was: Is every case this season going to be personalized? When we get a case that doesn't have some sort of soap opera-ish personal connection, I think I'll feel shocked. What was once old is new again ... or something like that. But the personal-involvement cases are getting old fast, at least for us.
 
byline said:
My overall feeling (and also hubby's), while watching this episode, was: Is every case this season going to be personalized? When we get a case that doesn't have some sort of soap opera-ish personal connection, I think I'll feel shocked. What was once old is new again ... or something like that. But the personal-involvement cases are getting old fast, at least for us.
Click to expand...

You aren't alone in that regards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top