"Hog Heaven" Discussion *SPOILERS*

I liked the episode, it wasn't one of the best but it was good.

I normally don't like Hodges in the field but having him there with Greg (as opposed to instead of) was kinda nice.

Not enough Nick time but with GE's back problem I can understand why. Nick fans are feeling the same way right now as we Greg fans do on a regular basis. Lack of your fave character sucks doesn't it?

Too much reporting of info to Ray instead of Catherine IMO. She is still in charge right?

The bar scene with Greg as the victim reminded me of FannySmackin, and from the look on Greg's face when it was over I get the feeling he felt that way too. Nice of the writer/David Rambo to show that.

I liked the scene with the scotch between Cath and Brass at the end, it was reminiscent of Grissom and Brass.

All in all a pretty decent episode.

 

Been away from here for a bit. One thing I'm seeing is a few more members agreeing that Langston's entrance to the show was mishandled. Browsing the forum, I've noted a couple of comments posted up in this and some of the other threads that either he needs to be a bit less all-knowing as a newbie (it seems he became an overnight CSIL3 and an expert in the field) or he should have been introduced as an L3 from elsewhere. I posted my opinion of this aspect of the "Ray" character shortly after his introduction, in another thread a while back. I took some stick over it ,and feel a bit vindicated/better about going out on a limb over the loss of the Grissom character and it's ultimate effect on the show. I still think the show is much weaker without him, and with Fishburn, but there's me out on a limb again.
I can't help thinking the episodes where he gets less exposure are the ones I've enjoyed the most. Grissom rarely dominated the entire episode the way LF did in his first few episodes. When the writing and screen time is better divided amongst the entire cast, the show is better, IMO. Writers? Any comment?
I'm thinking the writing IS becoming the main problem, including the episode about a "Star Trek" style convention. Who better to write about a Trekkie convention than a couple of guys from the defunct BG show.
Last night's "Hog H" episode was another example of it's increasing predictability or just plain unbelievably weird situational writing. The second you saw the wife trash the dead UC husband "didn't know who he was anymore", you knew she was probably culpable just like when Brass says to the barman "you don't carry protection" you probably knew he was the mysterious biker boss "Scratch", as he wouldn't need any.
"
Re: Now That Petersen, Fox, Dourdan Are Gone
I'm a newbie to CSI, getting most of my fix off of Spike TV reruns. I only recently caught up enough that I started watching it weekly on prime time. In my humble, the show is likely doomed to fail, now that Grissom is gone. He was the hub and foil of all the other characters. No matter what the reason, good or bad, they'd go to him and get advice, chastisement, or solace. Now that both Grissom and Sara are gone, but seem to be in storage in the rain forests of Costa Rica, there's always the possibility of a "show is dying and needs an emergency bail out" return of one or both of them, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Now, on to the new guy. Dr. Langston is a newbie himself, and it's that aspect of his character that fails the series. Had he been at least a CSI from somewhere else (like Mike Keppler?) the writers wouldn't have to waste as much time on his inability to dust for prints, and could concentrate on actually producing a forensics rich plot, instead of the lame story we were served in his second appearance sans Grissom last week. The show's producers, Petersen included, really missed the boat by introducing the new guy as a rookie. I just don't think the show has the time to spend "bringing him up to speed". I'd love to see the ratings since Sara, Warrick, and now Grissom have departed. I bet there wasn't much of a hit without the first two, but I can't see them holding up with the main character now just a memory. While I'm here, who decided that the Riley character would work as a viable replacement for Sara/Warrick? She belongs on Miami or New York maybe, but doesn't have the talent or presence to be anything more than totally one dimensional.
Just my opinion.
Last edited by scktwstdfrk; February 2 2009 at 03:48 PM.
"
Just my opinions, again, no offense intended.
Cheers, all.

 

I agree with most of what you said about Ray's character vs. Grissom's. That said, I really don't think that Sara had that big of an influence on the show. Personally, I liked her well enough for most of the series, but I think there are also a lot of fans who really didn't like here all that much. I love Warrick, but it feels like TPTB had been gradually writing him out for years.

Most of all, I really disagree with your take on Riley. I think LLS has done a great job so far. In a lot of ways, Riley reminds me more of the lab techs than the other CSIs. She doesn't get that much screentime and she definitely seems to provide a lot of humor. She's had a fairly smooth transition and doesn't really rock the boat at all. Personally, I think she's a very likable character and she's quickly becoming one of my favorites, but, even if she wasn't, I would still find it difficult to dislike her just because the writers and LLS just haven't done anything wrong with her. She's not an overwhelming or obnoxious character, and she has great chemistry with the rest of the characters. She doesn't provide excess drama and I think her personality has just the right amount of quirkiness. I liked Sara enough, but I definitely like Riley more.

 

I don't think anyone was dissing an actress. We were talking about the characters (at least that's what I thought).

 

Releasing from tack feel free to continue the discussion of the episode.

 

I liked this episode, and had instant recall, when I dated a biker, ions ago. Dagger, he as nice but his friends were just like these low-life scum bags depicited in the episode. I actually hung out in a biker bar, a few times, and the guys were all nasty, narly vile a..holes and the girls were, rhymes with witches, one time a fight broke out and I ran out the back door through the ally to my car and never went back again I was terrified. So this ep. The dead biker really an uncover dude with the mutiple knife wounds. Brass and Ray "nobody knows nothing, but somebody knows something" Hodges, his first time in a biker bar Cath dated a biker, of course she did. Them processing the dirty smelly stinky bikers what a filthy disgusting bums. The one guy goes to Brass, You gotta look at a better class of bars" Brass You're gonna be looking through bars":lol: Hodges getting head butted sticking up for Wendy. WOW, a bloody nose. Joey's missing knife. Ecklie and Brass going to the house and Rita apparently knowing Brass. Cath and Tonya in a squabble.. and Scratch [lovely names] Jackass too. The autopsy GROSS EWWW:klingon: Ecklie wanting Brass off the case. I like the part when Dr. Langston was riding a bike andd rode up to Nick, Nicks smiles "Wanna catch a rat, you move like a rat" And then snaking around in the allys, finding the bag of knifes and the bikers riding past him, he was scared, and had a look of relief whn they didn't make a move on him. Rita and Det. Vegas and Brass watching. So the big cocaine deal was orchestrated by Scratch, the bartender, and then the car explosion WOW, bye bye Tonya so much class The whole team reinacting the murder. interesting. Greg so sweet. The last scene, with Cath and Brass, I'm sure she cares about him and his past with Rita [Brass you rascal] but was she being nosy, like in the deleted scene in 'Grissom's Divine Comedy' going thought all his cupboards, closets etc. or the loss of their 3 colleagues, missing them terribly and the need to bond. I wonder if we'll find out the connection between Brass and Rita? "A little Scotch, a little talk"

 

I disagree. I thought it was a stroke of genius to introduce him as someone with vast experience in life and other professions, but not as a CSI. That way, the show was able to return to its roots of helping us in the audience learn about forensics through him, and also renew its focus on the crimes, themselves, and the CSIs' reactions to them, as opposed to delving a bit too much (IMO) into the personal lives of some of the CSIs. For me, the show was in danger of becoming a caricature of itself, but with Petersen's departure, it enabled the powers that be to hit the reset button and start all over again, with fresh yet still familiar ideas. Personally, I love what they've done with the show. But of course, that's just my opinion.

Back to the episode, itself. I enjoyed it. I wouldn't say it's one of my favorites, but still very good. I was a bit surprised about Brass's personal relationship with the victim's wife, and was glad when he finally stepped back because of the obvious conflict of interest. I also loved it that Brass got the tagline right before the opening credits. IMO, he should get more of those. Paul Guilfoyle is such a consummate actor that he can handle anything and do it superbly. This episode had so many great moments for him, and was also another example of everyone working as a team. I love the return we've seen this season to more of a team approach with all the CSIs. It's been slow in coming, and no doubt all the changes that have occurred this season presented everyone with huge challenges, but I think they've risen to the challenge in a stellar manner, and I applaud them. I find myself looking forward to my Thursday-night "CSI" fix once more!

 

[/QUOTE]I agree with most of what you said about Ray's character vs. Grissom's. That said, I really don't think that Sara had that big of an influence on the show. Personally, I liked her well enough for most of the series, but I think there are also a lot of fans who really didn't like here all that much. I love Warrick, but it feels like TPTB had been gradually writing him out for years. [/QUOTE]

Interesting comments.
I recently found an article by a Paige Newman published last summer describing rumoured upcoming changes to the show, including a comment to the effect that they shouldn't have written Keppler's character out as he might have been a reasonable replacement for GG. Apparently the other possibles for the LF character were Kurt Russell (hmmmm?) and John Malkovich. Who knows how either of them might have affected the cast dynamic.
I thought Sara/Grissom were Yin and Yang incarnate. He was geeky, nerdy, but emotionally solid and self-assured. She was a wild child, who had some forensic skills, but who arrived with a cartload of baggage. They were perfect together. I enjoyed waiting for her next episode of vulnerability and how he would handle/react to it. So, I liked her character. Mostly.
JMO.


[/QUOTE]Most of all, I really disagree with your take on Riley. I think LLS has done a great job so far. In a lot of ways, Riley reminds me more of the lab techs than the other CSIs. She doesn't get that much screentime and she definitely seems to provide a lot of humor. She's had a fairly smooth transition and doesn't really rock the boat at all. Personally, I think she's a very likable character and she's quickly becoming one of my favorites, but, even if she wasn't, I would still find it difficult to dislike her just because the writers and LLS just haven't done anything wrong with her. She's not an overwhelming or obnoxious character, and she has great chemistry with the rest of the characters. She doesn't provide excess drama and I think her personality has just the right amount of quirkiness. I liked Sara enough, but I definitely like Riley more.[/QUOTE]

At best, Riley is a decent replacement for Sofia. I can't see her character
developing much more than Lombard's. After reading and re-reading your quoted evaluation of her character I thought to myself, "then why is she even there?". And that's the way I've seen her on every show I've watched. A quick glimpse of sort of a lab tech, sort of a CSI, and sort of like Brass. She can be personable, or gruff, clever, or not so much. But as you say, she gets so little screen time, it's even more difficult to place her. I think the writers haven't yet figured out what to do with her, like Ronnie Lake. I suspect she may go out that way too, unless she's got a long term contract, which I doubt. Honestly, I don't know why she is there. She still seems one dimensional to me. Kinda like Sofia used to be.
Again, JMO.

 

I don't think they care if we learn anything about forensics, although a lot of what they do on screen is probably accurate in it's portrayal. However, I doubt they drop off trace and they have the results in minutes/hours not days/weeks. If you really want to learn forensics, you'd probably get more info from the documentary shows on the Discovery, or Court TV, TLC or A&E. The CSI producers and writers just want us to tune in for ANY reason, to generate ratings, which makes selling ad time to sponsors easier, and that's how they all get/stay rich.
I think there has been a trend since GG left to approach the fringes of the absurd in plot selections. Some have been a bit too far fetched, and others have just been reworked past episodes. I'm not saying that there weren't lousy plots with Grissom, just that they were excusable. I'm not sure what you mean by delving into the personal lives of the CSIs. That's been a mainstay of the show and writing since day one, IMO. I've tried to keep an open mind, but the last 10 or so episodes have been mostly disappointing, except the ones which didn't focus too heavily on Langston. That includes a very poor "All In" season finale. "Gone Dead Train" and the "Hammer" shows were decent, and they didn't involve too much Langston. I don't think hitting the reset button and starting over are good ideas or even possible, after 8.5 really great seasons. I guess they didn't have a choice, but I still think the "new guy" should have been at least a proper CSI L3 from somewhere else.
p.s. Apparently Kurt Russell and John Malkovich were also considered as additions to the cast, but LF got the job. Who knows what might have been?
Too bad they wrote Keppler out of the show the way they did, but I'd guess they didn't know that Petersen was going to leave when they did it.

I'd have to agree about the increased balance of characters and screen time in the last few episodes. The greater exposure of ALL the characters has made them a bit more palatable. As I said earlier, I really lost interest quickly when the show appeared to be focusing too much on Langston early on. You can tell which ones do, and I'd find myself drifting off to do something else before the second commercial break. Shame really, but that's up to the writers to deal with. If that's what the episode's creative direction is going to be as per the production team, than that's what we get. I did enjoy the 3 episodes before the finale, which was another dud for me.
JMO.

 

I don't think they care if we learn anything about forensics, although a lot of what they do on screen is probably accurate in it's portrayal. However, I doubt they drop off trace and have the results in minutes or hours in the real world. If you really want to learn forensics, you'd probably get more info from the documentary shows on the Discovery, or Court TV, TLC or A&E. The CSI producers and writers just want us to tune in for ANY reason, to generate ratings, which makes selling ad time to sponsors easier, and that's how they all get/stay rich.
I think there has been a trend since GG left to approach the fringes of the absurd in plot selections. Some have been a bit too far fetched, and others have just been reworked past episodes. I'm not saying that there weren't lousy plots with Grissom, just that they were (almost?) excusable. I'm not sure what you mean by delving into the personal lives of the CSIs. That's been a mainstay of the show and writing since day one, IMO. I've tried to keep an open mind, but the last 10 or so episodes have been mostly disappointing, except the ones which didn't focus too heavily on Langston. That includes a very poor "All In" season finale. "Gone Dead Train" and the "Hammer" shows were decent, and they didn't involve too much Langston. I don't think hitting the reset button and starting over are good ideas or even possible, after 8.5 really great seasons. I guess they didn't have a choice, but I still think the "new guy" should have been at least a proper CSI L3 from somewhere else.
p.s. Apparently Kurt Russell and John Malkovich were also considered as additions to the cast, but LF got the job. Who knows what might have been?
Too bad they wrote Keppler out of the show the way they did, but I'd guess they didn't know that Petersen was going to leave when they did it.

I'd have to agree about the increased balance of characters and screen time in the last few episodes. The greater exposure of ALL the characters has made them a bit more palatable. As I said earlier, I really lost interest quickly when the show appeared to be focusing too much on Langston early on. You can tell which ones do, and I'd find myself drifting off to do something else before the second commercial break. Shame really, but that's up to the writers to deal with. If that's what the episode's creative direction is going to be as per the production team, than that's what we get. I did enjoy the 3 episodes before the finale, which was another dud for me.
JMO.

 

I am the mod here and ^^^ what she said.