Dustin Lee Abraham did the teleplay and he and Naren Shankar did the story. Sad to say that this piece of 'literary drool' is not one of their better pieces. If they weren't experienced writers I'd say 'don't give up your day jobs'
"Mascara" 200th Ep Discussion *SPOILERS*
- Thread starter Destiny
- Start date
Dustin Lee Abraham did the teleplay and he and Naren Shankar did the story. Sad to say that this piece of 'literary drool' is not one of their better pieces. If they weren't experienced writers I'd say 'don't give up your day jobs'
myfuturecsi
Corpse
Dustlin Lee Abraham! Oh that explains it. He's written some of the worst episodes of CSI ever.
Naren Shankar-science guy does not equal good writer.
My third post to say, "Worst CSI episode ever!!"
Naren Shankar-science guy does not equal good writer.
My third post to say, "Worst CSI episode ever!!"
Okay... was it really that bad? Well, LF is a new guy and I guess they just try to give him more screetime so he wouldn't just fade to the background. Of course this could have been done in some other episode, not on 200th eppy. Some team thingie would have been great, like someone said, what they did with Miami's 100th eppy.
I was more excited when I saw that director of this eppy was William Friedkin and kind of paid more attention to different ways to move camera during the scene... and was bit disappointed that there was no car chase :lol:
Oh well, to me it was episode along with others, for me this original one hasn't had the same ...touch in past few seasons, what it had in it's earlier years.
But dats me
I was more excited when I saw that director of this eppy was William Friedkin and kind of paid more attention to different ways to move camera during the scene... and was bit disappointed that there was no car chase
:lol:Oh well, to me it was episode along with others, for me this original one hasn't had the same ...touch in past few seasons, what it had in it's earlier years.
But dats me
Nicksfriend
Police Officer
Go to MSNBC .COM and vote. Let them know how you really feel ... Go to the entertainment section and you will see the CSI directed by...,click and vote at bottom of page,let them know how you really feel.
happyharper13
Pathologist
What do you guys think caused the episode to be so bad? I've heard some people blame Abraham, and some say it has more to do with Friedkin's directing style. Personally, I've liked many of the other episodes that Abraham has done. I really didn't like 'Cockroaches', but it seems like Friedkin could only do so much with the script he was handed. For some reason, the impression that I got from the recent interview with Friedkin was that he had at least some hand in planning the plot/writing of the episode, though Abraham is listed as the writer. Given the emphasis they put on Sylvia earlier in 19 Down, I would think that they had a good part of this episode planned from the beginning. So I still can't help wondering where, exactly, did it go wrong. What do you guys think?
xfcanadian
Pathologist
Because a majority of hardcore fans for tv shows are mostly females, and well females prefer male characters.
Now Nick fans know how i felt about Gum Drops, the most overrated episode ever. I have watched it once...found it boring. I just don't like Nick as the lead...i like him, but not an entire episode of him.
When considering screen time, you can't just look at one episode. Consider the entire season. LF will get a lot of screen time, simply because he is an established actor who gets a specific amount in his contract. Besides, we have already had a nick episode this season. I think we have had lots of nick...i would rather more greg.
I really like LF, i thought he was fantastic last night. Taking the characters out of the picture, the acting was good, the case was realistic and intense, plus it was different. You don't see strange things like that on network tv anymore, it has become boring, safe and predictable.
I knew people wouldn't like it though...because it was too strange.
happyharper13
Pathologist
I can see what you're saying. It was different, and different can be good. There were, I have to admit, some good 'different's in this episode.
That said, I don't think that, in general, 'different' is something logical for CSI to strive for. If the show were at the bottom of its timeslot, it would be one thing, but it's not at the bottom. It's one of the top shows on TV today, and has been for quite a while. It's gotten there with one formula, and that formula clearly works -- given that it's ultimate purpose is to attract good ratings. I just don't see the purpose of changing a good thing. CBS was advertising heavily for the episode, which I would assume was, at least in part, in the hopes of winning new viewers. But this episode is so different than the standard CSI episode that a new viewer who liked it could very easily like it because of certain aspects that aren't even there in basically all other CSI episodes, and, as a result, that new viewer probably wouldn't stick around very long with the show because, as soon as it goes back to regular episodes, they'd be getting something very different. It's like if a viewer tuned in for '2 and a Half Deaths' and liked it because they only like sit-coms. They probably wouldn't like the rest of the series very much. Worse still, a new viewer who doesn't like the episode is likely to not bother watching further episodes, which is a shame because the rest of the episodes are both so different and so good.
Basically, I don't see how it makes any business sense whatsoever to make the big #200 such a misrepresentation of the show itself. TPTB are showing new viewers a different show than they could actually expect on a weekly basis so that, regardless, new viewers are going to end up disappointed, whether it's with this episode or with the other episodes, which are all so different than this one, while more long-time viewers are disappointed (as most of us on this board seem to be) with basically watching a very different show when we liked the one that was there in the first place. I just don't get it. This seems like such a crappy marketing strategy and definitely not a way to win over or keep fans.
myfuturecsi
Corpse
happyharper13
Pathologist
According to this article, airing CSI's 200th episode against ER's series finale was a big mistake,
14.7 million viewers--oops..
Ratings
Maybe this will smarten TPTB up and help them realize we want our old faves back in the spotlight.
Lol. Given how awful the episode was, I'd actually say it was a GREAT idea.
Maybe CSIs ptb made an awful episode on purpose knowing it was going up against ER's finale and not wanting to waste that with a good decent ep. :lol: They should have aired a repeat instead and thrown this episode on the cutting room floor... no scratch that, they should have thrown this episode in the cutting room garbage bin.
I think what made it so bad was the case was just utterly and completely boring. I don't mind as much that Ray was in it a lot as I minded that the rest of the characters (save for Brass) weren't in it much. If it wasn't a milestone episode, that factor wouldn't have bothered me quite as much. But given that Ray's only been on the show for a few months whereas the others (who helped the show reach that milestone) have been there from the beginning, they should have been featured more in the milestone episode. they should have balanced out the screen time more.
I disagree with this. While we women do like to have our guys, most of us wouldn't have a problem with a female in charge type of character. I personally was a big fan of Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Xena, Dark Angel, Blood ties, Charmed, etc... all of those shows had female leads. And I guarantee you that the majority of the fans of those shows were female (well maybe not for Xena lol). Alias had a female lead too and while I wasn’t a fan of that show, I’m sure most of it’s fans were female. Women like female characters who are the kick butt, tough, take charge kinds of characters because we like that we get to think of ourselves as that way. Medium and Ghost Whisperer also have female leads and I honestly don’t know of a lot of men who watch those types of shows, yet both seem to do well in the ratings.
Ray should have never been allowed to lead this investigation because it's a conflict of interest considering that it was a student he was close to. It was very clear in the flashbacks that the two of them had an almost father-daughter like relationship. And for that reason, he never should have been running the investigation. Miami is known for letting people run cases that are conflicts of interest for them. I never thought Vegas would join in that. It was highly disappointing. Greg was not able to work the Aaron James case because of his ordeal with the brother. Cath wasn't allowed to work any case that involved Sam. So, why should Ray be allowed to work a case that involved someone he was so close to?
Practically everyone who saw last night's ep has said it sucked. It wasn't because of the strangeness of the case. It was because of the boring nature of the case. Too much wrestling was shown for one thing. There wasn't really that much weirdness about the episode. The weird thing for me was the drums being played in various scenes before the scene with Nick and Brass entering that house where that ceremony was going on. I get the drums in that scene, but why were we having to hear it when Ray was looking in the vic's office or whatever? That just made absolutely no sense whatsoever.
I think what made it so bad was the case was just utterly and completely boring. I don't mind as much that Ray was in it a lot as I minded that the rest of the characters (save for Brass) weren't in it much. If it wasn't a milestone episode, that factor wouldn't have bothered me quite as much. But given that Ray's only been on the show for a few months whereas the others (who helped the show reach that milestone) have been there from the beginning, they should have been featured more in the milestone episode. they should have balanced out the screen time more.
I disagree with this. While we women do like to have our guys, most of us wouldn't have a problem with a female in charge type of character. I personally was a big fan of Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Xena, Dark Angel, Blood ties, Charmed, etc... all of those shows had female leads. And I guarantee you that the majority of the fans of those shows were female (well maybe not for Xena lol). Alias had a female lead too and while I wasn’t a fan of that show, I’m sure most of it’s fans were female. Women like female characters who are the kick butt, tough, take charge kinds of characters because we like that we get to think of ourselves as that way. Medium and Ghost Whisperer also have female leads and I honestly don’t know of a lot of men who watch those types of shows, yet both seem to do well in the ratings.
Ray should have never been allowed to lead this investigation because it's a conflict of interest considering that it was a student he was close to. It was very clear in the flashbacks that the two of them had an almost father-daughter like relationship. And for that reason, he never should have been running the investigation. Miami is known for letting people run cases that are conflicts of interest for them. I never thought Vegas would join in that. It was highly disappointing. Greg was not able to work the Aaron James case because of his ordeal with the brother. Cath wasn't allowed to work any case that involved Sam. So, why should Ray be allowed to work a case that involved someone he was so close to?
Practically everyone who saw last night's ep has said it sucked. It wasn't because of the strangeness of the case. It was because of the boring nature of the case. Too much wrestling was shown for one thing. There wasn't really that much weirdness about the episode. The weird thing for me was the drums being played in various scenes before the scene with Nick and Brass entering that house where that ceremony was going on. I get the drums in that scene, but why were we having to hear it when Ray was looking in the vic's office or whatever? That just made absolutely no sense whatsoever.
scottylass
Dead on Arrival
This could have been an awesome episode but unfortunately is was boring, confusing and downright wierd. Seriously, this is the best they could come up with for the 200th episode? I was so excited about watching this-it was #200, it was my birthday,Friedkin was directing-I was so disappointed.
It was quite foolish of CBS to put such a high profile episode against the series finale of ER. There was simply no way they were going to win that slot. If it was just another regular episode, that would've been fine. But when you air a high-profile, heavily-promoted episode at a time where it is certain to lose, you make the show look vulnerable. That's just very poor decision making on CBS's part.
Criminologist86
Pathologist
Agreed. Not only did the episode totally, totally, totally SUCK, but they were trying to compete with such a horrendous excuse for an episode (a 200th episode, for crying out loud) against the LAST episode of ER. Bad deal....If this episode is a preview of what the rest of Season 9 is going to be, then I hope CBS has the ability to pay these people BIG BIG money, because fans are gonna ditch the show.
Nicksfriend
Police Officer
ER beat CSI in the NIELSON RATINGS 16.2 TO 14.4...I must admit I probably helped the ER ratings because about halfway through I lost interest in CSI 200th episode,switching back during commercials,could not help it...I am not that into Langston and it made me mad that he took Nick's desk at the end...to a point of having to throw the channel changer.I know I need anger management class now but I could not help myself.