Ahh! So much Nick. *twitch, flail*
ford_prefect said:
ariela57 said:
...but wasn't it nice to see the characters...on screen for more than two seconds and actually let them do their stuff and get the scenes going?
I agree, I'd rather have some episodes with very little to no Nick alternating with episodes that have lots of Nick, than having him in just one or two scenes every episode. I think that's why I didn't really miss Greg and Grissom in this one. When they try to work all the characters into every episode it just gets congested and nobody gets any quality screentime.
Amen!
It's just way too strange and confusing when they have six CSIs working on the same case and have people dissapear half way through the investigation. It was really nice to see them focus on just a couple characters so they can actually follow it through. I hope it'll be the same with Grissom and Greg next week too.
Speaking of Grissom and Greg, I don't think their absence is anything to worry about. Think about last year's "Weeping Willows", "Committed", and "Hollywood Brass"...it's just that time of year when they have to divide and conquer.
...and like every Nick fan in the known universe my jaw dropped at his little comment to Hodges about knowing what it feels like to snap.
As much as I'd love to tie that back to "Grave Danger," I think he was really just getting a dig in at Hodges there.
Really? I thought for sure that was
it. The long overdue confirmation of Nick's post-GD mentality. The canonization of the Rage Diary. The foreshadowing of the kitty rampage. I actually jumped up and squealed into my blanket. :lol: It was the way he said it...did not sound like a throwaway line to me at all.
The coin flip thing, on the other hand, I don't know, because no one really reacted to that - on the show, I mean. We fans sure did.
One thing that struck me was that the brother almost looked -- unhappy (?) when he was acquitted? My thoughts are a bit out there but could it be he wanted to be convicted of this crime to show the world (and his parents) that he was smart enough to pull it off?? Could it be that his prodigy sister one-upped him again by casting a doubt that he was able to pull it off himself? I noticed how she ran for him in court when he was aquitted and he barely hugged her back?
I think so, and I really liked this angle of the case as well. There was so much bitterness that came through when the brother said "I'm not stupid" during interrogation. It's sad how he was destined to live under his little sister's shadow, and not even committing a murder can get him the attention he's been deprived of. I thought the actor did a good job.
The girl was just plain scary. Like some others I found it hard to take for granted what she whispered into Sara's ear. I mean after an entire episode of cunning manipulation, the knee-jerk reaction was to not take her word for anything. I really thought the CSIs were going to build a slam-dunk case in the end, so the ambiguity was quite frustrating. But in a good way. I think. The evil little genius getting to walk out like that! Grrr.
I love the way Sara is with kids. She's never condescending. Of course part of that is because she doesn't know how to deal with kids as well as her colleagues do, but that in itself I find pretty fascinating.
Re some people feeling there was too much court: I'm a huge sucker for court scenes. "The Accused is Entitled" is one of my all-time faves for the court angle. And I loved how the episode opened in court; very reminiscent of "Invisible Evidence" and "Mea Culpa", both of which I loved. The reason being that, first of all you get yummy suits for eye candy.
But more importantly, after all the word "forensic" means "used of legal argumentation". The CSIs have said before that if their science is no good in court, then it's all a waste of time. I really like the show's emphasis on that over the years, because I feel that's the bottom line in this profession, whether or not the evidence is good enough to a judge and jury.
all the evidence was played by a hunch, no one stepped back to look at the evidence in an unbiased way, which is what a good scientist has to do. i don't even think there was any strong forensic evidence against either of them, they were just going by there confessions...
I actually thought it was pretty realistic. From what I've seen on crime documentaries, oftentimes the investigators have to rely heavily on confessions/witness accounts because there just isn't enough physical evidence. This episode looked at just such a case from the CSI perspective, by showing us how sometimes the evidence can only play a minimal role in an investigation, how forensic science is not exact and almighty because it left them always playing catch-up one step behind the killer. I loved "Alter Boys" for the same reason. Sometimes the evidence just isn't there.
a scientist role isn't to get 'connected' with people. that is why i say sara and nick don't play very convincing scientists...besides the fact the neither of them seem like they actually know any science.
Heh, it's funny you should mention that, because I don't find any of them convincing as scientists if I were to get picky. They've all had their share of scenes where they discuss middle school science (sometimes not even that!) while looking important, it's actually quite comical. Of course I realize the need for exposition and I don't watch the show to get educated (although it's a bonus when I do), so it's not a problem. But truthfully I don't think of any character as exceptionally smart and science-savvy, although some of them are portrayed to be that way, ie Grissom, Sara, and Greg. With the occasional exception of Grissom, maybe. But certainly not Greg or Sara.
((Wow, I'm longwinded at 3 am on a Saturday morning...
))
