CSI Files
Captain
"They let you believe that, in a world where bad things happen, justice will prevail," <font color=yellow>Jan Nash</font>, executive producer for Without A Trace, said of crime shows and why they've become more popular.
CSI front man <font color=yellow>William Petersen</font> (Gil Grissom) thinks the popularity of shows such as CSI grew immensely due to the O.J. trial. "The more [people] watched, they got the feeling these scientists and witnesses were speaking this DNA language they didn't get, a whole vernacular they didn't understand. When he was found not guilty, they were confused. And they wanted more information."
"The culture had just been through this postmodern period of green tea and Buddhism, with everybody asking the big questions," the actor added. "People were lost. These guys had answers. You see a close-up of a broken toenail inside a shoe, and that becomes an important clue. Instead of the big things, it's about the littlest things. And they become the most important things. It's a new way of perceiving, and I think that spiritual aspect of the show is why people keep watching."
And people are expected to continue to watch for a long time. Although some critics believe procerudal dramas have reached their saturation point, <font color=yellow>Mark Gordon</font>, producer of Criminal Minds and Grey's Anatomy, believes America's fascination with crime will never wane. "Crime in American fiction dates from the 20s, 30s and 40s in potboiler novels and film noir, not to mention tabloid journalism. In the past few years, TV just figured out a way to capitalize on that in a different manner."
CSI's popularity, however, has created a big problem in the courtrooms, where jury members who've been exposed to the show expect too much from the prosecutors. It's been dubbed The CSI Effect. "We have a really serious problem on our hands, and TV has made it so much worse," novelist <font color=yellow>Patricia Cornwell</font> said. "CSI is fun to watch and entertaining. But, more and more, jury members believe that police and scientists work every case with this huge bag of tricks, and if they don't, the victim and jurors feel the case has not been adequately investigated."
Visit the Star Online to read the rest of the article.<center></center>
CSI front man <font color=yellow>William Petersen</font> (Gil Grissom) thinks the popularity of shows such as CSI grew immensely due to the O.J. trial. "The more [people] watched, they got the feeling these scientists and witnesses were speaking this DNA language they didn't get, a whole vernacular they didn't understand. When he was found not guilty, they were confused. And they wanted more information."
"The culture had just been through this postmodern period of green tea and Buddhism, with everybody asking the big questions," the actor added. "People were lost. These guys had answers. You see a close-up of a broken toenail inside a shoe, and that becomes an important clue. Instead of the big things, it's about the littlest things. And they become the most important things. It's a new way of perceiving, and I think that spiritual aspect of the show is why people keep watching."
And people are expected to continue to watch for a long time. Although some critics believe procerudal dramas have reached their saturation point, <font color=yellow>Mark Gordon</font>, producer of Criminal Minds and Grey's Anatomy, believes America's fascination with crime will never wane. "Crime in American fiction dates from the 20s, 30s and 40s in potboiler novels and film noir, not to mention tabloid journalism. In the past few years, TV just figured out a way to capitalize on that in a different manner."
CSI's popularity, however, has created a big problem in the courtrooms, where jury members who've been exposed to the show expect too much from the prosecutors. It's been dubbed The CSI Effect. "We have a really serious problem on our hands, and TV has made it so much worse," novelist <font color=yellow>Patricia Cornwell</font> said. "CSI is fun to watch and entertaining. But, more and more, jury members believe that police and scientists work every case with this huge bag of tricks, and if they don't, the victim and jurors feel the case has not been adequately investigated."
Visit the Star Online to read the rest of the article.<center></center>