Friday, September 29, 2006


I used to watch the original CSI all the time. Caught the new episodes on CBS, caught the old ones on Spike. Then last year, I stopped watching it because it was on opposite My Name is Earl and The Office. Well since those two shows were moved up an hour, I have now picked up where I last left off.

The good thing about the CSI franchises is that there is very little continuity. Basically, each episode can stand on its own, with little background knowledge needed. But that seems to be changing.

Last night's episode was the second part of a two-parter that opened up the new season. While that isn't unusual (in fact, the series premiere was a two-parter) what is unusual is that the main story of the second part was left unresolved. The killing of the character of that Danny Bonaduce played had no where near any closure. It was strongly implied, through a very confusing last five minutes, that this storyline is going to continue. Is CSI becoming more serialized?

I, for one, hope not. The reason why I liked CSI in the first place what that you didn't need to see every single episode to understand it. I could easily miss an episode and not feel left behind. And, contray to what one may believe, that actually inspired loyalty in me. If I missed an episode, I would not only be sure to catch the next one if I could, but also seek out CSI repeats. A serialized drama like Lost, I know if I missed an episode, highly doubtful as that may be, I would probably chose not to watch the next episode until I caught up. Luckily with iTunes that is easier, but it wasn't always like that for my favorite TV shows.

So hopefully, CSI doesn't try to become overly serialized. Some interconnectedness is fine, but try not to go overboard, ok Las Vegas Crime Lab?


Post a Comment

<< Home