I watched this show with enthusiasm for the first season or so, until it occurred to me, yanno, there’s no way crime scene techs would be interviewing suspects like this. Disbelief no longer suspended, I found it unwatchable, and I haven’t watched it at all during the intervening five years or so.
Now, of course, they’ve sandwiched it between two shows I do like, Survivor and The Mentalist (the latter, of course, also quite unbelievable in any kind of real-life terms, but not making any particular effort to attain verisimilitude, so hokey-doke with me), so I find myself watching it, at least on those evenings when I’m too cozily ensconced with kitties and afghans and knitting and suchlike to get up and do something else.
The last two weeks, they’ve started out with one case; had another team working on a different case; then, no later than 9:20 or so figured out that they’re actually all part of the same case.
Do they do this every single fucking week?
Actually, no. Not every single week, but they do do it several times a season.
I don’t have a problem with it not being realistic. I just accept that it’s a television program trying to tell a story, to keep me entertained long enough for me to see some of their commercials so that I might buy some of the products and help pay actors’ salaries.
So, I’m OK with overlooking the non-realistic aspects of it.
Plus, I’ve had a crush on Marg since “China Beach.”
It’s definitely becoming the standard move for the show.
We haven’t watched yesterday’s episode yet, but in the two previous episodes we’ve had…
10/29: The submerged car which turned out to be the catalyst for the coach’s murder.and
10/22: The troubled youth whose murder turned out to be part of a sequence in the “racist patrolman shoots off-duty black cop” case.
Just last week, I mentioned to my wife how they’ve gotten off of the multiple, separate cases in each episode angle for these ridiculous “surprise” connection ones.
Long sigh. And of course, an even longer sigh for Emily Procter.
One question I have with the CSI shows is, “Do female Crime Scene investigators and labrats process evidence with all that hair flowing around their shoulders?” It seems to me that processing DNA evidence without wearing a hairnet or cap would just be inviting cross-contamination.
How about the lab being so incredibly dark. Wouldn’t a crime lab be brightly lit so that you can actually see something?
No matter, I still like the show and Marg sure does have a nice backside.
The real ones, wear Lab Coats, Masks, Hair/Beard Coverings, name tags etc.
Not designer clothes, flowing locks, nor in my experience does your average lab-tech drive a Hummer.
They never interview suspects.
They don’t carry guns.
They rarely have the expensive equipment (or not so much of it).
Labs are not lit that way.
But apart from that…
Oh… and you can’t get a DNA test in a few minutes.
Nor can you enhance a photo beyond the pixel level.
They go into a crime scene and process using flashlights. Just turn the damn lights on will ya?