First off let me say that I love this show. I have been renting episodes on DVD for a while now, and have grown to really appreciate CSI more than any TV show in quite a long time. That said, I had a real problem with two little lines from this one specific episode. And please understand, I am not one of those people that picks apart every little thing in a movie or show on IMDb. I love CSI. You really have to be familiar with the show and have seen this episode for me not to sound like a raving lunatic:
When Grissom, Nick, and Sarah are at the crime scene in the desert digging up the second body, they find a wallet in his pocket that helps them to identify the victim as "Ramirez".
NICK: "A 25-year old Latino and a 42-year old white guy...?"
SARAH: "Strangers. Doesn't make sense, there's no connection."
OK, come on. This is CSI! We know these characters, we've seen in countless episodes how they approach everything scientifically and without bias (or at least it's a plot-driven bias that is specific to one character in one episode, and helps that character's development by revealing some hardship in their distant past). For two CSI's to come to the lightning fast assumption that two men MUST be strangers because they differ slightly in age and ethnicity is laughable to me. These guys were 17 years apart in age. The mens ethnicity makes even less of a difference than the age gap. We are in the Western U.S., almost everyone's either white or Latino. And sure, maybe one of the younger CSI's would conceivably jump to a conclusion like that... maybe. On a longshot. But for both Nick and Sarah to be so blatantly short-sighted, in front of Grissom on top of it, and NOT have it somehow be part of the episode....?? (The two did in fact turn out to be strangers, and they never even brushed the topic again.)
How bout they work together? Go to the same church? The same bar? Share a hobby? Maybe they both have kids in the same school? How could anyone possibly say they ARE strangers with such certainty, especially a CSI?
It just rubbed me the wrong way, because it seemed so completely out of character for this group. Also, the episode ended on a bad note, with a known murderer getting away scott free, and the innocent brother killing himself.... not standard fare for CSI. I was about to question whether the writer, Ann Donahue, was any good; but then I looked up her writing credits and saw she wrote a number of CSI episodes, including the last episode from season 1, "The Strip Strangler" which thus far is probably my favorite. I'll have to pay attention as I continue to watch and see what I think of her other work.
When Grissom, Nick, and Sarah are at the crime scene in the desert digging up the second body, they find a wallet in his pocket that helps them to identify the victim as "Ramirez".
NICK: "A 25-year old Latino and a 42-year old white guy...?"
SARAH: "Strangers. Doesn't make sense, there's no connection."
OK, come on. This is CSI! We know these characters, we've seen in countless episodes how they approach everything scientifically and without bias (or at least it's a plot-driven bias that is specific to one character in one episode, and helps that character's development by revealing some hardship in their distant past). For two CSI's to come to the lightning fast assumption that two men MUST be strangers because they differ slightly in age and ethnicity is laughable to me. These guys were 17 years apart in age. The mens ethnicity makes even less of a difference than the age gap. We are in the Western U.S., almost everyone's either white or Latino. And sure, maybe one of the younger CSI's would conceivably jump to a conclusion like that... maybe. On a longshot. But for both Nick and Sarah to be so blatantly short-sighted, in front of Grissom on top of it, and NOT have it somehow be part of the episode....?? (The two did in fact turn out to be strangers, and they never even brushed the topic again.)
How bout they work together? Go to the same church? The same bar? Share a hobby? Maybe they both have kids in the same school? How could anyone possibly say they ARE strangers with such certainty, especially a CSI?
It just rubbed me the wrong way, because it seemed so completely out of character for this group. Also, the episode ended on a bad note, with a known murderer getting away scott free, and the innocent brother killing himself.... not standard fare for CSI. I was about to question whether the writer, Ann Donahue, was any good; but then I looked up her writing credits and saw she wrote a number of CSI episodes, including the last episode from season 1, "The Strip Strangler" which thus far is probably my favorite. I'll have to pay attention as I continue to watch and see what I think of her other work.