CSI:Crime Scene Investigation was a startling and surprising television show that quickly grew a large following, and almost as quickly spawned this, another show with the magic "CSI" at the beginning. But those who might think that the two shows are related by anything more than the words "CSI" and "Bruckheimer" are not watching closely.
CSI starts normally with the discovery of a body. We don't know anything about who the person is or how they got dead. As the song says, "Who are you?". What follows is a voyage of discovery as Grissom and his team carefully examine clues and Brass, the cop, calmly asks for explanations, presenting the witness with the confusing evidence. But sometimes there's a perfectly simple explanation and sometimes the person died due to suicide, or accident or some reason other than deliberate murder.
CSI is a detective show. It is most akin to Sherlock Holmes, and the fun of the story is usually in the explanation of why the person is dead.
CSI:Miami starts normally with the scene of someone getting shot. As often as not we see who is doing the shooting. As soon as possible Horatio Kane will suspect the killer, and, not having any evidence on which he could possibly charge him, interviews him and threatens him that he will "get him" and "make him pay". And sooner and later he does, possibly giving him a well-deserved extra-judicial beating along the way.
Miami is a cop show. It is cops versus robbers (or shooters, usually) and one watches to see that the "good guys" win. It is a classic feature of such shows that the "bad guys" "get off" because of the ineptitude of the justice system, and only the unconventional cop is going to get them by ignoring the rules and trusting his instinct rather than finding evidence that might convince a jury.
I have just heard of a man wrongfully convicted when he confessed to the bloody beating death of his parents after being questioned by a policeman along the lines of Horatio Kane. Unfortunately Gil Grissom wasn't there, since he would have noticed the complete lack of blood evidence on the accused, and would have known that he was innocent.
Now for all of you who have been brought up on cop shows CSI Miami may be just what you want. It's safe and predictable and, incidentally, easier to write. You get the Horatio Kane character who is great fun (and very easy) to parody. You get to know right away who is wearing the black hats and who is wearing the white ones so you don't have to deal with the possibility that things may not be what they seem. To a certain mindset, ambiguity is anathema. This show is for that mind.
The original CSI show on the other hand is full of ambiguity. Evidence that seems to lead one way is subject to another interpretation. One has to reassess one's ideas about what is going on four or five times in a show, and the final result is usually an interesting and well-written tale. Sometimes no crime has been committed; sometimes there just isn't enough to convict even when a crime is involved. It doesn't matter. CSI, unlike Miami, is not about "getting the bad guy" but about finding the truth.
Don't confuse the two.
CSI starts normally with the discovery of a body. We don't know anything about who the person is or how they got dead. As the song says, "Who are you?". What follows is a voyage of discovery as Grissom and his team carefully examine clues and Brass, the cop, calmly asks for explanations, presenting the witness with the confusing evidence. But sometimes there's a perfectly simple explanation and sometimes the person died due to suicide, or accident or some reason other than deliberate murder.
CSI is a detective show. It is most akin to Sherlock Holmes, and the fun of the story is usually in the explanation of why the person is dead.
CSI:Miami starts normally with the scene of someone getting shot. As often as not we see who is doing the shooting. As soon as possible Horatio Kane will suspect the killer, and, not having any evidence on which he could possibly charge him, interviews him and threatens him that he will "get him" and "make him pay". And sooner and later he does, possibly giving him a well-deserved extra-judicial beating along the way.
Miami is a cop show. It is cops versus robbers (or shooters, usually) and one watches to see that the "good guys" win. It is a classic feature of such shows that the "bad guys" "get off" because of the ineptitude of the justice system, and only the unconventional cop is going to get them by ignoring the rules and trusting his instinct rather than finding evidence that might convince a jury.
I have just heard of a man wrongfully convicted when he confessed to the bloody beating death of his parents after being questioned by a policeman along the lines of Horatio Kane. Unfortunately Gil Grissom wasn't there, since he would have noticed the complete lack of blood evidence on the accused, and would have known that he was innocent.
Now for all of you who have been brought up on cop shows CSI Miami may be just what you want. It's safe and predictable and, incidentally, easier to write. You get the Horatio Kane character who is great fun (and very easy) to parody. You get to know right away who is wearing the black hats and who is wearing the white ones so you don't have to deal with the possibility that things may not be what they seem. To a certain mindset, ambiguity is anathema. This show is for that mind.
The original CSI show on the other hand is full of ambiguity. Evidence that seems to lead one way is subject to another interpretation. One has to reassess one's ideas about what is going on four or five times in a show, and the final result is usually an interesting and well-written tale. Sometimes no crime has been committed; sometimes there just isn't enough to convict even when a crime is involved. It doesn't matter. CSI, unlike Miami, is not about "getting the bad guy" but about finding the truth.
Don't confuse the two.