Saturday, 31 March 2012

Review: S08.E14 - Flash Pop



My thoughts on last night‘s episode Flash Pop, I was disappointed.

Spoilers after the jump!

I‘m not sure whether I felt let down because Don/Eddie was only in it for approx. 3 minutes or because it really was such a bad episode. I have to admit, as much as I missed them during their brief „winter hiatus“, I wasn‘t too keen on this episode once the first promos surfaced.

Another cold case from 50 years ago and another „big name“ as guest star announced. So far, most episodes where CBS has made such a hype about a guest actor prior to airing the episodes, they haven fallen through for me. This one was no exception to the rule.

They'll probably turn this into a multi-episode story arc and bring back Lee Majors in the next episode or so, I‘m not sure since I don‘t follow the spoilers for CSI:NY anymore. It would make sense though, since the case from 1957 was an unsolved one.

Anyway, back to last night‘s episode. I couldn‘t help but roll my eyes early on in this episode. The opening sequence alone was  strange. So, Mac Taylor gets a photo of a crime scene sent to his phone and the first thing he does is go to the „research library“ to look up the old case from 1957 to compare the photo to that of the original crime scene?!?! And STILL he manages to get to the crime scene before any of patrol does? Didn‘t he call it in first? If so, why did it take the officers so long to arrive on the scene?

I‘m sorry but I cannot help but notice these things and they bother me.

I must say, the whole story/case didn‘t work for me. The motive of the Lab Tech to murder her „competition“ was not plausible enough for me. Nor did the way it happen make sense. If she hadn‘t planned it premeditatedly  (or rather given up on her plan) and then acted on impulse when she saw the broken champagne glass, why did she have that lipstick with her? BTW... I find it hard to believe that the exact lipstick color „stormy red“ from the 50‘s was still around in 2012. These days it‘s hard to get the same lipstick color from one season to the next!

In my opinion, the writers totally overdid it here with the many clues. The parts from the stick insect, the footprints still visible beneath the snow(!), that particular lipstick, the crime scene photo that Kim shot and put into the stack of evidence photos that Mac had in his office later. Why should she do that? The way she had „staged“ the crime scene was enough to put the suspicion on Harlan who conveniently vanished after their night out and didn‘t have an alibi. Why did she steal the original murder weapon from the crime scene in 1957 and kept it in her apartment? If she was clever enough to forge Harlan's signature on the evidence transfer sheet, then why didn't she hide it in his apartment or throw it away? It was all confusing and rather illogical to me.

Another thing that was totally overdone was the way Taylor and especially Jo reacted to the Lab Tech‘s death. Jo was in tears over the whole thing? (even though she didn‘t really know the girl?).  Pleeeeeze, are you serious? That „tribute“ in the lab, the co-workers all mourning the young girl during working hours, Adam finding it necessary to defend the Lab Techs‘ honor so to speak and to point out that they all want to be treated with respect? (I didn‘t notice that they weren‘t treated that way?!). It was just plain ridiculous.

The only one keeping his cool and staying focused on his job was Flack. I loved it when he questioned the people on Taylor‘s Team and his reaction when they tried to wave him off.

On the one hand Taylor already said he hardly notices the Lab Techs and on the other they all readily jump to the conclusion that the main suspect, Harlan Porter, is beyond suspicion?!!? That was so silly! Don‘t get me wrong, I‘m all for loyalty between the team members, in fact it is one of CSI:NY's biggest draw for me, the way this team is loyal to each other... but we‘re talking about someone they hardly even knew!

There were many more plot holes, but the most obvious to me was the  crime scene itself. I would have thought that if you stabbed someone with the stem of a broken champagne glass, then the victim wouldn‘t die instantly (it takes a while to bleed out). Surely, she would have moved, or tried to crawl away or so. But, no..., in this case she stayed in the exact position that copied the case from 1957. The whole footprints thingy was quite unbelievable to me too.

Again, too much clues, too easily solved.

So I didn‘t like the plot/case much. I hated the lack of Eddie/Don in this episode and I was bored with the whole Mac Taylor emphasize, but that‘s just my personal perception.

I have loved this show for so long because of the great team work, great cases and because - unlike with CSI:Miami - the emphasize was not always on the leading man. That has changed in the last two seasons and even though I ADORE Gary Sinise, making everything about Mac Taylor is taking away much of the show‘s appeal to me. Or maybe I‘ve really just lost my passion for the show. I‘m at a point where I only tune in for Don Flack/Eddie moments it seems.

Not much to go on in this particular episode then.

What I liked were the flash backs to the original murder scene from 1957. That was cleverly done and beautifully photographed. However, the cold case didn‘t play such a big role in this episode which made the many flash backs kind of pointless. I guess we‘ll hear more about this case when Jo starts investigating.

I wish I could say I enjoyed this episode (especially after eagerly awaiting their return after the winter hiatus) but I didn‘t.

I truly, truly hope that the remaining four episodes will give everybody on the cast a moment to shine and not just Sela and Gary.

4 comments:

  1. Thanks for the heads up!
    I was too excited last night anticipating the return of CSI: NY to notice everything you did, and I fully agree with you! Lee Majors didn't even make an appearance until 40 minutes in. I was looking forward to him as well. I thought Adam was good, though and believable because he would know them better, I think. I didn't like that Jo cried, either. Come on! She's only been there a year. Hopefully Eddie/Flack will have more air time next week.
    Teresa

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know what you mean, Teresa. I was very eagerly awaiting their return too, but wasn't too impressed by what they did with that episode. From an artistic pov it was well done. Great sets and awesome photography, it's just that the story didn't work for me.

      Still... I'm glad they're back on a weekly basis - missed our favorite detective!!! - (at least I hope there won't be another huge gap between the remaining eps and the finale episode).

      Let's hope the ratings will improve and that the miracle of a season 09 might happen.

      Delete
  2. I agree with your issues. Also, the idea that the lead detective on a homicide case would be only 22 years old is preposterous. Plus when he pulled Lana's driver's license out of her purse it had a picture. They didn't have pictures on DLs back then.

    But yeah, there were a lot of holes in the story. Only four more episodes to go. I think it very unlikely the show will be renewed. Sigh.

    Tessa87

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, Tessa. I really can't see them renewing CSI:NY. I will miss Don/Eddie terribly, but I can't say I'll miss the show as much as would have been the case two years ago.

      Still... should they get another season, I'll certainly tune in for Eddie/Don :)

      Delete