It’s really not fair for a writer, columnist or critic to form opinions about a TV show or movie before watching it. (This can obviously apply to sports, politics or any other subject covered.)
Of course, we see it happen all the time. Writers have their stories planned out before they’re actually composed, often to fulfill a pre-conceived narrative. Or maybe because it’s just easier to go in a certain direction once the decision was made to pursue that path, instead of changing opinions or putting more thought into the matter.
All of this is my way of saying that I really wanted to hate CSI: Cyber before watching its premiere episode Wednesday night (March 4). Every time I saw a commercial promoting the new show during a NFL playoff game, 60 Minutes or whatever other CBS programming I might have been watching, I’d grind my teeth because it just looked so bad.
http://youtu.be/D7pGdsJQmao
Yet I tuned in anyway because I wanted to see if the show was indeed as bad as the commercials made it look. On one hand, maybe this was a clever tweak of the CSI formula, dealing in crimes that are having more real-world significance to us every day. Maybe the show would even force writers and producers to work outside the already established mold and tell some new types of stories.
Look, I feel like I tried. I gave the show a shot with what I felt was an open mind. And it’s entirely possible that this will become a better series after a few episodes as the writers and cast become more comfortable with their characters. Some shows take a little while to figure out what they are and the hope is that a network provides that chance.
But CSI: Cyber is terrible. Or at least its pilot episode was awful.
“Whoa! There’s malware!” – World’s Best White-Hat In the world of CSI:Cyber, green code is good, red code is malware pic.twitter.com/RXLVMiHI7J
— Rob Graham (@ErrataRob) March 5, 2015
Poor Patricia Arquette — now an Academy Award winner — was saddled with stiff, expository dialogue like, “Any crime involving electronic devices is, by definition, cyber.” Oh, by the way, this line is said to her boss who presumably knows exactly what area that crime should fall under. But apparently, he needed some convincing.
OK, then — I guess that explains the whole show. It’s not “I am the one who knocks” or anything like the gems David Caruso would drop in a CSI: Miami cold open. But objective accomplished, CSI writing team! (And honestly, it appears to have been even worse when Arquette’s character, Avery Ryan, was introduced on the flagship CSI show. I haven’t been a regular viewer of the franchise for years.)
Unfortunately, Arquette’s delivery further confirmed the clunkiness of the pilot episode’s clunkier lines, such as “It’s an auction. It’s an online baby auction.” Well, yeah — I mean, there was bidding and it was taking place over the internet. Thanks, Agent Obvious! Cut to commercial!
Behind her eyes, you can almost see Arquette thinking, “All right, I have to say this to get through the scene. I am a professional. Just say the line.” She wasn’t an Oscar winner yet, so couldn’t give herself that affirmation. But maybe, deep down, she knew that role in Boyhood was going to pay off. Maybe it would help in future episodes if she punctuated her dialogue by putting on sunglasses like Caruso. “I’m a cyber cop.” Cue The Who. YEEEEEAAAAHHHH!
It would be easy to be snarky about James Van Der Beek and Shad Moss (the rapper formerly known as Lil’ Bow Wow) also leading the cast. But that’s kind of mean. Moss likely won’t be helped by playing a former hacker who’s going to be sitting at a computer frequently and having to spout techno-babble dialogue. Or maybe there won’t be any tech aspect to his lines. In the pilot, Moss cracks the case by saying, “Eeny meeny miny mo… catch a gangsta by the toe… rearrange the numbers, yo… early years are first to go.” Maybe he needs Caruso’s sunglasses too.
I’m actually intrigued by Van Der Beek getting a lead role on what should be a hit series with the CSI brand. His character is given the unfortunate name of Elijah Mundo, but he’s the tough guy/action hero of the group, which should give him plenty of opportunity to fire guns and punch out bad guys. Van Der Beek served his time in pop culture exile and showed he doesn’t take himself too seriously. Why should Joshua Jackson and Michelle Williams get all the post-Dawson’s Creek glory?
Pilots are typically problematic because you have to explain to viewers (and executives) what this is going to be in basically 40 minutes of running time. So yes, you have characters with dialogue that serves solely as exposition. Every cast member and their role in the series has to be introduced. Future storylines may be hinted at, or character backgrounds and traits are mentioned to provide something of a road map.
That is a lot to shoehorn into one episode. There is basically one chance to sell the show, to convince viewers to tune in next week for the next installment. Characters and storylines have had little time to demonstrate if they can be compelling or not. Very few shows can pull this off. Even some of the best series have had weak or sub-optimal pilots. (Two of the best that immediately come to mind for me are ER and Mad Men. Those pilots made you want to see more and as quickly as possible.)
Another problem pilots face these days is that there is just so much good stuff on TV. Why waste your time with something mediocre — or bad — when far better alternatives is available? Our time is increasingly precious as TV viewers and pop culture consumers. We shouldn’t squander that luxury. But that’s exactly what you’d be doing by watching CSI: Cyber. It’s a crime Arquette’s character wouldn’t tolerate.
