CSI: Cyber

What can I say?!

Just: awful, awful, awful.

I cannot believe that - having cancelled all 3 of the other 'CSI' programmes - the producers then give us yet another programme of the exact same style!

It has been churned out with techniques identical to the last few series of 'CSI's 1 to 3. This sadly resulted in a first episode with the following flaws:

~ meandering plot ~ dull story ~ inconsequential events ~ confused schematic ~ none of the wit or humour hoped for ~ zero warmth from the protagonists ~ no depth or scope i.e superficial ~ nil characterisation or back stories for the players (until at the very end, when it was far too late to enthral me in any way!)

I was hoping to see another programme of the quality of the first few series of the original 'CSI' - when "Grissom" et al really grabbed my interest, and the plots were feasible and properly fleshed out. Instead, this CSI-4 simply - and unbelievably - reproduced the very death throes of 'CSI' & the other 2 'CSI' series.

Yet another US show with a fatal case of style over substance. Gloss does NOT equate to quality.

I had SO looked forward to this new series. So I was HORRIFIED to see such a lazy production being rolled out.

The episode was proving abysmal even after the first 5 minutes, and dropped ever lower in my estimation the further the drama went on.

I would have hoped to be able to watch the second episode, in order to give the whole series a critique - i.e. after perusal of more than just one storyline. But, having seen the exact same style of programme in the last days of 'CSI's 1 to 3, there is clearly NO hope that CSI-4 will change. So I am signing off the series as of now. And have in fact already deleted the 10+ episodes that we had so far recorded... 1 hour is enough of my life wasted! ,-) After all, if the 'CSI' studio haven't learnt by now, then from this first episode they have proved that they never will.

Sadly, I can give this programme no more than 1 out of 10, as the production studio should have known better.

No-one can blame the actors, so please, please - Patricia Arquette, Peter MacNicol, et al - MOVE ON to something worth your skills.

I just HAD to get my opinion down. A form of catharsis, no doubt!! ,-)

One last point: the best thing about this programme? In fact, the ONLY good thing? Is ANOTHER superb theme song from the catalogue of 'The Who'. So I am off to YouTube to listen again to the great 'I Can See For Miles'. Now that WILL be 4 minutes well spent!

Writing, acting, everything mediocre, just another crime show with generic characters, the hardcore geek, etc.

However, every single depiction of technology is horrible incorrect, it's like they want anyone that's technologically educated to want to turn the show off.

This show is very popular in a forum called "It's a unix system" that makes fun of horribly inaccurate and downright ignorant computer use in television and film.

CSI: Cyber would benefit from hiring an actual geek to consult on the mind-numbingly poor depictions of anything hacking, programming, or computer related.

And seriously, the acting is so mediocre, there's a million better things to watch.

So i've been watching this show since release, and i can agree with people saying that the first episode (the first 3 or 4 actually) was kinda bad, but now after a few more i'm starting to enjoy it more and more.

I personally think that episodes 5 - 8 was really good, especially episode 7. I think this show will turn out great if we just give it some time to develop.

Only thing that bugs me is that Avery, Elijah and Sifter doesn't really feel like they belong in a Cyber unit, but the rest of the crew is a very good fit.

Sure, it will never live up to the original CSI, but i don't think people should expect it to.

I write this in the assumption that someone connected with this series reads user reviews to get an idea of how their show is perceived.

One of the common problems with the CSI series (and, to be fair, many other shows) has always been that someone, somewhere feels that the audience has never seen (or heard) a computer work before, and so every action has to come with a "beep-boop-beep" sound effect. If I had to work with those computers all day, I would long ago have placed an empty plug in the headphone port, just to shut the bloody thing up! Now we have a show that should, from its title and premise, be a little more current about computers. But no, all of the scene cuts seem to be glitchy video transmissions, with static breaks and annoying pixellations. If I was watching this show as a streaming video, I would have thought my ISP needed a call to clear up my crappy connection, but no, I was watching on cable, and this was someone's poor idea of how to make the show look "Kewl". Well, this effect is about as outdated as the spelling of "Kewl".

Please, this is a show being sent to a 21st century audience, pretty well all of whom have computers and know how they look and sound. Give us some credit, and more realistic computers.

So far...episode 1 = not good, not good at all - bad acting all round, even from Patricia Arquette which really surprised me, below par script/plot, just so run of the mill not what you expect from CSI...very disappointed by it's lack of originality or sophistication. Surely they don't think this is what the average viewer wants nowadays, a paint by numbers plot with absolutely no challenge to the grey matter? So tired of these shows that are written for people with low to no intellect there are only a handful of shows still airing that I can say do that and this certainly is not one of them. (Why do they take off air the really good shows (sci-fi especially and replace it with this mindless drivel), well that is my late night rant, fueled by yet another disappointment in what looked to be a promising show over and done with.