CSI: Cyber

I am so disappointed in the production of CSI cyber. The constantly twitching camera angles are distracting. The slurred and mumbled speech make it hard to follow the plot. Someone confused suspense with technique. It is not working. Please, someone fix this so we can get into this spin off. The imitators of the original series need to watch the original CSI series again to correct technique.

The acting is good. Character selection and formula work. Staging O.K. Constant, and I do mean constant, use of computer parts to mark scene changes needs to be more thought out. Good T.V in CSI teaches something about the subject matter. All the hyped vocabulary, and explanation of it by characters, is not complete enough or even if it is, is not possible to follow because of all the camera angles and mumbling. So incredibly disappointed in production.

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.

I was really looking forward to this show! I used to watch CSI and CSI:Miami. I stopped watching at some point, but always loved the shows and love forensic series in general. CSI: Cyber was combining two of my favorite genres/subjects.

The acting really was not very good at all. Most of the acting was so wooden and monotone...especially Patricia Arquette's. Even Peter MacNicol, who I loved in Numb3rs was not great. The only characters with personality and that I actually enjoyed were the 3 hacker characters (Charley Koontz, Hayley Kiyoko, and Shad Moss).

I didn't mind the dumbing down of the tech stuff like some of the other reviews. You have to be able to appeal to a wider audience than the geeks out there.

I really hope this gets better. I'll probably give it 2 more episodes.

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.

I'm sad. There are some great actors in this show, but if I didn't know them from other works I'd rate the acting as terrible. The writing is so incredibly bad that it makes even Patricia Arquette (who is usually lovely) look less than stellar. Poor dialog, plots that aren't fully fleshed out, and inaccuracies abound. I'm bummed. I tried 3 episodes, but I don't like the characters, the stories are sufficiently flawed to detract from my enjoyment, and I'm just done. I tend to rate pretty generously and that's reflected in my 5 star review. I must have seen some glimmer of possibility because I came back 2 more times. But that's all you're getting from me CSI: Cyber.