A bit of Trivia to start with. What famous character dates back to at least the 15th century, has movies made about them in the years 1922, 1935, 1973,... and so on until we get to a new movie coming out in 2017. The new movie is called "Robin Hood: Origins". What does this have to do with CSI Cyber? Well the latest show has a Robin Hood character in it. The premise of Robin Hood is fairly clear. People like a movie where the rich corrupt people get their money taken away and given to the poor. That premise, given all the data, sells pretty dam well. Hence the roughly zillion billion remakes of Robin Hood.
Now how would CSI Cyber's version of Robin Hood go? Well some of Robin Hood's exploits end up with innocent people getting killed in improbable and crazy ways. Guess what people, a ATM spilling cash has actually happened several times in history already and people don't just start killing each other over it. The deaths feel like a clumsy and forced plot line.
When CSI finally catches up with Robin Hood he turns out to be a nut job with a lose grasp on reality. So are we supposed to hate the guy or not hate him? If we are supposed to hate the guy then why not have him steal some of the money for himself or be less pathetic? If we are supposed to like the guy why not have some lesser punishment? Even a speech like ".. we know the nut job meant well but society cannot function if everyone was Robin Hood" Instead we have Avery, the CSI Cyber director, telling Robin Hood that his plot, that would never have worked in the first place, is going to fail and he will die unknown. The whole scene comes off slightly better than watching a gang of thugs beat up a mentally challenged child, but not by much.
Which brings us now to the later part of the show, we have Avery again, apparently she is not yet hated enough by the TV audience, so now the director of the show has given her a part were she really back-stabs Raven. Raven is a tech that has been working on probation for the last few years under Avery's direction. Due to a minor indecent, where Raven was ambushed at a coffee shop by someone she's not supposed to talk to. Raven, ends the unwanted encounter fairly quickly. Yes even I was saying she probably should mention it to her boss, but given how small it is it seems like quite a forgivable event. Instead Avery uses it to force Raven into working another two years for her.
The director doesn't seem to realize how his main character, Avery is coming off so badly to the audience. So to top it off the director has Avery in a meeting with D.B. Russell where she quite clearly admits she back-stabbed and sabotaged Raven, but we, the audience are supposed to feel so sorry for Avery because it was such a hard hard decision. The beautiful irony of this scene is Avery and D.B. commiserate the "difficult" decision by drinking a bit of alcohol, disguised in coffee mugs at the FBI center, which they both acknowledge is improper. Yes the rules only apply to the little people.
How do episodes like this get written? Is the director of the show used to being in such a powerful position that screwing over underlings feels like the right thing to do? Does the director have so much money that the plot line to Robin Hood feels like it really should be rewritten with a different ending? An ending where the idea being shoved down our collective throats is the Robin Hood idea is pathetic? What kind of person produces a show like this? Can we ask if the show is being written by a computer; because it doesn't feel human.
Now how would CSI Cyber's version of Robin Hood go? Well some of Robin Hood's exploits end up with innocent people getting killed in improbable and crazy ways. Guess what people, a ATM spilling cash has actually happened several times in history already and people don't just start killing each other over it. The deaths feel like a clumsy and forced plot line.
When CSI finally catches up with Robin Hood he turns out to be a nut job with a lose grasp on reality. So are we supposed to hate the guy or not hate him? If we are supposed to hate the guy then why not have him steal some of the money for himself or be less pathetic? If we are supposed to like the guy why not have some lesser punishment? Even a speech like ".. we know the nut job meant well but society cannot function if everyone was Robin Hood" Instead we have Avery, the CSI Cyber director, telling Robin Hood that his plot, that would never have worked in the first place, is going to fail and he will die unknown. The whole scene comes off slightly better than watching a gang of thugs beat up a mentally challenged child, but not by much.
Which brings us now to the later part of the show, we have Avery again, apparently she is not yet hated enough by the TV audience, so now the director of the show has given her a part were she really back-stabs Raven. Raven is a tech that has been working on probation for the last few years under Avery's direction. Due to a minor indecent, where Raven was ambushed at a coffee shop by someone she's not supposed to talk to. Raven, ends the unwanted encounter fairly quickly. Yes even I was saying she probably should mention it to her boss, but given how small it is it seems like quite a forgivable event. Instead Avery uses it to force Raven into working another two years for her.
The director doesn't seem to realize how his main character, Avery is coming off so badly to the audience. So to top it off the director has Avery in a meeting with D.B. Russell where she quite clearly admits she back-stabbed and sabotaged Raven, but we, the audience are supposed to feel so sorry for Avery because it was such a hard hard decision. The beautiful irony of this scene is Avery and D.B. commiserate the "difficult" decision by drinking a bit of alcohol, disguised in coffee mugs at the FBI center, which they both acknowledge is improper. Yes the rules only apply to the little people.
How do episodes like this get written? Is the director of the show used to being in such a powerful position that screwing over underlings feels like the right thing to do? Does the director have so much money that the plot line to Robin Hood feels like it really should be rewritten with a different ending? An ending where the idea being shoved down our collective throats is the Robin Hood idea is pathetic? What kind of person produces a show like this? Can we ask if the show is being written by a computer; because it doesn't feel human.
