"CSI" started a phenomenon. It has been so popular that it has spawned two also popular spin-offs and practically revitalized the genre of crime drama. It is impressive in many ways and still going admirably strong. Personally the Miami show has been my favorite (though lately I've been reconsidering that), but I greatly enjoy all three. I'll watch other shows like "Law and Order" if I catch them on at the right time, but "CSI" was my crime drama of choice for years and still near the top. Though the city's name isn't part of the official show title of the original series like the other two, I'll usually refer to it as “CSI Las Vegas” (or “Vegas” for short) for easier clarification.

 

I think the reason "CSI" is popular is similar to why the original "Dragnet" was. We are all affected by crime in one way or another. Shows that focus on criminals getting caught give us hope that we can be protected from evil men. "CSI" is the modern "Dragnet." We watch the investigators work on a case, solve the mystery, and stop the bad guys. Of course, I'm putting this all in a nutshell, but that is the underlying, driving factor of the series.

 

But we've seen crime shows before. What makes this one so much better than the others? For starters it's put together well. The pacing, tone, plots, writing, acting: it's all high quality. There's also a focus on science. In the past we've followed detectives pounding the pavement hunting clues left behind, asking questions, that sort of thing. These crime scene investigators are different, they gather clues to examine under a microscope, check chemical compositions, beat heads of dummies to measure blood spatter patterns, throw things off roofs to measure trajectories. There's still some classic interrogation and pavement pounding, but this is more of a Sherlock Holmes approach to mystery, and all these years later has there ever been a better detective than Holmes? That’s not rhetorical. The correct answer is no.

 

A bunch of people standing around lab equipment sounds kind of boring if that’s all you know. "CSI" is anything but. This has a lot to do with strong characters and great acting. Grissom is the leader, but that's more because he's the top geek than because he's a good leader. He's a walking encyclopedia particularly when it comes to entomology. He's a whiz at practically simulating conditions and testing theories. Want to know how long it takes flesh to dissolve in the sewer? He's the one to figure it out. He's not great with people and often lets his managerial duties slide. He's in this because it gives him an outlet for his mind not because he has any aspirations of position. If he couldn't be a CSI he would be some other type of scientist.

 

Catherine is the next senior member. She’s a working single mother whose primary dedication is making a living. That’s not to say she isn’t loyal to the team, but she’s not likely to be doing this the rest of her life. Despite her experience she tends to make mistakes which holds her back. She’s plagued by the problems in her personal life due in large part to not enough time spent at home and seems lost on how to fix those issues. She’s vulnerable to the attention of men which doesn’t help either.

 

Warrick is one of the up and coming CSI’s. Strong in body and mind he has as much potential if not more than anyone to go far in this profession. The problem is he’s addicted to gambling which may destroy his career before it ever gets off the ground.

 

Nick is a lot like Warrick, a strapping young lad with a good brain in his noggin. He’s good and getting better at his job. He’s more emotional than Warrick and tends to lose it in dangerous situations.

 

Sara is newer to the team but has experience elsewhere. She’s smart but an emotional basket case. With demons that will not be explored for years yet, she is often a source of tension. She can often be seen gazing at Grissom and appears to have some jealousy for Catherine’s relationship with him despite it being nothing beyond professional.

 

Greg is the youngest staff member. He works the DNA lab but has aspirations to be a field agent (or will eventually). As good as he is in the lab, though, he’s too green for anything else. He’s always trying to impress the ladies but in a juvenile form and is easily intimidated by Grissom.

 

Dr. Robbins is the coroner. An older man who walks with a cane he is another scientific brainiac. He and Grissom are two peas in a pod often combining their immense collective knowledge on difficult cases.

 

Brass is the detective for the team. He seems to have it in for Warrick which belies an attitude that is most likely what causes him to have to hand leadership of the CSI team over to Grissom. While good at handling people, which saves Grissom’s butt at times, he knows he’s no mental match for the lab nerds.

 

The style of the sets in Vegas is more standard govt. building than the others. Miami is more open while New York has an older, Gothic style. Vegas is more like regular rooms in an average building. Since they do more practical recreations they don’t have as much of a need for extreme high tech. While this keeps the sets from having as much personality as the younger shows it feels more natural since the architecture is more common.

 

Vegas relies less on computer animated graphics since so many of their experiments are practical rather than virtual. It features flashbacks like the others and seems to rely more on these since it has less of the CG visualizations. The flashbacks are done differently as well. For example, while Miami tends to reveal what happened in the crime bit by bit as new information is collected, Las Vegas tends to visualize what the current theory would look like whether it’s what really happened or not (there are exceptions to that rule in both shows, but generally that is the approach they seem to take with it).

 

The show through and through is thoroughly enjoyable. Even after knowing what happens in an episode I like watching episodes again from time to time which makes having the TVD’s on hand quite nice.