"There are too many forensic shows on TV." -Gil Grissom, CSI
I just read jebbypal's short complaint about the repetative nature of network forensic/procedural dramas and, because I'm trying to update more even if I can't come up with anything insightful or brilliant or, let's face it, interesting, here's my reply to what Jebby said (sorry Jebby!).
I watch procedural crime shows religiously. I'm all about Without a Trace and Bones and Law and Order: SVU and CSI and CSI: New York (but not Miami, dear god. Never Miami). And I know, it's a sad waste of an evening. If you're at all able to recognize particular character archetypes, or plot lines, or even mystery-solving problems, well, most network procedurals will be fairly miserable viewing experiences for you.
Personally I'm awful about solving the crimes before the detectives/lawyers/Mounties do. Despite having watched thousands of hours of TV crime shows I can never put the clues together and the question of guilt or innocence always seems to come to a fairly random, if pat, conclusion. So I'm always surprised by how things turn out. And I find the characters interesting to watch: I'm always intrigued by the sort of personality it would take to be good at the sort of job I can't begin to tackle even from the vantagepoint of my couch and with the benefit of a straightforward narrative presentation of the evidence. I think any frustration and boredom with procedural dramas is a product of a high-functioning intellect, familiarity with science/forensic procedure, and the expectation for something more from a TV viewing experience. I tend to be satisfied with remarkably little, or far too much of the same thing.
I watch procedural crime shows religiously. I'm all about Without a Trace and Bones and Law and Order: SVU and CSI and CSI: New York (but not Miami, dear god. Never Miami). And I know, it's a sad waste of an evening. If you're at all able to recognize particular character archetypes, or plot lines, or even mystery-solving problems, well, most network procedurals will be fairly miserable viewing experiences for you.
Personally I'm awful about solving the crimes before the detectives/lawyers/Mounties do. Despite having watched thousands of hours of TV crime shows I can never put the clues together and the question of guilt or innocence always seems to come to a fairly random, if pat, conclusion. So I'm always surprised by how things turn out. And I find the characters interesting to watch: I'm always intrigued by the sort of personality it would take to be good at the sort of job I can't begin to tackle even from the vantagepoint of my couch and with the benefit of a straightforward narrative presentation of the evidence. I think any frustration and boredom with procedural dramas is a product of a high-functioning intellect, familiarity with science/forensic procedure, and the expectation for something more from a TV viewing experience. I tend to be satisfied with remarkably little, or far too much of the same thing.