User reviews

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.

I've never been a fan of Arquette and now that she won an Oscar I'm sure the shows written post-Oscar will include even more of her unfortunately. I am a fan of Peter MacNichol however he won't be able to save it either. It seems they are trying too hard to "dumb down" the show by explaining each and every technical aspect. Using the tried and true formula of animation and music is pointless. Too bad they just can't allow CSI to end gracefully! I will continue to watch each show until I simply can't stand it but if you are wanting to get in to some great new series, this will only disappoint! My suggestion would be to go and watch the entire "The Wire" series or Kevin Spacey's early days in the "Wiseguy" series!

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 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.

This a deeply flawed TV show.

I am not a big fan of Bruckheimer's CSI franchise but I watched some episodes of NY, Miami, Vegas etc. for purely "informational" reasons. I mean to see what the forensic science can do nowadays. Many of these stuff seem highly unlikely to be true but you can swallow them with a pinch of salt.

In the latest member of the series CSI Cyber however, the lack of realism reached unbelievable heights and the show is a joke to follow even for mere entertainment.

Who ever writes this has absolutely no clue about how technology works and what is possible and what is not. Surprisingly enough that goes the other way too! Not only you see a constant overestimation of what technology or a hacker can do BUT you often get the exact opposite where the computers "geniuses" of FBI seem to ignore the simplest truths and possibilities that any kid with a mobile phone knows. I'm now watching episode 6 and the computer "experts" of FBI are amazed by the fact that it's possible to create ...fake SMS into your phones, something that a gazillion apps out there are doing in a split second.

The direction, effects, editing and music of the show is also an over-the-top version of the CSI series. Either you like it or not. The fact is that is difficult to have any emotions with such a fast-paced pseudo-modern presentation. You are not going to feel sorry for the victim, or pity, or sadness or joy. The acting is wooden. Even the most sentimental line is been delivered like from robots.

And there are more flaws. A long uninspired intro, a lame song and credits, a couple of background stories that no one seems to care about and of course the ...terrifying message in every episode " It can happen to you "!! As I wrote I'm now watching the 6th episode. If you hate it why you watch it? you might ask. Well...I'don't...not really. Somewhere I read that the 7th episode something about cyberbulling is good, so I'm watching till this. And, yes. Sometimes you want to see how much more ridiculous a show can be...

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.

My wife and I are barely computer literate but educable. (Several of my students are employed in IT.) I am emphatically not a Patricia Arquette fan. I neither like nor watch CSI in any of its variations. I do, however, believe in giving almost any new series a chance and so it was that my wife and I settled in to watch CSI: Cyber with no great high expectations. We now have seen the second episode and we have thoroughly enjoyed both episodes. The actors are charming and their interactions, interesting. In the midst of all the computer language we have Arquette as a gifted therapist with a background. Her observations and insights give a human centre to the geeky surroundings. Exciting, human, techy drama. We like it. Therefore it will probably be cancelled very soon.

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'm actually at a loss on where to begin with the terrible first episode I watched last night. At first I thought I'd just give it a chance, being the first episode and all, but it just went from low to brand new lows with every scene. Some of the main features you can expect from this series.

* pathetic stilted acting * unbelievable characters * illogical plot * terrible storyline * below par music and atmosphere * preposterous make believe computer science * illogical cyber jargon galore

Even the last scene had me verbally insulting the TV and wishing I'd watched Teletubbies with the kids instead, for it's superior content and production.

This is a new low point in the whole CSI series. I am actually amazed that they found the funding to produce this tripe. It isn't even so bad it's funny... it's just plain bad. 45 minutes of my life has been taken and left me with nothing but the urge to write this review. On the bright side the whole thing makes me feel a little better about myself, seeing others fail so miserably.

I do like this show, and Arquette is playing a very different character for her.

I like the tech, I like the cast which is coming together, and I like that the show is fun. I am not one who tears holes in shows. I go with the flow, and this show is entertaining. I have seen the first 3 episodes and I have enjoyed all 3.

I do see some people's points about the tech lingo, a lot of computer looking, and the action scenes not being the best. Yet. Every show starts somewhere and the cast and stories start to glue.

Arquette's character is smart, tough, and does have a sense of humor. She keeps things close to the vest for obvious reasons, and I am sure she will be having some kind of breakdown, etc. shortly. I want to learn more about this character.

Give it a chance people and just enjoy it.

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!

I enjoyed both seasons of 'CSI: Cyber.' I worked in programming, I know the sloppy mistakes that slip through the lack of security in a company - and I know that this is boring, boring, boring!

'CSI: Cyber' accomplished taking an intriguing area of crime, called Cyber Crime, and making it interesting by focusing on not only the crimes but the people who work in the field of cyber crime detection and the victims.

What is so surprising is that this series was inspired by the character of a true life worker fighting cyber crime. Dr. Mary Aiken is an Irish cyber psychologist who blends the field of behavioral psychology with detection of cyber crime. To me, she is not unlike, in her appearance, a somewhat youthful Patricia Arquette!

The infant abductions in the first episode are taken from the real life case of these in Houston. I vaguely remember that Aiken consulted on that case. I know she consulted on this series, and shared ideas for the plots. This stuff is serious.

As serious as it is, it is something you learn to appreciate. Then you just want to learn about it. A television show that gives you information? Makes it so much more palatable.

I have both seasons of the series. Now, my appetite is whetted, helped by my husband's constant warnings that our data can be hacked - until now, I have not paid him much attention. Now, I'm watching 'Outlaw Tech' which is about cyber crime but lacks all the plot and actors of 'CSI: Cyber.' It's more of a documentary type series. Fascinating. Every episode so far would make a fine series (not an episode, a series!) and it is tech, tech, and more tech!

This is a good show that potentially could be better, however what so many TV shows seems to lack is new faces. I suggest, from having watched most of his movies that you bring one of your previous CSI supporting cast Tino Struckmann with you on this new endeavor and give him a bigger part. we need new faces just like his. he can act and does not look like all the other boring actors and he have chops. I know most series casting or execs do not read reviews but as a fan and somebody in the industry I wanted to open the door for new talent deserving of your attention. A veteran who does his own stunts, knows hos to hold a gun, he started on E-ring and lead a bunch of Indie movies but it is time he gets a break. He became known for his book on women's safety and have his heart in the right place.

We have really enjoyed some of the CSI series. We still watch the Las Vegas episodes and look forward to them each week (when we can guess what night they are on). We also really enjoyed CSI NY and were sad when that series ended. CSI Miami was great, except we just couldn't deal with the mannerisms of David Caruso's character so we didn't watch it. Caruso was great in the first season of NYPD Blue. It looks like CSI Cyber might be another one we will take a pass on.

Seven minutes into the show when the first commercial hit I didn't like CSI Cyber. The basic concept is fine. I didn't get to know the characters but that could come with time. We know that most shows don't settle down into their stride for a few episodes, or for some even half a season. But it is the music and flashy graphic jumps that first turned us off. Frankly it was difficult to judge the acting quality because the episode was so chopped up none of them were on screen long enough. But what I could discern was mostly poor acting. I blame that on the director rather than the actors.

CSI Cyber isn't a serious crime scene investigation series. It's more like the fast action glitzy type of show. MY feeling is CBS gave it the CSI name to give it a boost but it is more likely to tarnish the name. The pace seems more like the recent Scorpion show which we are still giving a chance. I'm not sure we'll give CSI Cyber a chance.

If you like fast paced shows with lots of action and don't mind questionable crime investigation methods you may like this show. It makes wide use of hand held cameras, nothing is stationary, camera angles last about 4 to 5 seconds and even then the camera is moving. It's like the director gave instructions to the editing crew that if the camera view didn't change in 5 seconds or less they'd be fired. If you're not already schizophrenic you may be after watching this show.

Overall I blame the director for this mess. but I'm sure the style is already burned into the series. They are shooting for a much different audience than those who enjoy CSI Las Vegas.

I really like Patricia Arquette, however, I did think the first episode was pretty rough (writing and all around acting) but I have been watching every episode thereafter. But I feel they're getting better and better. I look fwd to each new episode as the 'family' grows. As not a very tech savvy kind of person, I do like learning about what's possibly out there. It's quite scary, the cyber world, & how everyday things we use, pass by, etc... can be our truest enemy. My child won't watch the show because it freaks her out. But I hope the show sticks around awhile. Ted Danson did offer some more character to the show but am excited to see where they go from here.