IMDb > "CSI: Miami" (2002) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
"CSI: Miami"
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditsepisode listepisodes castepisode ratings... by rating... by votes
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsmessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summaryplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
"CSI: Miami" More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 24:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 231 reviews in total 

113 out of 172 people found the following review useful:

After Four Years Of Watching, A Handful Of Observations

Author: ccthemovieman-1 from United States
11 December 2006

Well, by now I have watched four years of this show, along with five years of the first CSI and two years of CSI-New York....and I could say a lot but will try to condense my thoughts to just a handful of opinions, namely:

1 - This is the best-looking of the three CSI series on DVD. All of them look great on disc but the colors in here are the boldest and the most spectacular of any. Each episode is a tremendous visual treat.

2 - I know David Caruso is a controversial topic among CSI fans because of the way he delivers his lines, but I personally find it great. It's so outrageous it's fun. Sometimes I just laugh. Hey, it makes him different from William Petersen (CSI: Vegas) and Gary Sinise (CSI: NY). I may be in the minority but I enjoy Caruso's overly dramatic delivery.

3 - This series has gotten better and better. I had some doubts the first year. It didn't seem half as good as the Las Vegas show, but it has improved significantly and I now rate it higher than the original CSI.

4 - As a guy I appreciate all the beautiful Miami women in this show, and there are tons of them, but I also think the show is geared more toward the 20-something crowd which leaves me out, being considerably older than that. Too many of these "kids" are sleazy, too, but that's what leads to problems and crimes.

5 - All the supporting actors on the show are good, too, as they are in all the CSI shows. I was sorry to see Rory Cochrane ("Tim Speedle") quit and hope we don't lose any more of the "team."

Was the above review useful to you?

45 out of 55 people found the following review useful:

Horatio Caine and his crime-fighting sunglasses

Author: petra_ste
30 August 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The original CSI used to be fun, before we got love stories shoved down the viewers' throats and victims wearing raccoon costumes. Preposterous, but entertaining: a different cop show.

CSI Miami, on the other hand, has all the flaws of CSI Las Vegas - like a penchant for overly implausible situations - without the strengths - like interesting protagonists and gripping story lines.

Emily Procter, Adam Rodriguez and other secondary characters are flat. The best was by far Rory Cochrane as moody Speedle, gone too soon - after Kim Delaney's Megan, who was quickly (and thankfully) written off.

The core of the show is David Caruso, who gives an unspeakably terrible turn as smug Horatio Caine; Horatio shamelessly chews the scenery and is so pompous and obnoxious, one doesn't know whether to incredulously shake his head or laugh at the sheer absurdity of this performance.

In a ludicrous amount of scenes we have a majestic shot of Horatio silhouetted against the dawn (or dusk), self-satisfaction oozing from every molecule of his body, as he puts his sunglasses on (or takes them off) in slow-motion, with a stoic smirk and a triumphant background music: all he is missing is a cape billowing in the wind. It's so cheesy that, if the show had not been trying so hard to be grandiose, it could have passed for a form of self-parody.

If you want to give a try to a CSI series, go for the first seasons of Las Vegas.


Was the above review useful to you?

54 out of 74 people found the following review useful:

What I dislike most of it is ...

Author: moni from Sofia, Bulgaria
1 February 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

That this show is simply a show, something that is meant to entertain and not to make you think. This is done American way - as simple as possible, as impossible as possible, as predictable as possible, as easy to swallow as possible. Do not and I repeat DO NOT confuse it with the original series. This is crap to anyone with more than 2 brain cells of use. The scriptwriters must've been recruited from a primary school - we cannot otherwise explain the lack of originality and the whole world of errors that emerge in every single episode. Clues that appears as soon as they're needed, always stupid suspects that A) are awaiting for the cops to come and arrest them; or/and B) leaving crucial evidence of a crime in the crime scene so the mighty Horatio (which is loathsome mockery with the Shakespeare's immortal Hamlet) can interfere. He is always right, he is carrying his head always climbed right so he can look more intelligent, he is carrying gun with intention to use it in every possible moment, the feelings of fear are unknown to him. There are no such things as corrupt cops and always and I mean really always the suspect is found and captured at the end with absolutely the right decision. The suspect always confess at the end, showing every possible remorse a suspect can give, leaving nothing to the judges to prove just because of the wonderful Horatio's job done. The evil is punished and the children may now go to bed. An ideal world, isn't it? The reality - there are plenty of wrong convicted persons serving time s in prison for crimes they do not commit. Showing ideal world does not help the society as whole for wrong hopes can do more harm than just showing crimes.

I wouldn't be so critical if this hadn't been taken itself so seriously.

Something to avoid. Stick to the original series, at least they do have more accomplished writers.

Was the above review useful to you?

42 out of 52 people found the following review useful:

3 for the price of one

Author: soulassassinx from Sweden
19 November 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I guess this is, as much about exploitation of audience as it is about pleasing all corners of U.S. territory - So the next CSI would be shot on Hawaii or in Alaska. An more interesting take on the whole forensic/pathology/ballistics's, etc. idea would for instance to place it in the Victorian era in London or revolutionary France, where some of the greatest luxuries would be a ruler or a microscope; that to me would seem like a greater challenge.

There are three versions. I have chosen to review the Miami one since this land in the middle of the two others, although all three of them are equally naive and borderline stupid. If the reason is too present escapist, fastfood-like plots all three shows actually work quite well when you're home from work with a cold or suffer a hangover.

This is where all three shows fail on equal basis: 1. Forensic investigators do not run around with guns, turning the city they work in, into a Sam Peckinpah shoot out.

2. If any city would spend so much man power on every case, the city's economy would be ruined pretty quickly.

3. It would ad grit and realism if the CSI-teams failed every once in a while. When 15 minutes remain of every episode you pretty much loose interest if you haven't changed the channel already after the mandatory montage scene with electronica music pounding over the soundtrack while the investigators use q-tips and coloured liquids in different vials. Take Note: Laboratories don't look like post-modern night clubs as they do here.

4. If police employees would treat suspects/witnesses the way they do in all shows they would get no collaboration. If some muppet-officer would treat me the same way these teams treat people I would obstruct justice for the fun of it. They are so unlikeable (all the characters) you actually root for the bad guys to get away with the crime. They're all pretentious, rude, cold, unempathetic and unpleasant; had they been really persons they would never get into any academy unless they tried out for CCCP's KGB or Gestapo.

5. Why must every team leader pull this strained, cheesy one liner before every opening credit. If some prostitute is found sliced and diced in a hotel room the team leader always looks into the camera and says something like: "That was the last time she charged you an arm and a leg." No professional treats dead people with such disrespect, especially not after the victim suffered a violent death.

It's a kids show with over the top, tasteless violence and some really far-fetched stories.

Was the above review useful to you?

77 out of 127 people found the following review useful:

Change the name to CSI: Vogue

Author: Patrick from United States
8 November 2005

One person ruins this show: David Caruso. All he does is pose. They should make it into a drinking game. Every time he strikes a pose, take a shot. Of course, people have died from alcohol poisoning. This would only add to the statistics. All the other characters have depth. He just gets this look on his face and 'strikes a pose'. Watch him turn sideways and look over his shoulder. Wow!! OOOhhh, he figured out something. Time for him to take off his sunglasses. I challenge any of you to find an episode where he isn't positioned sideways looking over his shoulder and where he takes off his sunglasses. Quit posing and pretend like you know how to act!!!!

And, how come he has to figure everything out? The other shows let the other characters show some brains. How 'bout letting the other CSI Vogue characters have a little spotlight?

Was the above review useful to you?

99 out of 172 people found the following review useful:

Not as good as the original

Author: oddtoddnm from Albuquerque, NM
10 August 2004

CSI: Miami is a fun show to watch, like the original CSI:. But the chemistry in the original isn't quite there.

Grissom, in CSI:, is interesting, deep, and can easily be believed to be as smart as he is. But Horatio in CSI: Miami seems a bit more flat, and his bright moments seem cheesy and scripted.

Other characters don't seem to grow in CSI: Miami, while there's clear changes in their CSI: counterparts. Also, the side stories are more interesting in CSI: than in CSI: Miami.

So, while I'll watch CSI: Miami, it's not growing on me like how the original did.

Was the above review useful to you?

40 out of 63 people found the following review useful:

Best comedy on TV

Author: obiwan-27 from New England
24 October 2004

How has CSI: Miami not picked up an Emmy for best comedy? It has everything--hilarious dialog, slapstick hijinx (when Horatio grabs the perps by their shirt collars), trademark moves (sunglasses), a comforting formulaic plot, and a ditzy blonde foil in skimpy clothes. Not since THREE'S COMPANY have we seen such a successful blending of the basic elements of comedy.

The funniest part of CSI: Miami by far is David Caruso. This guy was born to play the comedic straight man. He has his delivery and mannerisms down so well that I laugh uncontrollably every time he utters a line or removes his sunglasses. In one recent episode he even got a "non-English-speaking" Romanian man to speak perfect English--hilariously, of course--simply by throwing him around a little. Kramer, step aside. Horatio Cane is the funnyman of the new millennium. Mark my words, soon "yadda yadda yadda" will be replaced by "Thiiiiiisss... looks like A... MUURRRder" in the lexicon of the American public.

Of course, every comedian needs a good supporting cast. Fortunately, Emily Procter (Chrissy) and Khandi[!!] Alexander (Janet) are more than up to the challenge of providing laughs week after week. Even their character names--Calleigh and Alexx--are designed to provoke chuckles and highlight the brilliant absurdity of their roles. Khandi Alexander deserves a special mention for keeping a straight face while she talks to the corpses she is dissecting. Now that's comedy. I expect her to drop a junior mint into one of their chest cavities anytime now.

I was saddened at "Speed"'s recent departure as he was such an essential part of the show (following Adam Rodriguez around with a prop box is a REALLY important duty). However, his replacement is nearly as useless, a lot cuter, and has far more potential for high comedy, so I'm not worried. Besides, Speed's final moments generated "master of my domain" levels of hilarity, so it was all worth it.

The only thing about this show that's serious is Adam Rodriguez, who is SERIOUSLY hot. I'd gladly watch a weekly one-hour drama called RODRIGUEZ WRITES HIS SHOPPING LIST. This needs to happen. And why not? I mean, if shows like SEVENTH HEAVEN are still on...

Was the above review useful to you?

80 out of 149 people found the following review useful:

Baywatch meets CSI

Author: chris_fodder from South Korea
28 July 2007

I was a big fan of the original series (Las Vegas). Sadly this show seems to be nothing more than beautiful actors and cinematography. I won't lie to you, the actors are hot, and the scenery is awesome. Thats why i gave it a whopping 2/10. Nothing else grabbed me though.

Weak plot lines and character interactions. This show takes a bold leap from reality. Characters are strutting around the art-deco police station in their designer cloths. The capers they solve have HUGE plot holes and are very formulaic. There's always a quick fix at the end of the show to wrap things up.

Mostly I was disappointed by the content (lack thereof).

It's eye candy.....nothing more.

Was the above review useful to you?

46 out of 82 people found the following review useful:

The Worst of the CSI:s

Author: sammryder from United States
4 May 2008

Now, I am a faithful watcher of all the CSIs and I have watched them for many years, and there are some fantastic things about the CSIs that I love and they're the reason that I'm hooked on this brilliant series's. But I cannot stress enough how much I cannot stand this show. I used to love my week, I mean, I got to watch three different episodes of CSI. But I was disappointed in Miami to begin with. The main reason being David Caruso, he cannot act. He is such a joy to make fun of though. But has anyone else noticed that these people only solve ONE crime an episode. The other ones solve only one crime an episode when it's like the miniature killer, or the beginning or end to a long story arc similar. This CSI just bothers me, sometimes they have good story lines, but others are just dreadful. I cannot believe that this actually one an Emmy. All of the other CSIs have a great cast that can carry the show, but this? It just can't compete.

Was the above review useful to you?

52 out of 96 people found the following review useful:

Entertaining show that presents itself more in Style than in Content

Author: Elson321 from United Kingdom
27 February 2005

CSI Miami is an entertaining show that really has picked up David Caruso's career up from the Ocean floor. He is very blessed, indeed, to be experiencing success as a lead actor on a famous show since his NYPD Blue days.

CSI Miami is more about style than content. Compared to CSI: Las Vegas, CSI Miami is inferior. However, after watching it from the very first episode, and until 2004, i was hooked. It did grow on me. It's darker story lines than CSI: LV, =sunny settings, a cast that gels together made it different in a good way to CSI:LV. Plus i loved the way Caruso's Caine knows wlel as his emotional attachment and sympathy to the victims of crime.

A major downer since 2004 has been Rory Cochrane's absence in the show. He was a great character who was cool looking and had smart one-liners. Without him the show is a tad bit more empty.

The show is currently waring off me, and I am starting to find CSI:NY much more appealing. I will continue to watch CSI: Miami but not expect as much from it as I did before.

My score (2007 onwards) = 3/5

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 24:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history