Customer Reviews

CSI: Demon House (New Format) (CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (IDW Numbered))

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

good graphic novel form of CSI, decent art... Loved it! They are just getting hard to find now!

First of all, I really like the CSI series, even though I'm a bit concerned about how many spin-offs they'll produce. When I first looked into the novels and graphic novels, I was quite eager, since so much of the things I like about the series are to be found there. Yet, as I went through most of these books, most of them by Collins, I found again and again certain mistakes in the conclusions. As in this one, and not to spoil too much, there are two cases - case A and B, two shoeprints, one in each case, one with red dirt in it, one that isn't described any further. The dirt - from case A - has no further use in that case, yet somehow, miraculously, later on in Case B it indicates the living place of the perpetrator wearing that boot. I repeat, evidence from one case ends up being evidence for the other case, which happened on the same general premises, but except for that the cases have no further connection to each other.


I checked and double checked the whole book, and the only times a shoeprint with red dirt is mentioned is when it is found and analyzed by the team working case A, and then, when all of a sudden someone from Team B talks about the red dirt they found in that shoeprint leading them to a suspect.

I liked reading the book, really, the drawings are awesome, especially Wood's, but when I find something like this and the conclusions - which is the best things about CSI anyway - just don't add up, it does ruin the whole experience for me. And unfortunately, I've found equally disturbing mistakes in two other novels, namely "CSI-Miami : Heat Wave" and "CSI-Miami : Florida Getaway", where in the first, the information about one DNA sample (the information being that the person in question was African-American) was somehow conveniently transferred to another unknown DNA sample, resulting in an essential connection. In the second, the same house of the same family gets described twice. Completely different.

I guess, it's possible that maybe I didn't understand everything right, or skipped these ultimately essential details. If that is so, and someone reads this and knows, please post something here and tell me. Otherwise, mistakes like that ruin the otherwise enjoyable reading experience

You will not be able to put this book down! It keeps you reading and then all of a sudden your finished in a day because it is really great.