Dear Jerry Bruckheimer,

I have to start this letter by saying that I love CSI, and both spinoffs. You won't meet anyone who can defend CSI like I can - it's one of these shows that I can easily defend as it is a really great show, which has changed TV history forever, and for the better. I've watched them since the beginning, and have even gone to the extent of going to university to study forensic science and criminal investigation to find out more about this field. It's clear that I love this show.

But, what is going on? Even an avid fan like myself just can't understand why some decisions have been made to try and improve ratings. CSI was a show that was so good, the storylines, the chemistry of the characters, the reputation - that it stood out from the rest because of it. CSI didn't rely upon big names to make it great. But now, I feel that CSI is selling itself out.

My first observation was after William Petersen left, and the greatest character in CSI history, Grissom, with him leaving...the decision was made to bring in Lawrence Fishburne. He is brought in as a new character and doesn't have any CSI qualifications, he is brought in to be a consultant...ok. But, to replace Grissom's screentime with Ray Langston was not a good move. It felt like Ray Langston was too forced into the show, so forced that there wasn't the chemistry there as there was with Grissom. William Petersen was on the show for 10 years, and had an irreplaceable chemistry with the original team. No matter how forced Fishburne was into the show, there is no way he could gain the same standing as Grissom had. It was a real disappointment how the audience had to watch Grissom leave, and be left with a character who just didn't fit. There wasn't enough of a transition period with both Ray and Grissom, had there been then Grissom leaving would have been seen as a sad, but you'd have a character you could fall back on. It's much like having your childhood dog die, and having another dog brought in the next day and being forced to love it. It's not going to happen...and there's no way you can love that second dog in the same way as the first. Grissom's shadow will always be in CSI, and it takes a certain type of character to overcome it, Langston cannot. Sorry.

This same thing has happened in CSI: New York - but there wasn't even a transition period. Stella Bonasera was a central character to the team. Stella was a boss when she needed to be, and a really good friend. She offered a shoulder to cry on, a listening ear, and great advice. She was the advocate between the team if there were any tensions. She was the person the team would go to before making decisions. She knew when people were acting differently and needed someone to talk to. She was the glue of the team. Mac is the boss, but Stella held the team together. She's been through loads with the team, and there was a real chemistry and history with every person on the team. Stella's last episode was at the end of season 6, and in the beginning of season 7, we discover (via a letter) that Stella has moved to New Orleans and the new character Jo Danville, played by Sela Ward, has come in to replace her. She comes in, tells a joke about 'BYOB: Bring your own body' - and that's it? That joke is all she says to replace the legend that was Stella Bonasera. I love Sela Ward as an actress, I think she's great. But again, sorry, as an avid CSI fan, I was disappointed with watching a character come in and expect the same chemistry. It's more than just having chemistry with the other actors on screen, but the chemistry has to be there with the audience too. It wasn't there for me. When Lindsay Monroe was brought in to replace Aiden Burn, it wasn't forced. She was shy, she didn't expect the audience to love her, but through the joking around on screen with Danny, the chemistry built up...and Lindsay is a brilliant character. The character was not forced, and didn't have much screen time to begin with...just enough for you to understand who she is, and a few chemistry building scenes. The problem with Jo Danville is that she came in, told a joke, and then suddenly everyone was her best friend. This is unrealistic, and again, didn't work for me.

The final point I'd like to make is using big stars to improve ratings. Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber. I love these singers, I've been to see Taylor Swift in concert, and at the time Justin Bieber was supporting her...now I love his music as much as hers. But. Why? Ok...Taylor Swift wasn't too bad as she was playing a confused teenage girl...and yes, she did do it well and I enjoyed the episode. However, why use Justin Bieber? Why? He was 16 when he filmed CSI, and we're meant to believe he's some sort of terrorist bomber? I can understand the point which would say that the least likely people would be terrorist bombers, that it could be anyone. But, this was an obvious use of getting the biggest name there is at the moment, and putting him as a central character for a couple of episodes. CSI could have used any young actor to play this role...and CSI has regularly used relatively unknown actors for roles and having that quality to it. CSI is good enough to hold its own without using big names. And in terms of using a big name, it will improve the rating for that episode, then will most likely come back down to its regular viewers.

Though, I was a regular viewer...but after all these changes and money making schemes, it has lost its quality, and I continue to watch old seasons of the TV series', and remember how great it used to be instead of watching something which is craving for more attention, and forgetting its original qualities for the sake of new watchers. It seems to be wanting more viewers, but forgetting about the viewers it already had. I'll stick to watching the older seasons, but bring Grissom and Stella back, and don't use random A-listers for the only fact to increase ratings, and it may bring me back to watching, as well as the other original fans who have stopped watching for the same reasons.

Yours,

Steph Parsons.