Person of Interest
Person of Interest
TV-14 | 22 September 2011 (USA)
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • Reviews

    Excellent but underrated film

    ... View More

    It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

    ... View More

    To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

    ... View More

    At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

    ... View More

    I've laughed, (Leon and Bear cracks me up) cried and I have missed this show so much. The Noland's are Geniuses. This show is not to be missed. A perfect Binge Show. Jim Caviezel, Sarah Shahi, Amy Acker, Kevin Chapman, and Michael Emerson are brilliant in this show. Taraji P. Emerson...I miss her so much. A strong, intelligent and amazing character.

    ... View More

    I have created the imdb account to post the review for this series. It was very cleverly made plot and Im addicted to in watching the series. and some of the series you wont guess what is going to happen also some of the series has best twist ending. Every programmer has to see this series in which how artificial intelligence has been used. Finally it is a masterpiece.

    ... View More

    Person of Interest is one of the most underrated tv series of all time. Little sroties are as good as the main story. Saving people and character's (John's, Harold's etc) background stories are good as well. Main story is placed in a very good and attractive way. I don't know why this serie gets 8.5 point.

    ... View More
    Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

    This series is extremely difficult to analyze because it is so unreal that it sounds untrue though we know it is particularly true, with a few mistakes.The first mistake is that it is the government that has devised a way of taking control of everyone and every possible misdemeanor or crime, terrorist or not. It is private businesses, big private corporations plus some public services that have taken control of all communication between and among people. [. . .]The second mistake is that terrorist acts and attacks are not interesting as such to anyone, but people in power, particularly politicians, need these terrorist attacks to consolidate their security discourse that take control of the minds of people. At the same time, it enables the state to have strong security and investigating or intelligence services to prevent these terrorist attacks and thus to increase their prestige in society. Politicians are thus divided between an official public discourse about controlling terrorism and at the same time the need of such attacks or at least projects of attacks that could be thwarted to justify their power. This is rather clearly said here and there in a fuzzy way, centered on a female Secretary of Defense and a male Senator responsible for some security committee in the Senate, who are at least not very clear about their interest and are totally blind, deaf and oblivious of the interests of the people. The third element that is underscored is the role of social networks that are in no way social but are in all possible ways blinding and manipulative. And that's where the load carried by the camel brings the camel down. These networks, within the net neutrality approach, are preaching the absolute freedom of expression stated by the first amendment of the US constitution. It is today, in 2017, and next year, in 2018, that the Senate, hence the government is requiring all big firms, companies and businesses dealing with social networks to "control" fake news and other manipulative free expression. The government is asking, requesting, demanding on the side of some Senators a full and effective censorship, that can only be implemented by a program that will ban all discourses that would contain some words like S** or F*** or S***. Not to speak of course of words like racism, communism, socialism, anarchism, race, black (why not, but of course not and never white), supremacy, segregation, discrimination, and many others. This is absurd since sentences like "it is important to segregate nuclear molecules from non-nuclear molecules" could be banned the same way as "segregation between r***s brings violence down." This US federal government is asking for what is practiced in China and many other countries, what is the law in France and other European countries where it is forbidden to establish any ethnic statistics since these are considered as racist and racism is a crime, banned as such in all public expression, meaning any expression in front of a third person who may report it: it could be your husband, or your children. We are not in science fiction. In France such facts are real and common. Any member of any family is supposed to do what any citizen is supposed to do: report something considered as criminal by the law: a son can come to the police and say "My father, said yesterday all b****s are dark in their intentions and criminals by definition." This is obviously racist and the son is accepted even as a witness in a French court against a real crime that could follow such a private declaration in the family home. The Senate of the US is totally misled. Against fake news there is only one weapon: the truth but the truth is not always very fascinating, or agreeable, or simply flattering, I mean it does not flatter the basest instincts of man and women, of children too. This series goes a lot that way but opposes a "machine" that is under the control of the state - but is it really? - to a "samaritan" that is under the control of some ambitious fascist people from private corporations. That is not what menaces our countries, nor by the way the alleged manipulation the "Russians" would have done in the US during the latest presidential campaign. What is at stake is that a campaign for the "control" of social networks comes today from the state and first of all from the Senate. They are trying to impose onto private corporations and the Internet the control - and we mean censorship - of free expression on their platforms. The series is extremely interesting because of the great imagination it demonstrates. This imagination is probably a little bit trite and you will recognize many elements that have already been used in many other novels, short stories, films or series. It is what I could call composite imagination, but it is packed with action, violence, crimes, vicious and sordid perverts, though any sex is practically never shown. As an entertainment from 12 years of age onward, this series is good. As a work of the mind, a creative work of human imagination it is good though not that phenomenally creative. Too many special effects and not enough human depth. But the super bad ones hiding on the ninth (apocalyptic) floor of a mental institution is really a good idea: to desire becoming the next shadow and invisible Hitler you have to be deranged and you have to live in a permanent mental institution with no furlough or leave. At the end of the fourth season, the cleaning up of Augeas' stables is practically finished and suspense is suspended. It is only a few more episode to clean up the pigsty of the American political system based on corruption, authoritarianism and even soft everyday dictatorship.Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU

    ... View More
    Similar Movies to Person of Interest