Person of Interest
Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*
*Membership spots not really limited!
Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*
*Membership spots not really limited!
|
||
|
||
Actually it doesnt give any names. The machine/program spits out a social security number to them. But it doesnt say if the person that is connected to the social is a victim or the bad guy. Just that they are about to be involved in a crime of some sort. |
||
|
||
|
||
You know, this is a bit of a rip-off of an old Green Hornet episode. But there, the villain was the one programing the computer. | ||
|
||
|
||
I'd watch Michael Emerson in just about anything, though. Having said that, it's a bit of a shame that the proposed show with him and Terry O'Quinn as retired Black Ops guys never happened. |
||
|
||
|
||
It has some good potential to do overarching stories. |
||
|
||
|
||
Except, there are a couple problems with that, which they addressed. All information not pertaining directly to the war on terror is discarded before it can be processed into useful intel. Emerson's character can only retrieve SSNs without anyone noticing. |
||
|
||
|
||
You’re missing my point. My point is the machine’s nonrelevant date but still a crime list would seem to be more related to perpetrators than victims. “Let’s do this. We gotta get that motherfucker” is said in a text. We don’t know the victim But we sure know that this person is a perpetrator Now, the machine picks this up. It only tells him socials. But one would think, the info would be more likely coming re: a criminal than a victim. The criminals are doing the communicating. Not the victims. So the info being spit out would more likely be re: a perpetrator than a victim. The victim is buy text messaging “got ice cream today” , the perpetrator is texting about the crime. |
||
|
||
|
||
the biggest problem with the show is Caveziel. Imagine the show with someone with Jack bauer's charisma. Caveziel. eh. | ||
|
||
|
||
Yeah, I agree. |
||
|
||
|
||
And you're merely being argumentative. They've already addressed this in the show. The only info he can steal without getting noticed is SSNs. And the computer is not focused on analyzing intel it gains that is not directly related to the war on terror. And any info not related to the war on terror gets discarded. It would be nice if none of those things were true, because it would make Emerson's and Caviezel's job a lot easier. But those things are true, Rob. And they've already addressed them. |
||
|
||
|
||
But instead they just get a list of random social security numbers. A majority of them would still be the perps, but a lot would be the victims too. Statistically speaking though the computer would be able to identify the perp 100% of the time, and the victim less. So really it should have more perps than victims, but I doubt the show will go that route. |
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
The second episode was good, here's hoping the series keeps building in this direction and gives us more then just formula. | ||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
The character development of the two main made it work for me. Set an interesting tone. |
||
leave a comment with facebook
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Glacier16, Grayson, sdsichero and 28 guests
Advertisement |
---|
|