Same! It gets more real with every rewatch (last year most recently for me).
It's kind of refreshing to watch a series from before the streaming/miniseries format was really a thing. It's too long to be a miniseries, but not long enough to drag, or be off-putting if you want to watch the whole thing.
If you haven't seen it and you're on the fence, watch it. It's worth it. (Or you'll know by Episode 3 if it's not for you.)
Rewatched a few times. Unfortunately, around the end seasons, it became predictable and “extended”. There are quite a few screens on their computer that were borrowed from unsuspecting sources — such as the screens from the App, DaisyDisk.
Not annoyed at all. I just finished re-watching Person of Interest about a week ago.
In the new AI DLSS version, Bear is an obedient German Shephard with a dense sable coat of golden tan and reddish brown with black-tipped hairs, darker shading along his neck and shoulders, a broad black muzzle and eye mask, dark upright ears, and a thick neck ruff.
But the first time I watched Person of Interest when it was originally broadcast in 2011, Bear was a cantankerous enormous orange Maine Coon with a long, shaggy ginger coat, darker marmalade tabby stripes, a pale cream chin and chest, a heavy neck ruff, tufted ears and paws, a broad square muzzle, and a luxuriant plumed tail.
I think the later DLSS version of Bear as a German Shephard was much better. The original real life Maine Coone version of Bear gave off strong Garfield vibes, and that just didn't fit into the plot as well as the new AI generataed DLSS German Shephard version.
It was flawless DLSS, that actually contributed to the coherence of the plot and overall believability. Walking a Maine Coone around the streets of New York on a leash and attacking criminals on command was just weird for a central character like Bear.
This. It sounds unlikely, but it's exactly like this. All the stuff that was supposed to be somewhat science fiction back then, now you just nod and say "makes perfect sense".
i just burned through it for the first time and had the same impression. i had brushed it off as a procedural (and it sort of starts that way) but it seems oddly LLM (or Palantir) prescient, with the quality of a Nolan / Abrams joint (use of Philip Glass in the last ep kinda kills me). and as a guilty pleasure i enjoyed the cameos, among others i can watch any scene with Lester Freamon or Marlo Stanfield
I watched it for the first time starting this year. And at some point you realize: wait this part was Sci-fi when the show came out and now we have it, but many use it to just alter a recipe or something
Yes, but if the first season is too much crime-procedural and you want to just get to the overarching story that develops quickly, there is a list of "skippable" episodes where nothing happens that will be referenced afterwards that was posted below another comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/PersonOfInterest/wiki/index/
I absolutely can't stand shows where the protagonist has to deal with their own self inflicted issues due to drugs. Maybe because I'm sheltered, or maybe it's a bigger issue in the US than where I live, but I just can't relate at all, and just get annoyed that it's used to add conflicts to a story where I just feels it sidetracks. Like, just get on with it.
As an aside, same with cheating in movies/series. While it's probably more common than I know it to be where I live, it possibly cannot be as ubiquitous as American medias (and social medias) make it out to be. Again, just an annoyance detracting from the story, and again can't relate. I had to quit "Making a Murderer" over it. At some point in season two or something, absolutely everyone in the main cast were involved in cheating. All the students, the teacher, a policeman, some lawyers. Like, what the hell.
Sorry about the rant. But I really really wanted to like Mr Robot. But having tried to get into it twice I'm a bit miffed.
It is arguably a very uninspired literary device to set up conflicts, but it is unfortunately not exactly unrealistic. Estimates are that more than a third of western society, probably closer to half, meet the DSM-5 criteria for substance use disorder at some point in their lives. Roughly a little less than a third will cheat on their partner during their lifetime, closer to half will have their partner cheat on them. These numbers are after a rough fact check courtesy of whatever Gemini model is in Google search, my own rough sense and knowledge of the literature is just that it's very common.
Uninspired as they might be as literary devices, drug abuse and cheating are common themes in actual human existence.
Not trying to normalize usage in anyway. I just wonder if a behavior is well represented in a society is it still a disorder?
The behavior while under the influence should get labeled but the usage might be normal. People being angry or not taking responsibility deserves a label from the DSM. If a large population is ingesting things this might be normal.
The DSM defines substance use disorder as (roughly) a problematic pattern of substance use that produces clinically significant impairment or distress, demonstrated by at least two of eleven diagnostic criteria within a twelve month period.
It’s not a question of how well represented it is, but the effects it has on the person’s life. Drinking coffee or alcohol or taking prescription medication every day doesn’t qualify as a disorder as long as there’s no negative impact.
Note also that GP said “at one point in their lives”, not that a third or half the world has a substance problem at any given time. A five cup a day coffee addict who quit and had headaches that negatively impacted their work life could qualify, so it’s not all hard drug use either (mostly binge drinking iirc).
> As an aside, same with cheating in movies/series
As an aside from an aside, I find very interesting how every couple of main characters in movies has couple problems (cheating, lost of interest, one of them don't want to engage the other, etc). Taking a look at my list of recently watched movies (including very diverse ones, like Godfather, KPop Demon Hunters, Whiplash, Sunset Boulevard, Up, etc) and I cant't find a single one that we don't question whether the couple will stay together...
Actually, the only two exceptions that I remember are Marty/Jennifer from Back to the Future and Ferris/Sloane from Ferris Bueller's Day Off...
Spoiler: it's not drugs, you have to watch it till the end, and I mean it, really until the final season. I can't say much more than this without spoiling the very heart of the show.
In the final season, Mr. Robot does some fairly ambitious episodes. One of them is a continuous tracking shot (or made to appear as one) that goes through the entire episode. Another one has no spoken dialogue for the majority of the episode. A very well-written show. And yes, you really do need to see it all the way through.
Hehe, it kind of reminds me of an extreme (classic) Law and Order in that regard, but for hacking/tech.
Wildly unrealistic facts and how people are, like the janitor who finds eight bodies in a cellar talking to the cops like it happens everyday, but also gets nearly every tiny bit of New York law technically correct.
I enjoyed this show a lot and I was looking forward to westworld as a continuation of the story - I wanted to see what Nolan would do with the story when the AIs are corporeal, but ultimately westworld was a disappointment, spending too much of the story in the fantasy world.
Just your last clause was a weird one, if you do watch all four seasons. This is a tiny bit of a spoiler, but the problem was closely related to what you say. They didn't spend much time AT all in the "transition" to an AI infested world, but instead, well, skipped A LOT.
Incredibly prescient show, I loved it at the time and it's definitely worthy of a rewatch soon.
> I also find it pretty crazy and, frankly, a little sad to think that something like the Machine, which seemed like pure science fiction at the time, isn't all that far from our reality today.
Yeah. "You are being watched. The govt. has a secret system - a machine - that spies on you every hour of every day". The opening words from the show's title sequence - Jumped straight to mind after the revelations of Microsoft building "a machine" for the IDF on Azure not so long ago.
This show is the epitome of “you have to watch a few seasons before it gets good”. (Which if you think about it is an absurd thing to tell someone. Ie Invest 24 hours of your time into this show before you decide)
When I watched it I thought the privacy model the AI used was dumb but it kind of makes some sense.
It starts as a case-of-the-week type of show with a bit of AI backstory before it changes in the later season to a more overarching plot. I think this is one of the reasons it became so good, because it eased you in.
Jim Caviezel> I don't even just vote for Trump. I love the man!
I bet he hopes Trump transactionally admires his big beautiful powerful pile of muscle ass in return. May they both find true love in their mutual Gay Dementia.
Also, Bear deserves credit as being one of the main characters who holds it together.
I am more interested in how the philosophy of the show, how the ethics tie into real world implications.
We talk about open source licenses in a grand manner which some might say " why does it matter" but this show shows how the philosophical decisions tie into overall ideas and what it can do.
Person of Interest is a relentlessly silly show, although you wouldn't necessarily pick up on it at first. It leans into it more with each season until that's all there is. I still enjoyed it, it is pretty self aware. I would not watch it with the idea that it has any relevance to anything.
Pleasantly surprised to see this here. One of the most memorable shows that I watched ages ago. It was strong at the beginning but kind of dragged on in later seasons. Still very nice to binge.
In case you’re looking for some more shows related to AI, Cupertino by Robert King and Michelle King is currently airing and is pretty entertaining.
I enjoyed it for a bit but it was once of those shows that just didn't grab me after a while. But, then, I'm like that with a lot of shows and don't really binge watch. The few times I've bought a full series which I enjoyed on DVD, I've found that I watch it some and then drift away.
It did start to drag on but I still enjoyed it even though I was only able to watch it via Amazon's FreeVee with all their weird commercials. I watched it just to see root [1].
The primary science fiction quality of the show is that something like that could have been done as early as it was said to have been. At the time, that part of it seemed almost completely impossible. With subsequent developments, it now only seems implausible. Wild.
I really liked this show. Ultimately it was very formulaic and could have done a lot more with the concepts it revealed. It painted a future where ai (along with total surveillance) could benefit people in deeply meaningful ways; matchmaker, fulfilling work and daily task, coordination, purpose and guidance. And the dangers of all those used for control.
163 comments
[ 6.3 ms ] story [ 97.3 ms ] threadAlso, with all AI developments happening since past few years, the show has started to feel like a documentary.
Did you know Domain Awareness is an American company?
It's kind of refreshing to watch a series from before the streaming/miniseries format was really a thing. It's too long to be a miniseries, but not long enough to drag, or be off-putting if you want to watch the whole thing.
If you haven't seen it and you're on the fence, watch it. It's worth it. (Or you'll know by Episode 3 if it's not for you.)
https://x.com/brajeshwar/status/1733390176112800037
In the new AI DLSS version, Bear is an obedient German Shephard with a dense sable coat of golden tan and reddish brown with black-tipped hairs, darker shading along his neck and shoulders, a broad black muzzle and eye mask, dark upright ears, and a thick neck ruff.
But the first time I watched Person of Interest when it was originally broadcast in 2011, Bear was a cantankerous enormous orange Maine Coon with a long, shaggy ginger coat, darker marmalade tabby stripes, a pale cream chin and chest, a heavy neck ruff, tufted ears and paws, a broad square muzzle, and a luxuriant plumed tail.
I think the later DLSS version of Bear as a German Shephard was much better. The original real life Maine Coone version of Bear gave off strong Garfield vibes, and that just didn't fit into the plot as well as the new AI generataed DLSS German Shephard version.
It was flawless DLSS, that actually contributed to the coherence of the plot and overall believability. Walking a Maine Coone around the streets of New York on a leash and attacking criminals on command was just weird for a central character like Bear.
Maybe some people like these alterations, but others of us would prefer to have the option of the original work.
I'm glad I was able to find this show unaltered on internet archive before it was presumably yanked.
Second only to Justified on my list of “consistently brilliant across entire run”.
There are parts of PoI that stick with you long after the show.
Not saying which because spoilers, it’s one of those shows that is better for knowing little about it before watching.
It'll be eerily more relatable now. This show was way ahead of it's time, and damn accurate.
It's not really about hacking, but it depicted technology and hacking in an extraordinarily level of correctness.
As an aside, same with cheating in movies/series. While it's probably more common than I know it to be where I live, it possibly cannot be as ubiquitous as American medias (and social medias) make it out to be. Again, just an annoyance detracting from the story, and again can't relate. I had to quit "Making a Murderer" over it. At some point in season two or something, absolutely everyone in the main cast were involved in cheating. All the students, the teacher, a policeman, some lawyers. Like, what the hell.
Sorry about the rant. But I really really wanted to like Mr Robot. But having tried to get into it twice I'm a bit miffed.
Uninspired as they might be as literary devices, drug abuse and cheating are common themes in actual human existence.
The behavior while under the influence should get labeled but the usage might be normal. People being angry or not taking responsibility deserves a label from the DSM. If a large population is ingesting things this might be normal.
It’s not a question of how well represented it is, but the effects it has on the person’s life. Drinking coffee or alcohol or taking prescription medication every day doesn’t qualify as a disorder as long as there’s no negative impact.
Note also that GP said “at one point in their lives”, not that a third or half the world has a substance problem at any given time. A five cup a day coffee addict who quit and had headaches that negatively impacted their work life could qualify, so it’s not all hard drug use either (mostly binge drinking iirc).
As an aside from an aside, I find very interesting how every couple of main characters in movies has couple problems (cheating, lost of interest, one of them don't want to engage the other, etc). Taking a look at my list of recently watched movies (including very diverse ones, like Godfather, KPop Demon Hunters, Whiplash, Sunset Boulevard, Up, etc) and I cant't find a single one that we don't question whether the couple will stay together...
Actually, the only two exceptions that I remember are Marty/Jennifer from Back to the Future and Ferris/Sloane from Ferris Bueller's Day Off...
Wildly unrealistic facts and how people are, like the janitor who finds eight bodies in a cellar talking to the cops like it happens everyday, but also gets nearly every tiny bit of New York law technically correct.
Nightmares.
Just your last clause was a weird one, if you do watch all four seasons. This is a tiny bit of a spoiler, but the problem was closely related to what you say. They didn't spend much time AT all in the "transition" to an AI infested world, but instead, well, skipped A LOT.
> I also find it pretty crazy and, frankly, a little sad to think that something like the Machine, which seemed like pure science fiction at the time, isn't all that far from our reality today.
Yeah. "You are being watched. The govt. has a secret system - a machine - that spies on you every hour of every day". The opening words from the show's title sequence - Jumped straight to mind after the revelations of Microsoft building "a machine" for the IDF on Azure not so long ago.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/06/microsoft-isra...
I still remember the weird shock I felt the first time I saw “kys” as a reply and looked it up. Something changed that day. Wasn’t even to me.
When I watched it I thought the privacy model the AI used was dumb but it kind of makes some sense.
One of my most fav TV Serials to have come out of the West.
And of course Elias
Indeed she was!
Jim Caviezel> I don't even just vote for Trump. I love the man!
I bet he hopes Trump transactionally admires his big beautiful powerful pile of muscle ass in return. May they both find true love in their mutual Gay Dementia.
Also, Bear deserves credit as being one of the main characters who holds it together.
The underground subway lair was pure Batman.
If there is a show that I can rewatch, it's this.
I am more interested in how the philosophy of the show, how the ethics tie into real world implications.
We talk about open source licenses in a grand manner which some might say " why does it matter" but this show shows how the philosophical decisions tie into overall ideas and what it can do.
I feel like I'm being A/B tested by a broken AI.
Im feeing the premis of this show is not so far off..
In case you’re looking for some more shows related to AI, Cupertino by Robert King and Michelle King is currently airing and is pretty entertaining.
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN1sGIqdSUA