The team searches for a lost shipment of high-caliber firearms when one of the weapons is responsible for random killings throughout the city. Also, Charlie and Amita disagree on a wedding d... Read allThe team searches for a lost shipment of high-caliber firearms when one of the weapons is responsible for random killings throughout the city. Also, Charlie and Amita disagree on a wedding date while Don re-evaluates his relationship with Robin.The team searches for a lost shipment of high-caliber firearms when one of the weapons is responsible for random killings throughout the city. Also, Charlie and Amita disagree on a wedding date while Don re-evaluates his relationship with Robin.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Photos
Kieron Elliott
- Gino
- (uncredited)
Hans Marrero
- Thug #2
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
While it was interesting, there are so many events that just don't wash. Those weapons are so powerful, they can pierce several layers of steel, but they can't seem to hit an FBI agent. The gun purchaser/seller has a moral compass. Really? There's the nerd guy who takes one look at a gun and immediately tells it won't work. But there are lots of shootouts. Lots of carnage. So I guess for the average viewer it satisfied them and still made them think that things always turn out just fine.
I find that I have issues with all other reviewers at this time (Apr 2022)
Overall, I thought the main story here gave us an exciting and very watchable episode. Additionally, the episode developed the relationships between Charlie and Amita, and particularly between Don and Robin.
I'm afraid that sandcrab277's opinions I dismiss out of hand. Their reviews from the start of the series (and other series!) are so universally negative that I cannot understand why they continue watching. - if they have such a dislike of the series they should stop watching, and spare all those who like the series their venom.
But I respect the reviews by Hitchcoc, and here I find I have, unusually, a few divergences from their opinion. My first disagreement is in their assessment of the firepower/accuracy of weapons. The fact that a weapon can pierce several layers of steel has nothing to do with their accuracy. They can pierce several layers of steel: that is the result of the energy and construction of the projectile. That is why, in the script, a bullet was able to penetrate the wall (clapboard + drywall) of an American house. The same bullet would have had greater difficulty going through the stone or brick wall of a British, French or German house. Hmm... At the same time the shooter's failure to hit an FBI agent may have been due to their inability to aim accurately, or it may have been due to their intention not to injure any agent, but rather only to shoot out the tyres of their vehicle to prevent pursuit. I don't find it strange that "the geek" could see that the weapon design was flawed - he actually explained that quite clearly in the script. From his reading of the specifications and dimensional drawings, and his knowledge of the behaviour of metals he could tell that the walls of the chamber were too thin. Lastly, unfortunately Hitchcoc has hit upon one of my bugbears - the misuse of "moral compass". Where and when I was brought up, it did not have the meaning of a pointing device, but rather the alternative meaning of "compass" as a range, scope or extent (also used to describe (e.g.) understanding and musical range. So someone with a narrow moral compass would be very upright (or hidebound!) while someone with a wide moral compass would be accepting of a great range of behaviours in themselves and others (or maybe just a bit immoral!).
I'm afraid that sandcrab277's opinions I dismiss out of hand. Their reviews from the start of the series (and other series!) are so universally negative that I cannot understand why they continue watching. - if they have such a dislike of the series they should stop watching, and spare all those who like the series their venom.
But I respect the reviews by Hitchcoc, and here I find I have, unusually, a few divergences from their opinion. My first disagreement is in their assessment of the firepower/accuracy of weapons. The fact that a weapon can pierce several layers of steel has nothing to do with their accuracy. They can pierce several layers of steel: that is the result of the energy and construction of the projectile. That is why, in the script, a bullet was able to penetrate the wall (clapboard + drywall) of an American house. The same bullet would have had greater difficulty going through the stone or brick wall of a British, French or German house. Hmm... At the same time the shooter's failure to hit an FBI agent may have been due to their inability to aim accurately, or it may have been due to their intention not to injure any agent, but rather only to shoot out the tyres of their vehicle to prevent pursuit. I don't find it strange that "the geek" could see that the weapon design was flawed - he actually explained that quite clearly in the script. From his reading of the specifications and dimensional drawings, and his knowledge of the behaviour of metals he could tell that the walls of the chamber were too thin. Lastly, unfortunately Hitchcoc has hit upon one of my bugbears - the misuse of "moral compass". Where and when I was brought up, it did not have the meaning of a pointing device, but rather the alternative meaning of "compass" as a range, scope or extent (also used to describe (e.g.) understanding and musical range. So someone with a narrow moral compass would be very upright (or hidebound!) while someone with a wide moral compass would be accepting of a great range of behaviours in themselves and others (or maybe just a bit immoral!).
Neither of the eppes brothers know how to please their women ... the alleged urgency to solve crimes using algorithms takes precedence over using common sense to solve problems ... the writers of this series have never been able to find suitable love interests ... get it together
Did you know
- GoofsIn fact, guns do not work that way. Fictional BNT-35 automatic rifle is presented as one of a kind high-caliber weapon that somehow uses cartridges, that have no markings and are absolutely unknown to experts. There is a reason why most automatic rifles and machine guns have a cyclic rate of fire of about 600-800 rounds per minute (to ensure the balance between controllability, volume of fire and ammo consumption). Nobody will design a military rifle with the rate of fire of an anti-aircraft gun. However, the real .308 Winchester battle rifle would do much similar damage. It is used by the military.
- Crazy credits[This appears on the beginning of the episode] 28 global armed conflicts 43 military governments 600 million automatic weapons 1,100 rounds per minute
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content