FBI True

I realize my opinion is based on a weirdly technical thing, but it seems amateur or overlooked, to me. The interviews with FBI agents look washed out, like they were shot using low-contrast-a common method to leave room for later color grading-but they didn't color grade that footage.

The actual content of the show is good and entertaining. It's pretty cool to get the stories from the agents who were on scene. I do wish the show had episodes that would critique other drama shows and how they depict the FBI. Maybe that would be something for some other show entirely.

I'm really not sure if this show is even connected to the other FBI series by Dick Wolf.

This show shares a very shallow retelling of famous FBI cases. It would have been much more interesting and compelling to dive deeper into these cases from the perspective of the investigating FBI agents. A huge opportunity was missed here. We really don't find out anything about the agents other than a ten second bio line in an early 2000's Dateline-like interview structure which feels very manufactured and superficial. I already knew the majority of the details covered in these cases already. Any other viewer could find out more about these cases by reading a few Wikipedia pages. Again, this could've been such an impactful series. I'm pretty disappointed.

As much as I try to watch this series, I become frustrated with how the stories are shared. The first setback for me involves the hubris attitude that surfaces when the agents share the information. Most of the dominate speakers seem to seek recognition for fulfilling the very job they are hired and trained to do, so that prideful arrogance really isn't necessary.

Another obvious fact is the homogeneous culture that the bureau employs or prefers to interview. Those who share seem to reflect one who boast of their experiences as if theirs is paramount in professionalism. Again, an FBI agent is hired and trained to deal with terror threats and terror suspects; boasting about it seems a bit embarrassing. Some episodes do convey a retelling of a popular case. But for some reason, many of the episodes I have watched caused me to grow weary of the arrogance that comes across very strongly.

And lastly, if there are two or three agents involved in the retelling of the case, PLEASE LET THEM ALL SHARE THEIR EXPERIENCE!!! Gosh!!! I just stopped "Part 1" of season three's episode one. In that episode, ONE GUY WILL NOT STOP TALKING!!! Why have three guest if only one dominates the entire retelling of the event??? We are ONLY hearing HIS EXPERIENCE. That is ONE SIDED!

So, PLEASE, make adjustments to this interesting series. A few adjustments might make it more enjoyable. But remember, not all people like hearing barroom stories, some of us don't drink alcohol when watching this show. That means we are not under any alcoholic influence to tolerate the long winded speaker. So, the setting of this show could also benefit from a new setting.

I find the show interesting because the perspectives of the agents are intriguing and well told. They seem to choose good cases. That are relevant and interesting. My question is why is it set in a bar? It seems like a poor choice of background and seems distracting that they are drinking beer. Unfortunately it makes Kristy Kotits look like an alcoholic. Maybe it's poor lighting, but she looks kind of rough in the show and a little buzzed. It takes away from the credibility of such an intense and trusted position that they have held. I get that a lot of agents drink after work and maybe it's set so that it feels like they are unwinding together after work, but to me it takes away from the incredible work that these folks have done.

A whole lot of justifying to exonerate oversteps of the law. The branch davidvian story still sets wrong with alot of America , a shady search warrant, leads to stand off and eventual mass killing because Government would not change there narrative. This was one of the first nationwide, televised by the media day by day that captured the publics sympathy. IT made a lot of us look at what is sacred, are our homes s!fe from Government control. Are we nothing, do we have no real rights? Can the government produce a warrent on suspicion without real proof, burst into your house on hearsay? No in retrospect Janet Reno and company fouled up with no admission of wrong and it is further justified by these characters with there self pity.