Un étudiant en mathématiques de troisième cycle découvre que l'on tente de détruire son travail de recherche d'un modèle de nombres premiers qui lui permettrait d'accéder à tous les ordinate... Tout lireUn étudiant en mathématiques de troisième cycle découvre que l'on tente de détruire son travail de recherche d'un modèle de nombres premiers qui lui permettrait d'accéder à tous les ordinateurs du monde.Un étudiant en mathématiques de troisième cycle découvre que l'on tente de détruire son travail de recherche d'un modèle de nombres premiers qui lui permettrait d'accéder à tous les ordinateurs du monde.
Parcourir les épisodes
Résumé
Reviewers say 'Prime Target' presents a fascinating yet uneven mix of mathematical themes and global intrigue. Praised for its innovative premise and strong performances, it delves into human obsession, technology, and morality. However, some find the pacing slow and the plot unrealistic, with inconsistent writing. Acting reviews are mixed, and its complex themes may alienate some viewers. Overall, it’s an ambitious series with a divided reception.
Avis à la une
When I watched the trailer for Prime Target, I thought to myself, "This feels a bit like The Da Vinci Code"-a mix of mystery, some ancient history, and the classic chase of bad guys after the good ones. It had all the ingredients for an engaging thriller. After watching three episodes, I have to admit the storyline is actually quite decent, with potential to be gripping. The problem, however, lies in the execution. It just feels flat. The pacing lacks intensity, the characters don't have much depth, and the suspense doesn't quite land. It's watchable, but it misses that spark to make it truly captivating.
Regarding the actors: Quintessa really struggles there. She should not have been casted as a main character. As a secondary, where she would not be as much exposed, would be fine, but the lack of sublime acting skills, does not do any good to the story.
Overall, good watch if you do not expect too much. If it was a Netflix series, yeah, but it doesn't meet the standards of Apple TV Plus.
Regarding the actors: Quintessa really struggles there. She should not have been casted as a main character. As a secondary, where she would not be as much exposed, would be fine, but the lack of sublime acting skills, does not do any good to the story.
Overall, good watch if you do not expect too much. If it was a Netflix series, yeah, but it doesn't meet the standards of Apple TV Plus.
The basic idea is great: the notion that a gov't might kill to keep a possible math shortcut, that would instantly render useless modern cryptography, from being discovered isn't totally ridiculous.
Though I'm sufficiently interested to finish the series, what sank this for me, as already mentioned by others, are things such as the "check-list" attributes assigned to characters and thus the selected actors. Consequently, I found the casting was hit and miss. That may have also been a result of the direction. E.g. In episode 5, particularly, one veteran actor may well have been given direction to "imagine Matthew Goode in the role and act like him".
And the script wasn't great.
6/10 means interesting enough to watch it through but prioritize other, much better, viewing options.
Though I'm sufficiently interested to finish the series, what sank this for me, as already mentioned by others, are things such as the "check-list" attributes assigned to characters and thus the selected actors. Consequently, I found the casting was hit and miss. That may have also been a result of the direction. E.g. In episode 5, particularly, one veteran actor may well have been given direction to "imagine Matthew Goode in the role and act like him".
And the script wasn't great.
6/10 means interesting enough to watch it through but prioritize other, much better, viewing options.
It's not quite clear who the audience is for this series. Is it trying to appeal to people wanting to engage with intriguing scientific theories? Or is it trying to appeal to Gen Z feeling misunderstood for their genius?
On the one hand teasing intriguing questions on the nature of science and mathematics. And how archaeology may unearth interesting new theories.
And then, a supposed math genius who in the Cambridge library system searches for "prime numbers"... And then doesn't find anything in the library catalogue about prime numbers because it's been deleted.
I mean... it isn't consistent to its own universe. And that is very disrupting.
On the one hand teasing intriguing questions on the nature of science and mathematics. And how archaeology may unearth interesting new theories.
And then, a supposed math genius who in the Cambridge library system searches for "prime numbers"... And then doesn't find anything in the library catalogue about prime numbers because it's been deleted.
I mean... it isn't consistent to its own universe. And that is very disrupting.
Just 3 episodes in the viewer senses that the number of people out to murder the protagonists is uncountable. Starting with a belief that a unique prime number generator exists the argument postulates prime numbers used in cryptography are not random. If that is true then the financial foundation of the economy would be on shaky ground. Even without a degree in math that is hard to swallow. Everyone knows there is always a bigger number than any number you can think of. Just add 1. In a nutshell the movie is about 2 very pretty people evading the hoard after them while knowing the danger will never end.
Somewhat slow, everything is explained to the viewer at every stage so carry on with playboy or as background, you won't miss anything that won't be explained later. For example if the character uses an Apple computer then they're on the good side. If they don't, then..., we'll you get the point. It's an Apple+ (not sure what the+bestowes) production therefore anyone on planet earth who does not use products is defacto bad or misled. So much of this shallow drama is superficial and misleading it beggers belief. Time for a reality check, especially if you have to pay for this simplistic drivel. It gets 5* from me because the subscription is free!
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesEdward Brooks is shown to be left-handed. A study by C.P. Benbow in 1986 found the frequency of left-handedness among exceptionally gifted mathematics students was significantly higher than in the general population.
- GaffesToutes les informations contiennent des spoilers
- ConnexionsReferenced in kuji: Artur Chaparyan: Jokes are Not Needed (2025)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant