FBI True

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.

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.

After watching this all the stories missed key details that put the FBI in a bad light just so that they looked like they did the right thing. For the Ruby Ridge one they made it sound like all the FBI agents were all heroes. They totally skipped the part that they charges where are a setup by the same FBI agents just so that they could arrest the group. They failed to point out that Vickie Weaver was holding her 10 month old daughter and was not a threat when one of the FBI snipers shot her in the head. They said he son pointed a gun at him which when it went to court proved to be false.

For the Atlanta Olympic bombing they totally glossed over the fact that they the FBI ruined Richard Jewell's life because he was the security guard that found one of the bombs and reported it and was more than happy to give them any info he could about what happened that day. Instead of treating him like a witness they treated him as he was the one that actually did the bombing and ruin his life. This was never once brought up in this propaganda for the FBI that this show is.

And those are just two of the stories that I hit all. All the other ones are fully of the same propaganda and not the full stories of what actually happened. Simple historical research will prove all this.

These are old stories. The copyright on the films are 2012. I thought I had seen some of these shows before but was not sure. This is a rebranding of some shows that are over 10 years old. Most of these I had forgotten about but these guys dig them back up put in some new people but it's very old stores. They take two episodes to go over Waco. I haven't heard about Waco in forever but maybe some of the younger folks may not have seen these stories before. I think this is just paramount to create content for its streaming service paramount plus. But it's still interesting. I guess the fbi cannot discuss anything recent.

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.