Yes, it's Amy Acker's character.

Root from Person of Interest. A transcendence seeking reformed hacker/assassin, worshiping and become the avatar of an (female) AI god.

Dear Av Club. Where the hell is the Person of Interest review?

Speaking of PoI, I wonder if it's going to get an article about it for shows that reach 100 episodes. I can't recall what the section is called, but it would be nice for it to get one of those as it's ending.

Many people are drunks without resorting to violence. I feel sometimes it's a cop-out to responsibility, when they do terrible things such as this.

You are just about to hit a serious, serious run of quality. Strap in.

It's a pretty common reaction. "Hmm not sure if this show will be any good", *starts watching*.

Plenty of people who were not at all enthusiastic about the show aren't pleased with the reason(s) given for not picking it up, and the underlying causes behind it.

Funny timing about this non-pickup, literally 2 days later Sarah Shahi absolutely knocks it out of the park in a phenomenal Person of Interest episode - "6,741".

Person of Interest was "just another procedural". Elementary is a "procedural".

I put it down to the his belabored breathing as he lay there dying. That unsettled me.

I disagree entirely. First of all working out the "twist" prompts many many questions about who controls how the people are behaving in the simulation, leading to many interesting theories and discussions. Secondly, it shows us how Samaritan is still trying to get to and destroy the Machine. It shows how it's trying…

I think this is one of those episodes that actually becomes even better on subsequent viewing (if such a thing is possible). There are few things that prompt questions about how much control Shaw had in the simulation vs how much was Samaritan controlling the scenario.

So obviously the solution is to kick Heigl and cast Shahi in her place.

Let me get this straight. CBS chose Katherine Heigl over Sarah Shahi?

I'm sorry, but if I listen to 4 songs off the album and no-one of them remotely interest me (lyrics aside), I'm supposed to continue? It's not like the oeuvre and sensibilities of the music and it's genre were rapidly shifting song to song either. I started with the ones linked in the article above, so it's not like I…

Yeah. Yesterday's AND Today's we're waiting on. What's going on?

I understand what you are saying, but yeah, music to me is about lyrics paired with the emotions or soundscape the music provide. Sometimes triter lyrics can work if paired well with the melody or music. The entire mix just falls flat here, obviously others feel different. I think we'll leave it at that.

They're clearly the strongest part, but music is more then lyrics. The lyrics don't turn the songs into some transcendental experience.

Nah, I'm exactly the same as you. These songs seem maybe a tad above mediocre at best. Nothing against anyone, but how anyone describes those songs above as masterpieces and a work of genius just leaves me scratching my head.