User reviews

This began as a quite addictive, impressive experience. I confess (no spoilers) that certain plot developments were not resolved satisfactorily.

At under half an hour, the episodes are well paced. Many of the cast are fine in their roles, and are no doubt popping up elsewhere, deservedly. The possible break out star might be Carmen Kassovitz.

However, the relationships were impossibly tumultuous, perhaps for the sake of drama. The initial portrayal of 'hazing' is, I hope not a representation of reality in French education, or of pitiless French youth. The hazing looked worse even than that at American colleges!

I understand that many consider the hacking shown to be 'unrealistic', which I can agree with, although TV from CSI, all the way back to Star Trek, has portrayed impossibly futuristic techniques, some of which became reality. One hopes that this range of everyday, normalised hacking remains mostly fictitious!

Finally, the dour lead character; quite believable as a 'tech nerd'; he bears a close resemblance to the Mr Bean character and actor Rowan Atkinson!

Impressive OST, this series is a simple but very interesting product. The main actor has a future, very intense.

Here, as promised I watched all season 1 and I can say that I found it excellent and many will perceive the mirror effect that it projects. This series provides. The episodes are short (20 ') on average, but they are all effective and we want to know more, this series is intriguing at will. I loved.

I began to watch this series with distrust, but in the first moment it won me over. The best musical accompaniment with a convoluted plot, at the same time, the hack does not look like "keystrokes". As a programmer, I liked that the show is not like Hackers (1995), in which the data center is some kind of digital city.

I highly recommend it for viewing and rate it highly. Best music score I've heard.

The first episodes were quite good. I liked the characters, I liked the music and I liked the concept.

But it goes downhill really fast.

Most annoying for me was how wrong the hacking of computers and smartphones was displayed. At first I ignored it, because ... it is shown wrong in almost all movies and series. But it was getting more and more annoying in the later episodes.

And there are plotholes. A whole lot of plotholes.

Smartphones have no lights to show you, that your camera is on? Well they have since years. Okay, maybe they didn't when this show was filmed...

Everybody is holding their phones always in a way, that it can film their faces at all times, while being stalked.

Nice idea, badly executed.

This french TV series deserves the highest rank. The quality of the plot beats easily any other of this kind. Actors are all at the very top. The protagonist is incredibly excellent, he commands the whole 2 seasons serie with a level unseen from Gossip Girl. I do think it's the top of teen, super high quality, tech-oriented, series. Gorgeous.

When "Stalk" first graced our screens, it promised a thrilling dive into the dark world of cyberstalking, blending suspense with a modern technological twist. However, as the series progressed, it devolved into a realm of implausibility and irritation, primarily due to the character infamously known as 'the annoying face guy.'

Initially, "Stalk" captivated its audience with a gripping narrative and a chilling portrayal of cyberstalking's dangers. The premise was engaging, and the storyline seemed to be on a promising trajectory. But as the episodes rolled out, it became evident that the show was losing its grip on reality.

The most glaring issue was the character development of the 'annoying face guy.' Introduced as a complex antagonist, he quickly morphed into a caricature of villainy. His ability to execute complex cybercrimes with ease, without any realistic challenges or setbacks, strained credulity. In the real world, even the most skilled hackers face obstacles and complexities, but in "Stalk," these elements were conspicuously absent, replaced by an oversimplified portrayal of cybercrime.

Moreover, this character's omnipotence in the digital realm felt exaggerated. He could hack into any system, manipulate data, and evade detection with a few clicks - a portrayal that not only undermines the seriousness of cyberstalking but also belittles the intelligence of the audience. The creators seemed more focused on shock value than on maintaining a believable storyline.

The script didn't help either. Laden with clichés and predictable dialogues, it felt as if the writers were more invested in sensationalizing cyberstalking than in exploring its complexities and impacts. Each episode seemed to drift further away from the initial intrigue and suspense, culminating in a finale that felt both rushed and unfulfilling.

The series also missed an opportunity to delve into the psychological aspects of stalking, both from the stalker's and the victims' perspectives. Such exploration could have added a much-needed layer of depth and realism. Instead, the show remained superficial, glossing over the emotional and psychological consequences of stalking.

In conclusion, "Stalk" started as a promising series but quickly descended into a pit of unrealism and superficiality. The 'annoying face guy' became a symbol of the show's downfall - a character who could have been a fascinating study in obsession and technology turned into an unrealistic, one-dimensional figure. The series, in its entirety, serves as a missed opportunity to explore a critical and timely issue with the depth and nuance it deserves.