Sure, it has some intriguing stories, but for me the formula of Unsolved Mysteries is part of its 'special sauce'.
So what is the formula?
1) multiple stories per episode
2) a host narrating each story, which is a great way to speed things up instead of relying on interviews
3) Updates on previous stories
NO STACK...NO UNSOLVED MYSTERIES...THATS HOW I FEEL.🙂
shareIt is.
shareI agree 100%, with every point made.
This is not Unsolved Mysteries. Sure, the cases are interesting enough, but beyond presenting mysteries that are as yet unsolved, there is nothing at all that connects this show to the original UM. It feels nothing like UM and the style and format is almost completely different. It's just a generic modern true crime/mystery show with the Unsolved Mysteries name slapped on.
I never really watched the old show that much so i can't really speak on all the differences, but its stories about unsolved crimes/mysteries with some reenactments and interviews of the friends, family etc. I get that its not copy and pasting exactly how the old show did things but its a modern new take on the show, its not saying its a new season of the old Unsolved Mysteries, its a reinvented version of it, taking aspects of the old show and also doing their own thing with it.
I guess the major thing missing is the lack of a host, but come on no matter who they got people would've been comparing them to Robert Stack and saying they wasn't as good. I personally think its a good decision to not even try to replace Stack, cause you really can't, he had the perfect voice for that.
This show needs a narrator, badly. It doesn't have to be a voice like Robert Stack, although that would be preferred. That was part of what made the original so good and easy to follow. Just jumping into a story with no host where it takes 10-30 minutes to figure out what the episode is about is annoying.
shareTo me, Unsolved Mysteries was a show with will written and narrated stories, not just a bunch of interviews where we don't even hear.the questions. I feel like I'm watching jeapody.
shareI’ve only seen Ep 1 but it was just like Dateline.
shareThe pattern in this new series that I do not like is the subtle suggestion of a key suspect all along.
The guy who fell off the rooftop has a person of interest, as does the young girl who probably witnessed her own mother kill and dispose of her stepfather's body. The real unsolved mystery is why the police investigators in both cases come across as mediocre and/or incompetent. Then the series tells us that the main person of interest has "lawyer'd up" so nothing can move forward. So what's the point of getting a broader audience involved since we pretty much know who the suspect is? LOL
So what's the point of getting a broader audience involved since we pretty much know who the suspect is?
But they won't because there's a .0001% chance of anyone watching this becoming inspired to come forward. We already know who the main suspects/people of interest are so why not just sent an investigative team and talk to people in the immediate sphere of influence?
shareThe chances of someone coming forward with quality information depends on the case. For instance, in "No Ride Home," where the black guy never returned home after a party in rural southeast Kansas, there are people who were at the party or involved in the death & cover-up who could be inspired to come forward.
Or, take "Lady in the Lake," someone could've witnessed the woman's apprehension or her body being thrown in the river in Detroit and be inspired to come forward. Or, someone in the family or close to the family knows which family member put out the hit (assuming that's what actually happened).
Or someone in former East Germany (or wherever) might recognize the 24 year-old woman from "Death in Oslo" who was set-up to look like a suicide in the hotel in 1995.
But is solving the mystery the primary reason these stories are covered and aired? Or is it simply because the show's audience is interested in true-life mystery tales (with 99.999% not knowing any detail whatsoever of the various cases, like me)? In other words, the real-life mystery itself is the main entertainment. Having a case solved eventually is just icing on the cake.
I agree. It's like all the other crime documentaries out there, just with the title and familiar theme song slapped on. It doesn't stand out. No one will ever replace Robert Stack, and I'm fine with no host. However, they need to bring reenactments with the dialog back (as opposed to just showing the backs of people's heads acting out the events). Robert Stack use to talk over the reenactment dialog all the time, so the families telling the stories can do that now. Most of you probably already know this, but Matthew MCconaughey was once in one of the reenactments on the OG series.
shareI didn't know about Matthew's re-enactment role. Interesting.
share