One thing I really like in retrospect is that it wasn't unusual at all to see a segment from 1993 about a 1982 case or something, and of course sometimes they went WAY back for lost loves (like Cliff Sherwood) to the 50s or something. Not only did that give me a good feeling of certain times as a kid, but I think it overall made it more of a fascinating show with more depth to it.

I'm thinking there's two reasons for this

1. People's attention spans were longer in the old days, maybe because there wasn't as many channels (even Cable was still KINDA a luxury fairly well into the 90s!) so they figured a wider audience would watch it for longer and wouldn't mind if a case was from some years before. Compare this to now where you're lucky if something stays in rotation over a year!

2. The technology moved slower. Like I bet alot of those slightly older 70s/80s cases UM did in their glory days weren't intentionally older so much as they didn't receive the information until then. For instance, maybe the police investigators and family would've been at a dead end for years, then they hear about the show and write in/send the information, hoping they can help solve it.

Whatever the reason was, I just think it's sad it's not still this way. I bet that's why Spike felt the need to shorten and heavily modernize the segments, figuring "ah people won't pay attention unless we get right to the point and also we better make sure and try to hide how old the case is". If it came back on the air, do you think they'd do stories from, say 1999? The way UM did stuff from ten years earlier back in the day... I doubt it.

Whatever the reason was, I just think it's sad it's not still this way. I bet that's why Spike felt the need to shorten and heavily modernize the segments, figuring "ah people won't pay attention unless we get right to the point and also we better make sure and try to hide how old the case is". If it came back on the air, do you think they'd do stories from, say 1999? The way UM did stuff from ten years earlier back in the day... I doubt it.

Maybe.

1. Keep in mind what channel were talking about here. Spike TV. TV for MEN!:rolleyes: Add that to the fact that this was a show that previously was on Lifetime ..television for Women..I think you can see why they felt the need to jazz it up the way they did. :rolleyes:

2. The reason they shortened the episodes probably has to do with something else that changed from way back in the 90s....longer and more commercials!!!

3. UM was a unqiue show back in it's days. The only True Crime show like it was America's Most Wanted which was not even in UMs time slot or day. Today, there are several shows that feauture Tru-Crime shows & Strange Legend shows on several cable networks. Unsolved Mysteries has something they never had back in the day--competition!!!!!

I think I know what you are getting at Oldschooler.

I recently picked up some unedited NBC episodes of UM with the original commercials, bumpers and all that jazz and it has made for some interesting viewing. Particularly the commercials for other programming that was airing on NBC back in the late eighties. For instance, UM was pre-empted one week for a concert by some Orchestra (Royal Philharmonic perhaps, I can't remember), but I was shocked something like that would even air on NBC in prime time no less. I saw ads for other shows that are mostly family oriented like Cosby, My Two Dads, Dear John and Tattingers. The times were certainly different. Even the episodes of UM seemed to unfold very slowly and yes, it did take some time to get to the "meat" of the case, as it were.

As much as I love UM, I just don't think this formula works today. Everyone today is constantly "connected" - constantly online, on our cellphones, texting etc. My wife bought an I-Phone awhile back and I think it is the most obnoxious thing she has ever purchased, but I digress. Most folks today thrive on instant gratification. I think it's like you said, attention spans are shorter. No one stops to smell the roses anymore...it's just sad.

I also think television has "dumbed down" in a lot of ways since then...IE reality TV. Which is kinda ironic if you think about it, since UM was among the first reality shows.

Hey I looooove my IPhone more than life itself. I dont think I could ever ever love a piece of technology more, but then again I love Technology. Always and forever.

UM was waaay ahead of it's time and yes today people dont have the attention span, but i've always wondered why they don't bring it back. People are hungry for crime shows now. I know there are a lot out there, but none of them can even shine the shoes of UM! The recreations were unique and actually filmed at the locations the crime took place and the actors were awesome.

The only True Crime show like it was America's Most Wanted which was not even in UMs time slot or day.

AMW was actually shown on Friday nights at 8:00 pm (Eastern Time) during the early '90s, when UM was being broadcast on Wednesdays. It wasn't until early 1994 when AMW moved to Saturday nights at 9:00 pm, where it continues to be shown to this day. Of course, it was later that same year when UM moved to Fridays at 8:00 pm.

However, I see what you mean. Even when both AMW and UM were on primtime during the same time period (from the late '80s to 1999), they were generally broadcast on different nights. For that reason, they never shared a time slot, which I thought was sensible.

UM was waaay ahead of it's time and yes today people dont have the attention span, but i've always wondered why they don't bring it back. People are hungry for crime shows now. I know there are a lot out there, but none of them can even shine the shoes of UM!

48 Hours Mysteries, The First 48 and City Confidential I feel are comparable to UM.

UM was waaay ahead of it's time
In terms of true crime stories yes.
In terms of Bizzare Murders, Legends, UFOs and Ghosts. UM owed a lot to Leonard Nimoy's "In Search of.." & Arthur C. Clarkes "Mysterious Worlds"

Mastermind, I've never heard of those other shows? Was it before the 80's?? If so that would explain it. I was just a wee lass in the 80's.

The first 48, 48 hours and city confidential are like long news stores to me. They focus on one case. No reenactments. I love the theater of UM and the multiple cases featured.

Mastermind, I've never heard of those other shows? Was it before the 80's?? If so that would explain it. I was just a wee lass in the 80's

Yes, both shows originated in the 70s.

I highly recommend you watch "In Search of..." It is actually more frightening than UM, if you can believe that. The Jim Jones episodes and the Amityville Horror episodes alone will keep you up at nights (three words---face in fire!!!:eek: ) Their DB Cooper episode, IMHO, was far better than UMs.

If your looking for more factual information Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious Worlds is good bet. But the production values are nowhere near UM or "In Search of.."

The first 48, 48 hours and city confidential are like long news stores to me. They focus on one case. No reenactments. I love the theater of UM and the multiple cases featured.

Understood.
The First 48 actually deals usually with two homicide cases in two different departments.

...Unsolved Mysteries has something they never had back in the day--competition!!!!!

Even with all the other true-crime shows (competition) nowadays, and I have watched them all, UM is still my all-time favorite. There's just something about UM that makes it so unique.

Their DB Cooper episode, IMHO, was far better than UMs.

Yes, one of the better ISOs. I thought it was cool to see an interview with Carrol Hicks(sp?) the hunter who found the plastic notice sign from Cooper's plane.

The discovery of the money wasn't mentioned, as that had yet to happen.

I always wondered who John Wesley Rakstraw(sp?) was and what connection he may have had to the case.


If your looking for more factual information Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious Worlds is good bet. But the production values are nowhere near UM or "In Search of.."

Yeah, I always liked the poltergeist episode. I also thought it cool how Clarke would appear at the end and basically debunk whatever topic they were covering previously.

I think I know what you are getting at Oldschooler.

I recently picked up some unedited NBC episodes of UM with the original commercials, bumpers and all that jazz and it has made for some interesting viewing. Particularly the commercials for other programming that was airing on NBC back in the late eighties. For instance, UM was pre-empted one week for a concert by some Orchestra (Royal Philharmonic perhaps, I can't remember), but I was shocked something like that would even air on NBC in prime time no less. I saw ads for other shows that are mostly family oriented like Cosby, My Two Dads, Dear John and Tattingers. The times were certainly different. Even the episodes of UM seemed to unfold very slowly and yes, it did take some time to get to the "meat" of the case, as it were.

As much as I love UM, I just don't think this formula works today. Everyone today is constantly "connected" - constantly online, on our cellphones, texting etc. My wife bought an I-Phone awhile back and I think it is the most obnoxious thing she has ever purchased, but I digress. Most folks today thrive on instant gratification. I think it's like you said, attention spans are shorter. No one stops to smell the roses anymore...it's just sad.

I also think television has "dumbed down" in a lot of ways since then...IE reality TV. Which is kinda ironic if you think about it, since UM was among the first reality shows.

Yeah I agree with that, and w/ what Mastermind said too. There was more variety on tv (I also remember broacasts of older movies more frequently) probably because people didn't have as many channels. I also liked Real Stories of the Hwy Patrol, which was kinda a precursor to all those World's Shocking Videos and stuff you see on TruTV these days (but better).

On another subject (but related) I was a huge fan of MTV and VH1 in those days too, and I'd see 80s songs all the time (circa '91-95). Videos nowadays don't stay in rotation more than a few months... so maybe some of us grew up exposed to more retro stuff without even knowing it!


P.S. I get contradictory feelings all the time about tech. ;) I love texting, my ipod, downloading off Limewire, Youtube, and of course the rest of the internet... but I also greatly miss a time before all that existed and the elements that accompanied it. If that makes sense.

My sister would always make fun of the fact that some of the cases were old. I'd be watching it on lifetime and she would chime in (imitating Robert Stack) "...in fifteen hundred thirty-two, the case of..."

I liked it though. Mainly for the chance to help someone and maybe see the real life image of the police sketch or the age progressed photograph. And the fact that the cases were not brand new added to that air of being "a mystery that spans a decade," so to speak.

I only liked it for the "missing" or "unexplained death" or "wanted" cases. The only ghost story that creeped me out was the Civil War one, where the lady goes down to the basement and sees these ghosts in the middle of amputating a dude's leg. It was just a creepy image. But other than that, I was never able to take the ghost or UFO cases seriously. And the "lost loves" episodes were just too... warm and fuzzy.

As much as I love UM, I just don't think this formula works today. Everyone today is constantly "connected" - constantly online, on our cellphones, texting etc. My wife bought an I-Phone awhile back and I think it is the most obnoxious thing she has ever purchased, but I digress. Most folks today thrive on instant gratification. I think it's like you said, attention spans are shorter. No one stops to smell the roses anymore...it's just sad.


I can understand this. I miss the times too when you didn't have to constantly keep your cell phone on. But technology is a good thing though.

It makes me wonder how many cases on Unsolved Mysteries could have been solved if there were cell phones back then.

I wonder how anyone disappears these days with cell phones around, but they still do at an alarming rate. I think people should have tracking devices installed in them. That would deter crime.

I dont mind having my cell phone with me at all times. It entertains me when I'm bored or waiting. I'm 33 and embrace all things techno. I think our society is better for it.

I wonder how anyone disappears these days with cell phones around, but they still do at an alarming rate. I think people should have tracking devices installed in them. That would deter crime.

Sadly, no.:(

1. Your assuming your abductor is going to "let" you use your cell phone and make a call. That probably will be the first thing he takes. Remember, in some cases the abductor checks the victim to make sure they don't have a weapon. You also may be held at gun or knife point most of the time, you'd probably be too scared to use the cell phone.

2. Your assuming you will be concious enough and phsyically capable of making a call. You may be drugged, gagged and bound.

3. Some cell phones may not work in caves, farms, basements or trunks of cars. There are also several dead spots in the country.

4. Most missing persons cases tend to be ultimately murders, so that's self explanatory.

5. If robbery is the motive in the attack, the cell phone is as valuable a piece of property as

6. There's one place where you don't carry your cell phone----your home! Think about how many people are abducted from their homes or their bed. :eek:

7. Infants, toddlers, the deaf, and mentally handicapped do not carry cell phones. Very few young kids carry them (though they probably should). Many elderly can't stand to use cell phones.

8. Think about how many times your battery runs out or you forget to bring your cell phone. Or you forget to pay the cell phone bill. I'm sure all you guys pay your cell phone bill on time! ;) Some people simply can't afford cell phones.

9. Cell phones get damaged and lost very easily. In a struggle with an assailant, you'd be shocked how easy it is for your cell phone to slip out of it's holster.

10. There are several situations were a person may not willingly want to make a phone call.
a. The abduction may involve organized criminal activity.(ex. the abductee is a "marker" for payment for drugs or contraband. You can't simply call the police and implicate yourself in criminal activity)

b. The abductee may not realize that he/she is being kidnapped. (This is especially true in cases where the abductor knows his victime)

c. The abductee may not want to risk getting himself killed, he may feel that the situation will resolve itself soon. (ex. like a ransom kidnapping-why not let the kidnappers get their money and avoid risk.)