Of them reving unsolved mysteries. In this day and age it would so very well need to hear that creepy theme.

The Official Unsolved Mysteries Facebook page is asked that question (and variations of it) countless times, but the answer is always the same: They are hoping that a channel will be interested in the show. When giving that answer, they often acknowledge a desire to bring it back with new episodes. Needless to say, however, they would have to secure a deal with a network or syndicator before that can happen.

Is it because the network would want to much money or would the creators of the show want more money.

Is it because the network would want to much money or would the creators of the show want more money.

Beats me. However, networks generally want to profit from as many programs as possible as much as possible. Although I believe UM made a good amount of money, it was probably not good enough for network executives. Besides, nowadays networks are run by snobs who probably have an elitist attitude against programs like UM. Therefore, I am convinced that elitism is a factor.

But you know what? Forget about primetime and cable. If UM is ever revived, I believe it should be shown in first-run syndication, just like Star Trek: The Next Generation, for example.

I'd like to see a reboot, but I'm not horribly optimistic. I think there's a significant enough audience to make it work, and CMP really does seem to care about it and want to make it happen. But you have to remember the environment that UM took off in. It was incredibly compelling television, but that's what kept it going. It really got started because it was significantly cheaper to produce per episode than most of what was on network TV at the time, and there had been a Writers' Guild strike. A new UM wouldn't be that much cheaper to produce, at least not one you'd want to watch.

If it's going to work, CMP has to know what its market is.

But you know what? Forget about primetime and cable. If UM is ever revived, I believe it should be shown in first-run syndication, just like Star Trek: The Next Generation, for example.

If market research and test screenings indicate that there's a market for it in terrestrial daytime, that's definitely an option. Otherwise, I think streaming is the way to go. A well-executed binge-friendly rollout can get a series renewed and make it viral. The show would necessarily have to lose its weekly, update, public service feel. But that could be supplemented with regular shorts pushed out on social media.

All of this takes money, though. Crowdfunding exists now, which is an option. But that can easily backfire, because lots of people project very different things onto something and such things attract vocal malcontents.

I still think airing a revived series on one of the big four networks in primetime is the way to go. Putting it on some cable channel or online streaming wouldn't bring enough exposure. That works fine for a program like Forensic Files where the public's help isn't needed. When the original series aired on NBC, I am willing to bet it was the exposure that helped many of the cases get solved.

How are people going to help solve cases if they don't know about the program? A revival shouldn't just cater to the die-hard fans.

Think about the exposure the program would get if it were aired on one of the big four to people who don't have cable or satellite or even online streaming but do have an over-the-air antenna. And the people who do subscribe to the aforementioned services could still see the program as well. It just makes sense.

On the other hand, if they only care about the entertainment factor and not about actually solving cases (which is how it came off with the Spike/Farina version), then I guess it doesn't matter where they air it.

Well maybe lifetime or CBS or NBC. I just need my unsolved mysteries fix.

The show would necessarily have to lose its weekly, update, public service feel. But that could be supplemented with regular shorts pushed out on social media.

In other words, it would have to conform to the modern styles, whether the fans like it or not. Losing the feel UM had would mean watering down the show, and that would ensure failure.

By the way, when it comes to the discussion of reviving UM, I suggest using words like "revive" or "resurrect," instead of "reboot." Wanting an UM "reboot" (or "remake") implies a desire for the show to look far different than it was in its 1987-2002 production run. I hope it's not too much to ask, but I believe the suggested words are more appropriate.

In other words, it would have to conform to the modern styles, whether the fans like it or not. Losing the feel UM had would mean watering down the show, and that would ensure failure.

If I were thinking about this two or three years ago, I'd be less optimistic. There's going to have to be changes to expand the target demos. I'm not sure it has to automatically alienate us, however. Consider that NBC is launching Dateline in syndication this fall in a large number of markets. That's evidence there's interest in terrestrial for an hour-long investigative series with higher production values aimed at viewers with longer attention spans.


By the way, when it comes to the discussion of reviving UM, I suggest using words like "revive" or "resurrect," instead of "reboot." Wanting an UM "reboot" (or "remake") implies a desire for the show to look far different than it was in its 1987-2002 production run. I hope it's not too much to ask, but I believe the suggested words are more appropriate.

No, that's reasonable, and I agree. I love the dreamy-feeling 16mm cinematography of the original NBC/CBS run's re-enactments and interviews, and the longer-form nature of the segments. If that style of production can't work for whatever reason, there's a happy medium to be found between it and the frenetic quick-cutting style which a lot of broadcast and terrestrial investigative/true crime stuff has these days. I do think there's a place these days for an honest, intriguing show like UM was, and I have to think CMP learned the lesson from the Spike experience that the soul of UM has to be in there if it's going to work.

I love the dreamy-feeling 16mm cinematography of the original NBC/CBS run's re-enactments and interviews, and the longer-form nature of the segments. If that style of production can't work for whatever reason, there's a happy medium to be found between it and the frenetic quick-cutting style which a lot of broadcast and terrestrial investigative/true crime stuff has these days. I do think there's a place these days for an honest, intriguing show like UM was, and I have to think CMP learned the lesson from the Spike experience that the soul of UM has to be in there if it's going to work.

Indeed - I think a new series would need to be influenced by classic UM.

Not only would it be impossible, but it would not be popular for it to attempt to recreate the old series. You can't turn back the clock.

They need tonnage were we can call or text to solve the mysteries. I think the networks need to see how unsolved mysteries can help save there network they could show it at 12 or 11 pm like they use too.

I do think there's a place these days for an honest, intriguing show like UM was, and I have to think CMP learned the lesson from the Spike experience that the soul of UM has to be in there if it's going to work.

I pray to God that they have learned from their mistakes related to their experience with Spike. Otherwise, they will be doomed to repeat them.

I should note that UM is not the first show to be followed by a disastrous reboot. Another was In Search Of. Many viewers of the old series detested the 2002 reboot (hosted by Mitch Pileggi), which looked and felt nothing like the Leonard Nimoy version. The production values of the 1970s/early-1980s series were absent in the new version. It was canceled after only a short run and deservedly so.

I pray to God that they have learned from their mistakes related to their experience with Spike. Otherwise, they will be doomed to repeat them.

I should note that UM is not the first show to be followed by a disastrous reboot. Another was In Search Of. Many viewers of the old series detested the 2002 reboot (hosted by Mitch Pileggi), which looked and felt nothing like the Leonard Nimoy version. The production values of the 1970s/early-1980s series were absent in the new version. It was canceled after only a short run and deservedly so.

Ripley's Believe It Or Not (one of my other favorite shows of the 80s) also had a modern reboot which I didn't like but was very successful.

Ripley's Believe It Or Not (one of my other favorite shows of the 80s) also had a modern reboot which I didn't like but was very successful.

I remember the reboot of Ripley's Believe It Or Not. That version ran from 2000 to 2003 and looked so cheap that I couldn't stomach it. It goes to show that cheaper does not mean better.

Also, I am reminded of what Forensic Files executive producer Paul Dowling said last year following the death FF narrator Peter Thomas. Despite demands for new episodes of FF, Dowling made it clear that he would not be bringing the show back to life, noting that Peter Thomas is irreplaceable and he doesn't want to "water it down or change it." Given the history of inferior reboots and revivals of popular TV shows, it seems to me that Dowling's refusal to revive FF is based on principle. Regardless, I respect and agree with his decision.