Wow. :eek3: (after reading some of the complaints in another thread).

I remember how people were begging and screaming for an UNSOLVED MYSTERIES reboot or reimagining for many, many, many years on this board.

We wanted something - ANYTHING - better than the horrific Farina version and now that the world's largest streaming service has gathered not only a well-respected team of TV producers to helm the show, but also brought in the original creators of UM for a serious revival all some of you can do is complain.

The original UM spawned a sub-genre of true crime TV that has grown by leaps and bounds in the TV/cable marketplace with entire channels like INVESTIGATION DISCOVERY or long programming blocks with DATELINE reruns that all feel like imitations of the original UM format.

After over 25 years of true crime over-saturation, there was no way the original format could have worked in the short term because of the likely comparisons to all that has come since.

Newsflash - there are millions (count 'em), millions of people in the U.S. and abroad who have never seen the original UM.

People who don't know who Robert Stack is.

People who only know of UM from 80s retrospectives and pop culture references who decided to give the show a chance and lo and behold it was trending #1 on Netflix for days on end.

This UM sitcoms online community is generally thoughtful and well-intentioned, but we are a VERY SMALL COMMUNITY. TV is not made with small communities in mind, these shows are expensive to create and they need a return on investment and in 2020, that means appealing to the largest possible audience.

This means we cannot seriously expect the new UM to be "just like" the show from our collective haze of nostalgia - and let's face it, there were a ton of stinker episodes hosted by our beloved Mr. Stack.

IF they had hired a new host, there would have been endless complaints about how inferior they are compared to Robert Stack. Some would have complained that they should have experimented with a new format considering the streaming service and so on.

I don't get what some of you want. One of the absolute dumbest complaints I've ever read in my life was that the new UM has mysteries that cannot be solved. :confused::confused::confused::lol::lol::lol::happyface

All of these mysteries CAN BE SOLVED that's why they're featured on a show called UNSOLVED MYSTERIES.

Many of these cases require smarter investigators (Rivera) or a few more clues (Alonso Brooks) or a confession (Missing Witness).

The missing NYC kids can be solved because someone out there knows exactly what happened to those babies and it is likely at least one of those boys is still alive but don't know their true identity. Lester Eubanks (if alive) is still out there and could be retired from his sexual assault behaviors or extremely careful to not pop up on the radar.

The Oslo woman was either connected to the espionage game or a high-priced prostitute who simply knew too much or saw something she wasn't supposed to see and was executed. That kind of thing has occurred for years and this story just happened to pop up on the UM revival.

The French guy murdered his family for some reason and is likely still on the run.

In fact, all of the crime cases can eventually be unravelled. With the exception of the UFO material, I believe there is a solution on the horizon.

It's not like we're talking about stupid ghosts or psychic nonsense, these were crimes committed by human beings that can be prosecuted under the right set of circumstances. Sure, the cases are MYSTERIOUS but isn't that the point of the damn show?

Even in the original UM, there were a bunch of cases that seemed "unsolvable" even though the evidence pointed in a direction the police didn't want to follow or were incapable of following.

In my final analysis, I am happy I was exposed to a few new mysteries I had never heard about before. I do miss Robert Stack's narration but the man is gone (RIP) and we have hours of segments of the original UM to pour through whenever we like without having to go the internet bootleg route.

Obviously, if you don't like the series, the best thing to do is not watch it again. It's going to be a while before we get a Volume 3 because of Covid, etc., so all we've got for now is the old Robert Stack UM and the Netflix version (unless you happen to enjoy the Farina version which I couldn't deal with at all).

The 1980s and 1990s are long gone folks. Complaining about how things "aren't like how they used to be" won't bring back the world how we imagined it to be back then - aka - the rose-colored glasses of nostalgic hindsight.

CBW

I agree that the level of complaining of the new UM is bordering on the absurd. Another "favorite" complaint I see, the show doesn't show all the info. It's a 40 minute show, you're not going to be able to.

It's not perfect, it never will be, deal with it.

It’s called having an opinion. People are not required to nod their heads in agreement and simply take what is served to them. If I don’t like something, I will say it.

This weird sensitivity from folks who can’t handle a dissenting opinion is just bizarre. Works of art and entertainment are meant to be critiqued. If different opinions are so threatening to you, perhaps the internet is not the place for you.

It’s called having an opinion. People are not required to nod their heads in agreement and simply take what is served to them. If I don’t like something, I will say it.

This weird sensitivity from folks who can’t handle a dissenting opinion is just bizarre. Works of art and entertainment are meant to be critiqued. If different opinions are so threatening to you, perhaps the internet is not the place for you.

Not threatened or sensitive.

Just tired of the unrelenting negativity borne from entitlement and misplaced nostalgia (and also a lack of understanding of how the business of entertainment operates).

Fan whining and legit critique are two very different things.

Not threatened or sensitive.

Just tired of the unrelenting negativity borne from entitlement and misplaced nostalgia (and also a lack of understanding of how the business of entertainment operates).

Fan whining and legit critique are two very different things.

*yawn*

Time to add somebody to the good ol’ ignore list!

Not threatened or sensitive.

Just tired of the unrelenting negativity borne from entitlement and misplaced nostalgia (and also a lack of understanding of how the business of entertainment operates).

Fan whining and legit critique are two very different things.

You could have just replied to the thread since you're clearly talking about me.

As far as "unrelenting negativity" and "misplaced nostalgia" I could go off on a big long winded post but you simply have no idea what you're talking about. There are countless posts of me defending the one segment per episode and hostless concepts and talking about keeping an open mind until they air, and numerous positive comments about a few of the Vol 1 cases. I don't need to defend anything to you. I watched the 12 episodes, I have an opinion, and I'm going to share that opinion because I can.

As far as a "lack of understanding", I'm not the one claiming in a thread that a victim is so fat that she couldn't be moved by water. So, yeah.

You could have just replied to the thread since you're clearly talking about me.

As far as "unrelenting negativity" and "misplaced nostalgia" I could go off on a big long winded post but you simply have no idea what you're talking about. There are countless posts of me defending the one segment per episode and hostless concepts and talking about keeping an open mind until they air, and numerous positive comments about a few of the Vol 1 cases. I don't need to defend anything to you. I watched the 12 episodes, I have an opinion, and I'm going to share that opinion because I can.

As far as a "lack of understanding", I'm not the one claiming in a thread that a victim is so fat that she couldn't be moved by water. So, yeah.

To be 100% honest, I wasn't talking about you at all. I never actually look at the username most of the time and tend to respond to what I read.

My reaction was to the negativity toward a series that we all love and should be happy is back on the scene. I was not directing my message at YOU specifically and you're correct, there was no need for you to defend yourself since I had no desire to call you out.

In regards to your other comments, you seem to be lashing out defensively and bringing up my conclusions regarding the "lady in the lake."

I never said she was "too fat" to be moved by water, I said that it was highly unlikely that a shallow lake with little to no current could move a heavier person that far downstream without assistance or being placed in another location with stronger currents.

What that has to do with folks being unreasonably negative about a true crime documentary series is beyond me.

:confused:

Not threatened or sensitive.

Just tired of the unrelenting negativity borne from entitlement and misplaced nostalgia (and also a lack of understanding of how the business of entertainment operates).

Fan whining and legit critique are two very different things.

The rest of us are so very fortunate to have you here to explain the difference then.

The rest of us are so very fortunate to have you here to explain the difference then.

Why thank you. :wave:

LOL

:cool:

I totally agree with OP. Nothing will ever replace the original UM for us old school fans. However, I will gleefully take this reboot any day over Psycho Wives From Hell or whatever drivel ID is serving up.

Mmm-hmm das rite!

If you like it, great. If you don't, that's great too. I haven't seen people being overly negative about it.

As consumers we watch things for the entertainment. We pay for netflix. If we think something we pay for sucks we can call it out. I think UM drags too much and should have been shortened to half hour featuring one case. I could do with or without a narrator.

If you like it, great. If you don't, that's great too. I haven't seen people being overly negative about it.

I like to look at it as Unsolved Mysteries Jr. It's the son (the next generation) who is doing great things by broadcasting new material in hopes that these cases can be solved. But no matter what, he's never going to live up to the legend that his father was.

Bottom line, it's new material for us to discuss and theorize. And that's good enough for me.

If you like it, great. If you don't, that's great too. I haven't seen people being overly negative about it.

Exactly. I haven't seen this alleged negativity either. It just seems like fragile egos can't handle people not liking everything they do.

If you look at the socials no one's talking about the original. The people taking about it have all been positive, most don't even seem to have a knowledge of the original.

I just want re-enactments like the old ones did. I miss those, plus someone doing a voiceover.

I watched it for the first time a few weeks ago. It was okay, but I definitely think it needs a host. Yes, no one will ever be Robert Stack, but the jumping around from person to person involved in the case makes the stories rather hard to follow. A host helps sort everything out.

Also, a 5-10 minute segment where it revisits a classic case from the Stack era that are still unsolved would be great too. A number of Stack era cases are still relevant today and could still have a resolution. Angela Hammond for one, the Zodiac killer, Don Smith's killer, maybe even Dottie Caylor.

Start something like this: "And now tonight's classic case originally aired in 1992, Angela Hammond has been missing for nearly three decades."

Been watching some of the old Stack-era episodes for the past few nights. Just AMAZING how much more involving and watchable they are than the new series - even though I've seen the old segments multiple times.

Put it this way, even today this board regularly discusses Stack era episodes that are 30+ years old. Can you imagine anyone discussing the current series of UM in 2050?

Newsflash - there are millions (count 'em), millions of people in the U.S. and abroad who have never seen the original UM.

People who don't know who Robert Stack is.



Well, we have and we do. Therefore, it's entirely acceptable that many will come away from the reboot disappointed. I haven't seen it, and based on reviews from this community, I have no interest in doing so. C-M should have stuck to the original formula as closely as possible. While nobody will ever replace RS, we've already made some great suggestions for who could fill in. There are already enough boring, drawn out hour-long cookie cutter true crime shows. I can't believe the powers that be thought it wise to be just like everybody else. In the years since the end of the original RS episodes, C-M have consistently shown themselves to be their own worst enemies. They already have a format that's a proven winner, yet they insist upon going in every other possible direction. It's sad, and senseless.

I don't usually rely solely on outside opinions, preferring to draw my own conclusions, but the community on this board is one of the best I've found online for any area of interest. There are many decent, articulate people here whose opinions and even theories have great merit. Most flakes and nutters tend to be ferreted out or otherwise leave this forum in short order. Considering some of the subject matter discussed, that's always been particularly impressive. Those with whom I find myself in a nearly continual state of agreement are saying enough to dissuade me from giving the reboot a chance.

UM was magical, different, scary etc. This is just like every other true crime show our there from what little I have seen.

I don't post here too often, and I never even fully finished the first "new" Unsolved Mysteries episode (I got just past the opening credits, it just didn't feel right to me) so you all can take my opinion with a grain of salt. I had gotten interested in Unsolved Mysteries after hearing about the Don Kemp case and reading about it later on via this board. This lead me to explore and pour over "The Whackers" thread (which remains one of my favorite mysteries). When the Robert Stack episodes were recently brought out on YouTube, I was overjoyed, as I could finally see the show I had wanted to for so long.

I love the Stack era Unsolved Mysteries, and that's mostly due to how the show is presented and filmed. Having several shorter segments always felt better to me because it made the subjects seem much more mysterious. You never got all the pieces, but because of the shorter episode lengths, you wanted to think more and more about things? "What if this happened?" "How did this happen?" I also think with a shorter length the episodes can be gotten through a lot faster and it's easier for them to stick with you.

I also feel like a host would have been nice. Robert Stack gave an air of credibility to the show and his voice gave a slightly ominous tone to things. His narration helped to set the scene and atmosphere quite well. When you lose a host, you're taking more of a documentary approach to the show and you're banking more on the interviewers and reenactments carrying the show and setting the mood, which can be a tough ask. Having family members and law enforcement officials made it all seem more real, and more like a story. It felt like a small window into a baffling case.

At the end of the day, there's just nothing about the new show that appeals to me. It feels too clean, too crisp, too professional and there's no narrator. I agree with what James T said, this show just feels like any other true crime show. If you took Unsolved Mysteries off the title and gave it a different one, would it really feel like Unsolved Mysteries? I don't think so. It just feels....bland and generic. I can see why the show was rebooted, and I can see why the production company went in the direction they did.

I have no issues with people liking the new show. I just feel like there's something to the old show that gave it a lot more sticking power and made it feel unique and special.

At the end of the day, there's just nothing about the new show that appeals to me. It feels too clean, too crisp, too professional and there's no narrator. I agree with what James T said, this show just feels like any other true crime show. If you took Unsolved Mysteries off the title and gave it a different one, would it really feel like Unsolved Mysteries? I don't think so. It just feels....bland and generic. I can see why the show was rebooted, and I can see why the production company went in the direction they did.

I have no issues with people liking the new show.I just feel like there's something to the old show that gave it a lot more sticking power and made it feel unique and special.

You kinda reinforced one of my points in the OP - the Unsolved Mysteries format as we know it was very original and striking AT THAT TIME because no one had really nailed the narrator/reenactment formula on that level.

Obviously, the show struck a chord and inspired the presentational style of documentary true crime TV for at least two generations. Since the early 2000s, we've all been inundated with that style to the point where it has become stagnant and boring.

Also, Forensic Files was a strong borrower of the original UM style and we've had over 15 years of that series in the collective imagination.

If the new UM had been the EXACT same as before, there might not have been the mainstream appeal (because all shows are made for the sake of making money - even the original UM) since it wouldn't have looked or felt "different."

Sure, the small percentage of Sitcoms Online fans might have been applauding, but chances are it wouldn't have trended #1 on Netflix during both premiere
weeks.

I don't mind solid critique, but that one thread was filled with nitpicky complaints to the point of being unreasonable. I work in the entertainment biz, I deal with truly entitled fans of all stripes and it never ceases to amaze me how many people have uneducated opinions about tv shows and movies.

Many fans don't understand that reboots and/or reimaginings aren't usually meant to cater EXCLUSIVELY to the original fanbase.

Sure, they will throw in cool references and tips-of-the-hat, but the core idea is to foster a NEW FANBASE and that usually means bringing in modern or unfamiliar storytelling techniques, etc.

And this always drives the original fanbase crazy - you see this with comic book/superhero movies, sport team logos and uniforms, band member changes, theme songs, etc. - if an old-school fan can't find something legitimate to critique in a new iteration, they will find something to whine about.

For the record, I never once said the Netflix UM was perfect. There are some issues with pacing, editing and directing but none of that will stop me from engaging with the case and examining the evidence as presented.

Isn't the point of the show to bring attention to difficult and mysterious cases? In that context, UM still excels.

Everything comes and goes in waves. The format which you feel had become "stagnant and boring" (I disagree) has been gone for a generation, if not two. True crime shows mostly follow a different format these days--one which many longtime UM diehards find tedious and drawn out.

The formats employed by the original UM and AMW were proven successes and could easily succeed once again. Younger people tend to like their entertainment delivered at a faster pace and in shorter bursts. Therefore, bringing back the old format should really appeal to the very demographic whose attention the producers are trying to grab. Today's young adults weren't around to "get tired of" the old format, therefore it would be fresh to them. Better yet, they might actually derive the same pleasure that we did 30+ years ago! The younger crowd loves "retro", so bring back the 800 number in addition to more modern ways of giving tips! The original graphics and wonderful music could even be kept to combine a retro look with modern stories. Some tweaking would have to be done: Lost Loves would no longer be very viable, but treasure segments are timeless, and there might even be room for a Lost Heir or two in addition to the usual Wanted/Missing/Paranormal.

You kinda reinforced one of my points in the OP - the Unsolved Mysteries format as we know it was very original and striking AT THAT TIME because no one had really nailed the narrator/reenactment formula on that level.

Obviously, the show struck a chord and inspired the presentational style of documentary true crime TV for at least two generations. Since the early 2000s, we've all been inundated with that style to the point where it has become stagnant and boring.

Also, Forensic Files was a strong borrower of the original UM style and we've had over 15 years of that series in the collective imagination.

If the new UM had been the EXACT same as before, there might not have been the mainstream appeal (because all shows are made for the sake of making money - even the original UM) since it wouldn't have looked or felt "different."

Sure, the small percentage of Sitcoms Online fans might have been applauding, but chances are it wouldn't have trended #1 on Netflix during both premiere
weeks.

I don't mind solid critique, but that one thread was filled with nitpicky complaints to the point of being unreasonable. I work in the entertainment biz, I deal with truly entitled fans of all stripes and it never ceases to amaze me how many people have uneducated opinions about tv shows and movies.

Many fans don't understand that reboots and/or reimaginings aren't usually meant to cater EXCLUSIVELY to the original fanbase.

Sure, they will throw in cool references and tips-of-the-hat, but the core idea is to foster a NEW FANBASE and that usually means bringing in modern or unfamiliar storytelling techniques, etc.

And this always drives the original fanbase crazy - you see this with comic book/superhero movies, sport team logos and uniforms, band member changes, theme songs, etc. - if an old-school fan can't find something legitimate to critique in a new iteration, they will find something to whine about.

For the record, I never once said the Netflix UM was perfect. There are some issues with pacing, editing and directing but none of that will stop me from engaging with the case and examining the evidence as presented.

Isn't the point of the show to bring attention to difficult and mysterious cases? In that context, UM still excels.

I think most understand they want to do draw in a new audience, along with hopefully some of the old one-many of whom likely will lose interest when they see it is nothing like the original.

I don't agree about the UM format having been done to death-I am a huge fan of FBI Files, Forensic Detectives etc from the 1990's & 2000's, but to me UM remains a totally unique show in how it was presented & produced, along with the music choices & none of these shows really reminded me of it-aside from say the late 1990's to when the show ended in 2003 versions where UM tinkered about with the original format in an attempt for ratings & likely to copy these emerging shows, but the 1987-1996/1997 episodes were/are for me unique.

The big problem is you have a set audience who love the 1987-2003 run, they bought the DVD sets in the mid 2000's & wanted more-even asking for complete seasons. Eventually Spike decided to 'reboot' the show-but totally messed it up which caused great disappointment, as it was just old cases chopped up abysmally & with a host who didn't really fit. Then eventually we got pretty much the holy grail with the season uploads to YT-the only quibble being the segments that are missing. Then we get a your old show tackling new cases/mysteries hype job for this version-so fans are expecting something very similar to the original with updated production values & instead get a bog standard looking slick looking true crime show that aside from its name & the intro is totally unrecognisable from the original.

It’s called having an opinion. People are not required to nod their heads in agreement and simply take what is served to them. If I don’t like something, I will say it.

This weird sensitivity from folks who can’t handle a dissenting opinion is just bizarre. Works of art and entertainment are meant to be critiqued. If different opinions are so threatening to you, perhaps the internet is not the place for you.

You are so right and hit the nail on the head.

Original poster is part of the problem wanting to censor opinions.

Many of us on here have been watching UM since we were children or well over 25 years at this point.

Prestige means nothing I wish Amazon had done the reboot and stuck with the original format. I am ashamed that the original producers released such a horrible version of this show.

Yes we all wanted the reboot but reboots are notorious for not sticking to what the fans want and trying to usher in a new generation. The same generation that watched the OG version of UM would have came out for the new version with the same format.

This format has been done to death on the ID channel and it is quite a bore.

The Oslo woman was either connected to the espionage game or a high-priced prostitute who simply knew too much or saw something she wasn't supposed to see and was executed. That kind of thing has occurred for years and this story just happened to pop up on the UM revival.CBW

Or she had enough of her life & decided to end it, or she tried to rob a client & he killed her, or a client tried to rob her & killed her when she fought back, or she was targeted by a killer who hated prostitutes, hardly uncommon-Peter Sutcliffe, Gary Ridgway, Steve Wright etc.

Then we get a your old show tackling new cases/mysteries hype job for this version-so fans are expecting something very similar to the original with updated production values & instead get a bog standard looking slick looking true crime show that aside from its name & the intro is totally unrecognisable from the original.

Yes - I think the problem is essentially budgetary...it is FAR cheaper to film one story (as sluggish, dull and bloated as it may be) without a host, than to film 4 or 5 stories and then pay a host to narrate.

Budget issue also likely explain why every story has so many lengthy, pointless drone shots - which look superficially impressive, but cost little to film and don't take much time to set up.

I like the original best but I am thankful we have some new ones. I wish they had a narrator but at least we have some chance of cases being solved. I haven't watched all of the episodes yet but plan to before long.

*yawn*

Time to add somebody to the good ol’ ignore list!

Now who's the one being "sensitive?" :lol:

Original poster is part of the problem wanting to censor opinions.




Pretty exaggerated take. Seriously. I hope you don't always misconstrue to such ends.

If they wanted to censor, they did a lousy job of it. They would have tried to get said opinions removed entirely. Instead they posted a thread rebuking "New UM is lousy" threads. Nothing censoring about that.