THE NEW UNSOLVED MYSTERIES - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

Mr.Clairvoyant · 10-27-2008, 07:01 PM

I hate it.I mean I like the fact that the show is back on again but it sucks i mean they would have been better off reairing the old ones with Robert Stack.. The host sucks... the music is even worse.... I mean maybe it will grow on me..

Orgazmo · 10-28-2008, 08:05 AM

I agree, I used to get scared sh|tless as a kid watching UM and still get shivers at times watching old eps but this new one doesn't scare me at all. But Im still going to watch it and hopefully it will grow on me a bit.

hovaslash · 10-28-2008, 08:11 AM

Finally got a chance to see it yesterday........not too impressed. It's all CSI'd out. Meanwhile CSI et al may not exist if not for the groundwork UM layed down. I will say since the same production team is on board for the 're-launch'
I am willing to give it some time. Improvements can be made.

jjmcgr · 10-28-2008, 11:06 AM

the new show is very disappointing. It seems to lack some integrity or has a low opinion of the viewers. It is almost exclusively rewqorked tapes from the old series packaged to make it look new, but even the updates are really old rehashes. Three examples just from this week of the weakness of this show:

1. The other night the Sohus murder case was featured. I expected an update since the prime suspect has been in a jail in Boston since August under ther name Clark Rockefeller, yet the case was still presented as unsolved even though viewers were asked to call in with info about the guy who is in jail.

2. In 1988 a bunch of KC firemen were killed. After being on UM, five people were arrested in 1997 and found guilty. New UM presented this as if they were caught yesterday. And it failed to mention that there is a challenge in court to the guilt of the five. The two guards who were featured on the original UM episode are now suspected of being the real culprits. New UM only raises questions of guilt on cases it does not want to claim as having "solved."

3. I always thought the UM episodes on Roswell were despicable because they only presented one side and take at face value wacky claims. Since the original run of UM, the Air Force has done extensive research on Roswell and produced two large reports. Yet in this new run, UM presents some of the old, discredited claims again without mention of the AF report. According to the well-documented AF report, Roswell was actually a cover-up of a secret program to send balloons up in the atmosphere. The "strange symbols" shown in the episode were actually cheap tape bought from a Queens, NY, toy company used on the balloon. The symbols were childrens symbols like you'd find on birthday present wrapping. The story of the archaeologists and the little bodies has been long refuted. The AF isn't the only one. One of the true believers in Roswell, Karl Plock, did a detailed analysis of the case and concluded the AF story was correct and that the UFO community, and, apparently, UM, have a great desire to believe and ignore inconvenient facts. Shame on you, UM!

unsolvedmysteriesfan · 11-01-2008, 09:48 AM

It's a pretty disappointing show now in comparison to the Stack videos, which were just so much better done. The new show doesn't let you love or hate a character. It goes by too quickly. It also seems to have no real interest in helping victims, just another 'entertainment' show.

mikele · 11-01-2008, 10:07 AM

it makes my eyes bleed

what's the point of having the show aspiring to help solve cold cases when they don't mention any dates? They simply put emphasis on action & entertainment. I stick with the old Stack segments as much as possible.

unsolvedmysteriesfan · 11-02-2008, 02:24 AM

It sucks, but I try to remember the names and Google them to find out more. It makes me sad, but I don't remmeber seeing the Jean Hilliard case before, for example, so those things are nice to see. I don't have the collections everyone else does, and when the show was on, I watched it every now and then, but not regularly. I regret not doing so, but there's nothing that can be done about that now.

PrettyinPink55 · 11-02-2008, 03:11 AM

One of the things that bothers me most is that they don't mention dates!!!!

Also, like some have mentioned elsewhere on this board, I would like to see less of the music and special effects and for them to focus more on the actual story.
I am glad it's back on the air, don't get me wrong, but it's hard to accept a new version of a favorite.
Also, put Farina in the field like they did Stack! It looks like he's reporting from a spaceship!!!

Big3sCompanyFan · 11-02-2008, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Clairvoyant

I hate it.I mean I like the fact that the show is back on again but it sucks i mean they would have been better off reairing the old ones with Robert Stack.. The host sucks... the music is even worse.... I mean maybe it will grow on me..

I agree. Cosgrove-Meuer still produced so WHY didn't they stick with the same cool creepy music? Plus they could've gotten a better host like the Forensic Files guy or the Autopsy chick.

I've only seen 1 and half episodes since I've seem most of those cases plus it's not as cool as the old UM.

Big3sCompanyFan · 11-02-2008, 12:31 PM

What's REALLY stupid is they show Dennis in a call center but THEY DON'T EVEN GIVE OUT A PHONE NUMBER!!

What the he*ll are they thinking??!?? LOL!

ksm1967 · 11-02-2008, 03:02 PM

I just watched the first episode I have ever seen of the new UM. I don't think it is really that bad. True it isn't the same show, but remakes, continuations, sequels never are the same. The whole point is to bring to light some unsolved crimes that someone might have information on. I hope it does that. I also enjoy seeing the updates on old cases.

I had always wondered what happened to Tom Roche. Now at least I saw he was found dead. I don't always remember the names, but seeing the story updates jogs my memory.

hostedbyrobertstack · 11-02-2008, 03:17 PM

1. They don't mention dates because these are old cases that are meant to look new... to the casual viewer on spike, they are more inclined to watch if they think this is a newer show. If they show a case and start it out in 1984, people might be inclined to lose some interest there.

2. They could have gone w/ forensic files guy, BUT... they need someone who has a nice voice AND is aesthetically pleasing. Peter Thomas(?) from forensic files would be great, but I believe he is pretty old, and having a really old guy as a host may turn younger viewers off.

ZanzibarBlue · 11-02-2008, 07:35 PM

After approx. 3 weeks on the air it's become clear to me that the show is lame.

First I could make a decent argument that the title of the show is now misleading. It should be called "Mysteries that were unsolved 15 yrs. ago, but most of which are now solved, except for the unsolved, ghosts, loch ness monster, et al."

Second, I know nothing about them but Cosgrove Muerer are listed as writers and producers. What the hell is there to write or produce?!? You've simply taken old episodes, spliced them together and bizzarely added Dennis Farina. Retread tires are more original.

Finally, does anyone doubt that a 2 -hr. new special version of this show once a season (Fall, Winter, Spring, Summer) on a Fri. / Sat. night would TROUNCE anything on TV that night? CM - WHY CAN'T YOU SEE THE GOLD MINE YOU HAVE HERE?!?

Unfortunately, we're left w/ a production team hell-bent on wrining every last dime out of a franchise whose value diminishes everyday.

Fletch · 11-03-2008, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hostedbyrobertstack

1. They don't mention dates because these are old cases that are meant to look new... to the casual viewer on spike, they are more inclined to watch if they think this is a newer show. If they show a case and start it out in 1984, people might be inclined to lose some interest there.

I agree, but it also looks pretty stupid when they provide an "update" to case and mention that the guy has been caught, was sentenced to 10 years in prison and was released after serving his time.

Dislimb · 11-03-2008, 10:59 AM

I haven't even watched it yet and based on what most of you are saying about it, I'm not even going to waste my time.

10-27-2008, 07:01 PM	#1
Mr.Clairvoyant Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Aug 30, 2005 Posts: 139	THE NEW UNSOLVED MYSTERIES I hate it.I mean I like the fact that the show is back on again but it sucks i mean they would have been better off reairing the old ones with Robert Stack.. The host sucks... the music is even worse.... I mean maybe it will grow on me..
	__________________ "Unsolved murder victims need justice too...It's up to all of us to help there families find it!!"

11-02-2008, 03:11 AM	#8
PrettyinPink55 Member Forum Celebrity Join Date: Feb 11, 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 24,601	One of the things that bothers me most is that they don't mention dates!!!! Also, like some have mentioned elsewhere on this board, I would like to see less of the music and special effects and for them to focus more on the actual story. I am glad it's back on the air, don't get me wrong, but it's hard to accept a new version of a favorite. Also, put Farina in the field like they did Stack! It looks like he's reporting from a spaceship!!!
	__________________ ♥♥♥

11-02-2008, 07:35 PM	#13
ZanzibarBlue ZanzibarBlue Occasional Poster Join Date: Aug 03, 2005 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 95	Spiked After approx. 3 weeks on the air it's become clear to me that the show is lame. First I could make a decent argument that the title of the show is now misleading. It should be called "Mysteries that were unsolved 15 yrs. ago, but most of which are now solved, except for the unsolved, ghosts, loch ness monster, et al." Second, I know nothing about them but Cosgrove Muerer are listed as writers and producers. What the hell is there to write or produce?!? You've simply taken old episodes, spliced them together and bizzarely added Dennis Farina. Retread tires are more original. Finally, does anyone doubt that a 2 -hr. new special version of this show once a season (Fall, Winter, Spring, Summer) on a Fri. / Sat. night would TROUNCE anything on TV that night? CM - WHY CAN'T YOU SEE THE GOLD MINE YOU HAVE HERE?!? Unfortunately, we're left w/ a production team hell-bent on wrining every last dime out of a franchise whose value diminishes everyday.

10-28-2008, 08:05 AM	#2
Orgazmo UM Fan Occasional Poster Join Date: Sep 05, 2008 Posts: 74	I agree, I used to get scared sh\|tless as a kid watching UM and still get shivers at times watching old eps but this new one doesn't scare me at all. But Im still going to watch it and hopefully it will grow on me a bit.

10-28-2008, 08:11 AM	#3
hovaslash Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Apr 10, 2006 Location: ma Posts: 87	Finally got a chance to see it yesterday........not too impressed. It's all CSI'd out. Meanwhile CSI et al may not exist if not for the groundwork UM layed down. I will say since the same production team is on board for the 're-launch' I am willing to give it some time. Improvements can be made.

10-28-2008, 11:06 AM	#4
jjmcgr Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Dec 15, 2005 Location: Kansas Posts: 249	the new show is very disappointing. It seems to lack some integrity or has a low opinion of the viewers. It is almost exclusively rewqorked tapes from the old series packaged to make it look new, but even the updates are really old rehashes. Three examples just from this week of the weakness of this show: 1. The other night the Sohus murder case was featured. I expected an update since the prime suspect has been in a jail in Boston since August under ther name Clark Rockefeller, yet the case was still presented as unsolved even though viewers were asked to call in with info about the guy who is in jail. 2. In 1988 a bunch of KC firemen were killed. After being on UM, five people were arrested in 1997 and found guilty. New UM presented this as if they were caught yesterday. And it failed to mention that there is a challenge in court to the guilt of the five. The two guards who were featured on the original UM episode are now suspected of being the real culprits. New UM only raises questions of guilt on cases it does not want to claim as having "solved." 3. I always thought the UM episodes on Roswell were despicable because they only presented one side and take at face value wacky claims. Since the original run of UM, the Air Force has done extensive research on Roswell and produced two large reports. Yet in this new run, UM presents some of the old, discredited claims again without mention of the AF report. According to the well-documented AF report, Roswell was actually a cover-up of a secret program to send balloons up in the atmosphere. The "strange symbols" shown in the episode were actually cheap tape bought from a Queens, NY, toy company used on the balloon. The symbols were childrens symbols like you'd find on birthday present wrapping. The story of the archaeologists and the little bodies has been long refuted. The AF isn't the only one. One of the true believers in Roswell, Karl Plock, did a detailed analysis of the case and concluded the AF story was correct and that the UFO community, and, apparently, UM, have a great desire to believe and ignore inconvenient facts. Shame on you, UM!

11-01-2008, 09:48 AM	#5
unsolvedmysteriesfan Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Nov 25, 2007 Posts: 218	It's a pretty disappointing show now in comparison to the Stack videos, which were just so much better done. The new show doesn't let you love or hate a character. It goes by too quickly. It also seems to have no real interest in helping victims, just another 'entertainment' show.

11-01-2008, 10:07 AM	#6
mikele Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Aug 25, 2008 Location: old continent Posts: 27	it makes my eyes bleed what's the point of having the show aspiring to help solve cold cases when they don't mention any dates? They simply put emphasis on action & entertainment. I stick with the old Stack segments as much as possible.

11-02-2008, 02:24 AM	#7
unsolvedmysteriesfan Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Nov 25, 2007 Posts: 218	It sucks, but I try to remember the names and Google them to find out more. It makes me sad, but I don't remmeber seeing the Jean Hilliard case before, for example, so those things are nice to see. I don't have the collections everyone else does, and when the show was on, I watched it every now and then, but not regularly. I regret not doing so, but there's nothing that can be done about that now.

11-02-2008, 12:31 PM	#10
Big3sCompanyFan Member Senior Member Join Date: Sep 16, 2003 Posts: 2,493	What's REALLY stupid is they show Dennis in a call center but THEY DON'T EVEN GIVE OUT A PHONE NUMBER!! What the he*ll are they thinking??!?? LOL!

11-02-2008, 03:02 PM	#11
ksm1967 Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Oct 13, 2008 Posts: 26	I just watched the first episode I have ever seen of the new UM. I don't think it is really that bad. True it isn't the same show, but remakes, continuations, sequels never are the same. The whole point is to bring to light some unsolved crimes that someone might have information on. I hope it does that. I also enjoy seeing the updates on old cases. I had always wondered what happened to Tom Roche. Now at least I saw he was found dead. I don't always remember the names, but seeing the story updates jogs my memory.

11-02-2008, 03:17 PM	#12
hostedbyrobertstack Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 23, 2007 Location: OH Posts: 436	1. They don't mention dates because these are old cases that are meant to look new... to the casual viewer on spike, they are more inclined to watch if they think this is a newer show. If they show a case and start it out in 1984, people might be inclined to lose some interest there. 2. They could have gone w/ forensic files guy, BUT... they need someone who has a nice voice AND is aesthetically pleasing. Peter Thomas(?) from forensic files would be great, but I believe he is pretty old, and having a really old guy as a host may turn younger viewers off.

11-03-2008, 10:59 AM	#15
Dislimb Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Mar 23, 2006 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 431	I haven't even watched it yet and based on what most of you are saying about it, I'm not even going to waste my time.