Maestros del crimen

First of all, the diversity complaints are preposterous. Frankly I can't tell if they're doing satire or not. My problem is with the ongoing almost total absense of scientific evidence underscored in these cases. A & E can't help it if most people believe that interpretation of human reactions and body language is reasonable grounds for deciding guilt. They can help it if they choose to include that information as though it seals the deal. If you want to watch a show where the vast majority of cases are based on circumstantial evidence and unchallenged "mind reading" assertions from the people making important legal decisions, then this is the show for you.

First off this show isn't exactly perfect but it is solid. Which is more than I can say for most other murder mystery documentaries. What I really appreciate about this series is that they never resort to using corny recreated cut scenes. Its all real footage. I strongly dislike how reliant other series are on this method and it ruins the experience for me.

The one thing I do dislike is how at the start of each episode theres a 1-2 minute summary given that in some cases incapsulates like half of what the entire episode is about and I get that those are supposed to catch peoples attention but I dislike that introduction method. (So I always skip the first 2 minutes.)

7/10

STOP USING CORNY RECREATED SCENES IN CRIME DOCUMENTARIES.

First off, I don't think a single person that has reviewed this show has actually watched it. They're all saying things that have zero to do with this show. One person is complaining about 'reenactments." There are zero reenactments in this show. Another person is complaining about the results of cases, like the producers have anything to do with that.

This show is like a Law and order episode, the first half is about the case, the second half is the trial. So unlike a lot of other crimes shows out there today, they don't spend 15 minutes on the six guys they interviewed who had nothing to do with the case. There isn't a lot of fat. You get about half on the case, half on the trial.

They use a lot of video, photos and interview the principles in the case. That's it.

I personally can't stand when they show the detectives looking at a case book or walking in slow motion, this assumes we're all stupid and need to see them solving the case. It's annoying. Also the little filters like showing photos of the victims through an old timey film filter or little sparkles or things that are done to evoke emotion. We don't need this. There is emotion simply from the case and the crime itself. We don't need these other fake things done that assume people are stupid. People are not stupid and just want to see the straight facts with shots of the detective driving.

Outside that, I really like this show. Yeah, there are a couple cases that will have you screaming at the TV. I do hate that not everyone on the show was convicted and you know they're guilty. But overall, this is one of the best crime shows out there. I hope they do another season (I've watched the first two).

Really thought this was fake or slapped together by using other documentaries on the same case from different sources - just all conveniently leaving out the damming evidence that proves these cases should have any convicted humans. After watching two I am unsure why Hulu is having a hard time doing what every type of social platforms been doing for well ever.

Its a good show, although if you are a crime show buff you have seen all of these cases before, but all of a sudden they forgot about Diversity. Strange how they chose to leave that out now when thats not what the statistics show. So if Diversity is done in all other shows and movies now, you have to do it here as well too. Works both ways.