17 reviews
Very watchable series on solved crimes. The narrator is an actor but his over-the-top style does become irritating.
The reenactments are brief. This show instead focuses on interviews with the actual investigators, perhaps too much so. What I really don't like is that this 30 minute show covers two cases per episode, so there isn't a lot of chance to dig into a typical case. Keeping everything brief limits the likelihood of boring the audience, but it's only a moment after learning the details of the crime that they name the suspect and then solve it just as quickly. I think this really prevents the show from impacting its audience.
Could be great if the horrendous narrator, sounds like a football hooligan, is replaced by a proper professional narrator and cheap, typical American, gimmicks are left out.
The series looks interesting but I am afraid that I couldn't get past the first 5 minutes of any of them because of the narrator's EXTREMELY irritating offering.
I could do much better at probaly a fraction of the cost!
Until you get rid of him, the series will not be a success.
I could do much better at probaly a fraction of the cost!
Until you get rid of him, the series will not be a success.
A poorly presented programme complete with tabloid clichés regurgitated by some actor and not even the date of the crimes. The police interviews are appropriately professional and compassionate which highlights even more the infantile narrator's script.
Having the female police Detectives giving accounts of their investigations instead of their managers is a big bonus.
Just having a retired detective (not a journalist) narrating a grown-up script would elevate this show from exploitative to informative.
Having the female police Detectives giving accounts of their investigations instead of their managers is a big bonus.
Just having a retired detective (not a journalist) narrating a grown-up script would elevate this show from exploitative to informative.
I don't care what cancel whiners are saying, this is a good show, good stories, good real detective re-enactments.
My only complaint is to see criminals in the UK getting short sentences. Even if you get 10, 25 to life, they will not serve it all unless crim ate a baby and gets 75 yrs to life.
My only complaint is to see criminals in the UK getting short sentences. Even if you get 10, 25 to life, they will not serve it all unless crim ate a baby and gets 75 yrs to life.
- johnwwwatson
- Jan 14, 2022
- Permalink
I really enjoyed this program but have stopped watching because of the ridiculous way the narrator speaks, trying to sound mysterious/dramatic. Please change him, or ask him to speak normally.
- gillkarran
- Jan 5, 2022
- Permalink
And the female investigator is SMOKING HOT WOW!!! Her lips just made me feel all fuzzy inside mmmm and she has a tongue ring on top of having very sexy lips. =D
- firballblaze-69689
- Jan 13, 2021
- Permalink
Couldn't tell you if the show is good or not, as the narrator is so poor, I couldn't continue watching. The upward inflection at the end of every sentence is excrutiating. Forcing people to listen to his narration could be used as a torture technique. Worse than fingernails on a blackboard. The show's producers really need to replace him or risk losing lots of viewers.
- kateculshaw
- Jan 20, 2022
- Permalink
We find it very difficult to watch as the narrator has such a poor voice, it is so flat. Shame because it potentially is an interesting series. Please find someone who can actually narrate.
- koellis-32845
- Jan 16, 2022
- Permalink
Gave it five minutes, the narrator is terrible and makes it unwatchable. Shame as the stories are no doubt interesting but without the proper telling, it falls flat on its face.
The Narrator is just not the right person to do this job, he tries to make it exciting but fails, he is good on scammers but this sort of stuff is just not right for him. Rav wilding would be better or Jamie Theakston. Please if there is another series change him to one of the 2 above. Trying to make it interesting you need a specific voice narrating to find the right audience, this just makes people laugh and switch off. It's one of those things where he is doing too many things at the moment and pops up everywhere on tele to the point you think "not again" a good show apart from the narrators.
- echoecho-12988
- Apr 9, 2023
- Permalink
The programme itself is fine,but Chuku Modu 's narrative is the absolute worst ever. He seems to adopt a ridiculous intonation, stressing the wrong words in the wrong places. I am surprised the programme producers haven't identified this as an issue. Modu is irritating, over the top, immature and appears to try and copy his American counterparts, who do the job much better than he does. Its a shame he doesn't seem able to speak properly, he ruins the enjoyment of what could have been a decent show. Shall not be watching this any more, unless of course the narrator is changed. Don't jeopardise the whole programme for the sake of bad narration.
- jjane-56242
- Jun 6, 2024
- Permalink
The whole series is lost by the terrible voice style of the narrator who is jarring to say the least. If I could watch it without sound, I would!
The entire series is ruined by Chuku Modu narrating in a style which grates and irritates throughout the programme. If one person who ruin an entire series, he does it. How did nobody at the BBC realise the mistake they made. Otherwise, it would have been an enjoyable series of events based on how forces were solving crimes and taking the perpetrators to justice.its a shame they didn't arrest Chuku Modu at the end of the series for impersonating a narrator!
The entire series is ruined by Chuku Modu narrating in a style which grates and irritates throughout the programme. If one person who ruin an entire series, he does it. How did nobody at the BBC realise the mistake they made. Otherwise, it would have been an enjoyable series of events based on how forces were solving crimes and taking the perpetrators to justice.its a shame they didn't arrest Chuku Modu at the end of the series for impersonating a narrator!
- jaslally-68633
- May 7, 2024
- Permalink
It's not the narrator that makes this programme aggravating - it's the blurred out images he talks over. Obviously blurring images to protect identities or even locations is crucial for a crime show. But... just about every library shot image and almost all reconstructions, are blurred. That means about half of the programme is blurred. Things like a close-up of a hedge, random rooftops, gloved hands, etc. It's pointless and really aggravating; making you strain your eyes to work out what the image is. I know the current trend is to blur images but this one goes too far. If that stopped, I think it's a well put together programme and some of the ire directed at the narrator would stop.
- jereth-284-123075
- Apr 13, 2023
- Permalink
The content and the stories are very good but FFS stop the over narrating. It sounds so strange and almost makes a serious subject comical. It's like he's swallowed an 'Over Dramatic' pill. The Over. Long. Pauses. Between. Words. Is. Also. Very Off. Putting
I can't imagine what the casting lot were thinking but they can't have listening.
Why do IMBD insist on so many characters?
Why do IMBD insist on so many characters?
Why do IMBD insist on so many characters?
Why do IMBD insist on so many characters?
The End. The End The End The End the end of the story and it was really good and I think.
I can't imagine what the casting lot were thinking but they can't have listening.
Why do IMBD insist on so many characters?
Why do IMBD insist on so many characters?
Why do IMBD insist on so many characters?
Why do IMBD insist on so many characters?
The End. The End The End The End the end of the story and it was really good and I think.
The investigation process is interesting but I can't watch it because of the narration, it's terrible and just spoils the whole story. Sorry but that needs to be changed, doesn't seem like I'm alone either!
- pjranderson
- Jan 25, 2022
- Permalink