melwilson-80584

Many reviewers have expressed dissatisfaction with this documentary because it is "too slow" and "clunky". Yes, it kind of drags on here and there, and yes there are SO MANY people involved, but that's because the underlying truth is complicated and convoluted. It would be an egregious oversimplification if the documentary were presented in a simple linear, chronological style. If you enjoy true crime stories, give it a go and you won't be disappointed. ps. 'The Innocent Man' will undoubtedly be compared to 'Making A Murderer'. In my opinion MAM is a more shocking and infuriating story in part because (a) you get to know Steven Avery (who himself was wrongfully convicted) and his family and you start to empathize with them all, and b) the manipulation of Brendan Dassey, a minor, in the investigation and subsequent conviction. TIM doesn't get quite as close to the main subjects and as such it is easier to watch it with an objective mindset.

I am just about to start S.1. E.8. So far my family and I (all adults) have been totally digging this show. It took me a few episodes to accept John Krasinski as Jack rather than Jim Halpert, but once I got past that I got into the show. I see a lot of negative reviews on here, many saying the show deviates too far from the original Tom Clancy novels. I am also disheartened to read the reviews saying the book is too PC and not sufficiently. All I can say is that after decades of watching the same old formulaic macho espionage shows, it is refreshing to watch something where the main characters express real life emotions.

I watched both seasons of The Investigator before I looked it up on IMDB. I thought both seasons were OK (otherwise I would have stopped watching) and am surprised to see all the very low ratings (0, 1, 2 etc).

The show is based on true unsolved crimes. The crimes and events are convoluted and fascinating to learn about. And although Mark Williams-Thomas ("the Investigator") doesn't solve the mysteries, I give him credit for retracing the original investigations and turning over every stone and shedding some new light on the mysteries. The show follows his thought processes which involves numerous red herrings and dead ends. But hey that's real life investigative work. It's why the mysteries still remain unsolved after 30 years.

So while the underlying stories are interesting, there was a lot of filler. As other commenters have pointed out, there was a lot of repetition. A little bit of repetition is necessary because the stories are so convoluted and it is easy to lose track, but the show goes overboard. Both seasons could have easily been edited down to an 90 minutes each.

That said, I enjoyed it and have no problem recommending it if you like true crime dramas. Especially season 1.