User reviews

Interesting Note: This series will test your patience simply because it intentionally goes slow for a truly somber effect. Here's my secret: change the speed you watch this to 1.5X. The dialog is just as understandable and you won't feel like everything is in slow motion any longer. It's actually a better show! Onward to actually reviewing Cold Case Files.

Cold case crime shows have usually left the viewer hanging as are the cases at the time the episodes were made. This one is not another one of those. These cases are of that small percentage that languish for years and are finally solved. That in itself is of more interest to this viewer. The care and quality of the way the stories are told and recreated is seriously good. In fact it's the seriousness of presenting these cases that makes it also exceptional within the genre. These are tragic cases with extended periods of no breaks and as a result no closure for the families, It is truly poignant and the law enforcement personnel eventually solving these give the family a chance at a degree of peace. This kind of show is much better than the average crime TV shows in my opinion. Why it didn't get more seasons is a mystery? Surely others see this as a quality production with compelling stories?

A collection of solved cold cases as told by the families and investigating officers. Each episode tells the story of one case, from the time of the initial murder and the cause of the case to go cold, through the modern day solving. The cinematography and storytelling of each episode keeps you interested and has good flow. I really enjoyed that the cases were all solved eventually.

I enjoy this program for its intensity in mystery build-up; the cinematography is also stellar.

Albeit some cringeworthy elements; the cheesy over-dramatization, the snail-like "get to the point" pacing and Danny Glover's inordinately irritating and incomprehensible narration, the show is more than decent and worthy of any true crime lover.

Please contact me as soon as possible! My sister was killed in 1983 and it is a cold case. I was just watching Cold Case Files, Season 1 Episode 3 "She Never Came Home" and was particularly interested in this episode as I noted similarities in this case, as the victim was also only 14, the murder occurred in the same town and only a few months after my sister's murder. I was shocked to hear my sister's name mentioned as I was watching it and the detective identified a man as her killer. Imagine my shock, as I had not heard this news!!! First I was upset I wasn't informed, especially since I realized the show originally aired in 2017 then I was given false hope when I called the detective on the case, only to find out this information is FALSE! How can a show like this that relies on tips from the public to help solve these cases allow this to even happen?!? The victims/ public rely on the accuracy of these shows to help get the information out there to help get answers, tips and RESOLUTION. This kind of misinformation can be very detrimental to the case! One would think the producers would consult with the actual detectives on the case before airing these shows to get the facts straight. This is not okay!

One of the best shows I have ever seen on tv! Its absolutely gripping. Sucks u in from the beginning and you just can't stop watching! I cant wait for more episodes! Bravo!

I love true crime because of the mystery of it all. I'm not morbid but curious of how cruel human beings can be. This series is a keeper Netflix and prime

A good revamp of the original series of should I say a good continuation of a great original series. Some may say it's not a patch on the original or that it's too long but it captures the anguish of the victims family, it captures the tense situations and you can almost feel the the pain the family is going through. In my humble opinion each case is handled sensitively and informatively and Danny Glover makes a brilliant addition as a narrator. On a side note I liked the blurred effect of the re-enactments. Great watch and highlights the importance of never giving up on cases that have gone cold.

Unlike some reboots, this series is watchable. It manages to hold your attention without being annoying. I do miss the constant narration of the original show but its a nice addition when Glover comes on. In the interim, there's a lot of vocalizations from detectives and family members. Like a lot of modern shows, they do have a large amount of written info that is not offered verbally, so if you're not actually watching 100% you might miss important details. There are somewhat annoying aspects, such as the intentionally slow speech to drag the show out, repetitive info, and inaccurate visuals - like when they find out it wasn't Danita they still keep showing her pic while discussing the new suspect; however, contrary to one review, it is indeed a 1971 Ford Pinto in the Officer Down episode, not a Pacer - often confused by casual observers. There is a lot of blood and disturbing imagery but not as bad as CSI, for instance. Some are frustrating to realize the perp was the original suspect but some clue or witness was not in the open for decades. Glad these fams got some closure.

Why hire a narrator with such an awful speech impediment? It's next to impossible to understand half of what Glover says because he cannot enunciate to save his life!

Glover is just an unnecessary element; otherwise the show is good.

It seems obvious they're just using Bill Kurtis' name to draw people who liked the original CCF... Don't expect much BK... He doesn't narrate. He gives about 5-6 brief comments for the whole hour... Weird if you're used to the original. Still good but GEEZ Bill, you could practically take a nap between your comments...

They kept talking about a blue Ford Pinto but then showed an AMC Pacer! Not even close.

Other than that, decent true crime show but it does tend to drag a little bit. No big deal. Worth a watch if you're into this kind of show.

Some interesting cases depicted here but the presentation is frustrating. All reconstruction are shown in slow motion, often with some blurring and often in short bursts. This style could be effective if used judiciously - it conveys lack of clarity and confusion - but it's used way too much in this series.

I find this series exceptional in its treatment of each story. The interviewees are well spoken and seem to have been dealt with respect and dignity. We the viewers are also treated respectfully: the program doesn't resort to utilizing stock images from the case over and over or recycle pan shots to extend 10 minutes of info into a 30 minute film.

The one thing that has irked me: twice, in episode 1 and again in episode 6 of season 1, they clearly describe a particular make and model of a vehicle, and then proceed to use a completely different vehicle in the re-enactment. I'm not sure why it bothers me quite so much... perhaps it's that it now calls to mind a question as to the veracity of all the other visual re-enactments/information presented. The producers clearly didn't mind using photos: they couldn't be bothered to seek stock images of the actual vehicles involved in those cases?

As someone who is addicted to true crime and forensic series shows, this is a real standout. The production is very professional and artistically executed, including the perfect background music chosen. Kudos to all involved!

Now I watched all 10 episodes of Season 1 on Hulu and I noticed a comment on here from another person stating that a person who was named in episode 3 was an on going cold case and they had in fact used false information I agree with the person saying that airing false information is detrimental to an on going case or cold case and I am unsure of the person's name that was mentioned but to the commentor I say I hope that case gets solved here were I live we have a cold case involving 2 people whom were murdered right here in my town and no one is trying to solve it but then again the cops and city are corrupt but still a great show but they need to double check their sources so they don't falsely air incorrect information

I never really cared for certain ways that crime shows tell the story. I feel like the majority of them are just clips of the suspect being interviewed and the video is all fuzzy and the reasons why they think they are the killer. In this show it's just thought out so well, and told so well. I love hearing the story behind the families of the victims because then you can feel how real it is and you get more invested because you want justice for the family so bad. I couldn't stop watching this show as soon as I started the first episode. What makes me upset is that they stopped after 10 episodes. I fall in love with it and then there's only one season. Haha. I guess my question is, are they going to continue with this show eventually or are they completely done with it? I am assuming after 3 years they aren't going to come out with any more but I really wish they would. I could binge watch this show forever.

This show is entertaining to me. I thought it was done well. Not sure if the stories are accurate. But i enjoyed it very much.

I started watching this show when I was 10 years old and I've been hooked ever since. The episodes are well done and leave a lasting impression. You hear from family and detectives who worked the case and the story is told without reenactments. I am OVERJOYED that they brought the original narrator, Bill Kurtis, back!! He is a huge part of what makes the show great. That Danny narrator was horrible and sounded like the Grinch from Whoville. I did and still do fall asleep listening to Kurtis's calming voice in this show so I was thrilled that he was put back on. The show does a great job of telling a brief history of the victim and then proceeds to tell the story of the case in a chronological order, from what the victim was doing when they were killed all the way to the interrogation, trial and everything in between. It contains leads that were dead ends to help keep you guessing who the killer was until the very end! The best and original (next to forensic files) of true crime!!

Viewers who enjoyed the original run of Cold Case files may be disappointed with the reboot. This new series lacks the prominent narrational presence of Bill Kurtis.

While Kurtis does add narration to this show, he is sparsely heard. His inclusion feels like a token gesture that only serves as a throwback to the original series. Additionally, the original Cold Case files theme that once gave audiences the heebie-jeebies has been altered; it's not nearly as ominous as it once was.

At the risk of sounding callous, I must add that this new version of Cold Case files focuses too much on victims' personal lives and not enough on actual investigations. Rather than being a program about forensics and detective work, Cold Case files(2017-) plays more like a biography of murdered individuals. It's not interesting, and it's not entertaining.

3 stars.

The original Cold Case Files is one if my all time favorite shows. Maybe that's why I find this revamp disappointing. For starters these episodes should be condensed down to 30 mins. The episodes are repetitive and boring. Also, Danny Glover is a great guy but I find his voice irritating. I think this program is so far from being Cold Case files they should of given it a new name and made it a completely different show.

This reboot loses all of the umf that they original series had. For one, bill Kurt's talks a Only about 30% of the time. Otherwise it's filled with the family almost 60% and police the rest. Ot important to k ow SOMETHING about the victim, but it has way too much filler that drags everything down. The pace is slow. Just when yiu are getting interested then another 10 minutes of trivial nonsense. You start to lose track of everything. I find myself skipping spots and not lose out on the case. Just goes to show you how unimportant most of the show is. It's like a really bad sequel that never gets better.

I have watched thousands of true crime shows. So I know what makes an informative and engaging story. The reason I give this series 2 stars is, first of all, the visual experience. There is too much shifting between dozens of shots that do not advance the plot or even flesh out the setting for viewers. Many of them are blurry backgrounds with some random object in the foreground. Or vehicles driving nowhere. And I find that true crime told from the perspective of one or two people and a detective is the most effective, because it helps create intimacy with what the viewer is seeing and hearing. And it helps develop a sense of compassion for the victims, which is missing here. This is not a series of well-told true tales. It is a mishmash of visual clips and audio sound bites. Maybe since these were cold cases, many years in the solving, those left behind were left to stew in their own rage -- and they seem to be at the center of these stories. Episodes are drenched in that sense of futility, even though all of the cases have now been solved. Wasn't to my liking, but many of the other reviewers think the show is excellent. Maybe I should stick to podcasts where there are only one or two narrators.