I'm only on episode one and I am already doubting I will ever get to episode two. To me true crime documentaries are like horror movies. I really like the good ones, but there are very few good ones and an abundance of weak attempts.
When it comes to true crime, the biggest offence in my eyes is when they try to hopelessly stretch a story that could be told in 3 sentences to 45-60 minutes. (Or even worse, a whole series about one case that has practically no substance.) Now this one seems very much like one of those. Based on this one episode it certainly is. The story itself could be interesting, but it really does not have that much to it. Not much to explain, not much to unfold. So it would be great for a 10-15 minutes segment, but it becomes just plain boring when they try to make a 40 minute episode out of it.
It does manage to avoid a few other classic mistakes, like the overly dramatic, puffed up statements like "there never was a more horrible case than this", or "your blood will just cuuuuuurdle watching this!". They don't do the constant repeats either that can ruin a crime documentary, where they remind you every 3 seconds about stuff they already established 5 times. The usual overused cliche phrases are also missing, like "she just lit up any room she entered", or "and that just blew the case WIDE open!". All that is great.
But then again, these positives just can't seem to be able to balance out the horribly slow pace. E.g. If your whole story is that you and your partner went out for a walk, seen a cute kitten, had some great conversation and went home, then don't spend 20 minutes explaining how from early morning you were just looking at your shoes and knew they will be important today, they will have some fantastic adventures, or another 20 minutes dedicated to a friend talking about how they always knew you two were huge lovers of the outdoors, your whole life just revolved around it etc. It's much better to have a short but interesting episode, than a long but boring one.
