Dossiers FBI

Most of the episodes are okay, but the two-part stories tend to really bog down. They could have easily covered the details in a single episode, and I found myself losing interest in the tedium.

Every single episode is started with a monologue, where the narrator spoils the entire episode and even reveals exactly how the key evidence was found.

It's painfully obvious that this was not a decision by the creators, but rather by the narrator demanding that every episode start with a close in on his face. Whether it's for self-promotion, or that he sincerely believed we viewers want to see his face more is unclear, but this makes the entire series unwatchable.

I greatly admire the work of the FBI, but the TV series often makes the FBI looks like idiots taking vcredit for other peoples work. I just saw an episode where, after all the research by the FBI on a car jacker / killer, the actual arrest was made by a lone local policeman who saw a car drive by with the driver wearing a nylon mask. He pursued alone, no back was available for most of the arrest, and then after the arrest, the FBI calls a meeting and acts like they succeeded. Finding the killer was completely coincidental, it had nothing to do with the FBI.

I've seen other episodes where the FBI does less than perfect work, and that's ok, by why put them on national TV?

The show features some interesting cases but suffers hugely from storytelling. It's really, really slow and takes its sweet time to describe cases where so much time is wasted on details that don't matter and narrator keeps repeating the same things over and over just to fill 60 minutes.

If they reduced episode time to 30 mins, tightened storytelling and reduced repetitiveness and slow narration style, this could have been a much better show.

great show, pity it leaves out the evidence that doesn't support their story. Also very misleading, it shows pictures of the "crime scene" however they too are reenactments and incorrect ones at that It has the potential to be a halfway decent show if it was done with an unbiased view. They seemed to bend the "evidence" to suit their story and that the officials want to see. What wasn't mentioned was that the case shown has had the sentence overturned and is also being retried, due to new evidence (old evidence that had been reassessed) and makes it impossible for the crime to happen the way it was outlined. If they pick up their standard and look at cases from a neutral view it could be a passable show