Great insight to unsolved murders in my hometown.. I would think the editors or producers would have caught such a simple mistake. There is a connection to our civic theater with these murders but yet the episode is called " The Phantom of the CIVIL Theater "
11 Reviews
Bring It Back
Jeffronthi-950-5431349 April 2019
Drab, over dramatic, American attempt at "journalism"
rittings-117-4424854 January 2015
Let me get this one out straight away, M. William Phelps claims to be a "journalist". He's more like a cheesy reality star, with very little star quality. His corny presentations are perhaps only undercut by an even worse musical underscore - and that by an even cornier "inside serial killer" with the "codename" of 'Raven.'
It is completely un-watchable, lowest denominator, drivel-formed television programming. I don't even know how the good name of Discovery even agreed to attach itself with this terrible stuff. I'm used to American cheeseballing faux-reality TV (with poorly constructed stuff like "Cheaters" or "Lizard Lick Towing") - but this one tries so hard to pass off as a serious crime show that it ends up being toe-curlingly cringe-worthy.
Avoid it at all costs if you're a serious lover of crime documentaries. It will waste several hours of your life if you try to "give it a go" (as did I). 4 episodes (from a selection of seasons) and it never gets any better - if anything, it gets worse.
The only thing this might be good for is driving up the profits of your local liquor store as you'll find yourself needed a liter bottle of Jack Daniels to make it through... though at least the show does give you some good tips and choices on how you'd like to bump off Phelps and the rest of the production team for inflicting this upon society.
It is completely un-watchable, lowest denominator, drivel-formed television programming. I don't even know how the good name of Discovery even agreed to attach itself with this terrible stuff. I'm used to American cheeseballing faux-reality TV (with poorly constructed stuff like "Cheaters" or "Lizard Lick Towing") - but this one tries so hard to pass off as a serious crime show that it ends up being toe-curlingly cringe-worthy.
Avoid it at all costs if you're a serious lover of crime documentaries. It will waste several hours of your life if you try to "give it a go" (as did I). 4 episodes (from a selection of seasons) and it never gets any better - if anything, it gets worse.
The only thing this might be good for is driving up the profits of your local liquor store as you'll find yourself needed a liter bottle of Jack Daniels to make it through... though at least the show does give you some good tips and choices on how you'd like to bump off Phelps and the rest of the production team for inflicting this upon society.
All about Phelps - bereft of detail or respect.
mrdoyle24 February 2016
True crime falls into two basic categories: the somber, detailed, respectful type that places its emphasis on the events and the victims - and the loud, percussive, sensationalist type that focuses on the presenter. Dark Minds falls hard into the latter pigeonhole. There are quite a few churned out programs featuring preening forensic types who love the camera more than the lab, but none of these people are as disrespectful or narcissistic as M. William Phelps, who chews up the scenery at every opportunity, whether on camera or in voice over.
This program is presented as if it's hard-boiled fiction, the cod suspense a terrible mask, as if there might be a chance the victims weren't really brutally murdered in real life. In the wake of recent masterpieces like The Jinx, Making a Murderer and the first two seasons of A Crime to Remember, Dark Minds serves as an example to potential film makers of what not to do when approaching such material.
This program is presented as if it's hard-boiled fiction, the cod suspense a terrible mask, as if there might be a chance the victims weren't really brutally murdered in real life. In the wake of recent masterpieces like The Jinx, Making a Murderer and the first two seasons of A Crime to Remember, Dark Minds serves as an example to potential film makers of what not to do when approaching such material.
Dark Minds...Good Stuff !
imajazzygal24 October 2018
Ego fest
drojams12 April 2014
From the early days of FORENSIC FILES and THE NEW DETECTIVES,to the not so true reenactments of shows like BEHIND CASTLE WALLS, I m a big fan of Crime TV.
As I recall the first of these (well done) reenactment crime shows was the popular series DEADLY WOMEN,featuring commentary from former FBI Profiler,CANDICE DeLONG. This is the show that introduced me to crime writer M.WILLIAM PHELPS. As time went by, the fore mentioned commentators began to seem as if they believed themselves true experts in all things criminal. DARK MINDS pushes this ego fest a step further by pitting two crime writers together to state the obvious about matters of public record whether it is relevant or not, much like the B celebrity cast of Smoking Gun's World's Dumbest. PHELPS and KELLY boring opinions at each other, and look at a speaker on the table with disgust, as if to say "i hate that we have to consult this evil serial killer." Well, I could be wrong, but "Raven's" accent sounds a lot like John Kelly's, and that would explain why a serial killer locked in the safety of a maximum security prison feels the need to disguise his voice. It Just plays out like fiction.
As I recall the first of these (well done) reenactment crime shows was the popular series DEADLY WOMEN,featuring commentary from former FBI Profiler,CANDICE DeLONG. This is the show that introduced me to crime writer M.WILLIAM PHELPS. As time went by, the fore mentioned commentators began to seem as if they believed themselves true experts in all things criminal. DARK MINDS pushes this ego fest a step further by pitting two crime writers together to state the obvious about matters of public record whether it is relevant or not, much like the B celebrity cast of Smoking Gun's World's Dumbest. PHELPS and KELLY boring opinions at each other, and look at a speaker on the table with disgust, as if to say "i hate that we have to consult this evil serial killer." Well, I could be wrong, but "Raven's" accent sounds a lot like John Kelly's, and that would explain why a serial killer locked in the safety of a maximum security prison feels the need to disguise his voice. It Just plays out like fiction.
This is a great series tacking a very unique part of true crime
nathanielcunningham-1319314 October 2018
Phelps is great as the host of a show investigating unsolved crimes. He explores many different scenarios and suspects and sometimes he gets really close to very probable person of interest. You really need to watch this show with the fact these crimes are unsolved in mind. Many comments and reviews express discounted at the lack of a cookie cutter ending to the whodunit. The host is clearly very emotionally invested in solving these crimes and he has brought attention to cases that would probably be sitting in a cold case file untouched and forgotten about. 10 out of 10 if your a true crime buff this is a great addition to your collection.
Dramatic but functional
Tinytinusje23 July 2016
- M. William Phelps as a writer is successful, but as a host doesn't work too well, he does create a dramatic stage for his own moral display, which doesn't to the series a lot of good. However you can imagine this dramatic tone appeals to a larger sensation seeking audience. His implying to solve these crimes at the start of each episode is a misleading suggestion since the series is just a linear dramatized sum up of known events that occurred and are suspect to be the work of uncaught serial killers. The addition of an anonymous serial killer as an adviser is completely obsolete, the questions are self answering and the answers are common knowledge. It seems to be added to the series as a sensational aspect and serves to thrill the audience. + The series does work for a larger audience and to bring the cases back under the attention of the public cannot be seen as a bad thing. Whether it actually has done anything for these cases is unknown.
really bad
eleannasludge20 February 2016
Seriously this show is bad. All we see is a self centered man (with annoying appearance) talking about unsolved cases and he doesn't offer anything to the cases. So lame.
Other shows like this are amazing so I don't see why anyone would prefer to watch this one. No need to waste your time.
Since I am a fan I was excited to see another true crime series and see how profilers are working or at least how a case went. Nothing. Just nothing.
Such a shame that John Kelly is in this show. Shame that 13 is too and the result is so disappointing.
Other shows like this are amazing so I don't see why anyone would prefer to watch this one. No need to waste your time.
Since I am a fan I was excited to see another true crime series and see how profilers are working or at least how a case went. Nothing. Just nothing.
Such a shame that John Kelly is in this show. Shame that 13 is too and the result is so disappointing.
Hold the cheese, please
anonymousfidelis8 July 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I tried to watch this. It's just that terrible.
The host is a self-proclaimed investigative journalist, though he offers no proof in this show that he is anything but a prolific book "writer" whose books are nearly as bad as this show, who is also a hammy, cheesy, narcissist, and apparently has a fragile ego. He feels the need to constantly insult people, places and even towns and cities in order to puff himself up. He's not above putting himself in the forefront of the camera and the show, as if it were all about him.. which this show appears to be. The victims and their families are simply props for his pathetic need for relevancy.
You have an alleged profiler who, if he were a profiler and had the most basic knowledge, would know that any one serial killer would not know how any other serial killer thinks or operates. Its ludicrous! That same profiler and the obnoxiously over dramatic host neither one can tell the difference between a spree killer and a serial killer which is profiling 101. Yes the difference is important.
Add to the mix an actual serial killer, who will know nothing about any killer but himself, and this is a recipe for complete disaster.Compassion for the host wanes quickly when you realize he's using the death of a "relative" over and over and over, and over. It's a horrible thing to have happened, but to preface every single episode with it? Do us a favor, at least shed one fake tear..That whole part of it all makes the audience realize he's going for the sympathy of the viewer for himself, more than anyone else. He does this in every episode.
Simply put, this show offers no proof that anyone on this show is qualified in any way, shape or form, to do anything other than make it the most painful-to- watch, cheesiest, "crime" show ever aired. I found myself reaching for the cholesterol medicine after watching it.
The host is a self-proclaimed investigative journalist, though he offers no proof in this show that he is anything but a prolific book "writer" whose books are nearly as bad as this show, who is also a hammy, cheesy, narcissist, and apparently has a fragile ego. He feels the need to constantly insult people, places and even towns and cities in order to puff himself up. He's not above putting himself in the forefront of the camera and the show, as if it were all about him.. which this show appears to be. The victims and their families are simply props for his pathetic need for relevancy.
You have an alleged profiler who, if he were a profiler and had the most basic knowledge, would know that any one serial killer would not know how any other serial killer thinks or operates. Its ludicrous! That same profiler and the obnoxiously over dramatic host neither one can tell the difference between a spree killer and a serial killer which is profiling 101. Yes the difference is important.
Add to the mix an actual serial killer, who will know nothing about any killer but himself, and this is a recipe for complete disaster.Compassion for the host wanes quickly when you realize he's using the death of a "relative" over and over and over, and over. It's a horrible thing to have happened, but to preface every single episode with it? Do us a favor, at least shed one fake tear..That whole part of it all makes the audience realize he's going for the sympathy of the viewer for himself, more than anyone else. He does this in every episode.
Simply put, this show offers no proof that anyone on this show is qualified in any way, shape or form, to do anything other than make it the most painful-to- watch, cheesiest, "crime" show ever aired. I found myself reaching for the cholesterol medicine after watching it.
Ego trip by completely unqualified author
thisisklausw6 April 2024
Sometimes a television show comes along that is so very bad that not only do you want to smash your television, you want to have the electricity supply cut off from your house so you never have a reason to buy another television. Well look no further. Dark Minds is that show. Let me save you the torture of watching it by giving you a quick synopsis.
Book author with annoying tuft of hair below his bottom lip and absolutely no qualifications for investigating crime decides he can solve unsolved murders, some from 40 years ago.
Author interviews actual police and detectives and tells them what they have been doing wrong. They smile politely so that they get to watch themselves on TV with their families later on, then no doubt ridicule the guy as soon as the cameras are switched off.
Incarcerated serial killer (who we all secretly suspect is a paid actor) has the code name 'Thirteen', presumably based on the IQ of the person who decided that making this television show was a good idea.
'Thirteen', when given a case file for a victim who was stabbed 76 times, 'ummms' and 'ahhhs' for a short while and then offers pearls of wisdom such as 'I think your guy likes stabbing' before suddenly signing off with 'That's it'. Every. Single. Time.
Majority of the episode is taken up by Author wandering aimlessly around with a clipboard, sometimes glancing emotionally at the camera while slightly tilting his head, while his own voice over tells us that it's sad when people get murdered and how if he could find the killer, he wouldn't be as sad any more.
Episode wraps up either with absolutely no progress being made towards solving the crime, or us finding out that law enforcement has actually now found another suspect, with absolutely no assistance from anyone associated with this train wreck of an alleged television show.
The jury is in, and the verdict is that this show is guilty of being an absolute waste of time for everyone involved.
Book author with annoying tuft of hair below his bottom lip and absolutely no qualifications for investigating crime decides he can solve unsolved murders, some from 40 years ago.
Author interviews actual police and detectives and tells them what they have been doing wrong. They smile politely so that they get to watch themselves on TV with their families later on, then no doubt ridicule the guy as soon as the cameras are switched off.
Incarcerated serial killer (who we all secretly suspect is a paid actor) has the code name 'Thirteen', presumably based on the IQ of the person who decided that making this television show was a good idea.
'Thirteen', when given a case file for a victim who was stabbed 76 times, 'ummms' and 'ahhhs' for a short while and then offers pearls of wisdom such as 'I think your guy likes stabbing' before suddenly signing off with 'That's it'. Every. Single. Time.
Majority of the episode is taken up by Author wandering aimlessly around with a clipboard, sometimes glancing emotionally at the camera while slightly tilting his head, while his own voice over tells us that it's sad when people get murdered and how if he could find the killer, he wouldn't be as sad any more.
Episode wraps up either with absolutely no progress being made towards solving the crime, or us finding out that law enforcement has actually now found another suspect, with absolutely no assistance from anyone associated with this train wreck of an alleged television show.
The jury is in, and the verdict is that this show is guilty of being an absolute waste of time for everyone involved.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
