It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

IMDb reviewers enjoy a challenge almost as much as Parker's Jesse Stone character in this series.For those recently arrived from another planet, this series is not exactly what it seems, to wit: 1. Selleck is in the "mature" stage of his career is here killing two birds with one (sorry for the pun) 'stone' -- the actor spends most of his time in Nova Scotia, loves it, and by producing/starring in this self-made series he gets to have his cake and eat it too 2. The negatives? Not many. You cannot even in this day and age do a Canadian film without casting at least one or two "Canadian extras" with their strange dialects and poorly-formed thespian skills. However the US contingent (Stone, Baker, deVane) are so goshdarned good, and the writing is so goshdarned sharp, and the scenery so goshdarned splendid, that these small moments of pain pass quickly.3. Slow moving to some, but what you do have on screen is what the late Spencer Tracey would have referred to as "choice"

This is my first Jesse Stone and it may be my last. In Innocents Lost, Jesse tries to find out what happened to a young woman he once arrested with whom he lost touch. She went into a rehab facility, was released on antidepressants, and died of a heroin overdose.Part of my problem is not knowing all the characters who surround Jesse, and it is certainly an excellent cast: Kathy Baker, William Devane, Stephen McHattie, et al., and I suppose that would help subsequent viewing.To me this seemed slow-moving and I found Selleck as dull as dishwater. He shot to fame thanks to his wonderful looks, a relaxed charm, an ability to play humor, and warmth. I guess it all left on the last train. This character does not draw on any of his best assets. I just don't find him enough of an actor to give us a multilayered, depressed character. Instead, he comes off as grim and boring.I once read that a self-help guru did a workshop for actors. One of them was always one of the last two in an audition but lost the part. The teacher investigated and told him the reason was he had no talent. She explained it was a good thing because he didn't have to worry about "acting" any longer. He could use his charm, his presence, his looks, his demeanor, and his personality instead. She went on to write that he became a household name in the '80s. I'm convinced it was Selleck.I'm sure no one else will agree with me, and I may feel differently if I view more of these. But it was slow going watching one of the bright lights of '80s television meandering through this. One smile would have been welcome.

I liked this movie so much that I immediately went out and bought all eight (as of Spring 2015) and I will buy #9 when it comes out. This is a great drama, doesn't feed you the information, lets you take the lead only to find out later. I liked Rose Gammon in the series and would like to see much more of her. Could there be some electricity between Jesse and Rose if she returns? Jesse needs to catch Hasty. The homicide chief in Boston needs to keep up the dry whit with Jesse. Great job. There should be a closer bond with the dog. He is beautiful. I really enjoy the Jesse Stone series and look forward to many more episodes. Thanks.

While this is a welcomed continuation of a good (excellent) Tom Selleck series (I don't care for "Blue Bloods"), I was a bit disappointed in "Innocents Lost." For one, it clearly,clearly plays to Selleck's vanity as he lays (not so cleverly) the decided foundation for the next episode. While that is good, this one was too incomplete for my liking. Second, the pacing of "Innocents Lost" seemed to be out in the netherworld--slow at times, possibly to make sure that the full two hours time slot was completed yet not forgetting to set the stage for the next episode, when? In six months' time? A year? New viewers could easily have been baffled by the "inside" story, events and characters based upon previous episodes (which really isn't fair to new viewers, that is, if new viewers were wanted). Character development lagged (we've a new police chief and we know we don't like him and we know that he's bound to be "gone" in another episode, but, please, don't tease us to the extent that it did. And, Jesse, forget about your ex-wife. Pul-eeze. Enough whining. Move on. Please.All this said, though, I didn't regret watching "Innocents Lost"--but was quite let down by its "incompleteness."