"Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files" Reviewed!

(above: Fact)

I'm going to be a psychic and read your minds:

You were disappointed they wasted a half a show's episode on the moon walk urban legend that had been done already by Mythbusters and other conjecture shows on TV.

You wish the show would stick to viral videos.

You believe that a simple jump onto Google searches might keep them from traveling long distances and pursuing already disproven subjects.

You are beginning to wonder if it might be more exciting if they perform experiments to prove or disprove black market snuff films.

Now, let me take a moment to share a clairvoyant vision of the future:

The show is a brilliant premise and for that alone, viewers stick with it. SyFy will make it the biggest and most profitable show when they make Ben the producer and he gets to play out his vision which totally jives with us viewers. With him at the helm, my reviews are nothing more than praising sessions for a show living up to its potential.

(I'm sassy enough that if there was "nobody home" in Ben's pretty head, I would make jabs at him like Zak-baby and never ever beg SyFy to let him have control. I had enough face to face time with him to know intuitively that he is ready to burst out of the gate with our vision for the show, that is, if they just let him run the track. I see him like the Josh Gates who is better utilized with his intelligence and energy to help it form into a hit.)

Now, with all that said, I'm letting y'all have your turn. I would truly like to hear your own visions of how you want the show done to help them refine it even more for the next season. It has enormous potential, fantastic premise, and something we're all into, so what does it need to do to have your approval and your butt in front of the TV every Thursday night?


  1. I actually didn't mind that they did the moon landing, even though it's already been done. They at least did a good job of faking it. I still agree with their conclusion though, it could have been faked, but it probably wasn't.

    What disappointed me about the episode was the stinkbomb of a UFO case that they did after it. I thought the UFO looked fake anyways. Plus I found it a little suspicious that the guy filming it felt the need to state on the video that "This is real." It's almost like he was trying to convince the viewer that it was real. If he was having a genuine experience, would he have really felt the need to state that it was real?

    I thought the other case with the flashes in the sky would have been a more interesting one to try to duplicate.

    The show's premise is fine, so picking the content is what is crucial.

  2. Jerry;
    I agree about the Gulf Breeze. I really don't like seeing such big cases as the moon and Gulf Breeze. I don't want the cases that are so notable that they've been talked to death before by people proving them wrong. I also feel like UFOs are hopeless. There are only a few things a UFO can be and after a time, it gets told seeing them rent helicopters or rig models that fly remote controlled. What they're doing right? The basic format is great--let's please see more viral videos and the group tossing them out there and deciding. That part of the show is actually my favorite. I wouldn't even mind if they replay the videos a few times while they discuss why they do or don't want to use them. That dismissing part of the show is wonderful. I like that the teams break up separately. I'm not thrilled by the use of extraordinary explanations like hiring helicopters dangling light rigs under them. That's preoposterous. Stick with the regular at home hoaxer's methods. I want to see them McGuyver it more and rig things instead of having all the best materials and talents to make models and do things. I want to see how Mr. Nobody at home worked it and I also think they need to do a lot of computer special effects to explain a lot of the things that are done. They need to sit in front of a computer and rig a facsimile. I'm really pleased with Ben taking control of it and helping to bring all the findings together for us. He is taking on a parental role that I really like. It's making for a healthy family.

  3. I think the show is about more than just debunking videos, it's also about debunking armchair explanations.

    Psst, who is this Jerry that you are talking to? :)

  4. Jeff;
    Jeez, that's what I get for waking up and going straight to the computer without my coffee. My biggest curse typing is that for a living I type the spoken word from doctors and I find that if I try to type with no one speaking to me and me converting it, something gets lost in the process. Sorry, buddy. Yeah, I really think that I'd like to see them sitting around a big room on comfy couches, feet up, watching vids like a group of college kids in a dorm and defending or disputing vids and occasionally hitting the computer and showing how it could be rigged. Regular folks aren't going to do huge Hollywood productions to fool folks and people who accidentally film something that looks paranormal are more than likely making the usual matrixing with their eyes that we all do in ghost hunting when we see a face in an orb and such. There are regular animals outside and shadows and lighting that create all the things that look amazing on video, like that supposed mothman pic they were considering. I'm afraid the team would go out there and put a dude in a rubber suit of the mothman and recreate it and you know this was obviously just someone or something out there that was misinterpreted by lack of lighting.

  5. I've never actually seen the show (just commercials), but I have seen Mythbusters quite a bit.

    Still, I like the idea behind the show. There's certainly no shortage of 'haunted' places around the world.

    I've seen other shows about haunted places and they've all seem to be similar. One thing they all seem to have in common is shaky camerawork. But I can see that, because they're trying to capture the 'unseen'. (Where do you point the camera for that?)

    I think I'll have to check out this show, per your recommendation.

  6. What I am really disappointed with, is the fact that you are still holding on to this pseudo show. I watched once and that was enough. Move on, girl. Move on.

  7. Am I the only one who wonders if Ben Hanson is even his real name?

  8. This episode was a disaster. There isn't much else I can say about it.

  9. Eric;
    I hope you give it a try. The premise is a good one to take viral videos of the paranormal that people spread around the internet and see if they were faked or fact.

    But, you still come over here to comment on it. I think your protest too much MM. You should have given it more of a look-see. The feel of it has changed over time as they all loosen up and get more comfortable with the process. Some episodes have been downright chilling and awesome and I'm hoping they go from the light happy things like mermaids and moon walks to the darker more creepy and insane cryptid vids and supposed ghost vids.

    Yeah, I wondered for a time if his last name was really Osmond. He's so darned cute.

    I would have thought you'd appreciate how they replicated the moonwalk vids.

  10. We need mythbusters to do it, so we see stuff blow up at the end.

  11. Fact or Faked
    - 0.739 million viewers
    - 0.5/1 HH
    - 0.3/1 A18-49

  12. Don't have to say anything the numbers speak for themselves

  13. Don't have to say anything the numbers speak for themselves

  14. Sounds like we need to give FoF a shot of popularity. Any ideas? Other than having me on every episode in a tank top, whatcha think?


Post a Comment