Four people who think they're funny and entertaining to watch conclude that so many people have claimed to have experienced something paranormal, but no one has ever captured any visual material that hasn't been debunked.
And that premise is what caught my interest, since I'm always interested in how people take a simple situation and elevate it to something paranormal.
The "documentary" is 1 hour and 40 minutes long. Even though I had a strong dislike for the crew in this and the "experiments" they were doing, I stuck around. But when 1 hour and 20 minutes in they were interviewing an extremely sensitive-to-ghosts person who didn't even register the presence of a ghost when everyone (including the extremely sensitive-to-ghosts person) later claim they all clearly heard footsteps just outside the room, I just skipped to bits at the end for a few short clips to see what the "filmmakers" had concluded.
So there's supposedly a ghost just a few meters away from them, but the extremely sensitive-to-ghosts guy doesn't sense a thing until he's told by others that there was something there.
Even shorter: in a "documentary" that's asking the question if ghosts are real or not, they only interview amateur paranormal investigators and mediums, and a "professional" parapsychologist.
They do not interview any actual scientist who can easily dismiss every evidence so far on the existence of ghosts.
That's like making a documentary about whether the existence of the mythical cake-pooping unicorn is real or not, by interviewing the people who claim to have seen it, and the professor with a degree in the mythical cake-pooping unicorn who will tell you most sightings are lies but the thing really does live somewhere.
Have you maybe seen the definitive filmed proof of ghosts that this documentary provides in the end?
No?
That's because there isn't any.
Is that the conclusion these "filmmakers" draw?
No. There were 3 that were believers to begin with, and they still believe. And there's that 1 guy who was a non-believer. But now, thanks to his own documentary that did not document any ghost, he too has become a tiny bit of a believer in ghosts.
And all four of them are, now more than ever, definitely convinced that they are super quirky.
Do not see this film.
It does not confirm the existence of ghosts.
It does not professionally deal with debunking.
It only does what every other crappy "reality" TV show on ghosts does.
And that premise is what caught my interest, since I'm always interested in how people take a simple situation and elevate it to something paranormal.
The "documentary" is 1 hour and 40 minutes long. Even though I had a strong dislike for the crew in this and the "experiments" they were doing, I stuck around. But when 1 hour and 20 minutes in they were interviewing an extremely sensitive-to-ghosts person who didn't even register the presence of a ghost when everyone (including the extremely sensitive-to-ghosts person) later claim they all clearly heard footsteps just outside the room, I just skipped to bits at the end for a few short clips to see what the "filmmakers" had concluded.
So there's supposedly a ghost just a few meters away from them, but the extremely sensitive-to-ghosts guy doesn't sense a thing until he's told by others that there was something there.
Even shorter: in a "documentary" that's asking the question if ghosts are real or not, they only interview amateur paranormal investigators and mediums, and a "professional" parapsychologist.
They do not interview any actual scientist who can easily dismiss every evidence so far on the existence of ghosts.
That's like making a documentary about whether the existence of the mythical cake-pooping unicorn is real or not, by interviewing the people who claim to have seen it, and the professor with a degree in the mythical cake-pooping unicorn who will tell you most sightings are lies but the thing really does live somewhere.
Have you maybe seen the definitive filmed proof of ghosts that this documentary provides in the end?
No?
That's because there isn't any.
Is that the conclusion these "filmmakers" draw?
No. There were 3 that were believers to begin with, and they still believe. And there's that 1 guy who was a non-believer. But now, thanks to his own documentary that did not document any ghost, he too has become a tiny bit of a believer in ghosts.
And all four of them are, now more than ever, definitely convinced that they are super quirky.
Do not see this film.
It does not confirm the existence of ghosts.
It does not professionally deal with debunking.
It only does what every other crappy "reality" TV show on ghosts does.