UFO Hunters

I'll be honest. When I first started to watch this series I thought that it would be more serious, but I was way off. If you cannot tell that it's scripted then you haven't watched it enough. When you go into the "fringe" side of science or the paranormal, you need to stay a skeptic. Granted, a couple on the show are to an extent, but William Birnes has no business on this show. I'm pretty sure though he was the biggest reason History bought the idea and put it on the air. The science part is nice and it does help some what in explaining a few possible situations, but other than that there is just way too much "its alien and it was a flying saucer and you need to believe it" and it just ruins the show. I used to enjoy the ufo shows, but this is just way off and the fact that the History channel is putting money and time into it is sad. Heck, the narrator has more air time than anyone.

I do agree with some of the sentiments of the other comments here for "UFO Hunters". But, dammit, I like this show.

I've always been a sucker for "In Search Of...", "Unsolved Mysteries" and the like. Not because I wholly believe the material presented, but for the shear presentation of it all.

As far as "UFO Hunters" goes, it seems that the third season has taken a hat, drawn little pieces of paper with locations and/or historical references written on them, then tacked the "UFO" acronym onto it. Ta da! "Nazi UFO's"! I am glad, though, that the show is not airing on the "Sci-Fi" Channel, not to say that putting it on the History Channel suddenly gives "UFO Hunters" automatic credence. I do find that most of the experiments and analysis are done in earnest. Kevin, if I remember correctly, is the new science team member. I loved his reactions in his first episode listening to Bill automatically jump to wild possibilities. And that's what it's all about; the possibilities. He has since backed off a bit in his skepticism, and I'd like to see him take a stronger opposing stance. Here's hoping...

Is this a documentary in the strictest sense? Probably not. Any apparent "written scenes" are done so for clarity's sake. Bill can be ridiculous in his assertions, like the uncle who drops by and tries to convince you to invest in his gambling machine business. His exuberance and passion about the subject, though, makes for some good television. And I appreciate the continued mystery, the new analysis of old cases and even the "let downs" at discovering that a rumor is probably untrue.

I have tried to give UFO Hunters a chance, but the producers aren't on my side. The premise of investigation is interesting, and the incidents investigated are intriguing, but too much time is wasted on shaky, vertigo inducing, extreme zoom shots of vehicles and scenery. I understand that the hand held camera is considered the way to shoot television nowadays, but my twelve year old son could be a better cinematographer than this. Often, whenever something truly interesting is shown, it is on screen for mere seconds, or is blurred. The underground base episode, for instance, went on for most of an hour about the layout of the alleged base, and when maps were provided, they were on screen for 3 seconds (I timed it). I guess if the show were more visually appealing instead of a visual assault on the senses I would be able to continue watching it. This show epitomizes the difference between reality TV and documentary TV, the difference between sensationalism and journalism.

If you can get past the gimmicky "hey, people think this is cool/I think I'm cool" , flashy, lame overly dramatic crap, catering to the stupis, it definitely has some very interesting things. The research is cool, the case they study are cool, but their.. or HIS constantly trying to be "cool" or him concluding everything is "definitely extraterrestrial" even when there's no conclusive evidence and/or it even suggests otherwise, can be a bit tiresome.

First, "U.F.O. Hunters" is slightly better than another series by "The History Channel" called "Monster Quest". Although both documentaries appear to be chasing smoke, the experiments by John Tindall elevate "U.F.O. Hunters" to slightly above average. The various episodes are a hit or miss affair, with "Invasion Texas 2008" the most recent report. Although a believer - skeptic balance is presented, Bill Birnes of "U.F.O. Magazine" comes across as insincere, trying to defend an indefensible position. If you enjoy "fringe science", quirky characters, questionable research, biased investigations, and searching old "crash sites", this is for you. - MERK