Paranormal Files: Info ou intox

I have loved this show since I was a small child and as a person who's always been interested in the paranormal, this was right up my alley. The show doesn't have the traditional format of most ghost hunting shows or Bigfoot investigations. It centers on a team of filmmakers, photographers, and journalists who seek to debunk supposed paranormal videos. The topics range from ghosts to aliens to the lizard man.

I've heard many times that the show is like a mystical Mythbusters (another one of my favorite shows), I agree with this sentiment.

At some points the show does feel staged and like the hosts are very clearly talking to the camera and have a script but the experimentation is legit and lends credibility to the people behind the show. The team has a sort of familial dynamic that makes them feel real and relatable.

Some of the investigations do even in inconclusive evidence, and I wish that the episodes were longer so they could explore more explanations and really get to the bottom of it. Sometimes it just feels like there's not enough time to cover every possible explanation.

Overall, this show is a must watch for anybody interested in the supernatural and tired of clearly faked ghost hunting shows. It's a shame that it was canceled because this was one of the best shows for the common skeptic to be introduced to the weird world of the paranormal.

After viewing the first episode, I was sorely disappointed. Despite all the hype, there was precious little science, limited expertise, and no common sense in the evaluations. While one investigation was well done (Ghost Car), the rest were simply not worth the effort to have filmed.

The final "lights in the Arizona sky" segment killed any suggestion that the show intends to seriously address strange phenomena caught on videos. Anyone with any experience with military aviation could tell that the "unknown" lights were flares (sorry UFO fanatics – there may be something in the Arizona sky, but that wasn't it). This obvious explanation was never addressed by the "investigators", having apparently been dismissed because the person who took the video claimed that he had checked with the local Air Force base, and no aircraft were in the air when the video was made. Where was the confirmation? Why wasn't an effort made to recreate this important possibility? My guess is cost and an unwillingness to confirm the obvious. The (apparently) one night of investigation filming the area did record an interesting effect, but did nothing to prove or disprove the original video; all it did was create another video which needs further investigation. Saying that something odd is happening in the sky over Arizona doesn't answer the question, although the cast clearly thought they had done so.

Like too many of the paranormal related shows, this one also seems to want to find the paranormal more than it wants to provide accurate results. Granted, disproof doesn't get good ratings, but don't bill the show for what it is not. I for one won't waste time watching this in the future.

First of all, forget all you read before about this show in previous reviews.

This show is fun to watch, it tells you about videos/pictures/stories out there about the mysterious that you might not have heard before, and they go out there and investigate some of them.

I never really believe anything they come to conclusion because really, it could be ANYTHING, but it is definitely a very fun show to watch. I've seen both seasons out now (they are also up on Netflix) and honestly, if you like "the mysterious" stuff out there, you should sit and watch it.

At least it's genuinely entertaining instead of the Ghost Hunters crap and anything alike.

Axx

A group of straight unsuperstitious people set out to prove these supernatural/paranormal videos are fake. Simple premise - dumb but entertaining.

Unlike awful paranormal investigation shows this one tries to prove real "evidence" is fake as opposed to lolling in the dark for 50% of the episode and using the other 50% for an unfulfilling context dump. The show is best when they debunk it as quick as possible. Some of their attempts to replicate the footage can be dumbfounding, but hilarious.

Sometimes after failing to prove it is fake, they'll do a "paranormal investigation" from which they always get nothing from. Luckily it's heavily edited, unlike most boring ghost shows.

Nothing on TV? Put this on, it kills time effectively and it's quite addictive and engaging. Give it a go, don't expect much.

"Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files" is nothing more than an ultra-cheap ripoff of "UFO Hunters." The salient difference is that the ultra-youthful cast of "Fact or Faked" has zero scientific background whatsoever. They collect the cheesiest videos from here or there; set out to "prove" or "debunk" things based upon the most ill-conceived notion of the scientific method, indeed, of science in general; pepper the audience with nonsensical, high-falutin'-sounding nonsense such as, "Come on, guys, let's examinate this rocketological conburblification," and cannot-do-without exhortatives, such as, "Let's go green, guys!" (I think the kindergartners behave basically the same way on "Sid the Science Kid.") The kids are ignorant, annoying, unscientific, and a slap in the face to any viewer whose education extends beyond junior high school.