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.

This is another in the endless stream of 'people saw a few things over the past hundred years so let's do a one night investigation' type paranormal shows.

As usual they attempt to convince us there is no rational explanation and are therefore justified in immediately jumping to the EVP level of who-cares paranormal nighttime investigation.

Why at night? It's absurd to think ghosts sleep during the day, or that aliens would have the same visual limitations we have. If we aren't seeing these things during the day, we sure as heck aren't seeing them at night.

Not that it matters anyway. If all these ghosts or aliens or spirits or whatever can accomplish is localized brief temperature fluctuations, muddled blobs in photos, and faint sounds on questionable-premise spirit boxes then why bother. Seriously. Who cares if they exist or not if that's all they amount to. It doesn't change our day either way.

To the show's credit at least they spare us the usual parade of so-called experts on fictional subjects. Honestly, how can someone be an expert in Bigfoot or Nessie or aliens when no one has proven the darn things so much as exist. I love when these so-called experts assert authoritatively that Bigfoot feeds at night or is at higher altitudes during the summer. Something that no one has proven exists feeds at night? Sure thing. I've decided I'm an expert on the tooth fairy. Producers, call me.

All that said, attractive, likable actors doing harmlessly silly things requires no attention and makes great background noise. Five stars.

"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.

When this show first aired I think on SyFy Channel, I loved it.

Upon recently watching reruns on Destination America, I've come to realize that these people were trying way too hard to be the paranormal MythBusters.

It's OK, but not as amazing as I once thought.