Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files

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.

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.

The big flaw with this show is that they claim these people are "experts" but in reality are 30 something actors who probably couldn't get a REAL job in the REAL world. They come across as rather cloddish when evaluating the so called phenomena and part of me thinks they are in collusion with Scyfy in promoting Ghost Hunters just like Destination Truth does. I really hope they aren't this anserine in real life, but my God! A prime example is when they are set to debunk the ghost footage and parade around as skeptics until we are forced to accept that they just can't replicate the original footage and therefore have to believe that something is actually, really and genuinely haunted...GASP! Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't skeptics really scientists who believe in the scientific method to prove that something is not what it seems? Never in my life would a real skeptic decide that something is haunted because they can't collectively agree that they can't replicate the same effect on film. From the episodes that I've seen, they did a great job in replicating the ghostly apparitions, but yet we are somehow forced to reject their findings and embrace their flimsy conclusion that something is haunted based on their beliefs alone?! Belief that something is haunted is just that, a belief and should not be an option in a scientific investigation. That being said this show never does claim to be scientific in nature and this automatically places it in the entertainment category. Don't get me wrong, what they investigate is fascinating, but in the end we the audience need to be entertained so queue the dramatic commercial break cliff hangers and eerie sound effects. So in all, if you want to be entertained then this show is for you. If you are looking for a valid scientific program that is set out to debunk the paranormal, then look elsewhere this show is not for you.

I'm at a loss. I really am. I've read the other reviews on this show and I have to remind myself that we are talking about the same program. I had just looked up the Josh Gates show 'Destination Truth' which, correctly, received applause and I had expected the same here. Fact or Faked is a hugely entertaining, well researched, comprehensive look at the paranormal, cryptozoology, Ufology and the general unexplained. The program looks at these phenomenon without bias and I love the fact that they never ridicule anything, everything is possible. For those of you who enjoy Bigfoot, Ghosts, Lake monsters, Aliens, Conspiracy theories or if you simply enjoy the very lovely Jael De Pardo, then Fact or Faked is an absolute must.