I Wouldn't Go in There (TV Series 2013) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
Series: I Wouldn't Go in There
rls5930131 March 2014
I'm currently half-way through the final installment of the series. I saved the "Korea" installment for last, because I knew that RJ's heritage is Korean. Fortunately, installments do not have to be viewed in order--which was fortunate, because I encountered the series on Episode 3! It is interesting, however, to see the progression of RJ's presentation. On Episode 1, he places strong emphasis on the ghost concept. As the series progresses, he places less and less emphasis on fulfilling the ghostly aspects of a story and more and more on the history.

I find this particularly satisfying because I am nearly 60, and have lived through the eras which provide the setting for many of these histories. In some of the episodes, such as that of Vietnam, I'm now far enough away from the time period to be emotionally ready to look at these "stories" from a point of view other than that of an adolescent from a very republican family who was forced to watch the news each night and listen to my parents' commentaries. I found this new point of view not only interesting, but also thought-provoking.

The weakness of the series of the series is the vacillation of camera work. At times the viewer's point of view is through RJ's camera. At others it's through another anonymous camera and its operator. This not only adds confusion for the new viewer, but sometimes it makes the reader question the "truth" of the point of view. It sometimes gives the impression of being at least partially staged.

I'd like to see an additional episode which focuses on how an installment is filmed. For example: How are the fixers selected? Where do they come from? Who is the other camera person? How much of a crew does RJ work with? How much advance work is done in preparation for an episode? In other words, show me some background to reinforce my belief of the content.

I certainly hope a second season is produced. I'd be delighted to see RJ continue to focus on Asian cultures. But I'd also be delighted for him to focus on some other areas of the world. Perhaps he can continue to center his thoughts on "ghosts" to be explored; perhaps he can focus on something else. It would be very interesting to see him probe some unknown, yet rich-in-history and cultural areas of the world, Dar-es-Salaam, for example.

Good job, and keep going!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Ghost stories, history, fun storytelling through urban explorer POV
melissateacherkorea1 August 2019
If you like creepy subtle ghost stories that are just enough to spook you and then learn the true history of why those stories might exist- this is a very entertaining series to take you on the ride. I like that the content is mapped out to us through urban exploration- where the focus is on the architecture, dilapidation, and story of place. It makes the spooky side that much more intriguing.

The pace of the story is done well in my opinion. He doesn't drag out any of those "but why would a school need jail cels" kind of questions- the next cut scene shows him performing a simple internet search to find the answer. Done. Next anecdote and exploration. The suspense, however, still lasts.

It helps that the narrators voice is very pleasant to listen too- calm, deep, direct.

Highly recommended - especially if you would enjoy some authentic storytelling after too many Hollywood jump scares.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ignores it's premise
meganrkeefe23 December 2019
This show should ditch the haunted location angle all together. It's very obviously a gimmick to bring in an audience, even if said audience is not at all the target for this kind of programming.

The narrator has no interest in the subject of hauntings and, in attempting to debunk said locations, he belittles the locals and their superstitions. As an educational show about the traumas Asian countries have faced: it's great, but it's obvious the haunted-location angle is shoehorned in.

(Here, have some elaboration.)

This show is the essence of the slippery slope falacy. RJ starts off introducing a haunted location and, once he can't prove 1 myth behind the haunting, jumps ship from the idea entirely. After he has done the bare minimum to look into the haunted location he will begin to look into the area's tragic past, losing the narrative as he stretches to make connections of irrelevant local leads. By the end we have learned a lot about the location, but there is no conclusion to the main question: is the location haunted? He glosses over it by saying he "debunked" the location, clearly not understanding that personal beliefs does not count as debunking. The connections between the information he learns and the haunted locations is laughable, discrediting him as a paranormal debunker and investigative reporter.

This show would benefit from more editing and research staffing and a change in premise. As it is now, it's best suited for YouTube.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed