The last season really wasn't very good, and this season is worse. I quit watching this episode after about 20 minutes. Jumping the shark comes to mind...
Reviews
30 Reviews
Night Hunter
(2018)
This is an awful movie!
5 January 2020
And I'm surprised they were able to get so many quality actors to participate. The "suspect /perpetrator" is the kind of character that only exists in the minds of people who write bad stories. It makes the movie entirely too farcical to ever be good.
I have been watching this, with some irritation...
26 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
... but this is the episode where they jumped the shark. First we had velociraptor scene from Jurassic Park. When whey entered the ship trash dump, I told myself if they get caught in there, and the room starts to compact, I will stop watching this show. It starts to compact, and her shoe gets stuck.
These are obviously some of the laziest writers in all the history of television! What a shame.
These are obviously some of the laziest writers in all the history of television! What a shame.
Black Spot
(2017–2019)
Cinematography is exceptional, but it cannot makeup for the weak story and painful dialogue.
18 July 2019
Perhaps the story and dialogue is better in the original French, but the English dubbed version is not good, and it gets harder to watch with each episode. Now that all 8 one hour episodes are complete, I wish I had never started this damn show. None of the characters act like actual human beings and by the end, I cared about none of them.
The Answer
(III) (2015)
I made it to the 35 minute mark before I stopped watching it...
13 July 2019
It was a valiant effort, and technically the movie looks pretty good, but the story is a string of movie tropes and cliches. The first 20 minutes seemed like this might be an interesting little film, but by 30 minutes I was cringing, and by 35 minutes, I'd had enough. It was a good effort and no doubt good practice for the production crew.
One would need to dangerously gullible to believe this nonsense.
19 March 2019
I cannot believe a television channel named The Science Channel produced and broadcast this series. This is fools without clues speculating about images they don't understand, and they think it's a conspiracy because educated folks don't believe their wild speculations. Sad.
Bad Science Channel, bad!
Bad Science Channel, bad!
Stupid premise, stupid show.
25 January 2019
Bad Samaritan
(2018)
I really wanted to like this movie...
6 January 2019
But I started watching it three different times... I finally finished it. It looks really good (cinematography), but the story doesn't work... you could fly a 747 through the plot holes. It's good for background noise if you're working on something else.
WTF?
18 June 2018
Mad Max: Fury Road
(2015)
I cannot believe how high a score this movie has at IMDb.
11 January 2016
Mad Max: Fury Road currently has an IMDb score of 8.2 stars, and a Rotten Tomatoes score of 97%. It was in the running last night for a Golden Globe award for Best Picture, but it didn't win. The fact that it didn't win was no surprise; the fact that it was even nominated was a huge surprise. If you read actual user reviews, including this one, you will see that a great many people thought this movie was awful. The film's only redeeming quality was the cinematography, which I will admit was gorgeous. Beyond that, there was nothing to keep my interest. I actually purchased the movie when it became available for digital download, and I couldn't get past 1 hour mark, and I tried three different times.
I liked the original Mad Max movie, but it wasn't my favorite dystopian film. I like Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, and Nocholas Hoult, but that doesn't really matter here. I like dystopian action / adventure, and chase scenes, still doesn't matter. There was just no way for me to suspend my disbelief enough to get into this story. There really wasn't much of a story, and what little there was was, was entirely too stupid and disjointed to believe, even in a movie. Maybe I could have tolerated more than one hour if there was no dialogue at all. It was just too damn nonsensical and stupid.
I liked the original Mad Max movie, but it wasn't my favorite dystopian film. I like Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, and Nocholas Hoult, but that doesn't really matter here. I like dystopian action / adventure, and chase scenes, still doesn't matter. There was just no way for me to suspend my disbelief enough to get into this story. There really wasn't much of a story, and what little there was was, was entirely too stupid and disjointed to believe, even in a movie. Maybe I could have tolerated more than one hour if there was no dialogue at all. It was just too damn nonsensical and stupid.
Scorpion
(2014–2018)
I cannot stand this show!
6 October 2015
I watched a few episodes last season, and stopped watching by episode 4. I just tried watching the first episode of season two, and was forced to stop by the 11 minute mark. If you are a human with the least bit a knowledge about technology, this show is too damn stupid to watch. My ability to suspend disbelieve just isn't that strong. I can't even talk about the acting because I can't get past the ridiculousness stories and the technology.
If you have no idea how anything that uses electricity works, this show might work for you. If you do understand how things work, it is unwatchable. CBS is the syndication king of networks; how did this show get a second season. Can it be that many people really don't understand the world they live in?
If you have no idea how anything that uses electricity works, this show might work for you. If you do understand how things work, it is unwatchable. CBS is the syndication king of networks; how did this show get a second season. Can it be that many people really don't understand the world they live in?
21 Jump Street
(2012)
You people are kidding us with these highly rated reviews, right?
23 July 2013
I wanted to like this movie. I enjoyed the original series and so thought I'd give this a shot since it was available on one of my OnDemand channels. As I see it, the single biggest problem with this movie is that it was Rated R; so the people who are the correct age to enjoy this thing are not old enough to view it, and those that are old enough to watch it will not enjoy it. I will admit I laughed two or three times, but the boring times in between them far outweighed those tiny chuckles.
This movie repeated commits the greatest sin, that is people not reacting to events like a reasonably intelligent, poorly educated person might. Every character in this thing is dumber than a bag rocks, the dialog is awful, and the plot is incoherent. Had I gone to the cinema to watch this dog, I would have been force to walk out before the halfway mark, and demand my money back.
I promise I will die before I watch another movie, TV show, or video in which Jonah Hill had anything to do with the writing or production. The fact that so many people liked it, and wrote glowing reviews is either evidence that some people are paid to right false good reviews, or it is a further sign our civilization is rapidly approaching its ultimate demise due to the unfathomable inanity of the average voter.
This movie repeated commits the greatest sin, that is people not reacting to events like a reasonably intelligent, poorly educated person might. Every character in this thing is dumber than a bag rocks, the dialog is awful, and the plot is incoherent. Had I gone to the cinema to watch this dog, I would have been force to walk out before the halfway mark, and demand my money back.
I promise I will die before I watch another movie, TV show, or video in which Jonah Hill had anything to do with the writing or production. The fact that so many people liked it, and wrote glowing reviews is either evidence that some people are paid to right false good reviews, or it is a further sign our civilization is rapidly approaching its ultimate demise due to the unfathomable inanity of the average voter.
Ray Donovan
(2013–2020)
Not the best TV, but not the worst
22 July 2013
As others have suggested, this seem like an interesting idea for a show, but it is really poorly executed. I've now watched the first four episodes, and the pilot was easily the worst, and the others have gotten a bit better. But the writing and directing are really not very good. I don't really care about any of these characters, and find myself reaching for the fast forward button to get past long brooding moments, and painfully bad dialogue. And I like many of the actors in show, but writing has ruined it.
Now many people who rate shows at IMDb seem to think there are only two possible ratings, 1 and 10. I rate Ray Donavan as a 5 and I hope it is going to improve as the season continues, regrettably it doesn't seem to be improving very much so far..
Now many people who rate shows at IMDb seem to think there are only two possible ratings, 1 and 10. I rate Ray Donavan as a 5 and I hope it is going to improve as the season continues, regrettably it doesn't seem to be improving very much so far..
Bates Motel
(2013–2017)
Frustratingly slow, and stupid, but seem to get better as it goes.
5 May 2013
This is a terribly frustrating show, for a number of reasons. It's hard to say which frustrations is worst or least, so I'll just list them in no particular order.
Norma Bates is terminally stupid, batshit crazy, and incredibly lucky. We know she is lucky because no one that stupid should reasonably be able to live to her age and reproduce twice without a boatload of luck. If a problem arises, whether she created it or inflicted from the outside, if there are four possible solutions, Norma will instinctively choose the worst one. I anxiously await her death, because she is just too darn stupid to live. She may the stupidest TV character ever created.
Norman Bates is quite annoying, but you can hardly blame him. Just look who raised him. We don't learn until the 4th episode that Norman has been experiencing psychotic delusions which he cannot tell different from reality. The fact that the viewer doesn't learn this until episode four causes much confusion up to that point. Norman is frustrated when having to cope with more than one issue at a time, so considering his mom, he is in a constant state of frustration.
If you can force yourself to watch the first four episodes, the series starts to get better. That is where the larger story arc becomes more clear, so the viewer is more willing to tolerate the stupid crazy actions of the characters. We also know by the forth episode that with a few exceptions, the good people aren't really good, the bad people aren't all bad, and the whole darn town maybe just as dysfunctional and crazy as the Bates.
The acting is mediocre to bad, but the cinematography, and scenery are quite good. It's hard for me to recommend this show, but the story becomes interesting with time. Perhaps it should watched OnDemand during the summer when reruns rule the airwaves. Alternatively, you could create a drinking game out of it, and take a drink every time Norma does something stupid; you'll be drunk by the mid-show commercial break.
Norma Bates is terminally stupid, batshit crazy, and incredibly lucky. We know she is lucky because no one that stupid should reasonably be able to live to her age and reproduce twice without a boatload of luck. If a problem arises, whether she created it or inflicted from the outside, if there are four possible solutions, Norma will instinctively choose the worst one. I anxiously await her death, because she is just too darn stupid to live. She may the stupidest TV character ever created.
Norman Bates is quite annoying, but you can hardly blame him. Just look who raised him. We don't learn until the 4th episode that Norman has been experiencing psychotic delusions which he cannot tell different from reality. The fact that the viewer doesn't learn this until episode four causes much confusion up to that point. Norman is frustrated when having to cope with more than one issue at a time, so considering his mom, he is in a constant state of frustration.
If you can force yourself to watch the first four episodes, the series starts to get better. That is where the larger story arc becomes more clear, so the viewer is more willing to tolerate the stupid crazy actions of the characters. We also know by the forth episode that with a few exceptions, the good people aren't really good, the bad people aren't all bad, and the whole darn town maybe just as dysfunctional and crazy as the Bates.
The acting is mediocre to bad, but the cinematography, and scenery are quite good. It's hard for me to recommend this show, but the story becomes interesting with time. Perhaps it should watched OnDemand during the summer when reruns rule the airwaves. Alternatively, you could create a drinking game out of it, and take a drink every time Norma does something stupid; you'll be drunk by the mid-show commercial break.
24
(2001–2010)
Surprisingly Badl
30 December 2012
I find it hard to believe just how highly rated this program is. I never watched this program when it was on the air because I didn't think I would care for it much. Well it's the holiday season, there is basically nothing on TV for another week or so, and DirecTV started airing reruns of 24 on their Audience Network; as nothing else was on, and the show was highly rated, I figured I'd give it a try.
The concept of a 1 hour program covering a 1 hour period in a fictional story is at first, an interesting concept, but it grows old and annoying very quickly. Because there were 24 episodes in the first season, one fictional day was covered in one season. The real problem is this isn't a spy thriller or cop show; this is a prime time soap opera with 007 / Star Trek / CSI overtones. Being a soap opera, the plot devices and twists are extreme to the absurd, and very often predictable. The dialog is awful, and the acting is weak because the stories are weak. I'm not even sure why Jack is so enthusiastic to save his wife and child because both are so stupid, their deaths would be a huge benefit to humanity.
On the plus side, if there is one, if you can get past the silliness of the plot, dialog, and characters, I guess it could be mildly entertaining. It's two stars better than most SyFy Original movies, which I can almost never finish. If you are looking to kill time and brain cells, this might be the ticket. Must See TV, it is not.
The concept of a 1 hour program covering a 1 hour period in a fictional story is at first, an interesting concept, but it grows old and annoying very quickly. Because there were 24 episodes in the first season, one fictional day was covered in one season. The real problem is this isn't a spy thriller or cop show; this is a prime time soap opera with 007 / Star Trek / CSI overtones. Being a soap opera, the plot devices and twists are extreme to the absurd, and very often predictable. The dialog is awful, and the acting is weak because the stories are weak. I'm not even sure why Jack is so enthusiastic to save his wife and child because both are so stupid, their deaths would be a huge benefit to humanity.
On the plus side, if there is one, if you can get past the silliness of the plot, dialog, and characters, I guess it could be mildly entertaining. It's two stars better than most SyFy Original movies, which I can almost never finish. If you are looking to kill time and brain cells, this might be the ticket. Must See TV, it is not.
The Change-Up
(2011)
Meh, not awful.
13 May 2012
First off I want to state for the record that I fully understand that different people have different taste, and I consider that to be a good and normal thing. That being said, it still confounds me that anyone with eyes and ears that function nominally could give this movie 10 stars. People, 10 stars means it is among the very best movies you have ever seen, and that is something this movie is not. It's also not among the very worst movies I've ever seen, because I have watched many SyFy Channel movies, and those are among the worst movies. Please people, for the love of reasonableness, use the 10 stars and 1 star rating for the best and worst movies ever.
As for The Change-up, based on the actors and the well known story, I was expecting a bit more than I got. It had a few high points, but I think the lows were more disappointing than the highs were satisfying. I wasn't expecting a great movie, but I'd hoped for better than this. The movie is watchable, but there a few parts that had they been edited out, or shot differently, this would have been a more satisfying movie. Worth watching if you have a couple of hours to kill, but set your expectations solidly in the average to below average range before pressing play.
As for The Change-up, based on the actors and the well known story, I was expecting a bit more than I got. It had a few high points, but I think the lows were more disappointing than the highs were satisfying. I wasn't expecting a great movie, but I'd hoped for better than this. The movie is watchable, but there a few parts that had they been edited out, or shot differently, this would have been a more satisfying movie. Worth watching if you have a couple of hours to kill, but set your expectations solidly in the average to below average range before pressing play.
Touch
(2012–2013)
Touch might get better, but it's starting off pretty slow.
23 March 2012
Well I watched the preview episode weeks ago, and thought the show might have potential, but I wasn't sure. Now I've watched the first episode, and I think I liked that less than the preview. I'm going to give it five stars for now, and withhold final judgment for a few more episodes, because shows sometimes take a couple of episode to hit their stride.
Basically, their is an autistic son who through some process sees the patterns of connectivity between all thing in the universe in the form of number sequences and patterns. He can't speak, and he can't be touched without having some type emotional break-down. He communicates only with his dad by providing phone numbers, and the dad has to follow clues to meet people, to cause events or change events, which prevents some human tragedy.
It seems from the reviews before this one, people either love this show or hate it. The Woo people think it's wonderful, and the science / sic-fi people find it boring. I'll be in the middle for now. If it doesn't do something interesting soon to show me the love, I'll end up hating it eventually. It could be some of the other reviewers are correct in that the idea of this show is likely a better movie than a series.
Have changed the rating to 3 stars, and am thinking of dropping it lower. With each new episode, it keeps getting more annoying, and less entertaining. This is "Must NOT See TV."
Basically, their is an autistic son who through some process sees the patterns of connectivity between all thing in the universe in the form of number sequences and patterns. He can't speak, and he can't be touched without having some type emotional break-down. He communicates only with his dad by providing phone numbers, and the dad has to follow clues to meet people, to cause events or change events, which prevents some human tragedy.
It seems from the reviews before this one, people either love this show or hate it. The Woo people think it's wonderful, and the science / sic-fi people find it boring. I'll be in the middle for now. If it doesn't do something interesting soon to show me the love, I'll end up hating it eventually. It could be some of the other reviewers are correct in that the idea of this show is likely a better movie than a series.
Have changed the rating to 3 stars, and am thinking of dropping it lower. With each new episode, it keeps getting more annoying, and less entertaining. This is "Must NOT See TV."
Shameless
(2011–2021)
This is excellent TV, but not for children or the easily offended
22 March 2012
Confession first - I usually like British TV shows, but have always found US adaptations lacking. For Instance, I really like the UK version of Being Human, and cannot make myself watch a complete episode of the US version; I would perhaps feel differently if I hadn't seen entire UK version before watching the US version.
Well I'd never seen or even heard of the UK version of Shameless, and I only started watching the US version from the beginning of season 2. Somehow I stumbled across an episode earlier this month, and read largely favorable reviews, save some who'd seen the UK version first. I then used Showtime On Demand to watch the entire second season.
I highly recommend the show, but believe that some people might be offended by the harsh language, nudity, and sexual content as the show is full of all three. If this were a movie playing at the cinema, it would likely be rated NC-17; as it's on subscription TV, it's rated TV- MA (Adult Content, Graphic Language, Nudity). If such content offends your sensibilities, you will not like this show, and should just avoid it; this is no show for children.
Shameless is a good title for the program; an alternative, more descriptive title might be "Social Dysfunction Olympics: One family's race to the bottom". It's listed as being a Drama and Comedy, but the comedy is usually of the tragic or dark variety. The core family, their friends and neighbors are multi-generation families in a poor neighborhood on the south side of Chicago. The current generation of siblings have largely raised themselves because the parents are too busy chasing their next score, whether that be money, booze, or drugs; you quickly realize that sex is often a tool used to score.
The father and mother are perhaps the most reprehensible people one could imagine, but the way it plays out, they usually show just enough humanity to allow the audience to not want to kill them. The children are better people than their parents, and the parents are perhaps slightly better than the grandmother. It's all so tragic, but there are also heart warming scenes. Each episode is like an emotional roller-coaster ride, eliciting concern, fear, frustration, and laughter from the audience.
If you have not seen the show before, there is a writeup at wikipedia which gives plenty of background on each of the characters, but also contains significant spoilers. Make sure to lookup the US version as the UK is different and also listed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shameless_(U.S._TV_series)
Well I'd never seen or even heard of the UK version of Shameless, and I only started watching the US version from the beginning of season 2. Somehow I stumbled across an episode earlier this month, and read largely favorable reviews, save some who'd seen the UK version first. I then used Showtime On Demand to watch the entire second season.
I highly recommend the show, but believe that some people might be offended by the harsh language, nudity, and sexual content as the show is full of all three. If this were a movie playing at the cinema, it would likely be rated NC-17; as it's on subscription TV, it's rated TV- MA (Adult Content, Graphic Language, Nudity). If such content offends your sensibilities, you will not like this show, and should just avoid it; this is no show for children.
Shameless is a good title for the program; an alternative, more descriptive title might be "Social Dysfunction Olympics: One family's race to the bottom". It's listed as being a Drama and Comedy, but the comedy is usually of the tragic or dark variety. The core family, their friends and neighbors are multi-generation families in a poor neighborhood on the south side of Chicago. The current generation of siblings have largely raised themselves because the parents are too busy chasing their next score, whether that be money, booze, or drugs; you quickly realize that sex is often a tool used to score.
The father and mother are perhaps the most reprehensible people one could imagine, but the way it plays out, they usually show just enough humanity to allow the audience to not want to kill them. The children are better people than their parents, and the parents are perhaps slightly better than the grandmother. It's all so tragic, but there are also heart warming scenes. Each episode is like an emotional roller-coaster ride, eliciting concern, fear, frustration, and laughter from the audience.
If you have not seen the show before, there is a writeup at wikipedia which gives plenty of background on each of the characters, but also contains significant spoilers. Make sure to lookup the US version as the UK is different and also listed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shameless_(U.S._TV_series)
Spartacus
(2010–2013)
It's a well written program, but the gore and violence is so far over the top that it distracts from the story
2 March 2012
I don't normally object to such things, but it really is extreme at times, and has been since the first episode. Admittedly, I have a fear of knives and flesh being cut, so that's a significant part of it, and so I do occasionally avert my eye to what it happening on screen. If you can get past that, it is a well written interesting story, with fantastic visuals.
I am a bit partial to the first series, but more recent episodes seem true to the original. I'm adding this section at mid-season... As of the fifth episode "Libertus"' the story has picked up quite a bit from the first few episodes; the program is feeling more like the first season now. This series is a good reason to pay for Starz as I very seldom actually watch movies on Starz.
So good stories, compelling characters, great cinematography, over the top with the blood, gore, and violence, but otherwise an entertaining program.
I am a bit partial to the first series, but more recent episodes seem true to the original. I'm adding this section at mid-season... As of the fifth episode "Libertus"' the story has picked up quite a bit from the first few episodes; the program is feeling more like the first season now. This series is a good reason to pay for Starz as I very seldom actually watch movies on Starz.
So good stories, compelling characters, great cinematography, over the top with the blood, gore, and violence, but otherwise an entertaining program.
Chaos
(II) (2005)
I thought this was going to be an OK police action movie...
26 February 2012
... But not so much really. Guess that's why I had never heard of it before I saw it listed in the satellite guide.
Snipes and Statham, should be reasonably good, but the plot, dialog, and plot devices were just painful. After the setup and opening scenes, we are at a bank robbery hostage situation; the bank blows up, and all the hostages and robbers escape in the confusion. I mean explosions that blow the facade off a building almost never hurt the people inside, right? And then when the police were staking out the bad guys, and one of the police officers' pager goes off causes a shoot out; I almost deleted the recording right then and there. Also, Phillippe really can't pull off the smart / tough cop character he is trying to play.
Thecnically the film looked good, and there were a couple of interesting plot twists in the second half that surprised me, but the poor dialog and improbable plot devices just over powered what little good was in the movie. It might be good enough to keep teenage boys entertained for two hours.
Snipes and Statham, should be reasonably good, but the plot, dialog, and plot devices were just painful. After the setup and opening scenes, we are at a bank robbery hostage situation; the bank blows up, and all the hostages and robbers escape in the confusion. I mean explosions that blow the facade off a building almost never hurt the people inside, right? And then when the police were staking out the bad guys, and one of the police officers' pager goes off causes a shoot out; I almost deleted the recording right then and there. Also, Phillippe really can't pull off the smart / tough cop character he is trying to play.
Thecnically the film looked good, and there were a couple of interesting plot twists in the second half that surprised me, but the poor dialog and improbable plot devices just over powered what little good was in the movie. It might be good enough to keep teenage boys entertained for two hours.
Game of Thrones
(2011–2019)
Perhaps the best TV series of 2011
24 February 2012
I am writing this as I am re-watching the first season On Demand in preparation for the April 1 premier of the second season. Currently the original series is rated at 9.4 stars with 94,807 votes; I don't recall ever seeing a show rated so high, and with so many votes. This was a fantastic production, and I'm looking forward to the next installment.
I originally watched the series when it first aired. I had not read the books, and to be honest, didn't exactly know what I was getting into. I had thought it was set in medieval Britain, but I quickly realized the story is set in the mythical land of Westeros. This mythical setting allowed Mr. Martin the flexibility to write a fantastic tale of human lives, with love, hate, honor, betrayal, sex, lust, war, and other struggles that would have been something less had it been set on Earth. I did download an app for my iPad that was called the GoT companion, and this provided me much of the back-story that was not explained in the series. I thought the production was so good that I purchased the books once the series ended.
It seems most of the low ratings and poor reviews disliked the show because of the sex and violence. I find this humorous for a few reasons, the first being that the show is clearly rated AC, AL, N, V (AKA: Adult Content, Adult Language, Nudity, Violence). They show the ratings at the beginning of the program so that children, young and old, will not have their delicate sensibilities infringed upon. Secondly, the story is set in another time, on another world, with other gods and religions; from what we've seen so far, it appears that their gods and religions are not obsessed with human sexual practices, unlike several of our Earthy religions. That seems like a highly civilized concept if you ask me.
I originally watched the series when it first aired. I had not read the books, and to be honest, didn't exactly know what I was getting into. I had thought it was set in medieval Britain, but I quickly realized the story is set in the mythical land of Westeros. This mythical setting allowed Mr. Martin the flexibility to write a fantastic tale of human lives, with love, hate, honor, betrayal, sex, lust, war, and other struggles that would have been something less had it been set on Earth. I did download an app for my iPad that was called the GoT companion, and this provided me much of the back-story that was not explained in the series. I thought the production was so good that I purchased the books once the series ended.
It seems most of the low ratings and poor reviews disliked the show because of the sex and violence. I find this humorous for a few reasons, the first being that the show is clearly rated AC, AL, N, V (AKA: Adult Content, Adult Language, Nudity, Violence). They show the ratings at the beginning of the program so that children, young and old, will not have their delicate sensibilities infringed upon. Secondly, the story is set in another time, on another world, with other gods and religions; from what we've seen so far, it appears that their gods and religions are not obsessed with human sexual practices, unlike several of our Earthy religions. That seems like a highly civilized concept if you ask me.
Ghost Adventures
(2008– )
It is mostly boring and silly, but Zak is easy on the eyes
23 February 2012
IMDb puts this program in the categories History / Sci-Fi / Thriller. My satellite TV guide refers to it as Paranormal Series. I would categorize it as Sci-Fi / Supernatural / Sad attempt at Thriller. In the name of full disclosure, I've never seen a fake reality show or movie that I liked, horror shows are not often my favorite entertainment, but I occasionally do like horror films. I frequently like history, documentaries, Sci-Fi, science, and supernatural shows.
I do give Ghost Adventures a bit of a pass because it is categorized as Sci-Fi and Paranormal; by definition that means it is fictional, and outside our human understanding of the natural world. On the up side, I can see how some might be entertained by the silly antics the host, Zak Bagans, and his team (Zak is handsome and has a great body, but would be better looking if he'd just stop talking). I mean the guys seem to believe that every creaking board is a ghost, and every breeze is a demon. They also seems to think they can intimidate supernatural entities by yelling at them, and calling them names. To see grown men acting like that is quite humorous, and intentionally so, because if grown men did actually believe that silliness, it would be just too sad to bear.
The down side of Ghost Adventures is that it is filmed in the Reality TV style, and the guys are either fooling themselves or attempting to fool their audience into thinking they are collecting "evidence of paranormal activity." As I've written in other program reviews, when people mix Reality TV with Supernatural, the only possible outcomes are silly humor, or significant boredom. Luckily, GH has a significant humor quotient which helps to balance out the way big boredom.
The most disturbing thing about Ghost Adventures is that shows like this tend to fuel the magical thinking beliefs of people who posses limited critical thinking skills. Many of the positive reviews of this show seem to support that assertion. In and of itself, I don't really care if people believe in ghosts; the problem is, when people believe true that for which there is no evidence, that belief can effect how that person understands other facets of reality. E.g. If a person believes he knows the will of "The one true God," and based on that belief in god's will, he judges some group of non-believers to be evil (non-believer being any people who do not share his particular belief of god's will), and if he also believes the one true god rewards his servants who kill evil people in his name, that person might be willing to kill many people who "offend" his concept of god. I admit that is an extreme example, but it's an example that has happened time and time again throughout recorded history, and still happens way too often for my liking.
I have no expectation that my words here will change the mind of any ghost or magic true believers who like this show. If on the other hand a reader is curious about how we humans come to believe many of the things we do, one might want to consider doing an Internet search for Michael Shermer. He has written several good books which explain our current scientific knowledge of the human mind's inner workings. He writes his books in such a way that those without significant scientific education can still readily understand the subject matter. One of his more recent books is "The Believing Brain" which can be found online and at many traditional book stores. It's a very interesting read, but I will warn you that after reading it, you might be inclined to reconsider some of you long and deeply held beliefs. Even if it doesn't cause you to reconsider your old beliefs, it might still help you in selecting which future beliefs you come to hold.
I do not sell books, and I do not make money from the sale of any book on the market today. I have, however, just finished reading "The Believing Brain" and thought the book applies well to this subject.
I do give Ghost Adventures a bit of a pass because it is categorized as Sci-Fi and Paranormal; by definition that means it is fictional, and outside our human understanding of the natural world. On the up side, I can see how some might be entertained by the silly antics the host, Zak Bagans, and his team (Zak is handsome and has a great body, but would be better looking if he'd just stop talking). I mean the guys seem to believe that every creaking board is a ghost, and every breeze is a demon. They also seems to think they can intimidate supernatural entities by yelling at them, and calling them names. To see grown men acting like that is quite humorous, and intentionally so, because if grown men did actually believe that silliness, it would be just too sad to bear.
The down side of Ghost Adventures is that it is filmed in the Reality TV style, and the guys are either fooling themselves or attempting to fool their audience into thinking they are collecting "evidence of paranormal activity." As I've written in other program reviews, when people mix Reality TV with Supernatural, the only possible outcomes are silly humor, or significant boredom. Luckily, GH has a significant humor quotient which helps to balance out the way big boredom.
The most disturbing thing about Ghost Adventures is that shows like this tend to fuel the magical thinking beliefs of people who posses limited critical thinking skills. Many of the positive reviews of this show seem to support that assertion. In and of itself, I don't really care if people believe in ghosts; the problem is, when people believe true that for which there is no evidence, that belief can effect how that person understands other facets of reality. E.g. If a person believes he knows the will of "The one true God," and based on that belief in god's will, he judges some group of non-believers to be evil (non-believer being any people who do not share his particular belief of god's will), and if he also believes the one true god rewards his servants who kill evil people in his name, that person might be willing to kill many people who "offend" his concept of god. I admit that is an extreme example, but it's an example that has happened time and time again throughout recorded history, and still happens way too often for my liking.
I have no expectation that my words here will change the mind of any ghost or magic true believers who like this show. If on the other hand a reader is curious about how we humans come to believe many of the things we do, one might want to consider doing an Internet search for Michael Shermer. He has written several good books which explain our current scientific knowledge of the human mind's inner workings. He writes his books in such a way that those without significant scientific education can still readily understand the subject matter. One of his more recent books is "The Believing Brain" which can be found online and at many traditional book stores. It's a very interesting read, but I will warn you that after reading it, you might be inclined to reconsider some of you long and deeply held beliefs. Even if it doesn't cause you to reconsider your old beliefs, it might still help you in selecting which future beliefs you come to hold.
I do not sell books, and I do not make money from the sale of any book on the market today. I have, however, just finished reading "The Believing Brain" and thought the book applies well to this subject.
Tell Your Friends